Shape or Action?

[Sihing73]

Bong sao is ............................a mistake

Must be why it appears so many times in the forms, like CK for example, not to mention on the dummy.

Nothing like repeating ones mistakes over and over again.

[EternalSpring]

Tan/Bong/Fook/etc are concepts taught through shapes and expressed in action.

[sihing]

We must stress that contact is only made should there be an obstacle and we don't look to go to the arm to make some sort of bridge like most people think. If there are no limbs blocking the path of the punch we still strike in the same way regardless.

Yes totally agreed. The worst case scenario is that contact is made as this is more to "deal" with compared to no bridge contact and a clear path...

We prepare for bridge contact, but don't look for it and seek it, unless we want to. For me the primary habit to learn is too just hit (with accuracy, proper distance, connected power, ability to recover and hit again from whatever line, etc..), and let the reflexes take over is there is bridge contact. Then when that is mastered, you can take the "contact" reflexes you have gained as a side benefit of chi sau practice and use it if you want to, but this is secondary and not the primary thing learned in the beginning at least IMO..

I figure, why ignore the secondary skill set gained from the practice, might as well keep it in my back pocket and use it when I need to. In my line of work, I can't always just "hit" first, I need to try to control and subdue at times, if that doesn't work I will hit to end it..

J

[KPM]

Tan sao develops the elbow for the VT punch
Fook sao develops the elbow for the VT punch.

Bong sao is ............................a mistake

Ok. I'll bite! Why is Bong Sao a mistake? Please explain!

[KPM]

We prepare for bridge contact, but don't look for it and seek it, unless we want to........this is secondary and not the primary thing learned in the beginning at least IMO..

J

I agree James! We don't look for bridge contact, but we certainly expect it and are prepared for it! If someone is wide open, just hit them! Who wouldn't do that? Unfortunately that doesn't happen often. And unless you stop them with the first blow, as long as they aren't a complete idiot they are going to throw up an obstacle. THEN bridging happens and we seek to control and off-balance the opponent so we can continue to hit them at will. What WCK doesn't do, is back off from contact because the opponent HAS put up an obstacle...like boxers might do. Once we have established a bridge we aren't going to abandon it and have to form another one. At least that's how I see my WCK.

[Graham H]

I agree James! We don't look for bridge contact, but we certainly expect it and are prepared for it! If someone is wide open, just hit them! Who wouldn't do that? Unfortunately that doesn't happen often. And unless you stop them with the first blow, as long as they aren't a complete idiot they are going to throw up an obstacle.

Correct!

THEN bridging happens and we seek to control and off-balance the opponent so we can continue to hit them at will.

Incorrect! How are you going to seek and control an opponent who might be a lot bigger than you or a wiry little f**ker that is throwing everything but the kitchen sink at you? To think in any context that you can "hit somebody at will" is BS!!

What WCK doesn't do, is back off from contact because the opponent HAS put up an obstacle...like boxers might do. Once we have established a bridge we aren't going to abandon it and have to form another one. At least that's how I see my WCK.

Jesus! What is all this "form a bridge" rubbish? Backing off from contact? Abandoning bridges and forming new ones?

Can I ask you a question Keith? Have you ever had a proper vicious street encounter? It certainly doesn't sound like it.

I would guess that if you came up against somebody who was quite handy with their fists it would not be your day.

[BPWT]

For me, understanding bridge work and how we use it is vital. I think it is essential to WC/VT/WT. We are either working Lei Kiu or Chi Kiu, and this system specializes in the latter.

Various students of Yip Man talked about how he could disrupt their balance at will, move them around, walk them out the door... basically play with them. And Yip Man was, what, 5''3'', and very slight.

The majority of his students where probably taller and almost certainly heavier than him. Yet he had no problem controlling them. IMO, this had to be control via contact.

[Graham H]

Various students of Yip Man talked about how he could disrupt their balance at will, move them around, walk them out the door... basically play with them. And Yip Man was, what, 5''3'', and very slight.

