Fook Sau

[Graham H]

I am finding this thread a real joke as it seems that as brothers we can't even agree to a unified understanding of Fook Sau!

I also find it funny that nobody has mentioned that another translation for Fook is HIDDEN and it seems the concept of literal translation is still locked away in the Wing Chun vault somewhere in history!

Fook sau is just fook sau, as bong is just bong and tan is just tan. They are all part of a 'seed' that SHOULD unite us all. Unfortunately, even this is just not understood by everyone in the same way. What a shame.

Wing Chun is dying faster than I thought.

Hidden????????? Come on, you can't be serious!!!!!

Fook Sau is a punch, Tan Sau is a punch and Bong Sau opens the way for the punch....simple thinking, intelligent fighting!!!! How can you say fook is just fook and tan is just tan???? Its fundamentally the foundation of the whole system ffs!!!!

The basic disagreement here is whether fook sau is used for developing the concept and correct way of the VT punch or whether its used to sense energy, control limbs and subdue arms. Look at that statement and tell me which idea you would prefer to take into a fight????

If you guys are spent locked up in each others arms for the duration of your chi sau practice then thats ok........pointless but ok if that what you think VT is teaching us. I prefer to use my Chi Sau to develop attributes and then take into sparring to test......There is no rolling in sparring and neither is there prolonged periods of arm contact so why waste time trying to do things in Chi Sau that have no place in fighting?????? THAT'S why VT is dying!!!!!!!!!!

GH

[t_niehoff]

Hidden????????? Come on, you can't be serious!!!!!

Fook Sau is a punch, Tan Sau is a punch and Bong Sau opens the way for the punch....simple thinking, intelligent fighting!!!! How can you say fook is just fook and tan is just tan???? Its fundamentally the foundation of the whole system ffs!!!!

Fook sao, tan sao aren't punches. Bong sao isn't to open the way for a punch. These are all bridge hands (kiu sao). In fact, these same actions sometimes have different names in different branches of WCK, yet they always act as kiu sao.

And this explains why tan, bong, fook make up the luk sao chi sao platform -- as these are the fundamental bridge hands and we do the drill/exercise (chi sao) WHILE maintaining bridges. If all we wanted to do was to punch, we wouldn't need to do chi sao, we could just do punching drills.

The basic disagreement here is whether fook sau is used for developing the concept and correct way of the VT punch or whether its used to sense energy, control limbs and subdue arms. Look at that statement and tell me which idea you would prefer to take into a fight????

The WCK punch as it is done in the forms and drills develop the correct way of WCK punching. If you want to train how to punch, then punch. You can't learn how to do it by not punching.

Similarly, you can't learn to control by not controlling.

If you guys are spent locked up in each others arms for the duration of your chi sau practice then thats ok........pointless but ok if that what you think VT is teaching us. I prefer to use my Chi Sau to develop attributes and then take into sparring to test......There is no rolling in sparring and neither is there prolonged periods of arm contact so why waste time trying to do things in Chi Sau that have no place in fighting?????? THAT'S why VT is dying!!!!!!!!!!

GH

WCK's method is to control while striking -- the method goes back to the founders of WCK. Chi sao is only teaching us how the movements/actions of WCK can be used to do that. If you want a platform to teach contact fighting actions, including how to control and use someone's bridges, wouldn't you use something like chi sao? You need to then take that into sparring to develop it.

Chi sao doesn't develop "attributes".

The rolling arms (poon sao) is to teach you something that pertains to contact fighting. Do you know what that something is? If not, then doing it IS a waste of time since you don't know what you are learning.

[air]

Here is how we do our Fuk Sao

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m55twzbAufk

[k gledhill]

What GH said....the test is sparring with your 'developed' ideas... sparring.

A lot of chi-sao is actually redundant to our fighting, it simply is a unique drill that imo has been so misunderstood by so many for so long , its become the norm.

