The hands we use...

[BPWT]

In the WSL rant thread Graham posted something interesting from a PB article about what some of the Sau motions are for in his teaching.

Yes there is only one Tan Sau. It trains the punch...
Here are some ideas in his own words............

Tan sau trains your punch
Bong sau open the way for striking
Fook sau trains your punch
Pak sau open the way for striking
Kwan sau trains your punch
Tok sau (we dont have)
Poon sau (exchange of force)
Fak sau (striking)
Lap sau (open the way for striking)
Yee gee kim yum ma (training stance .. to conditioning the foot
and knee position for supporting the punch)
Jum sau trains your punch

Which made me think about what we use in our Chi Sau training, and how this might translate to actual use. Of course, it's clear that different lineages do Chi Sau with different reasoning in mind, but in my lineage (as an example), we're looking to learn how to strike whilst dealing with force. The Chi Sau training leads to the Lat Sau training which leads to the sparring, which (one hopes) gives a good foundation for real world use.

So my question is (to anyone, not just the PB guys), when you train Chi Sau and when you train whatever other drills to help you put your WC/VT/WT into real world use, what 'hands' (so to speak) are you using?

I said of the PB training:

Yes, I read that interview with PB, and it's an interesting take on things for sure.

From the list you quote, it makes me think that PB's method really is focused on punching, with only a few of the art's hand/arm movements/motions as support. So primarily: punching, with just pak and lap as main support (with bong used also in the lap sau drill/cycle).

So in my lineage, our Chi Sau training (and here I include the Bong/Lap cycle and its progressions, Poon Sau, our Chi Sau sections, Gor Sau, and so on), and thus also in our Lat Sau training, we look to understand and learn how to use (often based on handling force), the following:

Tan Sau Bong Sau Fook Sau Wu Sau Man Sau Kau Sau Jum Sau
Gaun Sau Gwat Sau Jut Sau Huen Sau Pak Sau Lan Sau Tok Sau
Tie Sau Gum Sau Kwan Sau Biu Sau

Plus, of course, the various striking techniques using the hands, feet, knees, elbows, shoulder.

[tc101]

In the WSL rant thread Graham posted something interesting from a PB article about what some of the Sau motions are for in his teaching.



Which made me think about what we use in our Chi Sau training, and how this might translate to actual use. Of course, it's clear that different lineages do Chi Sau with different reasoning in mind, but in my lineage (as an example), we're looking to learn how to strike whilst dealing with force. The Chi Sau training leads to the Lat Sau training which leads to the sparring, which (one hopes) gives a good foundation for real world use.

So my question is (to anyone, not just the PB guys), when you train Chi Sau and when you train whatever other drills to help you put your WC/VT/WT into real world use, what 'hands' (so to speak) are you using?

I said of the PB training:



So in my lineage, our Chi Sau training (and here I include the Bong/Lap cycle and its progressions, Poon Sau, our Chi Sau sections, Gor Sau, and so on), and thus also in our Lat Sau training, we look to understand and learn how to use (often based on handling force), the following:

Tan Sau Bong Sau Fook Sau Wu Sau Man Sau Kau Sau Jum Sau
Gaun Sau Gwat Sau Jut Sau Huen Sau Pak Sau Lan Sau Tok Sau
Tie Sau Gum Sau Kwan Sau Biu Sau

Plus, of course, the various striking techniques using the hands, feet, knees, elbows, shoulder.

Here is what I learned and when I say learned I do not mean told but what I have observed to be true though my own experience.

A lot of the problems I see in these discussions come from not looking at things fom a fighting perspective but from a practice perspective which is this is what and how I practice so it must be like that when I fight. Things do not work that way.

When you fight you are going to either be on the outside or the inside, and the tactics and techniques are different for each. For example when on the outside GENERALLY you want to use one hand techniques and not throw both hands into action like simul blocks and strikes with a tan da or guan da or whatever. Those are very difficult and risky to pull off and leave you exposed. The mun sau as taught with a leading and a rear guarding hand references wing chun on the outside. There are exceptions to the general rule including if the opponent telegraphs or is slow or you use the two hands to wedge in.

On the inside GENERALLY you want and need to use both hands at the same time. This is where the simul blocks and strikes work, where bridging actions and controls are used and so forth.

I often see wing chun inside tactics and techniques demonstrated and taught when the practitioner is on the outside. Then they try to make those things work in sparring, finds they do not work, and throw the baby out.

Chi sau is a drill or practice that references wing chun on the inside because here it comes here it comes when you do chi sau you ARE on the inside. As I learned wing chun the preference range was on the inside and in the pocket so we had chi sau to practice inside and a drill called dop sau which was practice using wing chun outside techniques and tactics to get inside or what some call closing or bridging the gap. I saw a A Fong video where he had a similar drill but he called it mun sau drill. A rose though is still a rose.

PB seems to focus his system mainly on outside wing chun tactics and techniques. Nothing wrong with that.

[Yoshiyahu]

I agree, very very good response...

Here is what I learned and when I say learned I do not mean told but what I have observed to be true though my own experience.

A lot of the problems I see in these discussions come from not looking at things fom a fighting perspective but from a practice perspective which is this is what and how I practice so it must be like that when I fight. Things do not work that way.

