Sticking Hands

[k gledhill]

You're right, it is not a secret. It is, as I said, a well-known LIMITED tactic in WCK.

You keep talking about "sticking to your arms" and you don't grasp that sticking in only part of the method.

WSL beat scrubs. Name any known fighter he beat. Yeah, none. What about when they carried WSL out on a stretcher -- did that happen in 3 moves too?



No you weren't.

First, understand that you aren't training now and you didn't train then. All you did and now do is keep repeating the curriculum of WCK. You don't DO WCK; you do the WCK curriculum. And the curriculum you learned from Victor Kan is lacking in many regards (as evidenced by your ignorance of the faat mun, the kuit, how the various parts fit together, etc.).



So, what does that matter?



Yes, I know. The student of Robert's you are referring to wasn't a serious practitioner (that he now trains with you proves that) but a recreational student, he never has tried to make his WCK functional, etc. If you want to get a good idea of Robert's curriculum and/or how it is put to use, you need to look at Robert's students that have put in "the work." Robert can tell you who they are.

Regardless, the method comes from the ancestors. And you apparently haven't learned it.

you called it fantasy fu before, now you accept it ...hah. what next : )

you are in a quagmire of your own making Terence.

so now roberts student is a low level ? he's actually very good but is like robert and has his errors. sacrificing upper body for a false sense of control....same as when I met and chi- saoed with robert myself....I did the same things to rc as I did to his student...

no doubt I might do the same to you too. ; )

[KPM]

No, it LOOKS like it to the uniformed observer, as does chi-sao, it LOOKS like we are trying to stick to the hands/wrists etc...due to a lack of understanding at the onset.

Chi-sao prepares us for the sudden chaotic clash of fighting a guy who DOESN'T DO CHI-SAO or is going to do something 'like' chi-sao, sure you can try to make it dirty clinch bs, but thats making s h i t up, because you dont know better...

Hey Kevin!

I think we may be talking past each other with semantics. What I am calling "sticking", you may be seeing as "chasing." We don't "chase hands" in Chi Sao and we don't overdo the sticking to the dummy arms. But the fact remains that you can't do the dummy without maintaining a good amount of contact with the dummy arms. Otherwise, what's the point of having the arms at all? Going by my prior example.....moving from Jum Sao to Huen Sao to a low palm on the dummy....do you do that without losing contact with the dummy arm? If you do, then you are "sticking".

[t_niehoff]

you called it fantasy fu before, now you accept it ...hah. what next : )

As I have repeatedly said, what Bayer does is just one aspect (a limited tactic) but he's mistakenly taken it for the whole enchilada. All you have to do is look at Lam or Wan and contrast that with Bayer to see that he only got part of WSL's curriculum. And a small part.

And if you contrast that to what other, older legit branches of WCK teach, you see they also have a great deal more than Bayer.

The reality is that when you get inside you can't only punch (or tan/jum and punch) -- that you NEED to control the opponent or you will be run over (or at the very least get into trading punches). If you were realistically sparring you'd know that. If Bayer did any realistic sparring, he'd know that. And this is why what you guys are doing is fantasy fu: you're not DOING it (in realistic sparring) but have an "idea", a fantasy of how you believe things will work. And that's why Bayer puts up all kinds of videos but none show any sparring.

Moreover, just by looking at the videos he has put up, I can see that he has no body structure, uses only localized muscle, has no control over his opponent, his punch is weak and doesn't break his opponent's structure, etc. IOWs, it is an example of fast-hand, weak, low-level WCK.

you are in a quagmire of your own making Terence.

Says the guy who has his head stuck up Bayer's ass and can't see beyond it.

so now roberts student is a low level ?

Yes, he is. Why don't you ask him how much time he's spent training his WCK (ie, sparring) against boxers, MT or MMA fighters? Yup, none. So he has -- like you -- learned the curriculum (forms, drills, etc.) but not put in any work trying to make it functional. And so, he is a beginner with no real skill, and so no real understanding.

WCK is a fighting method, and if you don't fight (ride the bike), you have no skill or understanding about it (riding the bike).

he's actually very good

Why don't you and he spar with some white-belt level MMA fighters and see how "very good" either of you are?

but is like robert and has his errors. sacrificing upper body for a false sense of control....same as when I met and chi- saoed with robert myself....I did the same things to rc as I did to his student...

no doubt I might do the same to you too. ; )

Sure, sure.

