Chum Kiu

[CFT]

[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1156029]Pretty silly really wouldn’t you say? What is the character? How many variables does that throw up?? What is the form for exactly?

There is only one character for Chum, and I was always taught seeking or searching.

http://translate.google.com/#zh-CN|en|尋 [/QUOTE]Sorry Spencer. There are many characters with the same sound and tone as Chum. Here are the ones for ‘search’ and ‘sink’:

Search: http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-can/search.php?q=�M
Sink:
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-can/search.php?q=�I
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-can/search.php?q=�H

[wingchunIan]

however you right it, say it, paint it or pronounce it, what do you do it for? what do you get out of practising it?

[k_gledhill]

[QUOTE=wingchunIan;1156421]however you right it, say it, paint it or pronounce it, what do you do it for? what do you get out of practising it?[/QUOTE]

A good way to see Chum Kil is to look at the LDBK [ pole ] form.

We generate force to a point in space, without relying on anything to support it.

If the focus of our line of force disappears suddenly we dont over rotate, lean forwards, backwards, off balance, over swinging a punch…aka commit errors to take advantage of.

We are in total control of our balance, movement, focus of intent, recovery, while delivering TOTAL body+arm unity of forces, in motion.

There is no kata, just dynamics in facing, angling, rotating to face and strike/parry in the same beat.

If you look for more than there is to see you wont focus on what it is and maxing out on it.

When you turn 180 deg or 90 deg back and forth, do it like you want to tear yourself in two and control the rebound. Spin on heels to generat as much balanced force as your body will allow without falling over. In fighting we use this dynamic to strike parry, etc while balanced force is issued.

Stepping laterally is a bodyweight in motion left or right to ‘cut the way’ to an opponent while harnessing the mass of your body in controlled bursts of short stepping. trying to time the bong sao wu sao as a unit of kinetic displacement at the point of max energy, then recover balanced to repeat.

facing is the same to generate force with balanced ability to shift to make force.

The arm speed of the bong is timed to coincide with body & striking, bong is not seen…you feel it move your arm off line suddenly a it goes back to hit…

you can see the blur of arms here in a pic of PB bonging an arm off line as an example of speed displacement while his body is perfectly balanced…

[Yoshiyahu]

Seeking the Bridge

[QUOTE=wingchunIan;1156043]I was trying to avoid just debating the literal meaning and was hoping to tease out some of the differences in theory. So far eveyone seems to concur about the introduction of movement and the generation of power but I’d love to hear from some of the “sinking the bridge” schools and some of those who are critical of using a bridge.[/QUOTE]

There are drills I do to close the gap. Once the gap is closed and your with in range to bridge…Seeking the bridge is evident. When you seek the bridge you dont do so like you would with Chi Sau. You do so defensively while attacking. Some of techniques in chum kiu can be used to uproot or distabilize your opponent structure as you bridge the gap. Once the bridge is established you control your opponents centre.

Many techniques of chum kiu are utilize as others have already listed on page one…

I agree with these things people have said.

1.Waist Power - turning and shifting
2.Power through your sturcture as you use your footwork

Chum Kiu links some of the basic techniques of the san sik that deals with those two ways of issuing power. It is a form the links the drills so to speak.

But all three forms deal with so much more than underline techniques people list!!!

Eric H said:

When the opponent can be dealt with without moving - you use Siu Nim Tao technology.

When the opponent forces you to move, you use Chum Kiu technology.

I agree in short…just not the wording…It can be because your opponent is in motion or still or it could because you have advantage in one of the two areas. Using your structure and stepping into a stationary opponent with power can give you more for your buck. When an opponent retreats you can use Chum Kiu to retain contact and maintain a bridge. There are various techniques in chum kiu that can be adapted to entry techniques.

But just is just small synopsis on what I feel about chum kiu and what I meditate on when I practice it!

My Opinion: SLT teaches you how to face opponent in YGKYM and deal with his force. Where as Chum Kiu teaches you how to deal with an opponent force in a side stance. For instance it expounds on the footwork to generate power with the following techniques. Cho Mah(shifting), Biu Ma(darting or shooting) and Toh Ma(advancing or chasing). It links the stances into the form in addition to introducing a few kicks. In addition from the techniques that expand on Sil Lim Tao. Bil Gee Introduces Huen Ma or Circle step. Each Forms builds off the other and adds attributes. I believe the forms are like glossaries that can be dissected and adapted into drills that can develop your WC more. Of course as a westerner myself I do not have the time to fully develop such skills but the knowledge to do is there.

