Seperating drills from practicallity

[Knifefighter]

The thing about Lop or Jut is the meaning of each word. Besides the fact that no one has ever had overall authority over the style, the understanding of each concept varies from teacher to teacher. There is plenty of in-fighting for this reason. Then we have Wing Chun outside of the Yip Man lineage, and there are even further deviations.

Conceptually Lop Sao is a grab, nothing more specific than a grab, how you interpret that grows and changes based on who you train with, and how you train. On top of that, it is also a concept with several variables for which you can express your own understanding of this grab, and not just what your teacher tells you that you can.

Ultimately in martial arts and fighting, you do what works. There is nothing gained from sticking to stylistic constraints.

If you want to know the best techniques for grabbing (or any other variable), all you have to do is watch the people who are the most highly skilled in the world at grabbing- judokas, BJJ stylists, Sambo players, MMA fighters, wrestlers, or any other activity in with people are performing in real time at world class levels using grabbing.

The fact is, you are not going to see athletes in these activities perform grabbing in the lop sao manner taught in WC.

[Ultimatewingchun]

There are applications for lop, pak, bil, tan, bong, garn, jut, etc. that can work.

But without constant sparring using serious contact, ie.- full, (or very close to full) power headshots, body punches, kicks, knees, and elbows being thrown with the same intensity (and I believe that using thin gloves but lots of protective gear is the way to go - with all due respect to the Dog Brothers and mma fighters)....

without these things - wing chun people will never find out what the applications for these moves (and the concepts and principles behind the moves) really are.

And what doesn't work at all.

After a full contact sparring session recently with myself and two other students who are way ahead of him - as well as being bigger than him by 5-6 inches, one of my students turned to me and said that when you spar - "you have to do a whole other version of wing chun".

He went on to say that the way he had to use pak, and lop, bong, bil, etc.. was different than what's done in the forms, drills, chi sao, etc.

And I was very happy that he said all this - because it shows me he's really starting to understand what it's all about. The very same thing I've been discovering for many years now for myself - this was starting to click for him too. The forms, drills, chi sao, wooden dummy, etc. all serve a purpose - by providing the letters that make up the alphabet, some phrases, some sentences, even a short paragraph or two here-and-there.

But all of this means nothing if you don't go and make your own paragraghs for yourself. More than paragraghs. YOU have to go REWRITE THE BOOK - and the book may constantly change with each new set of circumstances, with each new sparring partner, perhaps even with each new tool that an old sparring partner might bring to the table the next time.

It's important to learn the forms, drills, chi sao, etc. - and it's important to get grounded in certain applications of what's in the forms, drills, wooden dummy, etc...and to periodically return to these things - but it all comes out in the sparring.

In the end, it's the sparring/fighting that determines how the techniques will come out, which techniques, and when. And the final product may seriously surprise you.

[AdrianK]

If you want to know the best techniques for grabbing (or any other variable) all you have to do is watch the people who are the most highly skilled in the world at grabbing- judokas, BJJ stylists, Sambo players, MMA fighters, wrestlers, or any other activity in with people are performing in real time at world class levels using grabbing.

Absolutely, their grabs are forged in the fire of competition and combat, and if WC practitioners did so as well, you'd probably see lop sao become something extremely close to what they do.

The fact is, you are not going to see athletes in these activities perform grabbing in the lop sao manner taught in WC.

I never said it would be, in fact I've said the opposite, the general WC world is in a very poor state. Very few teachers have any understanding of their art conceptually, both in and out of Wing Chun.

[taojkd]

Absolutely, their grabs are forged in the fire of competition and combat, and if WC practitioners did so as well, you'd probably see lop sao become something extremely close to what they do.

So stop learning WC and go learn MMA/Judo/BJJ and see how they do grabs "forged in the fire of competition". Cause you wont get that from WC. i learned so WC, and then left to go do some MMA for a bit. I learned some FMA's and repeat. I still like the WC, when i can stand to be around that community.

He went on to say that the way he had to use pak, and lop, bong, bil, etc.. was different than what's done in the forms, drills, chi sao, etc.

Then stop doing those forms, drills, chi sao etc if the muscle memory your conditioning with those things isn't whats used when you spar. One reason I hate playing chi sao with people. Half of that crap never works when we gear up and spar. I only use chi sao-like drills to refines stuff I already know works.

