Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 123

Thread: Progression without Chi Sao, is it possible?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,228
    Quote Originally Posted by tigershorty View Post
    not that bruce lee was like king of wing chun or anything ..but didn't he tell WSL that "chi sao is out"?
    What does that even mean?

    As far as I know when the $hit hit the fan, Bruce relied on his WCK more than anything else. He also maintained various WCK training elements including ChiSao even into his JKD stage.. Bruce in fact did a ChiSao demo at the Nationals in California where he showcased his new JKD.
    Jim Hawkins
    M Y V T K F
    "You should have kicked him in the ball_..."—Sifu

  2. #32
    i'm not sure what it meant, i was putting it out there in case anyone wanted to clarify. but i've been told by a few wing chun people he said that and i'm sure there was a reason why he did. that's all.
    maybe it was a marketing thing remark or he thought westerners didn't relate to it, not sure.

    no one is saying he didn't rely on wing chun or whatever assumptions you're making

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Vajramusti View Post
    Chi sao is integral to the art. Take it away and you have something else. Call it what you want.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    True IMO.

    joy chaudhuri
    It's not the drill/exercise itself but what the drill/exercise teaches you that is integral to the art.

    The problems with all forms of unrealistic training (other than for conditioning) -- that is training not done under fighting conditions -- is that you can't help but practice the actions, movements, skills, etc. wrongly (not how you will perform them under fighting conditions). Thus, at best they are a waste of good training time and at worst counter-productive (actually making you worse).

    Training wheels on your bike may allow you learn some rudiments of riding, but it isn't riding the bike.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaolinstudent View Post
    Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)
    No, force sensitivity is important in close range combat.
    "In fighting, the hand you can see will not hurt you, the hand you cannot see, will hurt you." - Grandmaster Gary Lam

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rio Grande Valley, Texas
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    It's not the drill/exercise itself but what the drill/exercise teaches you that is integral to the art.

    The problems with all forms of unrealistic training (other than for conditioning) -- that is training not done under fighting conditions -- is that you can't help but practice the actions, movements, skills, etc. wrongly (not how you will perform them under fighting conditions). Thus, at best they are a waste of good training time and at worst counter-productive (actually making you worse).

    Training wheels on your bike may allow you learn some rudiments of riding, but it isn't riding the bike.
    I agree that its not the "drill/exercise" itself but what what it teaches you, but the question seems to be can you develop "sensitivity" - or much broader, what wing chun seeks to teach - without doing a sensitivity/control drill? How do you develop contact reflexes without doing any sort of contact reflex training?

    Chi Sau should be a means to an end, not the end itself....I think with that in mind for training, the unique method of chi sau develops the sensitivity (as well as other traits useful for fighting) that is pretty unique to Wing Chun's fighting concepts and method. I still maintain that without this training you are not doing wing chun...."stick to what comes, follow what leaves, hands free strike direct" is the principle....how do you do this principle if you don't understand the recieving and the sticking?

    I personally think that the "skill" of wing chun is best understood through the chi sau training, otherwise you are left with simply a series of set techniques (this is presupposing that one trains chi sau with no set techniques but seeks to take advantage of every opportunity that presents itself through the openings of the opponent's defenses and not as set techniques - which, in my opinion, is not chi sau). May as well be Krav Maga and for self defense you are left to memorize a series of techniques which you can only hope that in a real situation will be executed exactly as they were in your training or else you are training to be defeated because you have not trained for adaptation.

    It is through Chi sau that one learns to flow and adapt to a changing situation and stimuli in the same way that "rolling" in jiu jitsu brings about their skill level to learn to apply the proper techniques for the proper situation. Would you have the skill of Jiu Jitsu without rolling? Probably not...likewise, could you have skill of Wing Chun without Chi Sau.

    now, stepping out of bounds a wee bit.....I personally think that many who want do not incorporate Chi Sau in their Wing Chun training probably do not understand it and it becomes nothing more than a rote drill (which explains the "set techniques" and "routines" that ends up looking like a 2 man fighting form rather than freely flowing and applying techniques.

    my humble opinion again,

    Moses
    Last edited by RGVWingChun; 03-26-2010 at 12:56 PM.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    It's not the drill/exercise itself but what the drill/exercise teaches you that is integral to the art.
    Agreed. That's already been said previously.