The majority of his students where probably taller and almost certainly heavier than him. Yet he had no problem controlling them. IMO, this had to be control via contact.

Yes of course but you are not seeing the big picture are you?

These things are possible during the chi sau practice where contact is used for development purposes. I can move all the people I teach/train with around and unbalance them in Chi Sau because I have developed better structure and more power over the years. This has come via the correct training. In sparring it is a different story. There is no prolonged contact so I must use skill and LSJC to off balance them and this doesn't come via arm contact. In fact where their arm go I do not because the correct way is to position yourself out of their direct firing line. Everybody who trains with me especially if they come from a system of "sticky arm" Wing Chun soon realizes that this idea is nonsense. I'm sure that Neil with his previous idea on Wing Chun will vouch for that. Now he is making the change because bridge based Wing Chun is useless.

You have to ask yourself a question. How many of Yip Man's students actually sparred with him? Nobody on this forum knows what Yip man did. You can only speculate and more often than not interpret what is written about him in your own way.

There are many things you can do in chi sau that don't relate to actual fights. It all looks very good and to the untrained person they feel helpless against it all but this is not the correct way of applying Ving Tsun and why most of the time it falls flat on its a$$ unless you are fighting VT vs VT within the confines of chi sau.

[Graham H]

I have posted this article before written by my friend Ernie Barrios. He makes some valid points here. His ideas come from tried and tested situations.

http://www.abmvt.com/folio/chi-sau-misconception.pdf

[BPWT]

It's true that none of us here ever met Yip Man. My point is that of all the 'names' who did, they all stress the importance of bridge work and controlling. The one possible exception is WSL... but even this is debatable, as some of his students (e.g. DP) also talk about using bridging to control.

Your branch of VT pretty much rejects these ideas, as you explained. And that's cool. But with all due respect to PB, he (like you and I) never met Yip Man either.

Ernie's article has some very valid points, though I would argue that the recovery system he speaks about (allowing us to keep hitting) is actually part and parcel of the art's bridging and controlling methods.

But he's right in saying CS is not fighting, of course.

For me, the bigger picture is how do I strike without being struck. How do I keep attacking center without exposing my own. How do I do this without relying purely on visual cues, which are limited at the range we want to control. How does Chi Sau and Lat Sau give me the tools and skillset required to do all of this.

For me the answers are in understanding and effectively using Chi Kiu. This idea isn't just unique to people who learned from Yip Man - it's found in other Wing Chun lineages too.

For what it's worth, Neil's experiences are similar to my own, including how he used to do Dan Chi Sau and why it was, let's say, problematic.

[Graham H]

It's true that none of us here ever met Yip Man. My point is that of all the 'names' who did, they all stress the importance of bridge work and controlling. The one possible exception is WSL... but even this is debatable, as some of his students (e.g. DP) also talk about using bridging to control.

I think if you met both guys and moved around with them a little you would see within seconds which methods work and which methods do not. You should stop thinking that just because somebody was taught by WSL that they are all going to be the same. They are not! It's very easy to repeat what somebody else has said and show things through a drill or whatever but getting stuck in and sparring with hand, foot, pole and knives takes things to a new level. This test your knowledge on Ving Tsun and also reveals what you can apply and what you can't! Playing chi sau all day everyday is futile without the rest.

Your branch of VT pretty much rejects these ideas, as you explained. And that's cool. But with all due respect to PB, he (like you and I) never met Yip Man either.

Yes and my opinion is that through hard work and training with many people from all over the place has shown PB what can work and what cannot.

Ernie's article has some very valid points, though I would argue that the recovery system he speaks about (allowing us to keep hitting) is actually part and parcel of the art's bridging and controlling methods.

He would disagree with you point blank and has done a lot of research with other trained fighters.

But he's right in saying CS is not fighting, of course.

.....but many think it is.

For me, the bigger picture is how do I strike without being struck. How do I keep attacking center without exposing my own. How do I do this without relying purely on visual cues, which are limited at the range we want to control. How does Chi Sau and Lat Sau give me the tools and skillset required to do all of this.