Chi sao is an unrealistic EXERCISE. It's unrealistic because you can do -- and get away with -- all kinds of nonsense. Hence the kuit: Chi sao Mo Lien Fa Sik – Don’t practice flowery techniques in chi sao practice. It's just a teaching/learning platform (so you can practice the contact tools of WCK). It's not for skill comparison.

There are two HUGE problems with unrealistic practice (whether chi sao or unrealistic sparring). First, it doesn't develop - or show - realistic skill (realistic skill only comes from realistic practice). Second, and related to the first, is that it doesn't develop realistic understanding of either fighting or WCK. Understanding comes only from realistic skill.

The curriculum of WCK comes from our ancestors, and that curriculum includes the faat mun, the forms, the dummy, the weapons, the kuit, etc. Traditionally, the method is to control while striking the opponent. The curriculum provides the things we need to do that. And that is the method they left us. Some people in WCK still retain that method, and others, like Bayer, seem to have never learned it.

[Sean66]

Hey guys,

FWIW, I trained ving tsun for years in Germany with a student of Philip Bayer's, and I must say that Philip has plenty of experience fighting in the ring (in his Hong Kong days) and in the street. Sparring is part and parcel of the training.

My teacher, Michael Kurth, has sparred against plenty of people from other styles, including MMA. There are students of Bayer's who regularly take part in MMA fights. So to say that Bayer and his students have no experience in actually applying their ving tsun is absolutely false.

I have trained with Bayer plenty of times during workshops in Germany, and all I can say is that his "structure" is amazing. His whole body is behind whatever he does, be it a punch, jut sau, lap sau....everything. He destabilizes, controls and hits his opponent simultaneously.

Now, I've also trained with Wan Kam Leung, and I can say that Bayer's "structure" and abilities are just as good. Different, of course, but just as good.

@t_niehoff
Have you ever trained with Bayer?

Cheers,
Sean

[chusauli]

so now roberts student is a low level ? he's actually very good but is like robert and has his errors. sacrificing upper body for a false sense of control....same as when I met and chi- saoed with robert myself....I did the same things to rc as I did to his student...

no doubt I might do the same to you too. ; )

Kevin,

As I recall, you were flying Victor Kan's flag that day you visited Hawkins school with Victor Kan. Victor had you demonstrate SNT and CK, and roll.

You probably realize that we treated you like a visitor and a student of Victor Kan, Hawkins' senior. As a result, we just treated you politely - no egos, no need to dominate or control.

I'm sorry to say that my recollection of the events were simply we rolled and may have had a few Gor Sao, but in politeness, and hardly anything memorable. You hardly controlled me or Wally, Eric, or Elliot. You didn't have the proper mechanics at that time, as you "floated" and were largely "unrooted" doing that version of VT. And you were all "shoulder heavy" and shifted a lot "on top of the ground" rather than having root or control. That was hardly anything to boast about, which I am sure you now know doing the Bayer/WSL method (which I assume you could see your "limitations" after learning.)

The mechanics of what you were practicing at that time were severely limited, nothing like what WSL taught. I did Chi Sao with Gary Lam, his brother, David Peterson, and WSL himself, so I know what WSL VT feels like. Hawkins also was close to his senior WSL. It simply wasn't enough to "dominate".

Look at it simply, "fast hands" vs. "optimal body alignment"? What do you think is more powerful?

You had nothing of WSL VT at that time.

Kevin, we don't have to make this a p*ssing match, but you hardly kicked anyone's "arse" that day. The most we got out of it was "5 feet 2, eyes are blue" (whatever that means), a disgust of poor body mechanics VT way, (as you may recall nobody wanted a "certificate of attendance"), and more appreciation of our Sifu's teaching.

Please Kev, in your arguments with people here, don't just make stuff up to justify your view to defend your ego.

[bennyvt]

Hey terrence can you name the "good" people that WSL didn't fight back in the 60's-70's. You always say he fought scrubs. He fought anyone that would fight him, any style didn't matter. No he didnt fight randy couture. He wasn't alive, there was no MMA people so he fought the best there was at the time that was available.

