William Cheung's ANTI-CLF Tactics

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . . Actually..given the history of..for lack of a better word..friction between CLF and WC..I never thought I would see the way where a WC man would have something good to say about Chan Heungs' art.

First of all I wasn't around during the friction between CLF and WC. So it's not my fight. I have friends who do CLF. One is a Sifu. I was taught in the Marine Corps that a warrior should know the weakness as well as the strengths of an opponent. To ignore his strengths could get you killed.
I must make this clear. I'm a "martial artist" who just happens to specialize in WC. I'm not a "WC man". In my first tour in Vietnam we used M14s, my second tour we got M16s. We were also trained to fire AK50s and AK47s. What if your weapon misfired and there was an AK lying right next to you? If you weren't familiar with how to operate it you'd be SOL. The same goes for martial arts. If you stay in you own little box you'll get surprises from out side of the box. So a "martial artist" must be familiar with other systems and have respect for what other systems are capable of.

[TenTigers]

Gary is doing a great job explaining his art.


These Cho Gar have evolve into more Nam Kuen. Since Cho Gar has evolved for past 150 years, there are lots of different branches.

hmm..so are his pak-sau's WCK pak-sau, or Nam Kuen pak-sau?

[Shaolindynasty]

First of all I wasn't around during the friction between CLF and WC. So it's not my fight

This is true for most of us. Any friction between clf and wc is the result of friction between specific practitioners of both methods and not the methods themselves.

[Phil Redmond]

Yes, thanks!

These are great stuffs to learn from each others.




The two men set at 12.00 remind me of Cho WCK's two men set which is practicing left right back forth similar to that two men set but using WC technics and cover all the angles including the frontal which WCK in general shows. The set is called Chi Sau play set. Today it is almost totally lost / extinct beside a few people know it.

it is very different then IpMan and YKS chi sau platform type. there are lots of moving and angling and....etc. so it is like a CLF which continuous moving but the technics are all WCK type and way.

The following is a sample of it. start 0.35.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqHE5A4LC80

Hendrik, Is this the Cho Ga Wing Chun that you do?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMVsW...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGBsn...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7exQZ...eature=related

[Hendrik]

Hendrik, Is this the Cho Ga Wing Chun that you do?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMVsW...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGBsn...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7exQZ...eature=related

Phil,

Those are my Cho Gar relatives' practice.

mine is like the following,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKWVOc2HOig

even from the same family but I use a totally different type of jin dna.

[Hendrik]

hmm..so are his pak-sau's WCK pak-sau, or Nam Kuen pak-sau?

Pak sau is a troublesome terminology these days in WCK.

The pak sau such as in Ipman WCK is actually a combination of Kaam sau, pak sau, fok sau in the ancient terminology.


I dont know why is Ipman call it Pak sau when it is so many different things.


Pak sau in ancient definition means slapping like slapping a ball, or to be very specific, ligtht slap. not much force used.


So, if the Pak sau is light like slapping a ball with local powering that is accord to old WCK definition.


So, which specific sau are you asking? Pak sau as in the ancient time or Pak Sau as Ipman's called? if it is the Pak sau as Ipman's called then how can that be nam kuen pak sau for that is so many sau there?

Now, saying that, in Hung gar, do you pak with you whole body or local joints? and does that Pak accord to the style?

[Violent Designs]

Pak sau is a troublesome terminology these days in WCK.

The pak sau such as in Ipman WCK is actually a combination of Kaam sau, pak sau, fok sau in the ancient terminology.


I dont know why is Ipman call it Pak sau when it is so many different things.


Pak sau in ancient definition means slapping like slapping a ball, or to be very specific, ligtht slap. not much force used.


So, if the Pak sau is light like slapping a ball with local powering that is accord to old WCK definition.

Now, saying that, in Hung gar, do you slap with you whole body or local joints?

Hmm, I can't speak for Hung Gar but in CLF pak sao is like light parry, as you described. It is not so much whole body force hard bridge or anything... it's very easy, like in boxing....