Becoming sensitive to what an opponent is or isn't doing is got from years of reactive chi sau - gor sau and sparring practice. It is not made from touching arm methods. This is the main reason why so many people are ditching their old lineages. They can't all be wrong mate! That would not make sense.

For me the answers are in understanding and effectively using Chi Kiu. This idea isn't just unique to people who learned from Yip Man - it's found in other Wing Chun lineages too.

Chi Kiu? "sticking bridges" ?

For what it's worth, Neil's experiences are similar to my own, including how he used to do Dan Chi Sau and why it was, let's say, problematic.

Had Neil not exposed himself in person to our way he would still be none the wiser today. How do you think he would feel if I told him via text that his ideas on Wing Chun (that stem from a son of Yip Man) are flawed? He would react the same way most of you lot do. Of course he would. Fortunately for Neil he discovered his own short comings first and that has led him down a better path.

[KPM]

I am not going to let Graham draw me into another prolonged *****-fest because he has already proven that he cannot carry on a civil discussion with anyone who may have ideas different from his own without resorting to insults. But I did want to make two comments:


There is no prolonged contact so I must use skill and LSJC to off balance them and this doesn't come via arm contact.

You aren't going to off balance anyone without contacting them, unless you are an expert at I Chuan!

In fact where their arm go I do not because the correct way is to position yourself out of their direct firing line.

Nobody said the contact or "bridge" had to be the arm. In fact, contact should quickly move up from the arm to contact and control the torso/head.

[BPWT]

I think if you met both guys and moved around with them a little you would see within seconds which methods work and which methods do not. You should stop thinking that just because somebody was taught by WSL that they are all going to be the same. They are not! It's very easy to repeat what somebody else has said and show things through a drill or whatever but getting stuck in and sparring with hand, foot, pole and knives takes things to a new level. This test your knowledge on Ving Tsun and also reveals what you can apply and what you can't! Playing chi sau all day everyday is futile without the rest.

Well, I agree with you. It's only when you test things outside of Chi Sau that you see whether you can 'transfer' what you got from Chi Sau training into, say, sparring.

I have no doubt that PB would hand me my arse. Maybe DP would too, but from what I've seen and heard, I am willing to concede that PB would hand it to me quicker.

But is this really just about their understanding of the methods, or due to natural ability? DP knows the system to some depth, it seems to me. But PB may well be the better fighter.

If you were to meet Chris Collins or Maday Norbert, and they proved capable of beating you in sparring, would you say that the LTWT method was therefore better than the PBVT method? I think you would simply say that these two guys were, personally, better than you.

So I agree that things need to be tested outside of Chi Sau in order to establish what skill a person really has... but even then it just shows 'who' is better, not necessarily 'what' is better/more effective, etc.

Yes and my opinion is that through hard work and training with many people from all over the place has shown PB what can work and what cannot.

For sure, the man has put in years and years of hard training. And has drawn his conclusions. For him, he's reached an understanding based on this. I'm not arguing that the man has it all wrong, I am just saying that my Sifu too has put in years of hard work, and met many people from many MAs, and he has reached different conclusions.

He would disagree with you point blank and has done a lot of research with other trained fighters.

That's okay with me. Ernie seems like a nice guy, and he is passionate about how he trains (and what he trains). He can disagree with me if he likes.

Becoming sensitive to what an opponent is or isn't doing is got from years of reactive chi sau - gor sau and sparring practice.

I agree.

It is not made from touching arm methods.

I disagree. Reactive Chi Sau, Gor Sau and Sparring practice should include Kiu Sau - which encompasses WT's concepts, methods and strategies. IMO.

This is the main reason why so many people are ditching their old lineages. They can't all be wrong mate! That would not make sense.

Well, the numbers game is a tricky thing to play. Like I was saying in other threads, I can see and understand why some people might leave their group/organization to train with PB.

