Wing chun vids share please take 2

[Wayfaring]

Back to clips : one from Sean I found today , nice!

http://youtu.be/J0U9Kfp8XRY

I would say same observations as with the PB clip. At :06-:07, look at that LH punch. If you can call it a punch. To me it's pushing a hand out there and leaning on the bridge as the student knows without leaning on the bridge he will get pushed back. There's a lot of that going on, intermixed with what looks to be crisper pulled punches more along the lines that sparring should show.

Why do I see things like this you guys don't see? My MMA team has quite a few very talented wrestlers on it trying to learn striking. Every single one of those guys has a very hard time learning to throw punches, not push them. They look ridiculous when starting. I mean like a new deer trying to walk. When I spar with them, I want to punch them in the face, not chi sau with them. A chi sau stance will get me taken down in :01. Punching them in the face or center of mass sternum backs them off like a flaming stick would to wolves. They back out and circle with a similar look in their eyes.

[k gledhill]

Back to the clip and examples:

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

:02 -05 - three push techniques - RH push punch on shoulder, collapsed RH push with elbow, RH push on face.

Now maybe this is a chi sau drill and PB being a smaller guy has this as a natural reaction to an opponent bulling into him. But no way you would do that in a real fight - you would either dissipate the bull rush as it is developing or if it forces you back angle step off back 45 degrees and punch the bull in the side of his jaw. In any skilled art - WCK, boxing, MT, probably half a dozen TCMA. Not push him away.

I could do this throughout the clip, but it illustrates my point. No, my eyes aren't too slow to pick up what PB is doing there. He is pushing a guy away to maintain distance. And IMO that is exactly what you don't want to train for real fighting. Why? As I said it puts you in a no-mans-land between striking and grappling. Now if you're a good grappler I guess you could make an excuse. But I wouldn't do that. The resting hand and the static nature of the push would give an opponent of mine leverage to open me up to take me down.

Now maybe you think I'm picking on PB. I'm really not for a few reasons. First, I don't think it's PB putting that video up on YouTube. And it's not him explaining what's going on. Maybe to him he would read this thread, 100% agree with me, and say of course he was pushing the guy off and he wouldn't do that in a fight or in fight sparring. Most people who have logged thousands of hours sparring time wouldn't draw drastically different conclusions.

So my only caution here would be against somehow speeding up chi sau but not transitioning the elements of chi sau into fight-simulation striking.

And my question for the fan club is whether or not this clip of PB represents the pace and training methods you go for in all of your classes, or what differences do you have?

:02-:05 is just stance testing seung ma toi ma...again chi-sao is a series of modular events strung together ...to look at a drill and assign application to it can be a pitfall. I make sure students of mine know that I am testing them by making pushes and not to mimic me as an 'application in chi-sao or fighting.
The test is to improve the recipients balance and recovery...also PB is developing force to test with no leaning forwards..notice where his force comes from ?

[k gledhill]

I would say same observations as with the PB clip. At :06-:07, look at that LH punch. If you can call it a punch. To me it's pushing a hand out there and leaning on the bridge as the student knows without leaning on the bridge he will get pushed back. There's a lot of that going on, intermixed with what looks to be crisper pulled punches more along the lines that sparring should show.

Why do I see things like this you guys don't see? My MMA team has quite a few very talented wrestlers on it trying to learn striking. Every single one of those guys has a very hard time learning to throw punches, not push them. They look ridiculous when starting. I mean like a new deer trying to walk. When I spar with them, I want to punch them in the face, not chi sau with them. A chi sau stance will get me taken down in :01. Punching them in the face or center of mass sternum backs them off like a flaming stick would to wolves. They back out and circle with a similar look in their eyes.

You are trying to assign chi-sao as our fighting ...it isnt , period. Yeah I agree If a guy stands in front of me in a basic stance and fights...

A lot of times an arm is left out to bait incorrect reponses to it...; ) all testing arm chasing , or striking in balance. Arm chasing usually incorporates arm pressure seeking leading to losing balance...