-taojkd

To be honest, I really hate calling it chi sao since it usually ends up being more like pummeling or MT clinch drills with an emphasis on reacting on what I feel from my training partner and vice versa.

Hey Knifefighter, do you consider pummeling/MT clinch drills to be like a chi sao drill? Or does it turn your stomach to call them that

[Liddel]

the general WC world is in a very poor state. Very few teachers have any understanding of their art conceptually, both in and out of Wing Chun.

Given you've said Lop Sau is a grab i think you fall into this group.

The worst thing IMHO someone can do with lop sau is grab. Most schools out there advcate this. You see them showing teaching drills during chi sau telling people not to grab from Wu sau...the action has greater results as a chop.

The energy is better the touch points are more sound, you avoid being locked up and/or manipulated by people that are good at grabbing

IMO Lop sau (the action itself) is a parrying Chop. That may lead into a grab if one wishes, but to state the action is a grab is wrong.

Damm shocking

Too bad it doesn't work that way against a halfway skilled opponent.

As a grab perhaps not LOL but i've had sucess many times against kickboxers with the same experience as me. Generally in the clinch when they try to bridge in and put the plum on, on straight leads, head guards after wethering combos the list goes on....

Theres nothing wrong with being a hobiest and working theses things against mates from other styles that are also hobbiests, not everyone has to be a pro there bud...

DREW

[Ultimatewingchun]

Liddell is correct, lop sao's greatest efficiency is when it's used more as a guiding hand than as a grab-and-pull. It can be done much faster, and it's easier to transition to something else than when using the grab-and-pull.

[AdrianK]

So stop learning WC and go learn MMA/Judo/BJJ and see how they do grabs "forged in the fire of competition". Cause you wont get that from WC.

How does that have anything to do with what I said? I said, forged in the fire of combat, lop sao would probably become something very similar, because what they have is very conceptually similar to wing chun's lop sao. But then again, the concept of lop sao is up to the practitioner and who he or she has learned from.

I didn't say specifically that it would become exactly like MMA, in fact I believe there is a lot of arrogance there that MMA/Judo/BJJ is the best way. I don't think its the best way, just a proven way. The person's understanding and expression of the ideas is always the best way, meaning the "best" person has the "best" way, to a point.

Then stop doing those forms, drills, chi sao etc if the muscle memory your conditioning with those things isn't whats used when you spar. One reason I hate playing chi sao with people. Half of that crap never works when we gear up and spar. I only use chi sao-like drills to refines stuff I already know works.

You can talk to Violent Designs about the way we do chi sao. Its basically like sparring, just starting from a very close range. Why not spar, you might ask? Well, Chi sao is designed to build your understanding and ability from that range. Sparring is designed to be a more complete method. Chi Sao in my expression of it, is designed to focus on that range. So our sparring is actually very much like our chi sao, only we have less outside-range fighting and more inside-range fighting, since we start on the inner ranges. I think the strongest point of it is that he isn't even a Wing Chun practitioner. So there aren't any imaginary rules built into it.

Given you've said Lop Sau is a grab i think you fall into this group.

As far as I know, the literal translation of lop sao is grabbing hand? Given the number of lineages, conceptually it can only be said that this is a GRAB, nothing more, and nothing less. I am NOT saying that this is the only, or best, way of interpreting lop sao. I'm simply saying that as a concept, it can only be said that Wing Chun's Lop Sao is a grab. I'm not saying it can't be more than that, or less than that, but given the diversity of the wing chun community, its the most complete explanation that can be given, on the whole.

The worst thing IMHO someone can do with lop sau is grab. Most schools out there advcate this. You see them showing teaching drills during chi sau telling people not to grab from Wu sau...the action has greater results as a chop.

There is a chopping hand, which can utilize the ideas of lop sao. But lop sao does not mean chop, or chopping hand.

The energy is better the touch points are more sound, you avoid being locked up and/or manipulated by people that are good at grabbing

Obviously if someone is better at you than grabbing, you should use it less. Thats strategy. One of my biggest pet peeves is when I show someone something, and they say, well what if I do this?(that they usually learned from someone else) - Well, there is a counter to every counter, to every response. There is no full-proof method. If someone is better at countering your best move, you need to do something else.

