Wing Chun use of Fook Sao/u

[Graham H]

Let's do some image snapping.

Is this not the image in the Wing Chun Dictionary entry for "Chasing Hands"?

I wouldn't want to find myself in such a position, especially not intentionally thinking it is good and I'm gonna pull off a few more moves before the next hand comes.

We try and train these mistakes away in our system and aspire to correct those errors.

[LFJ]

Ok I agree if that's your interpretation but suppressing to me assumes contact has been made. I know a lot of people use arm contact to explain fook sau. Its wrong IMO. The elbow position/punching action derived from the fook sau concept should be the same regardless of whether there are obstacles in the way or not.

Right. It is the same. I call it a suppressing energy because that is the effect when met with an obstacle, and the meaning of the word fuk is to subdue.

[Graham H]

Right. It is the same. I call it a suppressing energy because that is the effect when met with an obstacle, and the meaning of the word fuk is to subdue.

Gone are the days where I abide by the exact translations of Chinese into English. In Wing Chun, Fook/Fuk Sau seems to have many different translations even between Cantonese speakers.

I prefer to say the action of Fook Sau trains the elbow for the punch. Better for me that way.

Its the same for Bong and Tan. Most say Wing Arm and Palm up facing blocksc don't they? Some say spreading arm deflection or Bong being the bone that connects the elbow to the shoulder. There are many more from lineage to lineage. You can see why we have so many versions.

I say elbow rotation (Bong) and Tan trains the punch. Simples.

[LFJ]

I prefer to say the action of Fook Sau trains the elbow for the punch....

...and Tan trains the punch. Simples.

The problem with that is it makes fuk and taan sound like the same energy. They have different effects and are applied in different situations, sometimes to defeat the other. Different concepts require different interpretations, although in person there's of course one quick way to clarify.

[Graham H]

The problem with that is it makes fuk and taan sound like the same energy. They have different effects and are applied in different situations, sometimes to defeat the other. Different concepts require different interpretations, although in person there's of course one quick way to clarify.

No they have the same "energy". It's a f888ing punch!

One uses the outside of the arm to clear any obstacles and protect our center (Tan) and one uses the inside (Jum/Fook). Two punching concepts for the main weapon in Ving Tsun. The straight punch.

[Bacon]

We try and train these mistakes away in our system and aspire to correct those errors.

Unless you're chasing hands you'll never make those errors.

[Graham H]

Unless you're chasing hands you'll never make those errors.

Tiz very true

[Graham H]

I want to stand up for you here from a Gung Fu perspective, Phil. I am not a WC practitioner and I have trained SLT with WC practitioners in the past. The technique you demonstrate comes right out of the beginning section of SLT. You make the key point that the arm does not move, the centerline does. In the training I do, this is called 'attack hands' or' 'clinging hands', and operates on a similar principle. I think what the other guys are talking about is that with 'pure' WC operation, they stay square to the opponent and use the 'springing' energy to use the technique rather than a 'guiding energy'.

The result of your operation is that you can maneuver from the inside to outside or outside to the inside of the opponents bridge, depending on where you want to attack the opponent. I would say well done. You have put something together that is a 'jeep' or 'all terrain vehicle' that can go anywhere at all times in the engagement. Thank you. All the best.
SKM

Another lamb for the slaughter!

[Paddington]

Please explain.

Well, it could be that some of these guys are overly masculine, what with all those testosterone and hormone supplements they take to keep their pecks pert so that when they beat their chests, all can hear!

Lets take post 2 for an example, you could always give you feedback more constructively and in a less rude and confrontational manner. I just cannot see you, k_gledhil, talking to a paying client you are training like that. I imagine you do know how to be polite and phrase criticisms in a soft manner.

In general I fear the Buddhist and Taoist aspects of WC, at least gauging by some people's conduct on these boards, are completely wasted on them.

[LFJ]

No they have the same "energy". It's a f888ing punch!

One uses the outside of the arm to clear any obstacles and protect our center (Tan) and one uses the inside (Jum/Fook). Two punching concepts for the main weapon in Ving Tsun. The straight punch.

Two punching concepts/energies, with spreading and suppressing effects. Hence the names. But sure...

[LFJ]

I just cannot see you, k_gledhil, talking to a paying client you are training like that.

A paying client wouldn't be telling people what the fuk-sau is. Phil is an instructor in his own right.

In general I fear the Buddhist and Taoist aspects of WC, at least gauging by some people's conduct on these boards, are completely wasted on them.

Wing Chun isn't a religion.

[Paddington]

A paying client wouldn't be telling people what the fuk-sau is. Phil is an instructor in his own right.



Wing Chun isn't a religion.

I didn't say it was a religion. I merely acknowledged and commented that Taoism and Buddhism have influenced the development of wing chun, and that includes ideas regarding etiquette and conduct in wing chun.

Just becasue Phil is teaching, that does not mean that it is OK to suddenly be rude and show poor etiquette and conduct.

[LFJ]

I didn't say it was a religion. I merely acknowledged and commented that Taoism and Buddhism have influenced the development of wing chun, and that includes ideas regarding etiquette and conduct in wing chun.

...which people may be inclined to follow if they are Buddhist or Taoist. The majority of folks are learning how to punch people while not being punched. Religion is a separate matter.

Just becasue Phil is teaching, that does not mean that it is OK to suddenly be rude and show poor etiquette and conduct.

Or, it gives more of a reason to point out the ridiculousness of the techniques he's teaching people, and likely charging a fee for, not just that he's practicing for himself.

[Paddington]

Or, it gives more of a reason to point out the ridiculousness of the techniques he's teaching people, and likely charging a fee for, not just that he's practicing for himself.

This is the thing with people such as yourself; becasue you are overly masculine-ised you are unable to view a discussion as something other than an arena in which there are winners and losers. Consequently you fail to be able to understand or read what a person has written.

At no point did I say that it is wrong to point out, from ones own perspective, why something is weak. I just stated that I think such feedback can be done in a polite and constructive way.

EDIT: I would much prefer these forums to be more active with many more interesting discussions. Unfortunately I see certain people's behavior and conduct as the reason why participation levels are low on these forums. You don't make these forums a nice place to be.

[LFJ]

@SKM - I explained in a good bit of detail what issue I take with the technique he taught in my first response. Go back and look.

@Paddington - I didn't find his response rude, just straightforward, but so be it. Besides, maybe we're wrong and Phil will show him that it actually works when he goes to NYC.