Is the modern Wck structure and chi sau a problem in reality?

[KPM]

Kei, vertical.


Bong and kie are couple. Bong without kei is missing one element.


the 1848 YKSLT kuit says:

Interesting! What is "kei"? KLPSWCK has a "Sao Sao" hand the looks very similar to what you are doing in that picture. And how does Bong have "Kei"?

But I would point out that some do the "modern" platform with more of an up and down motion of Bong/Tan than others. That would seem to cover the vertical line to me. In fact, I would argue that the "modern" platform puts more emphasis on the vertical line than the horizontal line! And the "ancient" platform puts more emphasis on the horizontal line than on the vertical line! Neither one really covers all 4 directions.

[KPM]

Ok.
IMHO, Alan or Robert is using a CSL dynamic platform which is no longer the modern generic Wck platform.
And this platform is rely on CSL power generation which is a seven bows based technology.

So, explicitly, it might looks generic in the beginning, but while in action it is a different type.


Csl dynamic platform can be analog to a four wheel drive for all range play, while genetic platform is a two wheel drive bounded by its structure and power generation for barrier range play.


The cars looks similar but not under the hood. If Csl doesn't have their special engine, it cannot go into a certain range.

I still don't understand what you are saying. Is the platform the rolling structure or not? I was seeing the "modern" platform as rolling with Bong/Tan/Fook and the "ancient" platform as rolling with Huen Sao. CSL still rolls with Bong/Tan/Fook, so what you are referring to as a "platform"? Do you mean the mechanics used for power generation? Because if you do this conversation has been completely off because we have been talking about different things!

BTW...what are you wearing on your feet in those photos? Your feet look huge!

[Vajramusti]

Joy, I don't even know what that means! Do you have a counterpoint?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Counterpoint" is often a debating term. Debating has rules and judges.


A different analytical point- tan, bong and fook are three major families of motions- each family has many children- they cover
all dimensions and directions. And of course wing chun in application is a two handed system- so bong on one side can be accompanied by a wu or a kuen
on the other side for balanced issuing of force.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1265741]You have said in well on the platform, that is what I mean

-------------------------------------------------

Hendrik-KPM's statement had several parts. Which part do you agree with.?

[Hendrik]

Interesting! What is "kei"? KLPSWCK has a "Sao Sao" hand the looks very similar to what you are doing in that picture. And how does Bong have "Kei"?

But I would point out that some do the "modern" platform with more of an up and down motion of Bong/Tan than others. That would seem to cover the vertical line to me. In fact, I would argue that the "modern" platform puts more emphasis on the vertical line than the horizontal line! And the "ancient" platform puts more emphasis on the horizontal line than on the vertical line! Neither one really covers all 4 directions.

1.

Kei is vertical way of using the part of the arm as bong is horizontal way.

Kei and bong cover the "+" . Thus, with both of them, it is a balance coverage. At least the 1848 YKSLT data point it is a balance one .


Kei is a vertical elbow type of arm where bong is horizontal wing elbow. Kei is pressing forward vertically while bong is pressing forward horizontally.


If you still lost, think about if bong is related to the horizontal forward elbow strike. And kei is related to the vertical forward elbow Strike.

2.

These days, everything is called tan . Seem people likes to define as they like it.


As for 1848 data point,
The attach photo is Zhao Yang , it is not Tan but now a day many called it tan.

So, there are kei, zhao yang, tan. They represent different mechanics

Tan is hand at chest level travel from chest outward , zhao yang is end up in shoulder level, starting from lower chest level with kind of 45degree forward and upward. Kei is pressing forward with some rotation

[Hendrik]

I still don't understand what you are saying. Is the platform the rolling structure or not? I was seeing the "modern" platform as rolling with Bong/Tan/Fook and the "ancient" platform as rolling with Huen Sao. CSL still rolls with Bong/Tan/Fook, so what you are referring to as a "platform"? Do you mean the mechanics used for power generation? Because if you do this conversation has been completely off because we have been talking about different things!

BTW...what are you wearing on your feet in those photos? Your feet look huge!

"Starts with the modern platform and then it switches into the ancient range " type of platform is what I mean.

It is not an ancient huen sau platform
but it is no longer the modern platform which keep a barrier infront of ones body, (barrier as in the two pictures in the beginning of this thread. Which keep one away from moving close into the opponent body)




It was freezing winter so I wear a feet warmer shoe

[kung fu fighter]

I don't know what you mean by that. Those clips look just like Yip Man Luk Sao. Yip Man Luk Sao will close in to elbow range at times as well depending on the circumstance.

I was referring to the first clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0, I rarely seen ymwc luk sao played that close.

[Vajramusti]

I was referring to the first clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0, I rarely seen ymwc luk sao played that close.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk sao can be close.

[LFJ]

Again, what is that training good for in a mma era where people combine bjj and boxing is the norm?