Feeling / sensitivity is a by-product of the striking drills, not the aim to become acute feelers in controlling, contact, clinch-fests.

imo, the problem lies in the initiation to the process, guys get shown to use a jut instead of a fok sao with inwards forwards striking energy,meeting a tan with inwards forwards energy...the tan extends and instead of engaging it with an equalizing forward inward elbow [preceding a following strike] the fok rolls back and does all kinds of dissolving things. This takes the hips out of the equation due to the tans energy being nullified instead of using it to develop a counter striking energy that will be its [tans] partner in striking attacks, developing the stance too, to back up the punches ...iow we start to develop the striking partnership in dan chi-sao, each in turn. Tan leads, jum responds, jum strikes, tan bongs, jum becomes fok elbow recovery [in and down] arms drop to repeat.
You feel the hips when doing this because the jum is trying to maintain its elbow angle alone to make the tan deflect sideways ...

[YungChun]

I always see both points and I also see both extremes as extremes..

Kevin and Terence are polar opposites, that while each has good points each is limited (or it would seem so) because neither can see the validity in the other POV...or any other POV..

Of course there are controlling aspects, of course there are striking aspects, and of course there are attributes...

The key is the cultivation of kinesthetic awareness to energy and position.. The training addresses how to use that to gain an advantage tactically in the moment (conditioned response) to gain an advantage using Chun tools and techniques in order to strike, often while controlling which can be direct or indirect control.

Again, much of the confusion arises IMO because much of what is Chun and the training methods were created and intended to be used against people that used similar methods; that also wanted to bridge; that wanted to control the centerline, etc.. When you fight someone like that, vs someone who doesn't fight anything like that, you cannot expect the same things to happen, the same tools and actions to be useful or needed... How the art of Chun is used will be dependent on what you are dealing with or not dealing with in the moment.

[Graham H]

Fook sao, tan sao aren't punches. Bong sao isn't to open the way for a punch.

In our lineage it is and thats the exact reason I'm in it. I've seen and done your way T and it sucks!!! In fact I had 8 years of it!!!!!!

The contact in Poon Sau is so we can use each other to increase our own force and attain structure for the punch amongst other things. Not to learn how to bridge arms and control them!!!!!

Like Kevin and many before him, I too used to see Chi Sau how T does until the day came when I met somebody who had a better idea.....a much better idea!!!!

GH

[shawchemical]

If you want to learn how to position your elbow in punching and train it, then practice it with punching. Learn X, then practice X, then do X. Crazy idea, huh?

Your idea that everything is to train elbow position is silly -- you don't need to do fook sao to learn how to position your elbow when punching: you've already learned that when you learned the punch.

Geez you're simple T.

Did you ride the special blue bus to school?

[Graham H]

A lot of chi-sao is actually redundant to our fighting, it simply is a unique drill that imo has been so misunderstood by so many for so long , its become the norm.

Feeling / sensitivity is a by-product of the striking drills, not the aim to become acute feelers in controlling, contact, clinch-fests.

For anybody that has even a slightest bit of common sense they should be able to see how "poon sau" has been so misinterpreted. Not many can though until they are shown otherwise. Most never will so they will carry playing the contact and control game forever. Sad really but very true.

I have an article by WSL in which he states that in order to understand Ving Tsun it requires a "certain intelligence".....This intelligence doesn't mean a high IQ but an understanding of the system and what the components inside are actually teaching us. This "intelligence" is not shared by everybody and is the main reason why VT lost its way.

Kevin has made a great point in that the feeling and sensitivity in Chi Sau is a by product of the striking drills. Its easy to see why it has been over complicated and grossly misinterpreted today.

GH

[CFT]

iow you don't have to use your two 'hands' to fight the guys one always, this is what Terence and others follow the controlling ,clinching path. Their Punch isnt capable of doing anything other than fist to target, while their other hand seeks to make a controlling action and take itself out of the fight, trying to use lopsao ( grab ) and maintain a controlling /trapping hand constantly.

Not true Kevin. I've had a play with some of the CSLWCK "entry level" (my term) drills when some of my friends started training in the system. If I remember correctly one of their "cutting punch" drills trained this aspect. The "jum-ing" punch cut across the elbow crease of the incoming punch letting your elbow control theirs.

[LoneTiger108]

Hidden????????? Come on, you can't be serious!!!!!

Unfortunately for you, yes I AM serious. If you just 'look' at the character you would see what I'm saying. I'm not trying to change what you think but trying to open your mind to the idea that I learnt from the written word. That's all. Fook means hidden/subdue/control.