IMO Lop sau (the action itself) is a parrying Chop. That may lead into a grab if one wishes, but to state the action is a grab is wrong.

Thats your interpretation, and I commend you for having an interpretation of it that is different than the norm. The expressions of what we know, that come from ourselves, are far more powerful than stylistic or systemic creations. IMHO.

Liddell is correct, lop sao's greatest efficiency is when it's used more as a guiding hand than as a grab-and-pull. It can be done much faster, and it's easier to transition to something else than when using the grab-and-pull.

I'd agree its a very good guiding hand, be careful when you talk about the greatest or best though, someone will inevitably come along and prove us all wrong But thats the nature of good martial arts, being proven wrong is a GREAT thing, not a bad one!

[taojkd]

I didn't say specifically that it would become exactly like MMA, in fact I believe there is a lot of arrogance there that MMA/Judo/BJJ is the best way. I don't think its the best way, just a proven way. The person's understanding and expression of the ideas is always the best way, meaning the "best" person has the "best" way, to a point.

MMA isnt the "best way". Traditional Martial artists think like this.
ex:
WC is the best way.
FMA is the best way.

MMA just trains according to what works for each individual. (i.e the "best" person is the one who trains the hardest)

You can talk to Violent Designs about the way we do chi sao. Its basically like sparring, just starting from a very close range. Why not spar, you might ask? Well, Chi sao is designed to build your understanding and ability from that range. Sparring is designed to be a more complete method. Chi Sao in my expression of it, is designed to focus on that range. So our sparring is actually very much like our chi sao, only we have less outside-range fighting and more inside-range fighting, since we start on the inner ranges. I think the strongest point of it is that he isn't even a Wing Chun practitioner. So there aren't any imaginary rules built into it.

So your version of chi sao is like sparring.

You can talk to Violent Designs about the way we do chi sao. Its basically like sparring, just starting from a very close range.

But not really.

Chi sao is designed to build your understanding and ability from that range. Sparring is designed to be a more complete method. Chi Sao in my expression of it, is designed to focus on that range.

But actually it is. Cause chi sao without rules = sparring.

So there aren't any imaginary rules built into it.

Glad you cleared that up for us.

Liddell is correct, lop sao's greatest efficiency is when it's used more as a guiding hand than as a grab-and-pull. It can be done much faster, and it's easier to transition to something else than when using the grab-and-pull.

Unless I want to grab you. Cause i likes me my grappling
In which case the grap-n-pull its the most efficient for me.

[sanjuro_ronin]

MMA just trains according to what works for each individual. (i.e the "best" person is the one who trains the hardest)

You should have stopped here, you had me at "hello".

[AdrianK]

But actually it is. Cause chi sao without rules = sparring.

It's interesting that you'd come to that conclusion. I'm not saying it doesn't follow a similar structure to Chi Sao - But the intensity level, and what goes, is more similar to sparring. You could call it sparring, but the focal point of the exercise is to build skills in that mid range.

[Liddel]

As far as I know, the literal translation of lop sao is grabbing hand? Given the number of lineages, conceptually it can only be said that this is a GRAB, nothing more, and nothing less. I am NOT saying that this is the only, or best, way of interpreting lop sao. I'm simply saying that as a concept, it can only be said that Wing Chun's Lop Sao is a grab. I'm not saying it can't be more than that, or less than that, but given the diversity of the wing chun community, its the most complete explanation that can be given, on the whole.

Conceptually - literal translation - interpreting.... i guess the biggest difference between you and i would be i talk about my own specific experience and actual application rather than what a word may mean or how its understood.

Using / applying Lop Sau as a grab is IMO not a good idea, which is why KF's call about looking to people who's grabbing is better, is good advice IMO.

My intention and appllication with Lop is different to grabs in Judo, BJJ so i need not look to those systems for what im trying to achieve. My Lop is not a grab.

When posting about Kung Fu or Wing Chun speciffically i reccomend using direct experience and application rather than what you think people from a hundred years ago intended or what word its accosiated with...it'll make for a smoother ride
But its your call.