Video I like of Chum Kiu!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLYRtGfPx4M&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

My Conclusion: As joy said there is more to chum kiu than seeking the bridge. But When i practice it thats what i focus on among other things. I do not know about the sinking bridge analogy. I would love to hear how people apply or train or drill sinking the bridge. i can merely speculate on sinking the bridge as it concides with Chum Kiu since I didnt learn this way. Please share!

[LoneTiger108]

[QUOTE=CFT;1156415]Sorry Spencer. There are many characters with the same sound and tone as Chum. Here are the ones for ‘search’ and ‘sink’:

Search: http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-can/search.php?q=�M
Sink:
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-can/search.php?q=�I
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-can/search.php?q=�H[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the info Chee, but if you know the character you know the character and the correct one (according to my transmition!) is

I’ve already said why I practise the form, so it’s good to see others views. As a brief example, I have demonstrated this form twice for my Sifu. Once at the Hackney Empire in front of about 300 people, and the second time was in a small sound stage.

Messed up the first one a bit, but it was epic if I may say so myself! The second time I was asked later to do it again because most didn’t see it (because of the speed) and looking at this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLYRt…_order&list=UL I just can’t take it seriously.

I’m sorry, but there are just too many things wrong in this specific version, which is also the same as Pan Nam and Cheung Bo lineage from my research. Except they had more control over their power lines than the YKS example in the clip imho.

Erratic, unconcentrated speed will not give you the power signature of a good Chum Kiu form imo and it will play havoc with your joints later in life lol! Looked like a typical CK that had no SLT base… (sorry Yoshiyahu!)

[CFT]

That’s fine Spencer. Just that it is a bit misleading to say there is only one character for Chum in general. Other lineages do use the ‘sink’ character. I’m not bothered by that per se. Just that the right characteristics are cultivated in the training.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=CFT;1156454]That’s fine Spencer. Just that it is a bit misleading to say there is only one character for Chum in general. Other lineages do use the ‘sink’ character. I’m not bothered by that per se. Just that the right characteristics are cultivated in the training.[/QUOTE]

True. Dogmatic dependence on a character can miss many things.
Spencers link has a malformed video!! No matter- I have little interest in Pan Nam.

joy

[LoneTiger108]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1156507]----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True. Dogmatic dependence on a character can miss many things.
Spencers link has a malformed video!! No matter- I have little interest in Pan Nam.

joy[/QUOTE]

It’s okay I don’t have a dogmatic dependence on the character at all, just sharing what I know as I have never seen the other characters used by anyone yet. I do love the language as this was how I was taught, but that’s just me. I don’t expect everyone to share the same interest.

The link was actually Yoshiyahu’s one of a YKS version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLYRtGfPx4M&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

[k_gledhill]

A good way to see Chum Kil is to look at the LDBK [ pole ] form.

We generate force to a point in space, without relying on anything to support it.

If the focus of our line of force disappears suddenly we dont over rotate, lean forwards, backwards, off balance, over swinging a punch…aka commit errors to take advantage of.

We are in total control of our balance, movement, focus of intent, recovery, while delivering TOTAL body+arm unity of forces, in motion.

There is no kata, just dynamics in facing, angling, rotating to face and strike/parry in the same beat.

If you look for more than there is to see you wont focus on what it is and maxing out on it.

When you turn 180 deg or 90 deg back and forth, do it like you want to tear yourself in two and control the rebound. Spin on heels to generat as much balanced force as your body will allow without falling over. In fighting we use this dynamic to strike parry, etc while balanced force is issued.

Stepping laterally is a bodyweight in motion left or right to ‘cut the way’ to an opponent while harnessing the mass of your body in controlled bursts of short stepping. trying to time the bong sao wu sao as a unit of kinetic displacement at the point of max energy, then recover balanced to repeat.

facing is the same to generate force with balanced ability to shift to make force.