When you fight you are going to either be on the outside or the inside, and the tactics and techniques are different for each. For example when on the outside GENERALLY you want to use one hand techniques and not throw both hands into action like simul blocks and strikes with a tan da or guan da or whatever. Those are very difficult and risky to pull off and leave you exposed. The mun sau as taught with a leading and a rear guarding hand references wing chun on the outside. There are exceptions to the general rule including if the opponent telegraphs or is slow or you use the two hands to wedge in.

On the inside GENERALLY you want and need to use both hands at the same time. This is where the simul blocks and strikes work, where bridging actions and controls are used and so forth.

I often see wing chun inside tactics and techniques demonstrated and taught when the practitioner is on the outside. Then they try to make those things work in sparring, finds they do not work, and throw the baby out.

Chi sau is a drill or practice that references wing chun on the inside because here it comes here it comes when you do chi sau you ARE on the inside. As I learned wing chun the preference range was on the inside and in the pocket so we had chi sau to practice inside and a drill called dop sau which was practice using wing chun outside techniques and tactics to get inside or what some call closing or bridging the gap. I saw a A Fong video where he had a similar drill but he called it mun sau drill. A rose though is still a rose.

PB seems to focus his system mainly on outside wing chun tactics and techniques. Nothing wrong with that.

[LaRoux]

Chi sao teaches fighting techniques that are only utilized in non-sporting, life and death situations in which there are no video recording capabilities around. If it is a sporting event, or not a life and death situation, or a video is recording it, the principles learned in chi sao cannot be performed in fighting situations.

[k gledhill]

Left out the most important one ; )
The punch.

[BPWT]

That sure is a lot of sau's to...er.. use.

All the things from the forms, you know (some of which have an obvious use, some of which perhaps are more conceptual, some training devices that also include conceptual use and obvious application).

Left out the most important one ; )
The punch.

Of course But that's a strike with the hand (closed hand)

[guy b.]

Why ask the question about drills rather than fighting?

[BPWT]

Why ask the question about drills rather than fighting?

Just because if you can't use these things in drills (set drills, free-flowing drills based off of cycles, etc), you probably won't be able to use them in fighting either.

We start with drills, to aid us in our fighting.

[guy b.]

Just because if you can't use these things in drills (set drills, free-flowing drills based off of cycles, etc), you probably won't be able to use them in fighting either.

We start with drills, to aid us in our fighting.

Why do you assume that what you do in drills is directly transferable to fighting?

[BPWT]

Why do you assume that what you do in drills is directly transferable to fighting?

The drills start off light and set (following a pattern), and then progress to using more force (hitting harder) and being less set (being free to move off in whatever direction is needed - that is to say, outside of what was previously the set pattern).

The aim is train this in a way that becomes transferable to fighting (as much as is possible of course).

But you have to start somewhere. If you taught a beginner how to punch (the technical punching method in your system), and then said "Now try to fight with it," the results would be, well, not so good.

Better to start the beginner with how to punch, and then get them working on drills that incorporate timing, intercepting, footwork, distancing, etc... and then see how they do in a more open setting.

But... tell me about your hands! Which do you train within your CS, for example?

[Shads]

Why do you assume that what you do in drills is directly transferable to fighting?

If your drills don't translate to fighting then what the fcuk are you doing them for let me guess its abstract

[BPWT]

Right.... To have ready to apply against all the possible moves the other guy might do eh?

I wouldn't say "to apply against all possible moves", as this implies technique against technique - which most lineages would say is wrong.

I'd rather say it is to help you understand how to deal with different force (direction of force, amount of force) and the varying positions that lead to this and come from this.

[BPWT]

Well.... Good luck with that

Ummm... thanks (I think).

So, what do you use in your training? From the PB clips, I see a lot of Pak Sau and punch. Lots of Wu Sau, some Bong Sau, some Lap.

What else do you guys train in class (in Chi Sau or whatever other training)?

Tell me about your hands!!!

[JPinAZ]

Ummm... thanks (I think).

So, what do you use in your training? From the PB clips, I see a lot of Pak Sau and punch. Lots of Wu Sau, some Bong Sau, some Lap.

What else do you guys train in class (in Chi Sau or whatever other training)?

Tell me about your hands!!!

I think this can be one problem with watching videos online - people sometimes only focus on shapes and techniques and not catch what's most important: things like strategy, tactics, body methods/mechanics, etc.

I often times run class where I don't mention ANY techniques except maybe what kind of attack your partner is throwing. But, I do mention things like reference points, leverage, centerline occupation, gate & box theories, descriptions of body mechanics, facing, etc.

Sure, I have to give descriptors for shapes when asked, like 'this is a tan for disapating pressure on the bridge', or '5-line pak sau' or 'use biu jong sau to occupy space on center'. But like in my examples, everytime I have to give a technique name, I stress the concept behind the tool so they don't focus only on the tool. I do this because I've learned that the more I talk about the shapes/techniques, the more the student focuses on only that and start thinking in terms of 'doing moves' vs. understanding and focusing on what's really important - the core principles/concepts of WC. Similar to when people watch clips on youtube, see what techniques are being used and then ask what 'hands' people focus on in class. (sorry, couldn't resist)

Simple answer: all of them and none of them. But then, that's not really a simple answer either

[k gledhill]

So after I stopped laughing , still laughing !! Are these your hands in chi sao ? ; )

http://youtu.be/faDIYG6QZsY