[Hendrik]

Hmm, I can't speak for Hung Gar but in CLF pak sao is like light parry, as you described. It is not so much whole body force hard bridge or anything... it's very easy, like in boxing....

Yup. pak sao is light. and purposely not using the whole body structure. as in the ancient definition.

[hskwarrior]

Hmm, I can't speak for Hung Gar but in CLF pak sao is like light parry, as you described. It is not so much whole body force hard bridge or anything... it's very easy, like in boxing....

a good flick of the wrist

[Violent Designs]

Yup. pak sao is light. and purposely not using the whole body structure. as in the ancient definition.

There are more "forceful" or more "redirecting" in application.

Poon sao is more guiding hand.

Garn sao is much more forceful or explosive.

This CLF interpretation, I don't know how helpful it is. But perhaps there is some overlap with WCK techniques or interpretation.

[Hendrik]

There are more "forceful" or more "redirecting" in application.

Poon sao is more guiding hand.

Garn sao is much more forceful or explosive.

This CLF interpretation, I don't know how helpful it is. But perhaps there is some overlap with WCK techniques or interpretation.

Pak sau in WCK is for dissolving in coming power, similar to put a fire cracker bomb in the joints of a big robot or a rokect launcher. a slight shift there the whole operation is totally screwed.

Pak sau is also the Anti-Sun chain punch. it is the high efficient way of destroying sun chain punch.

[TenTigers]

So, if the Pak sau is light like slapping a ball with local powering that is accord to old WCK definition.


So, which specific sau are you asking? Pak sau as in the ancient time or Pak Sau as Ipman's called? if it is the Pak sau as Ipman's called then how can that be nam kuen pak sau for that is so many sau there?

Now, saying that, in Hung gar, do you pak with you whole body or local joints? and does that Pak accord to the style?

All of the above.
In the Ip Man WCK I was exposed to, the Pak Sau can be done with local joints, but there is always connection to body.Otherwise the punch will just blow right through it. Power can be a light slap or a jarring slap. It can guide the strike without much force, utilizing body position to avoid the strike (many just refer to this as wu-sau)
It can redirect, check, or attack. Depends on angle and force utilized.
Our Hung Kuen views it the same way. We don't have just one interpetation, one way, one energy. Hence the term, sup yi kiu sau. Not twelve techniques, but twelve energy methods, which is applied to the bridge-no matter what the technique is.
ex: Pak can be hard, soft, guiding,raising, sinking,suppressing, immobilizing, etc...

[Hendrik]

1, All of the above.


2, In the Ip Man WCK I was exposed to, the Pak Sau can be done with local joints, but there is always connection to body.Otherwise the punch will just blow right through it. Power can be a light slap or a jarring slap. It can guide the strike without much force, utilizing body position to avoid the strike (many just refer to this as wu-sau)
It can redirect, check, or attack. Depends on angle and force utilized.


3, Our Hung Kuen views it the same way. We don't have just one interpetation, one way, one energy. Hence the term, sup yi kiu sau. Not twelve techniques, but twelve energy methods, which is applied to the bridge-no matter what the technique is.
ex: Pak can be hard, soft, guiding,raising, sinking,suppressing, immobilizing, etc...

1, if it is ancient WCK it cant be all of the above. the definition is clear.


2, You are doing Ipman or other stuffs. so is it WCK or Nam kuen? you have to iron it out for yourself.

3, I dont know Hung Kuen, however, in ancient WCK that is not the case, WCK stress on every point has to be crytal clear or Dim Dim Cheng.


This above might sound stric and rigid. however, look at it. Pak is a well define technics. Certainly one can use different technics to make an application sequence. But, the technics or the building blocks has to be clear. other wise, it will get lost.