The arm speed of the bong is timed to coincide with body & striking, bong is not seen…you feel it move your arm off line suddenly a it goes back to hit…

you can see the blur of arms here in a pic of PB bonging an arm off line as an example of speed displacement while his body is perfectly balanced…

[LoneTiger108]

Yes I am going to say it…

Nice post Kev!

(NOTE: Well, it was before you removed it! Strange…)

[Treznor]

[QUOTE=Yoshiyahu;1156436]There are drills I do to close the gap. Once the gap is closed and your with in range to bridge…Seeking the bridge is evident. When you seek the bridge you dont do so like you would with Chi Sau. You do so defensively while attacking. Some of techniques in chum kiu can be used to uproot or distabilize your opponent structure as you bridge the gap. Once the bridge is established you control your opponents centre.

Many techniques of chum kiu are utilize as others have already listed on page one…

I agree with these things people have said.

1.Waist Power - turning and shifting
2.Power through your sturcture as you use your footwork

Chum Kiu links some of the basic techniques of the san sik that deals with those two ways of issuing power. It is a form the links the drills so to speak.

But all three forms deal with so much more than underline techniques people list!!!

Eric H said:

I agree in short…just not the wording…It can be because your opponent is in motion or still or it could because you have advantage in one of the two areas. Using your structure and stepping into a stationary opponent with power can give you more for your buck. When an opponent retreats you can use Chum Kiu to retain contact and maintain a bridge. There are various techniques in chum kiu that can be adapted to entry techniques.

But just is just small synopsis on what I feel about chum kiu and what I meditate on when I practice it!

My Opinion: SLT teaches you how to face opponent in YGKYM and deal with his force. Where as Chum Kiu teaches you how to deal with an opponent force in a side stance. For instance it expounds on the footwork to generate power with the following techniques. Cho Mah(shifting), Biu Ma(darting or shooting) and Toh Ma(advancing or chasing). It links the stances into the form in addition to introducing a few kicks. In addition from the techniques that expand on Sil Lim Tao. Bil Gee Introduces Huen Ma or Circle step. Each Forms builds off the other and adds attributes. I believe the forms are like glossaries that can be dissected and adapted into drills that can develop your WC more. Of course as a westerner myself I do not have the time to fully develop such skills but the knowledge to do is there.

Video I like of Chum Kiu!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLYRtGfPx4M&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

My Conclusion: As joy said there is more to chum kiu than seeking the bridge. But When i practice it thats what i focus on among other things. I do not know about the sinking bridge analogy. I would love to hear how people apply or train or drill sinking the bridge. i can merely speculate on sinking the bridge as it concides with Chum Kiu since I didnt learn this way. Please share![/QUOTE]

Whilst I was reading through this, I had one of those sudden flashes of inspiration (although it COULD be complete bobbins).

SLT, as we all know, is done in the basic YGKYM stance and doesn’t shift from this… CK on the other hand involves movement, mainly at 90 degrees to the centreline established with YGKYM.

Bearing this in mind, is it fair to say that SLT is establishing techniques for inside gate whereas CK introduces techniques for the outside gate?

Looking forward to the responses on this

Mat

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Treznor;1156754]Whilst I was reading through this, I had one of those sudden flashes of inspiration (although it COULD be complete bobbins).

SLT, as we all know, is done in the basic YGKYM stance and doesn’t shift from this… CK on the other hand involves movement, mainly at 90 degrees to the centreline established with YGKYM.

Bearing this in mind, is it fair to say that SLT is establishing techniques for inside gate whereas CK introduces techniques for the outside gate?

Looking forward to the responses on this

Mat[/QUOTE]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi Treznor- IMO of course, hopefully without bobbins(?). While techniques emerge from slt and ck…
they are both about control and master coordinated motions of the entire body in different directions.

Chum kiu is not just about inside gates..it applies to all gates and directions. After understanding the body structure and hand structire in slt, chum kiu footwork is rich with subtleties.

joy chaudhuri

[Treznor]

Yeah, I wasn’t thinking in terms of SLT being exclusively inside gate and CK being exclusively outside gate… More that they introduce techniques / lend themselves to inside / outside gates.

Oh, and ‘bobbins’ basically means rubbish (at least in this context)

Mat

[WingChunABQ]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1156764]------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi Treznor- IMO of course, hopefully without bobbins(?). While techniques emerge from slt and ck…
they are both about control and master coordinated motions of the entire body in different directions.