And again, I don't use pun-sau to fight. This question is as ignorant as asking what use SNT has against BJJ, since they can easily take you down.

It's a stage of development only, not fighting. If you are progressing through free sparring and fighting and understand what you're doing in pun-sau you won't ask this question.

[LFJ]

In this clip starting at about 30 seconds in these guys are doing a decent job of rolling. This is the little bit more refined version that "coils" that I mentioned. Notice that the movement appears to be at the wrists, but there is elbow behind it connected to the hips.

That's not how the elbow is used in the system I study. It's like a whole different martial art concept.

How can increased structure lead to less gamesmanship? Its like any activity, the more rules you impose the more specific things people attempt to "work" the rules. The more structured something is the less "open-ended" it becomes. But I do agree it shouldn't be a fight simulation.

If you look at the structure as imposed "rules", you are looking at chi-sau as a form of (unrealistic) sparring. That is a game. The less structure there is, the more you're just doing unrealistic sparring (playing a game).

One of the first things we are training when we begin chi-sau is the use of the elbow. The structure of pun-sau is to develop its use in an exchange of force with a partner. Even when we get into gwo-sau we're still developing these behaviors under increased pressure.

If we want to do something free form that is going to be relevant to facing BJJ and Boxing as Hendrik mentions, then we need to do realistic free sparring/fighting where we are applying what we have been developing with the system. Pun-sau is structured in such a way because it is developing something specific. If we want to do a free form exchange, we should be moving onto sparring, imo. Chi-sau being too free form turns into slaphappy nonsense with zero relevance to actual fighting which gives you nothing.

[KPM]

And again, I don't use pun-sau to fight. This question is as ignorant as asking what use SNT has against BJJ, since they can easily take you down.

It's a stage of development only, not fighting. If you are progressing through free sparring and fighting and understand what you're doing in pun-sau you won't ask this question.

I don't know LFJ, seems like a legitmate quesiton to me. Chi Sao is training. If you are always training at that intermediate range that is neither close in or at boxing distance, then your Chi Sao may not be training you very well to deal with those distances. It seems to me that's all Hendrik is saying.

[KPM]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Counterpoint" is often a debating term. Debating has rules and judges.


A different analytical point- tan, bong and fook are three major families of motions- each family has many children- they cover
all dimensions and directions. And of course wing chun in application is a two handed system- so bong on one side can be accompanied by a wu or a kuen
on the other side for balanced issuing of force.

An actual reply is all I meant. No need to get technical. Its seems too often lately that you post simply to say someone else is wrong, rather than contribute to the discussion and say WHY you think they are wrong.

[KPM]

Kei is vertical way of using the part of the arm as bong is horizontal way.

Kei and bong cover the "+" . Thus, with both of them, it is a balance coverage. At least the 1848 YKSLT data point it is a balance one .


Kei is a vertical elbow type of arm where bong is horizontal wing elbow. Kei is pressing forward vertically while bong is pressing forward horizontally.

Cool! That sounds exactly like the KLPS "Sao Sao" or "cover hand." But how does that factor into either the modern or the ancient Chi Sao platforms?



As for 1848 data point,
The attach photo is Zhao Yang , it is not Tan but now a day many called it tan.

So, there are kei, zhao yang, tan. They represent different mechanics

Tan is hand at chest level travel from chest outward , zhao yang is end up in shoulder level, starting from lower chest level with kind of 45degree forward and upward. Kei is pressing forward with some rotation

Zhao yang does not sound familiar to me. I'm still not sure how it is different from Tan? Or...is it the "Tok Sao" that some lineages refer to? Does it lift forward and upward using the palm rather than the outside edge of the forearm?


"Starts with the modern platform and then it switches into the ancient range " type of platform is what I mean.

It is not an ancient huen sau platform but it is no longer the modern platform which keep a barrier infront of ones body, (barrier as in the two pictures in the beginning of this thread. Which keep one away from moving close into the opponent body)

Ok. Understood! Thanks!

[KPM]

I was referring to the first clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0, I rarely seen ymwc luk sao played that close.

Really? Who have you been watching doing YMWCK Luk Sao, because that still doesn't look any different to me!

[KPM]

That's not how the elbow is used in the system I study. It's like a whole different martial art concept.

Elbows down and connected with the hips. That's how to generate good power in a strike and how to maintain good structure to transmit and receive force. I can't say how different that is from what you are doing.


If you look at the structure as imposed "rules", you are looking at chi-sau as a form of (unrealistic) sparring. That is a game. The less structure there is, the more you're just doing unrealistic sparring (playing a game).

There may be some truth to that. But also consider that the more structured it is, the more things have to "fit" with that structure. The things that "fit" with that structure are Wing Chun techniques. Granted, there are plenty of attributes you can develop training with a fellow Wing Chun partner, but at the end of the day Wing Chun technique is not what you will have to deal with in a real situation. So to me, the more "open-ended" the better!