How does ones understanding and use of the term 'Wing Arm' (or insert translation here) help them get the timing structure and energy involved in using Bong Sau ?

Sometimes undersdtanding terms helps, sometimes it hinders... your explanation of Lop Here is an example of it hindering understanding of application IMHO.

There is a chopping hand, which can utilize the ideas of lop sao. But lop sao does not mean chop, or chopping hand.

Regardless of what one thinks it means, how have you been taught to USE it ?
Do you apply it like a grab ?

DREW

[AdrianK]

Conceptually - literal translation - interpreting.... i guess the biggest difference between you and i would be i talk about my own specific experience and actual application rather than what a word may mean or how its understood.

Well absolutely, your personal experience and application is far more important to your fighting abilities than a broad, sweeping definition. I meant it only that no one has any real authority in saying what is and isn't lop sao, because of the extreme differences in opinion between lineages and teachers.

Using / applying Lop Sau as a grab is IMO not a good idea, which is why KF's call about looking to people who's grabbing is better, is good advice IMO.

It really depends on what Lop Sao is to you, and what other concepts mean to you as well. Your application of Lop Sao, without a grab may be more similar to my application of a different concept.

When I personally talk about Lop Sao, I talk about the concepts behind grabbing. That doesn't mean that it is WC Lop Sao either, it is just what I use to describe a grab, and everything I know about grabbing, regardless of style. I use Pak to describe a parrying motion and not the movement itself, thats my personal expression of such.

When posting about Kung Fu or Wing Chun speciffically i reccomend using direct experience and application rather than what you think people from a hundred years ago intended or what word its accosiated with...it'll make for a smoother ride

Sure, all that matters really is your personal experiences and understanding of how to utilize your body and abilities. Whether that means you grab or you don't grab, whether you parry or not, how you define it is up to you. But when speaking to an entire community, you need to keep in mind the diverse opinions on such vague term.

How does ones understanding and use of the term 'Wing Arm' (or insert translation here) help them get the timing structure and energy involved in using Bong Sau ?

I would say that understanding the term will allow you to see that its a variable and not a set motion. It really depends on how you look at your Wing Chun, or Martial Arts, though. I use the broad, sweeping definitions to give myself room to find all of the variable ways to apply each idea. The movements themselves are templates, ideas of good ways to utilize the concepts, but I don't think they are the only ways, or the best ways for each and every person.

Regardless of what one thinks it means, how have you been taught to USE it ?
Do you apply it like a grab ?

I've had several WC Sifu, I've been taught to use it many different ways

I think the split here is that we're speaking in the same terms with a different understanding of each. I use Lop to describe a segment of knowledge that involves grabbing - which includes all grabs and grabbing methods, concepts, ideas that I've ever learned from various styles and such, and anything I've come up with, as well. I don't use it as a means to describe a specific technique.

I don't "Apply" Lop Sao as anything other than a method for understanding how my body works. That goes for all WC concepts. After that, in sparring or fighting, you will see the expression of what I find effective.

That is when IMHO, there is no lop sao, pak sao, or anything like that. It is simply what my body expresses naturally based on how I've trained and my understanding of things.

Do I have an understanding of a guiding hand similar to the Lop Sao technique found in many WC lineages? Absolutely. Do I grab in the traditional Lop Sao way which you find ineffective?

I know what you mean by the Lop Sao Grab you find ineffective, I honestly agree, its very weak for me. I think most of our differences come more from what I use to describe things, they get mixed in with expressions that most people have very different ideas of.

[Liddel]

Seems like you dont apply the idea "the shortest distance between two points is a straight line" - to your explanations LOL.

With all due respect - at face value its seems you might be the type to apply a huen sau bong sau po sau then punch to the face when you could have just used. Pak Da.

This is my #1 issue with chunners - overcomplicating stuff thats good 'as is'.

I would say that understanding the term will allow you to see that its a variable and not a set motion

I would say experience in fighting does that for you.

I use the broad, sweeping definitions to give myself room to find all of the variable ways to apply each idea. The movements themselves are templates

Actually its quite the contrary. As i see it you;ve boxed yourself in and only grab with Lop Sau cause thats its literal translation.

I feel your POV and the way you've conveyed that - at least here in this thread is incossistent.