[Wayfaring]

:02-:05 is just stance testing seung ma toi ma...again chi-sao is a series of modular events strung together ...to look at a drill and assign application to it can be a pitfall. I make sure students of mine know that I am testing them by making pushes and not to mimic me as an 'application in chi-sao or fighting.
The test is to improve the recipients balance and recovery...also PB is developing force to test with no leaning forwards..notice where his force comes from ?

Okay so you're categorizing that clip as chi sau or a sensitivity drill.

Can you discuss how you train the difference between a sensitivity drill and a real fight?

All force in any art comes from your stance. The connection to the ground, gravity, and your balance within yourself all contribute to power. In striking, power comes from mobilizing your core with everything else in balance.

[k gledhill]

Okay so you're categorizing that clip as chi sau or a sensitivity drill.

Can you discuss how you train the difference between a sensitivity drill and a real fight?

All force in any art comes from your stance. The connection to the ground, gravity, and your balance within yourself all contribute to power. In striking, power comes from mobilizing your core with everything else in balance.

Its not a 'sensitivity drill' period...WSL .."sensitivity to negative force is a BY PRODUCT of chi-sao drilling, NOT THE GOAL "

[Wayfaring]

You are trying to assign chi-sao as our fighting ...it isnt , period. Yeah I agree If a guy stands in front of me in a basic stance and fights...

I'm just looking at training clips and trying to sort them out and allowing some leeway. Maybe the story is there are ONLY chi sau clips up there and none of you guys sparring or fighting. What do you call it "go sau / gor sau"??? If so it is what it is. I'd just say make sure the public clips available don't reflect your % of training. Once you get to a certain point static looping square stance chi sau doesn't do a lot for you. And speeding it up and making it pushy and slappy will probably train the wrong responses into students from a realistic fight perspective.

A lot of times an arm is left out to bait incorrect reponses to it...; ) all testing arm chasing , or striking in balance. Arm chasing usually incorporates arm pressure seeking leading to losing balance...

I don't think that's what it was in that clip. It was a bad habit. Feinting and baiting are both valid approaches and necessary at more advanced levels. But if you make excuses for bad habits then it just hurts the reality of what the students are learning. I say slow them down and correct them.

[Wayfaring]

Its not a 'sensitivity drill' period...WSL .."sensitivity to negative force is a BY PRODUCT of chi-sao drilling, NOT THE GOAL "

Well I don't think he intended slappy and pushy with speed to be the goal. What did he say was the goal?

I mean people's training methods are no skin off my back. I'm just trying to avoid things like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDLRX1P0bEg

where someone gets taken down with one of the world's ugliest and worst double-legs ever followed by the inevitable. and pushy on the bridge and laying your hands out there in some kind of misguided feint will absolutely get you there. nice crisp strikes not leaving your hands out there for a handle will keep you from there.

[k gledhill]

I'm just looking at training clips and trying to sort them out and allowing some leeway. Maybe the story is there are ONLY chi sau clips up there and none of you guys sparring or fighting. What do you call it "go sau / gor sau"??? If so it is what it is. I'd just say make sure the public clips available don't reflect your % of training. Once you get to a certain point static looping square stance chi sau doesn't do a lot for you. And speeding it up and making it pushy and slappy will probably train the wrong responses into students from a realistic fight perspective.



I don't think that's what it was in that clip. It was a bad habit. Feinting and baiting are both valid approaches and necessary at more advanced levels. But if you make excuses for bad habits then it just hurts the reality of what the students are learning. I say slow them down and correct them.

If you dont know whats going on how can anyone give an informed opinion about bad habit or jut sao on arm ? You're a guy who hasnt been introduced to the methods we use to develop. You see action and like most, try to assign applicable correlation to real fighting. VT DRILLING is abstract to the onlooker who has no common understanding.
Sure to the onlooker chi-sao seems like a weird fight, a lot of guys go for the "i would kick you in the nuts" response, or "who fights with arms rolling?", so they assign dirty boxing/clinching, because they DONT KNOW whats going on. This has been going on for years, leading to pushing hands /pressure seeking arms, wars of rolling arms....a mess.

