Leaking Hand

[sanjuro_ronin]

trouble is you will never think you are good enough..........and then it will be too late

Too true...too true indeed.
Still, maybe one day.
When I did teach I loved it to be honest, but I needed to take time to develop myself and my MA more and that is what I have been doing.
The process is long but I can see the light around the corner.
Of course that may be a bus, but such is life !

[Indrafist]

That has to do with how it is drilled and trained, not with its principle.
The sad fact is that too many TCMA train VS themselves and as such, only get good against themselves.

Doing "live hand" vs a boxer is like doing judo grips in a submision grappling match.

Absolutely true - as usual Paul you nail the issues very clearly.

It's also true that this stuff is very workable.

You have to get beyond the limitations of the systems entrainment, which as has been said, is often just the compliant exchange of structure. A Wing Chun teacher of mine (very well known) said that "Without Chi Sao Wing Chung is nothing!" This is true (of his lineage and many others) and often for the wrong reasons, as when said teacher was picked up and run into a wall by a JJJ practitioner, who by-passed his chi-sao by ignoring it.

'Leaking' negates a lot of poorly developed Wing Chun simply by passing contact above the elbow joint. This eliminates the functionality of many of the core Chi Sao structures. Once that happens, then the system (of poorly developed Wing Chun) falls apart, and this is just under the mild pressure of a light san sau exchange.
It can boil down to just what a 'style' really is, and what the reasons are (if any) for entraining it. Training to fight against other systems is an eye opener, but better still is to apply the rationale of the techniques (thru principles) to deconstructing the human form. What you need to do then becomes obvious and natural, rather than abstract and compliant.

Indra.

[Indrafist]

There is a away around it though.
The obvious being sparring with other systems, but there is more to it than just that.
Most guys tend to attack the other guys system, they fight the system instead of what is being presented to them:
IE: the "shape" of the opponent.
Now, we all knwo that the opponent hits back, that ******* !
He hite and moves and grabs and kicks and throws and whatnot.
The thing is that every opponent does that in enough of a different way to cause a bit of a mess (understatement).
The solution to that is to fight the "shape" of the opponent and not the opponent's system.
Of course you must deal with him being alive and not just standing there, but the point is that EVERY opponent presents you you certain constants and THOSE are the one you fight.
Fighting someone you don't know means you are unprepared for what they bring to the table, bu if what they bring is LESS relevant, then it becomes less of an issue to overcome.

Quoted for the truth!

[sanjuro_ronin]

Absolutely true - as usual Paul you nail the issues very clearly.

It's also true that this stuff is very workable.

You have to get beyond the limitations of the systems entrainment, which as has been said, is often just the compliant exchange of structure. A Wing Chun teacher of mine (very well known) said that "Without Chi Sao Wing Chung is nothing!" This is true (of his lineage and many others) and often for the wrong reasons, as when said teacher was picked up and run into a wall by a JJJ practitioner, who by-passed his chi-sao by ignoring it.

'Leaking' negates a lot of poorly developed Wing Chun simply by passing contact above the elbow joint. This eliminates the functionality of many of the core Chi Sao structures. Once that happens, then the system (of poorly developed Wing Chun) falls apart, and this is just under the mild pressure of a light san sau exchange.
It can boil down to just what a 'style' really is, and what the reasons are (if any) for entraining it. Training to fight against other systems is an eye opener, but better still is to apply the rationale of the techniques (thru principles) to deconstructing the human form. What you need to do then becomes obvious and natural, rather than abstract and compliant.

Indra.

Well put.
The "beyond the elbow" mention is a hidden gem.
Very few people know how to work, much less defend and counter in that zone.
It should be, in theory at least, where a "short hand" system excels and rules.

[Indrafist]

Well put.
The "beyond the elbow" mention is a hidden gem.
Very few people know how to work, much less defend and counter in that zone.
It should be, in theory at least, where a "short hand" system excels and rules.

Thanks Paul, it's where 'Short Hand' systems paradoxically fall down because they often know this, but still work the forearms so that they can practce 'sticking' or 'feeling'. Frankly, that's pointless, it should all be about 'leaking' and to do that you need a proper cognitive map of the body (not 'Gate theory' which is too passive and reactionary, but a proactive Head Up Display Combat Map of the human form).
This can feed into a 'software' entrained cognitive programme that works like a battle computer, giving spare-capacity (the mark of a lot of successful achievers such as Fighter aces or racing drivers).

An issue with this is that it will eventually superceed 'style' as techniques are selected autonomously by 'it' both on the basis of experience and hypothesis driven information processing.

Indra.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Thanks Paul, it's where 'Short Hand' systems paradoxically fall down because they often know this, but still work the forearms so that they can practce 'sticking' or 'feeling'. Frankly, that's pointless, it should all be about 'leaking' and to do that you need a proper cognitive map of the body (not 'Gate theory' which is too passive and reactionary, but a proactive Head Up Display Combat Map of the human form).
This can feed into a 'software' entrained cognitive programme that works like a battle computer, giving spare-capacity (the mark of a lot of successful achievers such as Fighter aces or racing drivers).

An issue with this is that it will eventually superceed 'style' as techniques are selected autonomously by 'it' both on the basis of experience and hypothesis driven information processing.

Indra.

In english, you mean that by visually, tactilly and cognatively, understanding where A is in relation to B ( B being the part of the body in contact with), we can strike instinctively and effectively.

A teacher of mine onces said that when you hit the HB, you are hitting the opponent when his is "in the corner", you can't fight the bag since it doesn't fight back, but the bag is giving you a "shape" and they shape is what you must exploit ( like a boxer on the ropes or in the corner).