[Buddha_Fist]

As I have repeatedly said, what Bayer does is just one aspect (a limited tactic) but he's mistakenly taken it for the whole enchilada. All you have to do is look at Lam or Wan and contrast that with Bayer to see that he only got part of WSL's curriculum. And a small part.

And if you contrast that to what other, older legit branches of WCK teach, you see they also have a great deal more than Bayer.

The reality is that when you get inside you can't only punch (or tan/jum and punch) -- that you NEED to control the opponent or you will be run over (or at the very least get into trading punches). If you were realistically sparring you'd know that. If Bayer did any realistic sparring, he'd know that. And this is why what you guys are doing is fantasy fu: you're not DOING it (in realistic sparring) but have an "idea", a fantasy of how you believe things will work. And that's why Bayer puts up all kinds of videos but none show any sparring.

Moreover, just by looking at the videos he has put up, I can see that he has no body structure, uses only localized muscle, has no control over his opponent, his punch is weak and doesn't break his opponent's structure, etc. IOWs, it is an example of fast-hand, weak, low-level WCK.



Says the guy who has his head stuck up Bayer's ass and can't see beyond it.



Yes, he is. Why don't you ask him how much time he's spent training his WCK (ie, sparring) against boxers, MT or MMA fighters? Yup, none. So he has -- like you -- learned the curriculum (forms, drills, etc.) but not put in any work trying to make it functional. And so, he is a beginner with no real skill, and so no real understanding.

WCK is a fighting method, and if you don't fight (ride the bike), you have no skill or understanding about it (riding the bike).



Why don't you and he spar with some white-belt level MMA fighters and see how "very good" either of you are?



Sure, sure.

Chi sao is an unrealistic EXERCISE. It's unrealistic because you can do -- and get away with -- all kinds of nonsense. Hence the kuit: Chi sao Mo Lien Fa Sik – Don’t practice flowery techniques in chi sao practice. It's just a teaching/learning platform (so you can practice the contact tools of WCK). It's not for skill comparison.

There are two HUGE problems with unrealistic practice (whether chi sao or unrealistic sparring). First, it doesn't develop - or show - realistic skill (realistic skill only comes from realistic practice). Second, and related to the first, is that it doesn't develop realistic understanding of either fighting or WCK. Understanding comes only from realistic skill.

The curriculum of WCK comes from our ancestors, and that curriculum includes the faat mun, the forms, the dummy, the weapons, the kuit, etc. Traditionally, the method is to control while striking the opponent. The curriculum provides the things we need to do that. And that is the method they left us. Some people in WCK still retain that method, and others, like Bayer, seem to have never learned it.

Terrence,

You have never met neither Wong Shun Leung nor Philipp Bayer, yet you pass judgment on their capabilities. There's too much yaddayadda going on here by keyboard-warriors. Comment on people you've actually sparred with, not on your fantasies. Everything else has no value... Freakin' waste of time...

Emil

[shawchemical]

.........is not what to do in Chi Sau!!!!!

Tell me Terence. How would you fight a person that is not stupid enough to give you their arms????

GH

He'd try to kiss them. Scare them into submission. It seems his mouth is his only weapon, and a pretty poor one at that.

[YungChun]

You have never met neither Wong Shun Leung nor Philipp Bayer, yet you pass judgment on their capabilities. There's too much yaddayadda going on here by keyboard-warriors. Comment on people you've actually sparred with, not on your fantasies. Everything else has no value... Freakin' waste of time...

It's a two way Internet.. If folks are going to say that they have the "real new and improved Chun" and then put up video featuring the same old BS then what do you think is going to happen??

Talking BS posting it, posting video of crap etc, will always be met with reaction and discussion... Why that should come as a surprise or itself draw criticism on a discussion board remains a mystery...

[t_niehoff]

Hey terrence can you name the "good" people that WSL didn't fight back in the 60's-70's. You always say he fought scrubs. He fought anyone that would fight him, any style didn't matter. No he didnt fight randy couture. He wasn't alive, there was no MMA people so he fought the best there was at the time that was available.

These guys fought other TCMAists in Hong Kong. None of them fought "the best available at the time" -- they didn't fight the thai's (until later, and then were soundly defeated), they didn't fight any decent kickboxers, any decent (kyukoshinkai) karate guys, any decent boxers, etc.