    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    The problems with all forms of unrealistic training (other than for conditioning) -- that is training not done under fighting conditions -- is that you can't help but practice the actions, movements, skills, etc. wrongly (not how you will perform them under fighting conditions). Thus, at best they are a waste of good training time and at worst counter-productive (actually making you worse).
    Why is conditioning an exception? Can't you get conditioning under fighting conditions too?
    Of course sparring is also unrealistic training, since it is not a "real fight" or are there degrees of realism?
    'Talk is cheap because there is an excess of supply over demand'

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by YungChun View Post
    As a result they begin to remove any useful training elements and instead take advantage of the limits within an artificial construct--a drill.

    The problem isn't ChiSao it's how ChiSao is used.

    Choppy chop chop anyone?
    Yes, that's it. Someone who allows themselves to experience the chi sao, rather than trying to win some game may in fact be the "winner" in the sense that they have learned something in the process.

    Sorry, no choppy chop chop here.
    'Talk is cheap because there is an excess of supply over demand'

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Matrix View Post
    Agreed. That's already been said previously.
    And your point is?

    Why is conditioning an exception? Can't you get conditioning under fighting conditions too?
    Of course you get conditioning by training realistically, but you can also develop your conditioning by not doing realistic training (running, skipping rope, hitting bags or mitts, etc.) whereas you can develop fighting skill except only by realistic training.

    Of course sparring is also unrealistic training, since it is not a "real fight" or are there degrees of realism?
    There's no such thing as "real fighting".

    Realistic training develops realistic skills, i.e., skills that work under realistic conditions (in any sort of fighting). At its core, realsitic training involves dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is genuinely trying to overcome you (and not behaving in a contrived way).

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by RGVWingChun View Post
    I agree that its not the "drill/exercise" itself but what what it teaches you, but the question seems to be can you develop "sensitivity" - or much broader, what wing chun seeks to teach - without doing a sensitivity/control drill? How do you develop contact reflexes without doing any sort of contact reflex training?
    Chi sao isn't to develop "sensitivity" or "contact reflexes" -- it is a platform to teach/learn various contact skills. As chi sao is an unrealistic drill, any "reflexes" you develop will be wrong.

    Good grapplers develop contact skills without doing chi sao -- how? By simply grappling. In other words, by using their contact skills in sparring.

    Chi Sau should be a means to an end, not the end itself....I think with that in mind for training, the unique method of chi sau develops the sensitivity (as well as other traits useful for fighting) that is pretty unique to Wing Chun's fighting concepts and method. I still maintain that without this training you are not doing wing chun...."stick to what comes, follow what leaves, hands free strike direct" is the principle....how do you do this principle if you don't understand the recieving and the sticking?
    Firstly, your translation of the kuit -- "stick to what comes, follow what leaves, hands free strike direct"-- is very, very wrong.

    Secondly, chi sao does not develop "sensitivity". Sensitivity is nothing more than timing derived from our tactile sense. But you don't -- and can't -- develop timing from chi sao since your partner isn't behaving realistically (he is not fighitng you). What chi sao "develops" is a false timing.

    Thirdly, all forms of unrealistic training involve (by definition) doing the actions, movements, and skills wrong. So, the more you do unrealsitic training (chi sao), the more you waste your time and the worse you get.

    Fourthly, you can learn and/or develop functional skills by simply doing that skill realistically.

    I personally think that the "skill" of wing chun is best understood through the chi sau training, otherwise you are left with simply a series of set techniques (this is presupposing that one trains chi sau with no set techniques but seeks to take advantage of every opportunity that presents itself through the openings of the opponent's defenses and not as set techniques - which, in my opinion, is not chi sau). May as well be Krav Maga and for self defense you are left to memorize a series of techniques which you can only hope that in a real situation will be executed exactly as they were in your training or else you are training to be defeated because you have not trained for adaptation.
    If that's "all you are left with", then your WCK training was very, very incomplete.

    WCK has a method, an organized, strategic approach to fighting (without which you are lost). It has various tools (skills and tactics) to implement that approach. It has a kuit to point you in the right direction. Instead of practicing the skills in an unrealsitic exercise that unrealstically represents contact/attached fighting, just learn and practice in contact/attached fighting.