Perhaps im wrong

DREW

[AdrianK]

With all due respect - at face value its seems you might be the type to apply a huen sau bong sau po sau then punch to the face when you could have just used. Pak Da.

Its actually quite the opposite - Yes, I'm the type of person who tries to understand everything in its entirety - In Wing Chun or Martial Arts, most of what I will talk about or ponder on is almost purely academic. An understanding of the Art, Sciences, Conceptualization, variables, etc. - No one needs any of that to be a good fighter. And I understand that. And as a personal fighting philosophy, my on-going goals is to eliminate the unnecessary, the illogical.

I'd like to say how I fight and how anyone I teach fights, is to use the understanding of the concepts learned, to find the openings in balance, striking, everything, and to forget about complex performances like the one you suggest.

This is my #1 issue with chunners - overcomplicating stuff thats good 'as is'.

Agreed. There is a trend among all martial arts where people over complicate what is actually very simple, and over-simplify what is actually very complex.

I would say experience in fighting does that for you.

Experience in the doing, for every subject, will give way to real knowledge. Does that mean we shouldn't try to speak or understand what is effectively art, science and philosphy, on the deepest level possible?

Actually its quite the contrary. As i see it you;ve boxed yourself in and only grab with Lop Sau cause thats its literal translation.

Ehh, I'd say you're not really understanding what I'm saying, then.
I only "Grab" with Lop Sao because Lop Sao is a descriptive term for a grab. By saying Lop Sao I am not specifically speaking of Wing Chun Lop Sao, or any specific style's lop sao. When speaking of a specific WC Lop Sao - It is both a physical template, and concept that can be derived into any number of variations that of course, go outside of the literal definition. I would personally no longer describe them as lop sao, even if I utilize the concepts derived from. I would try to describe them with a term as fitting as possible, but thats just my opinion. I don't call a car, a fish, I don't call yellow, orange.

[Mr Punch]

Sorry, don't get around here much... here's a reply I started a couple of days ago:

I don't understand what you mean.

That most wing chun is NOT natural expression. It is forcing natural reactions into unnatural expression. Now, I'm not saying that's a bad thing: sometimes you have force yourself into unnatural patterns of movement for the sake of a useful technique/strategy (e.g. I don't like most of the throws that involve you throwing yourself to the ground from a Russian arm drag - they seem very unnatural... but done that way the result is what I want: someone on the floor hopefully under me or set up for an arm bar). But in a lot of wing chun you force yourself to internalise these patterns... and then force yourself to change them when you use them in fighting...!!! Doesn't make sense.

Whats your point? That dodge isn't in the curriculum? Or that I didn't include dodge? If its the former, I never said WC encompassed all of our natural reactions. I believe it is far from that. If it is the latter, I named a certain few concepts, not nearly all of them.

My point is that dodging and riding blows are HUGE parts of fighting, and to have a 'style' that eschews these things, that even forces you to have a fairly motionless upper body is a HUGE flaw. You can't move your whole body out the way of a full speed strike or kick, but you can by using moving your upper body. Also, despite chun having a hook and an uppercut, these are still based on the premise that your upper body is a solid unit. Which is daft.

Some lines believe that BJ is for breaking out of this box; e.g. doing the first elbow strike sequence really folding their upper body over. That might make sense. When I learnt BJ and worked with that motion I found it way more effective than the static body version. And when I applied BJ to the other sets it worked better too. Now, maybe I'd got it wrong until then (fair enough!... although in chi sao and light sparring with other chun lines I've always given better than I got so I doubt it somehow... ☺ ) ... or maybe learning the static body thing in the first place is bloody stupid.

Either way, I didn't miss anything.

Point taken: no need to get touchy. Maybe I should have said 'something missing from your list'. It's a turn of phrase, and not an accusatory one.

I believe almost all styles as they are taught lend themselves to rigidity and stiffness.

It is because these styles aren't taught in the form of concepts, that they are a small but valid science, instead they are taught that with rehearsed motions - they are the ONLY valid "Science", and follow no scientific method or understanding.