Let's not romanticize things -- they were youngsters fighting other youngsters, and the "fights" were hardly knock-down, drag-out affairs, but friendly, not very intense matches.

For example, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTXtQogCNh4

Is the WCK fighter in the clip some "master", someone with "great understanding",with "profound knowledge"? Because you could replace him with any of Yip's other guys and it would look exactly the same.

[t_niehoff]

FWIW, I trained ving tsun for years in Germany with a student of Philip Bayer's, and I must say that Philip has plenty of experience fighting in the ring (in his Hong Kong days) and in the street. Sparring is part and parcel of the training.

Why is it that we always HEAR about how so-and-so did this or did that -- all the fighting he did do -- but we never see any evidence of it?

He puts up all kinds of clips of himself, why not ONE sparring clip? Why put up clip after clip showing him doing chi sao when he could put up clips with some significance?

But, to be fair, I have no doubt that you guys "spar". So do lame-ass, strip mall karate studio guys. Crap sparring with crap is meaningless. And, more importantly, it is all part of the brainwashing. It is like guys who train to fight hopping on one leg -- and then saying that they "spar" and that they can make it work. Of course they can -- because they are only "sparring" with other guys hopping on one leg! Whenever people with extremely limited tools/skills, like chain-punchers, "spar" with others having only extremely limited tools/skills, like their classmates, they SEEM to be able to make what they do work. Hell, aikido guys can make their aikido work in the aikido dojo. But that proves nothing. It is all part of the brainwashing (this is great stuff, we make it work, my sifu is so skilled, etc.).

My teacher, Michael Kurth, has sparred against plenty of people from other styles, including MMA. There are students of Bayer's who regularly take part in MMA fights. So to say that Bayer and his students have no experience in actually applying their ving tsun is absolutely false.

Are there any videos of any of this? MMA fights are, for example, routinely video-taped.

I have trained with Bayer plenty of times during workshops in Germany, and all I can say is that his "structure" is amazing. His whole body is behind whatever he does, be it a punch, jut sau, lap sau....everything. He destabilizes, controls and hits his opponent simultaneously.

I guess then that he only puts up videos of himself where he has poor structure, where he doesn't destabilize, control, etc.

Now, I've also trained with Wan Kam Leung, and I can say that Bayer's "structure" and abilities are just as good. Different, of course, but just as good.

@t_niehoff
Have you ever trained with Bayer?

Cheers,
Sean

No, I haven't. All I have to go by is his videos and what some of his students, like Kevin and Graham, report are his "teachings".

[k gledhill]

Hey Kevin!

I think we may be talking past each other with semantics. What I am calling "sticking", you may be seeing as "chasing." We don't "chase hands" in Chi Sao and we don't overdo the sticking to the dummy arms. But the fact remains that you can't do the dummy without maintaining a good amount of contact with the dummy arms. Otherwise, what's the point of having the arms at all? Going by my prior example.....moving from Jum Sao to Huen Sao to a low palm on the dummy....do you do that without losing contact with the dummy arm? If you do, then you are "sticking".

the action you refer to is not to maintain contact with an arm in 1:1 application.

imagine an old school large paper cutter with a long lever and a cutting edge underneath it. The 'huen' is not the key action, the elbow as the 'cutter hinge' is. It controls the forearm to 'cut' down and make the opponents low midsection punch/strike get displaced by the cut of the forearm/elbow.
The wrist iow doesnt do the action and sacrifice the elbow , lifting it to create a sticking 'hook'. Its easy to hit you if your elbow pops up like the dummy action , ergo we keep the dummy very low to develop the elbow principle further.