    It is through Chi sau that one learns to flow and adapt to a changing situation and stimuli in the same way that "rolling" in jiu jitsu brings about their skill level to learn to apply the proper techniques for the proper situation. Would you have the skill of Jiu Jitsu without rolling? Probably not...likewise, could you have skill of Wing Chun without Chi Sau.
    Go fight some non WCK people while in contact/attached and see if that "looks" like chi sao. It won't. That tells you that chi sao is unrealistic training. To develop your WCK movement/actions into fighting skills you need to practice using them in contact/attached fighting, i.e., sparring.

    That's what rolling is in BJJ -- rolling is using your BJJ skills in sparring.

    now, stepping out of bounds a wee bit.....I personally think that many who want do not incorporate Chi Sau in their Wing Chun training probably do not understand it and it becomes nothing more than a rote drill (which explains the "set techniques" and "routines" that ends up looking like a 2 man fighting form rather than freely flowing and applying techniques.

    my humble opinion again,

    Moses
    I practiced chi sao for 20 years before I realized that I had been wasting my time for 19 years! Once you can ride the bicycle with the training wheels on, it is time to take the training wheels off (and you don't even need the training wheels in the first place). Continuing to ride around with the training wheels on won't make you any better. You get better by just riding the bike.

    Nothing is "rote" about sparring (which is riding the bike) -- all the functional martial arts use realistic sparring as their core platform for teaching/learning and for training (which is why they are functional).

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    And your point is?.
    My point is that I'm agreeing with you about the drill and what is being taught by the drill. Also I'm mentioning that several others had already made the same point. Is that a problem?

    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    Of course you get conditioning by training realistically, but you can also develop your conditioning by not doing realistic training (running, skipping rope, hitting bags or mitts, etc.) whereas you can develop fighting skill except only by realistic training.
    But aren't you wasting valuable training time by skipping rope instead of fighting?

    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    There's no such thing as "real fighting".
    That's why I put the term "real fighting" in quotes. I know you have an issue with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    Realistic training develops realistic skills, i.e., skills that work under realistic conditions (in any sort of fighting). At its core, realsitic training involves dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is genuinely trying to overcome you (and not behaving in a contrived way).
    But if there's no such thing as a "real fight" then I guess by extension there should be no such thing as "realistic training". I agree with your point on a genuinely resisting opponent, by the way. I hope that's not a problem.

    Peace
    Bill
    Last edited by Matrix; 03-27-2010 at 05:44 AM.
    'Talk is cheap because there is an excess of supply over demand'

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO USA
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Matrix View Post
    But aren't you wasting valuable training time by skipping rope instead of fighting?
    Yes and no.

    In one sense, I see conditioning as preparing yoru body for the rigors of sparring (the skill development process).

    I think that the "best" form of conditioning for fighting is fighting/sparring. And, you will need to fight/spar to develop your conditioning no matter what else you do. However, fighting/sparring carries a higher risk of injury than other forms of conditioning and by doing nonfighting forms of conditioning you can supplement your development in amore risk-free way.

    Also, you can concentrate or focus more specifically on certain aspects of your body's condition outside of sparring.

    That's why I put the term "real fighting" in quotes. I know you have an issue with this.

    But if there's no such thing as a "real fight" then I guess by extension there should be no such thing as "realistic training". I agree with your point on a genuinely resisting opponent, by the way. I hope that's not a problem.

    Peace
    Bill
    No, you miss the point. It isn't helpful to focus on some theoretical thing you call a "real fight" (which seems to vary among people) or various rulesets. What is helpful is to focus instead on what all "forms" of fighting have in common.

    Fighting is simply when you face a genuine resisting opponent(s) who is trying to genuinely overcome you by physical force -- by striking or by grappling or by a combination of striking and grappling (focusing on emptyhand for the moment). That can range from a fight to the death to a scuffle.

    We learn to deal with someoen genuinely trying to strike us (knock our block off) by dealing with someone genuinely trying to strike us (knock our block off) -- that is realsitic training. We learn to deal with someone genuinely trying to grapple with (and take down or submit) us by dealing with someone genuinely trying to grapple with us -- that is realsitic training. We learn to deal with someone trying to strike and grapple with us by dealingwith someone genuinely trying to strike and grapple with us -- that is realistic training.