Chum kiu is not just about inside gates..it applies to all gates and directions. After understanding the body structure and hand structire in slt, chum kiu footwork is rich with subtleties.

joy chaudhuri[/QUOTE]

In what ways would you say that SLT body structure/power generation related to those of Chum Kiu?

[Yoshiyahu]

[QUOTE=Treznor;1156754]Whilst I was reading through this, I had one of those sudden flashes of inspiration (although it COULD be complete bobbins).

SLT, as we all know, is done in the basic YGKYM stance and doesn’t shift from this… CK on the other hand involves movement, mainly at 90 degrees to the centreline established with YGKYM.

Bearing this in mind, is it fair to say that SLT is establishing techniques for inside gate whereas CK introduces techniques for the outside gate?

Looking forward to the responses on this

Mat[/QUOTE]

Yes thats a good way to put it…In my opinion i see it that way too but more so…Chum Kiu is what you do to create a bridge or when you lost connection and need to re-establish a bridge. An chi sau and slt is what you do once the bridge is made! When your bridging utilize chi sau and slt…when you have no bridge utilize chum kiu to create one!

But both forms have other elements with in them besides those two focal ideas!

[anerlich]

Whilst I was reading through this, I had one of those sudden flashes of inspiration (although it COULD be complete bobbins).

SLT, as we all know, is done in the basic YGKYM stance and doesn’t shift from this… CK on the other hand involves movement, mainly at 90 degrees to the centreline established with YGKYM.

Bearing this in mind, is it fair to say that SLT is establishing techniques for inside gate whereas CK introduces techniques for the outside gate?

I think you are on to something there.

However, I train a variation of SLT with footwork and (mostly) without YGKYM … and in that context I believe SLT involves predominantly outer gate deflections and CK inner gate deflections.

Also, while the movement might be 90 degrees to the centreline in CK, I see a lot of the energy/intent approximately on the 45’s (or from a TWC point of view, along the central line)(s).

[imperialtaichi]

In my opinion, while SLT is great in building up structure, habit and power, it alone is not great for being the aggressor and getting into range. Try sparring with someone who is mobile (e.g. Boxers, MT etc) and see how well you do just using standard SLT and reactive Chi Sau techniques.

Chum Kiu, on the other hand, is great for being the “aggressor”, actively moving in, “seeking the bridge”, intercepting, jamming, chasing and pressing the opponent.

Of course, part of dominating the opponent is through “sinking bridge” to almost lock him in and take away his mobility. Almost like a “clinch” but not really at the same time.

In a fight, it is necessary to be the “dominator”, be active instead of reactive. Make the opponent deal with you, instead of you dealing with the opponent.

[wingchunIan]

[QUOTE=imperialtaichi;1157097]In my opinion, while SLT is great in building up structure, habit and power, it alone is not great for being the aggressor and getting into range. Try sparring with someone who is mobile (e.g. Boxers, MT etc) and see how well you do just using standard SLT and reactive Chi Sau techniques.

Chum Kiu, on the other hand, is great for being the “aggressor”, actively moving in, “seeking the bridge”, intercepting, jamming, chasing and pressing the opponent.

Of course, part of dominating the opponent is through “sinking bridge” to almost lock him in and take away his mobility. Almost like a “clinch” but not really at the same time.

In a fight, it is necessary to be the “dominator”, be active instead of reactive. Make the opponent deal with you, instead of you dealing with the opponent.[/QUOTE]

As you’re the first to mention sinking bridge, could you perhaps provide some insight as to how this aspect is trained through the form?

[Treznor]

As it happens we worked through the first couple of sections of CK in training last night…

In addition to everything else that’s been mentioned here, there also seems to be a lot of emphasis on the elbows connection to the hip and, when that connection is lost, how to regain it.

Mat

[LoneTiger108]

[QUOTE=Treznor;1157099]As it happens we worked through the first couple of sections of CK in training last night…[/QUOTE]

Just out of curiosity Mat, how long did you say you had been training? From what I remember you were very very young (5 months?) so is it normal to learn Chum Kiu so early?

This for me is a major problem with commercial teaching/learning.