[Wayfaring]

If you dont know whats going on how can anyone give an informed opinion about bad habit or jut sao on arm ? You're a guy who hasnt been introduced to the methods we use to develop. You see action and like most, try to assign applicable correlation to real fighting. VT DRILLING is abstract to the onlooker who has no common understanding.

I wouldn't say I don't know what is going on. I've been through chi sau platform training - both in ip man systems (moy yat) and how hfy views it, which are different. I don't know how you guys view it is all and the specific methods you use and the %. So this is me asking questions about your methods. Do you use standard ip man progression? daan chi sau (one and two hand), poon sau, luk sau, jip sau, jau sau, teui ma, seung ma, gor sau?

I know you aren't knowledgeable of the hfy chi sau progression - kiu sau, chi kiu, chi sau.

So "no common understanding" is quite inaccurate.

Sure to the onlooker chi-sao seems like a weird fight, a lot of guys go for the "i would kick you in the nuts" response, or "who fights with arms rolling?", so they assign dirty boxing/clinching, because they DONT KNOW whats going on. This has been going on for years, leading to pushing hands /pressure seeking arms, wars of rolling arms....a mess.

If you think chi sau automatically leads to "knowing what's going on" in a fighting sense, you're delusional.

As it is practiced I see far more of a case for chi sau being a cute little mysticized drill to string a student along for years while collecting dues and ingraining bad habits to make the student even more dependent upon advanced training to break out of it. And producing pockets of parlor trick specialists.

[k gledhill]

The easiest way to differentiate chi sao ideas is to make one Idea based on arms feeling other arms in a combat mode and arms developing a multifaceted striking concept in a mutual drilling platform without competition to defeat another in a delusional ritualized form of combat.

Pick your way.

[wingchunIan]

Why do folks have such a hard time understanding chi sao? In a fight situation if you strike your opponent unimpeded great, if not and something gets in the way or you need to intercept an incoming strike you need to be able to react in order to land your next strike, that reaction is all that is being trained in chi sao. The fact that chi sao is a continuous exercise of multiple situations is no different to the fact that the movements in the forms are not intended to be taken as a series of do this then do that and yet folks grasp that but struggle to understand chi sao.

[wingchunIan]

Well I don't think he intended slappy and pushy with speed to be the goal. What did he say was the goal?

I mean people's training methods are no skin off my back. I'm just trying to avoid things like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDLRX1P0bEg

where someone gets taken down with one of the world's ugliest and worst double-legs ever followed by the inevitable. and pushy on the bridge and laying your hands out there in some kind of misguided feint will absolutely get you there. nice crisp strikes not leaving your hands out there for a handle will keep you from there.

Clearly chi sao would have no relevance in defending the take down, that is purely a matter of not spotting the change in level and having poor footwork, probably due to lack of exposure to that type of attack.

[LFJ]

Spoken like a true believer on a quest. Anyone making real observations of real clips - oh, their eyes must just not be quick enough to pick up the blinding speed of PB.

A true believer of what and on what quest? I've never met PB and am not even of his lineage. You honestly didn't see the punches in that clip?

Anyway, I've found these software tools to be of great help when analyzing peoples movements in clips. When discussing clips with others, it enables us to move forwards quickly in analysis rather than be stuck in the routine of 'to fast to see' etc.

That shouldn't really be necessary. There were too many clearly pulled punches in that clip. Wayfaring was just sleeping and obviously knows nothing about chi-sau, as evidenced by his 'if you did that you'd be open to this' type arguments.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=wingchunIan;1210009]Clearly chi sao would have no relevance in defending the take down,
----------------------------------------------------------
Possibly a premature assumption-but not worth discussing at a mad hatter's party.

[Paddington]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1210025]

Clearly chi sao would have no relevance in defending the take down,
----------------------------------------------------------
Possibly a premature assumption-but not worth discussing at a mad hatter's party.

I think I share your view here, Joy. If only these forums were moderated properly so that useful discussion could occur more often. I am noticing that most just take their conversations elsewhere, which is a shame cause it kills these boards.