The jum sao [inside forearm] is launched simultaneously as the lowering midsection parry with huen so the lowering arm has an attacking hand backing it up.....and taking the forward line defense over as it attacks.

in chi-sao this can be dont from a bong that suddenly lowers on the partners tan sao [as a low midsection role play], with a jum sao strike together ...if you lift the elbow or dont bring it to center the partners tan can keep striking you to show a bad elbow, not a 1:1 fighting application from 2 extended arms in a drill...get it ?


btw the 3 palms of VT

vertical palm from tan sao makes the elbow expand off the line [tan elbow], try to do a palm in front of your centerline arm a little extended, then do a horizontal palm from this position and you will see the elbow contract in towards the centerline [jum elbow] while the palm stays centered. The point is that you can change the elbows of tan and jum while still striking on the centerline. Same as stepping into the dummy from the sides with both tan and a jum [horizontal palm] each is a strike at the opponent with BOTH POSSIBLE ELBOW STRIKES ..[we arent doing 1:1 applict...] ..but we dont know which would lead so we train facing and alignment [we dont fight with 2 'equally' extended arms as the drills]
the 3rd palm a low palm for pushing with a fixed elbow inwards [immovable elbow]

We can also use the rear pak sao to back up the lowering forearm> sidepalm or punch as it goes into a strike after displacing the midsection strike, the elbow being brought to your center as you strike brings the stance/structure force unity with momentum etc...so the key action is elbow control [your own].

Step away from each other and then step back and try to do these actions BEFORE you try to 'roll' then step back and step in a again ...you see that your visiting a person with attacking in mind, lat sao chit cheung instantly if they dont stop your punch as you reach this point in space and time we call chi-sao distance.....we enter into this space with a lead and a rear hand to work our way in regardless of attempts to stop us.

Progressively you see less 'sticking' attempts, instead you develop lightning fast attacking actions based off an entry 'mistake' like subtle hand chase offline to our leading attacking hand opening up for the rear, or a low bong you simply punch them in the face for, a bad bong that doesnt do anything , a 'hesitation' from your partner that allows you to keep attacking, bad stance when you 'clash' making it easy to strike or trap them from refacing.... All from entry to this point in space.
What hand leads and strikes depends on the angles you and your partner make, this can change many times before you even make an attack as each of you moves sideways /laterally, before even putting lead leg forwards....allowing the other to give the tactical entry , role playing in chi-sao allows us to react intuitively to this 'moment' thoughtlessly and maintain it without hesitstion, thus allowing the opponent to regain 'safe space'.

The dummy gives out 'unity' of action a sudden shocking /ballistic force to further turn or mishape a persons structure, so we can make punches on them or keep them defensive 'we are the rain, they are the windshield wipers'....if someone throws a bucket of water at you do you attempt to stand your ground and chase the drops of water ? or make defensive counter moves with your own bucket as you seek dry positions...further imagine your opponent has a cup of water in each hand and your trying to stop them from being able to throw both , so you turn them o trap them from facing momentarily so you can wet them first...this requires mobility and freedom to aim your water not play hand sticking games.

Terences responses prove he hasnt really ever KO'd a guy with a VT punch ; )...if he had all this talk of 'controlling' is redundant, you dont need to control guys lying down unconcious, or holding their [choose body part] in intense pain due to the fact you just hit them there...I have lost count fo guys who I had to deliver a strike in real force and situation. Its moot to talk about how good a fighter they are, becasue I am defending myself regardless....do i let them hit me to see if they have a good punch ? ask them their qualifications before engaging ina fight with them ? you see my point. I fight you blind you might be a black belt in 3 methods but I could care less.....

reality is all the OVER control guys indulge in is due to a lack of real experience of what happens when you deliver a VT punch into a guys head...

The real 'control' we learn isnt to control the other person...its to control our OWN ability .

[k gledhill]

Why is it that we always HEAR about how so-and-so did this or did that -- all the fighting he did do -- but we never see any evidence of it?

He puts up all kinds of clips of himself, why not ONE sparring clip? Why put up clip after clip showing him doing chi sao when he could put up clips with some significance?

But, to be fair, I have no doubt that you guys "spar". So do lame-ass, strip mall karate studio guys. Crap sparring with crap is meaningless. And, more importantly, it is all part of the brainwashing. It is like guys who train to fight hopping on one leg -- and then saying that they "spar" and that they can make it work. Of course they can -- because they are only "sparring" with other guys hopping on one leg! Whenever people with extremely limited tools/skills, like chain-punchers, "spar" with others having only extremely limited tools/skills, like their classmates, they SEEM to be able to make what they do work. Hell, aikido guys can make their aikido work in the aikido dojo. But that proves nothing. It is all part of the brainwashing (this is great stuff, we make it work, my sifu is so skilled, etc.).



Are there any videos of any of this? MMA fights are, for example, routinely video-taped.