IMHO,
For example, There is no such thing as Wu sau. "Wu" in reality/ancient time is actually similar to Luu jin the second key of Taijichuan. In Wu/Luu, one can use the under elbow power to snap away the incoming attack if needed while stick and ride on the incoming attack ,but usually, such as Luu one just ride the incoming and mislead it without have to snap away the incoming.

However, today, when people do SLT's WU , one is fix at "after the snap away", so one has this tensing palm retracting or pulling back this tensing palm. That cant snap away power but become a very rigid sustain. it lost the characteristics of Luu as in taiji also lost the snap power. and we start to see some is doing a palm drive forward to call it Wu sau. That is not Wu sau according to the ancient.

Wu sau is " Luu as in taijichuan riding and mislead the incoming, and snap to break away or bounce when needed."


So, if the WCner keep doing these type of things, the art is going to be lost because the agile fine points are loosing or being fuzzy out replace with brute force.


I am pretty rigid when it comes to a discussion like this, not because I cannot accept other opinion. I actually can accept that very well. I am purposely being rigid so that the art is not fuzzy away. my bottom line is if you know what exactly you do that is fine with me. I switch around things too in the real life. however, you must not confuse yourself because when one get fuzzy that is the problem.

similar to the so many Cho Gar clip above, we know things get fuzzy to the point that it is out of the range of WCK, and these days we have a good term to give face to those stuffs ---- oh everyone can interprate things differently.


I personally like CLF alots is because lots of CLF stuffs are well define and well practice instead of every one goes interprate things their way.

[kung fu fighter]

For example, There is no such thing as Wu sau. "Wu" in reality/ancient time is actually similar to Luu jin the second key of Taijichuan. In Wu/Luu, one can use the under elbow power to snap away the incoming attack if needed while stick and ride on the incoming attack ,but usually, such as Luu one just ride the incoming and mislead it without have to snap away the incoming.

However, today, when people do SLT's WU , one is fix at "after the snap away", so one has this tensing palm retracting or pulling back this tensing palm. That cant snap away power but become a very rigid sustain. it lost the characteristics of Luu as in taiji also lost the snap power. and we start to see some is doing a palm drive forward to call it Wu sau. That is not Wu sau according to the ancient.

Wu sau is " Luu as in taijichuan riding and mislead the incoming, and snap to break away or bounce when needed."

So if wu is equivent to Luu in taiji chuan, would you say Bong is equal to Peng in taiji chuan?

Is it possible that wing chun could have been a system that evolved from tai chi, since it share so many of the same principles/concepts. That could be why they both share the same snake and crane origin story. what do you think?

[Hendrik]

So if wu is equivent to Luu in taiji chuan, would you say Bong is equal to Peng in taiji chuan?

Is it possible that wing chun could have been a system that evolved from tai chi, since it share so many of the same principles/concepts. That could be why they both share the same snake and crane origin story. what do you think?

1, nope, Peng jin is in what in general Ipman WCK called Fook Sau. Those are actually misnaming according to the old WCK terminology. That "fook Sau" is called Kung Sau.

So that so called " sam bai fut " in the Ipman WCK or some other wck which consist of the Fook Sau and Wu sau. That is the practice of the Peng and Wu type of frontal jin. it is not as what most think today.


2, Taiji is a different system. "fook and Wu" is not exactly Taiji stuffs. because "fook" involve with White Crane's metal shape hand. So it can be use as press...etc. instead of just peng. I am using the Taiji terminology here is only for the purpose of common language so all could understand what is it.


3, So the practice of SLT's "sam bai fut or the fook and wu cycle is the training for accepting Jin for the frontal while one is extending or contracting while sticking at the opponents and cover a large frontal angle.

it is not what most today practice think as today's "sam bai fut" as striking only. foward projection pressure type of things.



IMHO, those are the practice of sticking and ride on the opponent and one can mislead him or snap bounce him as one likes if needed.


a sample of application among many of the so called Sam bai fut in Cho WCK according to the old two men set.

check out 0.5/1.21 1.01/1.21
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqHE5...6584247DE61C53