Why chi sau?

[LSWCTN1]

This is hilarious... farcical even! Perhaps your Chinese is better than your English? Would you like to explain the difference between the full infinitive in English and the present participle? And then tell us maybe how these are different in Chinese, a language which has neither?

Otherwise, this is a great discussion, but let's keep the pointless semantics out of it. Semantics has value but between two languages it then becomes a plainly linguistic argument and pointless.

when Tom Kagan brought this up, i was satisfied (almost) that i had the answer to my initial question

now I'm not cheers Mr Punch

I guess that, like the exercise itself, the semantics of it mean different things to different people!

who here deliberately sticks (as in 'sticky') to their training partner? i know Pan Nams wck does - as their chi sau has a sole purpose of uprooting and snatching structure (as i understand it)

[Mr Punch]

Sticking: verb (used with object) - to stick:

1. piercing or puncturing with something pointed
2. killing by this means: to stick a pig.
3. thrusting (something pointed) in, into, through, etc.
   ...

A profound difference.


"I don't know much English. This word, I happen to know." -- Moy Yat

Interesting: I'd only ever heard of the 'adhering' definition before... is it 黐?

[CFT]

My poor attempt at translating Hendrik's Chinese post.
Not easy to translate the Chinese philosophical terms - I don't have the background in either Chinese or Western disciplines. I think the term "beyond image" must allude to the "mere physical".

“神動得自有象外，意存妙在無念中。”
Movement of “Shen” (Spirit) comes from “beyond image” (“有象外”). The wonder of “Yi” (Intent) comes from “Wu Nian” (Mou Nim - No thought).

這是王薌齋先生的詩文，它對於健身和技擊的練習都有指導意義。
This is the prose of Mr. Wang Xiangzhai. These words are guidance for the training of fitness and striking skills.

需將自己的意念與天空、大氣、宇宙相呼應，而且這種呼應是從四維空間得到的。“有象”是三維空 間。“有象外 ”是四維空間。
One’s thoughts (intent) must resonate with the sky(?), atmosphere and universe. This resonance is achieved in 4-dimensional space. “With image” (“有象”) is 3-dimensional space, “Beyond image” (“有象外”) is 4-dimensional space.

[CFT]

in chinese the 'chi' of chi sau means to stick.

not sticking. totally wrong

the point is to stick to the other person

Correct, the Chinese character is the one for "adhering" as Mr. Punch points out.

Sticking - as to pierce/puncture might best be: 刺
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexi...h.php?q=%A8%EB

However, one can't really infer the intent of chi sau from just the term "chi sau" even in the original Chinese characters.

[-木叶-]

黐 - chi
[1] stick sth to/on/together, especially using a sticky substance such as glue
[2] stick with; stay close to

Practicing chi sao is to practice sticking to the opponent's arms as much as you can. This is because once the opponent's hand leaves (no longer sticks) to your hand/arm, his arm is free to strike, and becomes unpredictable.
This is also why, when training on the wooden dummy, mook yan jong, sifu will
ask you to also "chi jong", as in sticking to the wooden arms as much as possible.

I tend to disagree that chisao is only a small part of training, in fact it is a very integral and important part of wing chun training. People will argue that in real
fighting situations, it is hard to really apply chi sao techniques.

However, one has to apply what is learnt into the situation and not follow like a wooden block, move for move. I believe once this can be done, wing chun will be applied in a deadly way.

A person who chisao/gongsao (Gongsao here also means sparring with opponents from another discipline) more often than another who does less, will be more effective in combat. A person who does chisao, will be more effective than another who doesn't know MA.

[CFT]

How do you avoid arm chasing?

[-木叶-]

How do you avoid arm chasing?

If you tend to do "arm chasing", it will give rise to risk of not defending your
centerline, and be exposed to attack. If the opponent's arms leaves, one of
the ways to get it back is always, man sao, if you man sao, the opponent
will leave with no choice and block. Therefore if you receive well, once
again, it will be sticking again.

[t_niehoff]

to me wck is a set of principles and actions to be used in combat. your SiFu will teach you the ways to use and not to use these in a setting outside full contact sparring... usually .

WCK is a skill -- fighting skill -- which involves many different skills working together. A skill is your ability to consistently get some desired result with max certainty and min time/effort.

There are many "problems" with the whole notion of WCK principles. for a starter, they are ideas -- not skills. You don't fight with principles, you fight with skills. So how can you tell if your "principles" are working? You can't; you can only tell if your skills are working. It also brings up the next question of WHOSE ideas? Because a person's "understanding" of WCK, including its principles, will depend on their skill level, their ability to USE (fight with) their WCK.

Also, skill in fighting, regardless of your method, doesn't come from simply ssparring with yoru sifu. It comes from doing lots of fighting, and with COMPETENT fighters. Your skill level will be directly proportional to the amount of time you spend sparring with competent fighters. I'd say that most WCK sifu aren't competent fighters since most haven't put in the hundreds of hours of sparring with GOOD fighters that it takes to develop basic level competence.