    It's easy to ID realistic training.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    No, you miss the point. It isn't helpful to focus on some theoretical thing you call a "real fight" (which seems to vary among people) or various rulesets. What is helpful is to focus instead on what all "forms" of fighting have in common.
    Hey T.
    I deliberately wanted to go off on a strange tangent in my response, just to show how bizarre the logic can get. In other words, I was yanking your chain. Sorry about that.

    Quite frankly I agree with a lot of what you have to say. I just disagree with the rigidity of your thinking. You've had a bad experience with chi sao, and therefore you feel that invalidates everyone elses experience with it. You know as well as I do that what is called "chi sao" varies widely from group to group.

    I'm sorry that you feel that you've wasted 19 years of your life on something that you now feel is worthless. I think that explains alot about why you respond the way you do. Maybe in a few years, I will feel the same way, but based on my current POV, I highly doubt it.............. but I remain open to other ideas and thoughts.

    Many thanks.
    Bill
    'Talk is cheap because there is an excess of supply over demand'

  13. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Kagan View Post
    Don't you find it a tad exhausting to worry about whether you can be a superhero?
    Superhero! Not even close, most of my friends are very adept fighters, but some have not had a real fight in a long time and some never been in a fight there whole life. So yes, it could be me helping out the little guy but the little guy is my friend in thiis case. I would have a watching a friend fight someone twice their size who looks like they will eat tem afterwards. So if that makes me a "Superhero". Then I am.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,228
    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    Good grapplers develop contact skills without doing chi sao -- how? By simply grappling. In other words, by using their contact skills in sparring.
    Grapplers will also train from specific positions and conditions, IOW starting from a particular position of engagement.. And repeating that over and over in order to increase familiarity and focus on those conditions ...

    Yes grapplers grapple but often don't strike while grappling.. So there goes your realism I guess eh? So then the training is useless right? LOL

    This is what ChiSao is doing, it is taking certain conditions that can happen during fighting and recreating those conditions with greater frequency in order to focus on skill development wrt those conditions..


    Quote Originally Posted by t_niehoff View Post
    Thirdly, all forms of unrealistic training involve (by definition) doing the actions, movements, and skills wrong. So, the more you do unrealsitic training (chi sao), the more you waste your time and the worse you get.
    If you really believe that then I don't think you have ever trained in anything approaching good WCK with ChiSao.. ChiSao is a platform where the student can train various WCK techniques and tactics in a controlled environment. And an environment that is alive, dynamic, where the partner resists and can also involve a partner trying to 'take your head off'...

    The techniques and the conditions that WCK work in are a constant.. That means two things..

    1. The tools/techniques of WCK are the tools and techniques--they are constants.

    2. The conditions that call for a particular tool or action are also constants.

    The conditions depend on energy and position and how the opponent or partner resists.. These physical conditions are constants..meaning the same conditions must exist for a given move to work no matter if it is a drill or a fight..


    It's easy to see ChiSao as unrelated to the WCK fight if you don't understand what real ChiSao is and how it is supposed to be used..

    The tactics are the tactics, the tools are the tools and what makes them work (conditions) are what they are and also don't change.. because they are generic (position/force vector)

    ChiSao done correctly is simply a way to focus on the conditions, tools and tactics that WCK operates in--nothing more nothing less.. Just like the grapplers working from specific grappling positions and conditions from the perspective of a grappler--WCK does the same from the perspective of a WCK fighter.

    Yes, we must fight and spar but this doesn't mean ChiSao somehow runs counter to how and what WCK does in fighting. If trained correctly and understood ChiSao works directly on many WCK elements that will be used in the fight exactly how they were designed to be used..
    Last edited by YungChun; 03-28-2010 at 12:51 AM.
    Jim Hawkins
    M Y V T K F
    "You should have kicked him in the ball_..."—Sifu

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Midwestern United States
    Posts
    1,922
    Quote Originally Posted by YungChun View Post
    What does that even mean?

    As far as I know when the $hit hit the fan, Bruce relied on his WCK more than anything else. He also maintained various WCK training elements including ChiSao even into his JKD stage.. Bruce in fact did a ChiSao demo at the Nationals in California where he showcased his new JKD.
    Then, you would be incorrect. The further that Bruce went down the path of JKD the less viable he found chi sao and trapping.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •