Hold to the basics

[Ultimatewingchun]

CSK,

and I'll tell you, that my experience teaching and observing has been that if I show someone the pure mechanic of an action (position their body, line 'em up so they have things right out to the hand and down to the floor), create a drill that brings out that mechanic (walk in and crash, for instance), create a limited sparring environment where they have to use that mechanic (cut in on a straight punch, aka jab sparring), *then* show the chi sao (jum), students run down far fewer blind alleys and develop proficiency in chi sao at a much greater rate and frequency.

BCB,

while I wholeheartedly agree with you about the importance of the basics, that importance is what leads to the delusion that standing around for 30 minutes a day will lead to martial achievement or skill- something proven patently false by many Wing Chun and taiji players.

Most teachers don't have the basics, of those that do, few realize how they got them or how to efficiently transmit them, of their students few realize the importance of those basics, unless the teacher is someone able to convey that importance. The system. . . much as the system annoys me on occasion, the system is clear as day about the work you need to do and what matters.

Andrew

***GOT TO AGREE COMPLETELY with AndrewS about this...spending months and months standing still in a "perfect" neutral stance while doing SLT for half an hour....or spending months and months doing dan chi sao and what not (including double armed chi sao)...and other basic drills (like pak sao)...bong sao/larp sao, etc....

BEFORE ever engaging in the kinds of "sparring-like" (but not actual sparring) drills as Andrew described...is a waste of a lot of valuable time, imo.

Show them some basics - and then create some sort of semi-realistic drill to test those basics - that's the way to go.

[Sekabin]

Show them some basics - and then create some sort of semi-realistic drill to test those basics - that's the way to go.

I think 'semi-realistic' is the key word (er... words). Particularly for people beginning WCK, throwing them into very realistic, totally uncooperative sparring won't help them hone their technique. Well, that is to say, it will help them generate a technique that will probably be effective for them in the short-term, but in the long run they may well be picking up bad habits that they'll only have to get rid of later in order to use their body more efficiently.

I'm not one who believes that if you put a bunch of monkeys and some sparring gloves in a ring together they will become the most effective fighters. They'll be able to fight, true, but if they drill their bodies into efficient monkey-fighting shapes and structures, they'd be better off in the long run.

[Kapten Klutz]

This is a very interesting thread, thanks to all participants. I'm too new to MA to get specific, but my opening approach would be to respect traditional teaching techniques but not to worship them. Teaching has improved a lot over the last 100 years in many areas, even over the last twenty years. The military has new types of drills to hone skills, language teachers have focussed drills for learning to speak (something in between grammar practice and free conversation), doctors are being trained in new ways, musicians have been developing their teaching... you name the area and the method of effective teaching has improved and is showing results. I wouldn't want to learn Spanish the way they taught it in even the best schools 100 yrs ago. Why shouldn't new kinds of drills be developed for MA?

I guess what some people might worry about is that there are some subtle sides to the art that get rationalized out because a reformer doesn't understand them or thinks students are too lazy to master it. This is why I can accept that the idea of lineage can have something to it, even if it is sometimes abused and cheapened. But as soon as a coach shows that he or she is really thinking about how they train the students, and can explain innovations as clearly as some of these posts show, then I feel they're doing a good thing. That's the kind of thinking that led to these systems being developed in the first place. Unless you think it just appeared in some monks mind while he meditated. (fat chance).

I guess I'm lucky to be training at a place where I have a lot of confidence in the instructors. I'm also such a beginner that pretty much anything I do is an improvement.

[Edmund]

I guess what some people might worry about is that there are some subtle sides to the art that get rationalized out because a reformer doesn't understand them or thinks students are too lazy to master it. This is why I can accept that the idea of lineage can have something to it, even if it is sometimes abused and cheapened. But as soon as a coach shows that he or she is really thinking about how they train the students, and can explain innovations as clearly as some of these posts show, then I feel they're doing a good thing.

Well this relates back to some of the stuff that Rene quoted concerning grappling - though it applies to WC just as well:
Different lineages will have different basics and different underlying logic and principles. Until the student can understand how their particular lineage's system is used in fighting application, they can't turn their basic skill into a fundamental part of their personal style.

Even with that understanding, a student needs to practice in a intelligent way to master the basics so it can be applied in a dynamic situation. If the student only repeats things such as forms or drills without thinking and applying context, it doesn't matter how many times or how long they do it. A good teacher will be able to guide the student towards making sense of it rather than just making them do a form or a drill.

[Hendrik]

1,



The term basic have been brought up many times here.

But, what is Basic?

what is Basic? How deep is the Basic needs to be get into?




2,

while I wholeheartedly agree with you about the importance of the basics, that importance is what leads to the delusion that standing around for 30 minutes a day will lead to martial achievement or skill- something proven patently false by many Wing Chun and taiji players. -----------


Imho,

Perhaps,

it is not a dellusion; and perhaps it just prove mimic things superficially or looking good or have no idea what is for what.....


It is a causal world. law of cause and effect always applied. Diferent cause lead to different effect.


a,
cooking sand expecting to become rice
or totally have no idea what one is cooking...


b,
Standing around 30mins a day will yield standing.
Standing and day dream around 30 mins a day will yield day dream..
however, standing investigate/ aligning/ exploring-experimenting the different components of body structure, force field, breathing... 30mins a day accumulate lots of usefull experience.




and,

even punching heavy bag for 30 mins a day might do revse service if one has reach the dimissing of return or saturation point after 15mins.




Just some thoughts

[Matrix]

But, what is Basic?

What is not basic?
IMO, advanced is just incorporating many basic concepts together.

[Hendrik]

What is not basic?
IMO, advanced is just incorporating many basic concepts together-----






just Imho for discussion shake

The above are a fuzzy statement which is a root cause of lots of problem. since it doesnt tell anything.

IE: when one is asking how to cross a bridge , and the answer is do whatever not cause one fall.

This type of stuffs sound zen but it is not zen at all but causing confusion.

What is basic? if Basic cannot be defined clearly there is no advance. Imho

Imho, lots of cma get into trouble with the un beable to define in on hand and on the other hand thinking this confusion is zen instead of realized what happen.

Ie: what is the different between mimic-ing Slt for 30 mins with the zen like fantasy and mimic-ing slt for 30 mind with the zen like imitation while making a movie.

and
if mimic-ing can become expert then all those hongkong kungfu movie actors will be the greatest expert because they looks great in thier performance.


So again, what is the basic?
what is that basic one root in so that that is the first few things since that is the tool one cultivate from the first day of doing wck and continously grow as the time goes by.

hopefully after years of tra it become only one thing ining one will default to skillfuly without thinking at all.


So, imho, without the one true skill develop or fully develop. there isnt much there.
People said Tan Bong Fok...etc, is the basic. is it?

If my memory serve, one of a hong kong GM in WCK once said the real kung fu is those count able stuffs which one default to every time. I agree with him and would like to add that, the stuffs one default to might be only say 3 but the level of attainment or states of these 3 stuffs are infinite, there is where the level of kungfu shown. same sun punch but it is not the samething at all.

Thus, within the default stuffs, one can really see, is one a wcner or karateka...etc because the engine supporting or powering that default stuffs is the original face of what one's art is.

Thus, there is mma...ect. but, what is the default kungfu of one? Bjj? WCK? boxing? or .... different condition program to different default?

No matter what it is, the basic got to be clearly define. otherwise, it doesnt work in a long run.

in addition, just knowing dan ta, lap da...etc cant' count as the "complete basic "because those are just a certain application technics. it sure may have advantage but it is limited due to the nature of the condition.


For me, imho, power or force generation/manipulation/handling is the core of the basic deep beyond tan bong fok. or slt. and the process/procedure to train to acquire a type of power generation/handling which become the enginee of the system is a core that one needs to based or rooted on. without this, one has not much but drifting from pop application technics to pop technics without a sense of whole and grounded.

Ie: the different between the successfully or not executed of a same technic is core in power manualing. Same Tan da might work or not depend on it.


Just some thoughts.

[Matrix]

Yes, in essence there is no advanced.
My statement may have seemed fuzzy, and that was by design.
BCB said it in the original post on this thread "the tendancy to overlook the powerful place of the most basic elements of Wing Chun and to try and race ahead to what is considered the "meat" of the system." IMO, they are looking for something that doesn't really exist. The basics are the "meat" of the system.

If you want the ONE basic, I would say YJKYM or your horse.
You can have great hands, but without a good horse it is largely a waste.
It's the first thing we learn in SLT, and I do not believe that is purely coincidence.

[Liddel]

Some good points, Both sides of these types of training are needed, the chi sao and the use in a sparring platform.

I dont think you can say right away though.

Sebakin said to sparring early -
"but in the long run they may well be picking up bad habits that they'll only have to get rid of later in order to use their body more efficiently"

I always think this is a funny type of statement, mainly because i believe this to be true, but isnt that the point of having a Sifu ?
Someone whos there to look over and point these things out so as to not form bad habbits ??

[Liddel]

Some good points, Both sides of these types of training are needed, the chi sao and the use in a sparring platform.

I dont think you can say right away though.

Sebakin said to sparring early -
"but in the long run they may well be picking up bad habits that they'll only have to get rid of later in order to use their body more efficiently"

I always think this is a funny type of statement, mainly because i believe this to be true, but isnt that the point of having a Sifu ?
Someone whos there to look over and point these things out so as to not form bad habbits ??

[Hendrik]

If you want the ONE basic, I would say YJKYM or your horse. --------

You might be right. However, I think it is deeper then that such as the essence of YJKYM. and what is that essence carry by or to be release by the posture of yjkym?

[Keng Geng]

There can't be one basic, that is not the essence of kung fu. Thinking in these terms is what gets WC practitioners screwed. The essence of kung fu is not in two dimensional thinking and absolutes. More chain punching anyone?

[Hendrik]

1, There can't be one basic, that is not the essence of kung fu.

2, Thinking in these terms is what gets WC practitioners screwed.

3,The essence of kung fu is not in two dimensional thinking and absolutes.

4, More chain punching anyone?

Just for fun of discussion, i am playing critical role to ask some questions..


1, so what is basic?
saying this cant or that is not is not touching at to solving the issues at all.

2, What does one have when one needs it? who cares what or how the terms for thinking? that thinking stuffs doesnt solve the issue either.

3, again, what is basic?

4, is your chain punch power with 6 directional or 2 directional force vectors? since you mention "The essence of kung fu is not in two dimensional thinking and absolutes"

[kj]

Here's some stuff from Michael Jen's UG Q&A. It's geared towards grappling, but applies to WCK and any combat sport, really:<snip great stuff>

Excellent! Thanks for sharing the essay here, Rene.

Regards,
- kj

[Keng Geng]

Just for fun of discussion, i am playing critical role to ask some questions..


1, so what is basic?
saying this cant or that is not is not touching at to solving the issues at all.

2, What does one have when one needs it? who cares what or how the terms for thinking? that thinking stuffs doesnt solve the issue either.

3, again, what is basic?

4, is your chain punch power with 6 directional or 2 directional force vectors? since you mention "The essence of kung fu is not in two dimensional thinking and absolutes"

1. I won't answer that question, but I definitely won't confine it to one thing. Having a solid horse is not the be all of kung fu.

2. True at a basic level, but not at advanced.

3. That can only be determined by what's in the person's head. It's all about the way you think about your training.

4. My chain punch is multidimensional, so much so it doesn't look like most chain punching.