Recently I read something by Keith Kernspecht where he stated that 2013 was an amazing year for the EWTO, as it now has more members than ever before in its 40-odd year history. As you know, I am no big fan of what the EWTO teaches today... I positively dislike it ... and so I wouldn't want to apply your statement, regarding numbers, of "they can't all be wrong." There are far more people studying in the EWTO than with PB, sometimes personal choices just don't make sense - at least to some people.

Chi Kiu? "sticking bridges" ?

It is a term used in the art. But I would add that this is not/should not be taken to mean prolonged stick, like a fly stuck on fly paper. It is referring to bridge contact. It lasts only as long as it needs to last.

In an exchange you've either made contact or haven't. Two ranges. Lei Kiu and Chi Kiu.

Had Neil not exposed himself in person to our way he would still be none the wiser today. How do you think he would feel if I told him via text that his ideas on Wing Chun (that stem from a son of Yip Man) are flawed? He would react the same way most of you lot do. Of course he would. Fortunately for Neil he discovered his own short comings first and that has led him down a better path.

Been there myself, so I feel his pain. But I've seen how the training I do now can be used - and not just by my Sifu, but by numerous people within our lineage. Some more talented than others, but all of them training the methods.

But this type of training in the art is not easy to apply - it takes lots of work. People say Wing Chun should be simple, efficient, effective.

I agree, but simple, efficient and effective in its use - in application. Sometimes the training to get there is not so simple - and certainly not easy. Lots of hard work, sweat, bruised ego and bruised bodies.

I walk to work each day and walk through a park where there are a ton of guys doing bodyweight exercises on bars and posts. They make it look really simple. It isn't, I've tried - much to their amusement. When you've developed skill in something, doing it always looks simple.

[Graham H]

If you were to meet Chris Collins or Maday Norbert, and they proved capable of beating you in sparring, would you say that the LTWT method was therefore better than the PBVT method? I think you would simply say that these two guys were, personally, better than you.

No because I'm interested in how the system can improve and develop my own Ving Tsun. Wing Tsun makes no sense and there is a good reason why Leung Ting has a bad reputation in many VT/WC circles.

For sure, the man has put in years and years of hard training. And has drawn his conclusions. For him, he's reached an understanding based on this. I'm not arguing that the man has it all wrong, I am just saying that my Sifu too has put in years of hard work, and met many people from many MAs, and he has reached different conclusions.

Like I said before some people can make any sh1t work for them. Without being in the same room as these guys (which will never happen) nobody will ever know who will come out on top.

I disagree. Reactive Chi Sau, Gor Sau and Sparring practice should include Kiu Sau - which encompasses WT's concepts, methods and strategies. IMO.

................im not interested in WT

Recently I read something by Keith Kernspecht where he stated that 2013 was an amazing year for the EWTO, as it now has more members than ever before in its 40-odd year history. As you know, I am no big fan of what the EWTO teaches today... I positively dislike it ... and so I wouldn't want to apply your statement, regarding numbers, of "they can't all be wrong." There are far more people studying in the EWTO than with PB, sometimes personal choices just don't make sense - at least to some people.

Yes! There are more stupid people in the world than there are windows

I walk to work each day and walk through a park where there are a ton of guys doing bodyweight exercises on bars and posts. They make it look really simple. It isn't, I've tried - much to their amusement. When you've developed skill in something, doing it always looks simple.

Agree

[BPWT]

No because I'm interested in how the system can improve and develop my own Ving Tsun. Wing Tsun makes no sense and there is a good reason why Leung Ting has a bad reputation in many VT/WC circles.

Well, I think we all study with the aim that the system's methods improve what we do. LT's reputation, for those who have a problem with him, gets a real battering... but this is really more a personal thing. LT can rub people the wrong way.

Like I said before some people can make any sh1t work for them. Without being in the same room as these guys (which will never happen) nobody will ever know who will come out on top.

For sure. Maybe PB's skill is based on innate ability too. Who in his group can match his skills?