So if someone who hasn't put inhundreds of hours of sparring with competent fighters is telling you how to do something, it begs the question: how does he know? If he can't do it, and do it against a competent fighter, then what makes you think he's right or knows what he is talking about?

you say gwoh sau doesnt look like a real fight. of course it doesnt. it looks like a real fight between two wck practitioners. two practitioners that have been taught to adhere to wck principles of economy of motion and taking the shortest path, among other things.

No, it doesn't look likea fight between two WCK practitioners, it looks like free flowing chi sao between two WCK practitioners. If you think it lookslike fighting, then you haven't spent time fighting.

therefore you arent going to see huge hooks or high kicks when you practice gwoh sau - because they dont adhere to wck principles. as someone mentioned earlier - for wck practitioners, gwoh sau means free hands. doing as you please

why would you kick someone in the head, for example, if you have never practised it in a trained environment, and have been specifically taught to avoid it?

it IS sparring, not sparring in a boxing or kickboxing sense. but it is sparring.

It's not sparring/fighting since neither of you are genuinely resisting with high levels of physical force. As you yourself said, you are "adhering" to YOUR understanding of WCK "principles". And your partner is doing the same. What this means is that you are doing a cooperative drill, essentially adhering to artificial rules and making it unrealistic (not like a fight). Fighting is not chi sao. Chi sao, gwoh sao won't develop fighting skills.

and i dont know what happens when you practice gwoh sau, but i think many people on here will agree that when they practice it - it is full of intent

That's like saying if we practice "sparring" but restrict ourselves to standing on one leg but have "intent" then it is like fighitng. No, it's not. It's unrealistic. No one is ever going to fight like that. Ever. No one is ever going to fight you like gwoh sao. Ever. There are "rules" of gwoh sao that both sides must stick to in order for it to remain gwoh sao -- like sticking. In fighting, your opponent is never going to try and remain "sticking" with you, not even a WCK fighter unless he is a complete scrub. No one is going to stay at that range unless he is a complete scrub. Nor does ghow sao permit you to face the kinds of things that will really happen in a fight when you make contact. Chi sao/gwoh sao isn't ANYTHING like a fight.

[t_niehoff]

How do you avoid arm chasing?

As I see it, chi sao is a platform/exercise to learn certain contact skills. As they are contact skills, we need to be in contact to practice them -- hence "sticking", i.e., remaining attached to an opponent.

The objective of those contact skills isn't simply to remain attached but to learn how to control and set up control of our opponent. We are not, therefore, chasing the hands but chasing (seeking) control (not just openings to hit).

[sanjuro_ronin]

Lets make it clear that, in a fight, someone is trying to rip your face off and use it as a napkin, to one degree or another, and he does that will all the available tools at his disposal ( rules take into account, if applicable), unless your Chi Sao is like that, well, its then a drill, nothing more, nothing less.

[LSWCTN1]

黐 - chi
[1] stick sth to/on/together, especially using a sticky substance such as glue
[2] stick with; stay close to

Practicing chi sao is to practice sticking to the opponent's arms as much as you can. This is because once the opponent's hand leaves (no longer sticks) to your hand/arm, his arm is free to strike, and becomes unpredictable.
This is also why, when training on the wooden dummy, mook yan jong, sifu will
ask you to also "chi jong", as in sticking to the wooden arms as much as possible.

I tend to disagree that chisao is only a small part of training, in fact it is a very integral and important part of wing chun training. People will argue that in real
fighting situations, it is hard to really apply chi sao techniques.

However, one has to apply what is learnt into the situation and not follow like a wooden block, move for move. I believe once this can be done, wing chun will be applied in a deadly way.

A person who chisao/gongsao (Gongsao here also means sparring with opponents from another discipline) more often than another who does less, will be more effective in combat. A person who does chisao, will be more effective than another who doesn't know MA.

with respect, as i understand it that is incorrect.

sticking to the dummy is about controlling your opponents bridge - like chum kiu. that is not, as i understand it, the same as in chi sau. although i believe it should be - but not in the way that you seem to be expressing

i agree that once his arm has left yours he is free to strike, but is that not the 'upon loss of contact rush forward'?

[LSWCTN1]

As I see it, chi sao is a platform/exercise to learn certain contact skills. As they are contact skills, we need to be in contact to practice them -- hence "sticking", i.e., remaining attached to an opponent.

The objective of those contact skills isn't simply to remain attached but to learn how to control and set up control of our opponent. We are not, therefore, chasing the hands but chasing (seeking) control (not just openings to hit).

of course, this is what i mean....

but you dont have an opening to hit (safely) without controlling their bridges

[t_niehoff]

of course, this is what i mean....

but you dont have an opening to hit (safely) without controlling their bridges

As I see it, striking isn't the objective of chi sao. The objective of chi sao is to learn certain contact skills that will permit you to control your opponent. Not simply bridge control. Striking is one of those contact skills. Striking used to set up, get or maintain control.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Nothing controls a person better than being knocked out.

[t_niehoff]

Nothing controls a person better than being knocked out.

Sure. And that raises two questions: how do you get to that point? and can you do it?