Boxing is rigid for absolute beginners in their first couple of weeks. As soon as they get into a ring it’d had better’ve gone. BJJ, wrestling etc, MAY be rigid for a day or two… but again it soon has to go… same with Thai, same with kickboxing, even karate as soon as they fight. So I don’t know what you’re trying to say here. I also don’t know what you’re trying to say in terms of ‘science’. To call any fighting methods ‘science’ is to show a fundamental ignorance of scientific method, and of fighting! Even just to say that they are ‘scientific’ is conceit! Are you really telling me that in some way knowledge of leverage and physics and statistical probability as to the potential reactions you’re going to get has anything to do with how you fight?! OK, I’m messing around putting words into your mouth: so please tell me – what are you talking about?

What you don't seem to understand is that fighting, and expressing concepts, are the same thing.

Yep, you got me there too. What are you talking about? (EDIT: I started writing this reply before you started that thread on expression of concepts. I stated my opinions on that clearly enough: in practical terms, seeing ‘fighting’ as ‘expressing concepts’ is abstruse, pointless and serves no purpose in improving your fighting.)

Expressing concepts is a more specific way of saying you are utilizing what you are taught and what you teach yourself, in a natural way. Utilizing your physical and mental abilities, as well as your emotions and will.

Fighting is very expressive. In a fight where you are tested to your limits, you show exactly who you are as a person. There is no room for anything else.

I get you. You’re using philosophical existential concepts to explain a physical phenomenon. The Dog Brothers’ motto ‘Greater enlightenment through harder contact’ or whatever it is would fit into this.　As would the idea that everyone should make wing chun their own. Then your interpretation of your wing chun comes out, and it doesn’t matter if it isn’t hide-bound or even system-specific but it becomes true freedom of movement. That’s what Terrence is saying. That’s what Robert Chu says. That’s what WSL said. That’s what Bruce Lee said. That’s what my sifu said. Doesn’t mean they all mean/t quite the same thing! Difference being in how they only learn stuff: as they use it, and testing it from the get-go in a variety of ways including full live resistance, OR as reinterpretation of the modification of the interpretation of the energy work of a completely different movement in a form!

Absolutely, conceptually its strengths lie beyond simply covering up. Though, its as natural a reaction as any, to lift your arms up to protect yourself. Its as natural as any to grab(lop), but the concepts behind grabbing are what empower it…

The bong, like every technique, is variable. The elbow being down is similar in structure as the elbow being up, its just a variation. Still bong sao conceptually. Thats where we all get confused is that the rehearsed motion is static. Its not, its an idea which is infinitely variable. Thats where expression comes in, how you choose to utilize that variable idea at any given moment.

Now, I don’t think you’re getting what I’m saying. Lifting your arms to cover up is natural. Specifically, lifting your arms with your hands palm-in by your head and your elbows forwards or down is a natural cover up. Bong is not. From what you’re saying, the boxing cover, or even the Thai guard which is different to the boxing one, are the same as each other, are the same as the spike/shell guard, and are the same as the bong sao. You could argue the first three, but the bong sao is up when the others are down. You’re not trying to argue that up is down, are you?

Bong sao is a ****ty position. And yeah, sure, it’s a dynamic action, not a static position… and it does have its uses: but ‘covering up’ is not one of them.

Fighting isn't rehearsed, it is not an expression of a style, that we can use anything we're taught is great. The ideas need to be adaptable though, otherwise we're stuck trying to do all of these techniques we learn, trying to find the perfect situations to do them in, and everything in between that, we have no answer to.

Completely agreed on that.

Grabbing as a concept, again, encompasses every variable.

And AGAIN, like with bong and covering, you were upholding specifically the lop as a grab itself that covers any variable? It doesn’t. Apart from the fact that we’ve then got the argument Liddel brought up that it more often than not isn’t even a grab… you’re agreeing with him while holding that it’s THE wing chun example of a grab to rival judo/JJ’s/wrestling’s grab positioning work? Sounds like the bong sao up = down argument again to me!

Ya know, grab everything is just an idea. It has its place, but you can't always control both arms, and you can't always control just one arm. Both are valid. Grab everything is an expression of lop sao as well.

If you read my original point again here, you’ll see that my grab anything isn’t talking about grabbing every part of the body and smothering every possible angle of attack: it’s talking about grabbing whatever it takes to control everything: i.e. the head or the neck. I’m talking about the clinch.