[Indrafist]

In english, you mean that by visually, tactilly and cognatively, understanding where A is in relation to B ( B being the part of the body in contact with), we can strike instinctively and effectively.

A teacher of mine onces said that when you hit the HB, you are hitting the opponent when his is "in the corner", you can't fight the bag since it doesn't fight back, but the bag is giving you a "shape" and they shape is what you must exploit ( like a boxer on the ropes or in the corner).

Yep, there is a simple way to map the human body and close it down: based on the spatial relationships between specific points. It forms a reliable map, and also a grid of control surfaces. I was inspired to work on this back in 1981 after seeing a TV lecture by Professor Colin Blakemore of Oxford University. The less information you need to process through 'data' (incoming sensory information) the more you can generate against the target proactively. This is 'spare capacity' and it has nothing to do with reflexes or natural speed. It's about reducing overload and working the target like a human predator.

[Brule]

so how do you teach this to your students? the teachers i had never got into the terms for certain things. They would never mention, "alive hand" "Leaking hand" etc...we just did. Now from these discussions, i see that these concepts were taught to us, just without this terminology. We were shown the techniques.

Not sure if i'm understanding your post Indra, but you mention reducuing overload. Could this be a different way to the same path sort of method of teaching? I mean, there are some students that just want the names of everything and get so caught up in that that they lose sight of the actual goal. We have all seen them, always asking what the name of this was or that was but cannot grasp the technique. Could it be that going into so much detail, one would be "overloading" the mind and giving it too much to process when the time comes to display their technique?

Just some thoughts.

[TenTigers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJRLK_4zy10
even though the topic is chain punching, he has an exercise that develops leaking hands.

[jo]

Frankly, that's pointless, it should all be about 'leaking' and to do that you need a proper cognitive map of the body (not 'Gate theory' which is too passive and reactionary, but a proactive Head Up Display Combat Map of the human form).
This can feed into a 'software' entrained cognitive programme that works like a battle computer, giving spare-capacity (the mark of a lot of successful achievers such as Fighter aces or racing drivers).

WOW! Right out of the Steven Richards/John (JFS-USA) Springer Playbook!

- jo

[Hardwork108]

Should we try another?

How prominent is leaking hand concept in your style? How do you guys compare it to say Live hand, since that is what we just discussed? Can you give some examples of leaking hand techs?

I am a little late into this, but let me thank you first for bringing up this topic as it is very relevant to many TCMA systems and more importantly it connects to other TCMA principles and approaches.

From the way I have been trained, leaking is connected to live hands (definition?). That is, you need live hands in order to be able to skillfully leak. Definition of live hands in this case is, "listening hands and sticking hands".

Another TCMA principle that leaking is related to is the NOT GOING BACK principle, which seems to be ignored by many practitioners who like to mix their styles (and therefore their principles).

Water leaks through by a forward motion and so do one's strikes. Going back and leaking do not go together, generally speaking. I was trained to hold my ground in chi sao and sparring.

Holding ground does not mean standing there and exchanging blows, but rather using your sensitivity and angling to LEAK into the opponent.

Another TCMA principle that should be kept in mind during the practice of leaking is the "if you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", which is again linked to fine tuned sensitivity and listening abilities. One can see references to this in the Wing Chun video clip posted by Ten Tigers.

So in conclusion, to really understand concepts such as leaking, one has to have knowledge and understanding of other important TCMA principles, as more often than not they are all related, hence cannot be practiced in isolation.

[Violent Designs]

Because of many southern systems propensity to work inside AND to woke with their elbows "up in front", things like "live hand", Leaking hand" flowing hand", shadow/ghost hand", all become quite important IF the practioner doesn;t want it to "degenerate" into stand up grappling.
The hand being able to turn from on strike, to another, to another with minimal recoil/withdrawl becomes the main factor in keeping the practioner striking as opposed to grappling.

Excellent description and fits in with how I interpret tau lau theory (leak and steal).

[Indrafist]

so how do you teach this to your students? the teachers i had never got into the terms for certain things. They would never mention, "alive hand" "Leaking hand" etc...we just did. Now from these discussions, i see that these concepts were taught to us, just without this terminology. We were shown the techniques.

Not sure if i'm understanding your post Indra, but you mention reducuing overload. Could this be a different way to the same path sort of method of teaching? I mean, there are some students that just want the names of everything and get so caught up in that that they lose sight of the actual goal. We have all seen them, always asking what the name of this was or that was but cannot grasp the technique. Could it be that going into so much detail, one would be "overloading" the mind and giving it too much to process when the time comes to display their technique?

Just some thoughts.

Hi Brule,

By 'overload' I meant sensory overload - i.e. of data-driven perception as typically found in 'feeling' based exercises through (say) the forearm bridge. This (data driven perception) has a well known range/limit of 7 plus or minus 2 'items' or chunks of information, that can be handled effectively before overload sets in. Sensory information, because it relies on feedback is always reactionary and therfore relatively slow. Hypothesis driven perception second guesses, as a probability computation, based on experience and cognitive modeling: and has a higher bandwidth of information carrying capacity. Contact training via a bridge is sensory-based initially, but in skilled practitioners will be increasingly based on hypothesis (intuitive) processing. Principles convey a highly compressed bandwidth, and an understanding of them increases hypothesis driven processing. Leaking, as a skill, will come from techinique, as a delivery system, but it will be 'driven' by a mental (cognitive) entrainment, that starts as sensory (feeling) and devolps on into a highly developed intuitive process with error-correction already programed in.

Indra.

[Phil Redmond]

Lauh Sao (leaking hand)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCjLU06s-IE