I guess then that he only puts up videos of himself where he has poor structure, where he doesn't destabilize, control, etc.



No, I haven't. All I have to go by is his videos and what some of his students, like Kevin and Graham, report are his "teachings".

Terence has another person who experienced P Bayer 1st hand but still likes to make an argument without any personal first hand experience. He cant 'see' the force so its fantasy Im telling you PB is awesome...way ahead of us on the 'vt perfection loop'....

[k gledhill]

Kevin,

As I recall, you were flying Victor Kan's flag that day you visited Hawkins school with Victor Kan. Victor had you demonstrate SNT and CK, and roll.

You probably realize that we treated you like a visitor and a student of Victor Kan, Hawkins' senior. As a result, we just treated you politely - no egos, no need to dominate or control.

I'm sorry to say that my recollection of the events were simply we rolled and may have had a few Gor Sao, but in politeness, and hardly anything memorable. You hardly controlled me or Wally, Eric, or Elliot. You didn't have the proper mechanics at that time, as you "floated" and were largely "unrooted" doing that version of VT. And you were all "shoulder heavy" and shifted a lot "on top of the ground" rather than having root or control. That was hardly anything to boast about, which I am sure you now know doing the Bayer/WSL method (which I assume you could see your "limitations" after learning.)

The mechanics of what you were practicing at that time were severely limited, nothing like what WSL taught. I did Chi Sao with Gary Lam, his brother, David Peterson, and WSL himself, so I know what WSL VT feels like. Hawkins also was close to his senior WSL. It simply wasn't enough to "dominate".

Look at it simply, "fast hands" vs. "optimal body alignment"? What do you think is more powerful?

You had nothing of WSL VT at that time.

Kevin, we don't have to make this a p*ssing match, but you hardly kicked anyone's "arse" that day. The most we got out of it was "5 feet 2, eyes are blue" (whatever that means), a disgust of poor body mechanics VT way, (as you may recall nobody wanted a "certificate of attendance"), and more appreciation of our Sifu's teaching.

Please Kev, in your arguments with people here, don't just make stuff up to justify your view to defend your ego.

Okaaaay, Your Sifu complemented me on my use of bongsaos at the dinner after, that you didnt attend. I used these bong saos to turn your upper body power [tall guy] and you didnt have an answer for it so you took me back to the rear door outside so we could be alone and asked me all about bong saos, you peered over our arms like a bird as we 'rolled'.... remember ?

I didnt say I kaarse...V Kan actually teaches very good mechanics it worked against you
didnt it.

Anyway your always welcome to come to ny and join in a class as old buddy's

My replies are aimed at Terence not you. He insults me I am a mirror, VK taught me that.

[LoneTiger108]

The question was posed by Kenton.. I know what he means.. He means the drill ChiSao...

Are your eyes rolling because you're dizzy? If so then sit down and breath.

LukSao is the rolling.. The rolling is the basis for ChiSao, which is how we refer to the main two handed sticking drill. The term ChiSao could be used to refer to any contact (sticking) drill but is most commonly used to refer to the two handed drill.. This should not be news to anyone..

As I said LukSao is the rolling, the platform for two handed ChiSao... What you see and think is still a mystery..

I really don't know why you're wasting your breath dude Lets just be honest with eachother. You don't know what I mean by Looksau. You just have your own interpretation of what you 'think' it is as for you it's all within this 'chisau' drill, yes? Let me ask you this, what is the difference between hand and forearm contact? Can you 'stick' and really control me with your forearm?

Looksau isn't only about rolling, it's about breaking structure and getting into hand to body contact range. Specific two handed postures are used to do this. They are linked and cycled. They help to actually defend chisau, and so I have to say you are not on my page man. You're thinking its all the same. All contact is Chisau? I have to disagree.

ChiSao is a learning and teaching platform..

Ah, he's teaching how to be beaten.. Uh huh.. Care to elaborate?

I can't really be bothered. Was he really 'teaching' how to be beaten? No. He was just beating his student, he wasn't teaching him to do that. And FWIW he was using Looksau alot to gain the advantage against someone who didn't know the difference between Looksau and Chisau.

A common misinterpretation in Wing Chun today is thinking that all interactive exercises are Chisau.