Fook Sau is a punch, Tan Sau is a punch and Bong Sau opens the way for the punch....simple thinking, intelligent fighting!!!! How can you say fook is just fook and tan is just tan???? Its fundamentally the foundation of the whole system ffs!!!!

I think this is where we get our wires crossed. I never said fook sau can not BE a punch, but I do think it's wrong to describe fook sau as ONLY a punch. The seeds can ALL be a punch, BUT as I said, I learnt from the words so I would then refer to what you're talking of as fook sau kuen I have to ask though, if fook and tan CAN BE punches then why do you not use bong sau kuen?? For self proclaimed practical fighters you don't throw a hook??

I prefer to use my Chi Sau to develop attributes and then take into sparring to test......There is no rolling in sparring and neither is there prolonged periods of arm contact so why waste time trying to do things in Chi Sau that have no place in fighting?????? THAT'S why VT is dying!!!!!!!!!!

Really? Wing Chun is dying because of it's Chisau exercise? Answer me this, and believe me it's a very simple answer, what's the difference between chisau and looksau? They're both very different INTERACTIONS, for different purposes, but I'm sure you know this.

IMHO Wing Chun is dying because not enough people have studied under a competent Sifu. I also believe Wing Chun is dying because so many incompetent students leave the basics behind in preference of fighting and may even believe that all Wing Chun is IS fighting!

[CFT]

Kevin has made a great point in that the feeling and sensitivity in Chi Sau is a by product of the striking drills. Its easy to see why it has been over complicated and grossly misinterpreted today.

This is a very good point and worth repeating. It is still a boxing art.

But Terence is quite consistent with his advocacy of the idea of control. Position and control. To a degree it is not too different to what PBWSLVT does with it's flanking to get superior position. Maybe PBWSLVT is a bit more "ballistic" and CSLWCK is a bit more "hands on"? Without personally experience it is better not to be so strident with the labelling.

[t_niehoff]

This is a very good point and worth repeating. It is still a boxing art.

What do you mean by "boxing art"?

But Terence is quite consistent with his advocacy of the idea of control. Position and control. To a degree it is not too different to what PBWSLVT does with it's flanking to get superior position. Maybe PBWSLVT is a bit more "ballistic" and CSLWCK is a bit more "hands on"? Without personally experience it is better not to be so strident with the labelling.

The method of WCK as it comes down from the ancestors is to control the opponent while striking him.

In practice, you can't get or maintain the flank in free-movement as your opponents will track your movement and continually face you.

[t_niehoff]

Not true Kevin. I've had a play with some of the CSLWCK "entry level" (my term) drills when some of my friends started training in the system. If I remember correctly one of their "cutting punch" drills trained this aspect. The "jum-ing" punch cut across the elbow crease of the incoming punch letting your elbow control theirs.

Exactly. This is just ONE aspect/tactic of WCK -- and it can be very useful in the proper situation. But it isn't the whole enchilada, and doesn't work in all or even most situations.

[t_niehoff]

In our lineage it is and thats the exact reason I'm in it. I've seen and done your way T and it sucks!!! In fact I had 8 years of it!!!!!!

The contact in Poon Sau is so we can use each other to increase our own force and attain structure for the punch amongst other things. Not to learn how to bridge arms and control them!!!!!

Like Kevin and many before him, I too used to see Chi Sau how T does until the day came when I met somebody who had a better idea.....a much better idea!!!!

GH

No, you've never done chi sao how I do it.

Why do poon sao to develop the structure for the punch? You are not doing a punch when you do poon sao. So how can it develop punching structure?

You don't know what poon sao teaches. Do you even know what "poon" means?

[CFT]

What do you mean by "boxing art"?

That it is not a grappling art.

In practice, you can't get or maintain the flank in free-movement as your opponents will track your movement and continually face you.

I agree.

Exactly. This is just ONE aspect/tactic of WCK -- and it can be very useful in the proper situation. But it isn't the whole enchilada, and doesn't work in all or even most situations.

Aye, short-arse like me cannot always get above the incoming punch with a "jum-ing" action.