http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoXu2zc7ed4
I know that this is not a Wing Chun video but I find that it is relevant and that is why I am posting it here in the Wing Chun threads.
Have a look at this short Five Ancestor Kung Fu Chi Sao video clip by Sifu Yap Leong. The approach seems very direct and in your face and shows the sifus sensitivity and “listening” abilities.
The more I watch, the more I see.
Looks quite different to VT chi sau he doesn’t roll from what i can see.
It would be nice to see them working a friendly with VT though i cant imagine that ever happening :rolleyes:
Its interesting just how many styles are now being posted on you tube.
Fwiw… there exists much more shared elements of “Chi Sau” between 5 ancestors and WC than what was presented in this vid. One of our students is also a master in 5 ancestors, and he can definitely roll and flow and stick using solely 5 ancestor techniques. (Not that rolling is the endpoint of Chi Sau imo.)
[QUOTE=janemayday;908569]
It would be nice to see them working a friendly with VT though i cant imagine that ever happening :rolleyes:[/quote]
I have seen him rolling with WC players. He just jams and closes their limbs or he “leaks” through and bam!
You are right there is some great (and some not so great) stuff on YouTube.
[QUOTE=duende;908572]Fwiw… there exists much more shared elements of “Chi Sau” between 5 ancestors and WC than what was presented in this vid.[/quote]
The concept should be the same. The sensitivity, the listening and the leaking etc. Except that in FA there is no rolling or fixed movements. You just make contact in the given position and then you “listen”.
Wow, you have a Five Ancestor Fist master studying Wing Chun?
From what little I know about Five Ancestor style, a master of this style would not need to study Wing Chun. It is my understanding that it is a higher level style when compared to most Wing Chun around nowadays.
The concept is the same and I believe that with a bit of practice one can adapt from one to the other.
Sifu Leong
I did play the video. Sifu Leong is doing his thing. The other fellow is not really doing wing chun.
where’s the beef?
joy chaudhuri
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;908647]The concept should be the same. The sensitivity, the listening and the leaking etc. Except that in FA there is no rolling or fixed movements. You just make contact in the given position and then you “listen”.
Wow, you have a Five Ancestor Fist master studying Wing Chun?
From what little I know about Five Ancestor style, a master of this style would not need to study Wing Chun. It is my understanding that it is a higher level style when compared to most Wing Chun around nowadays.
The concept is the same and I believe that with a bit of practice one can adapt from one to the other.:)[/QUOTE]
I beg to differ
We had a 5 Ancestor Master/Doctor in private practice who learnt for 20 over years in Malaysia and when he discovered wingchun, he crossed the causeway to Singapore, just to learn Yip Chun Wingchun. He even went back to malaysia and brought his 5 Ancestor Students to learn from my Sifu.
His comments were he had to relearn “everything” again.
Interestingly he told us a story about his fellow siheng, who burst a blood vessel “playing” with a young guy in class, he died.
In chi sao, he was very hard, strong, fast. Hard bridges, very tense. Like a truck, but not wingchun definately. And using mere slapping, or hand muscles to power your strikes would yield no results against him. Breaking structure moves like Larp sao against his tense arms, neck, shoulder strikes were effective.
In wingchun we want to use just enough energy, economy of motion/energy, and to be Sung/relax. Structure, angles, body sticking, whole body attacks, signatures of wingchun are needed.
The wingchun chi sao positions are far from “fixed”, every position is held just enough to react to the amount of force the hands receive and every angled hand has its principle in physical body structure principles e.g elbows tips pointing down, so the muscles wrap around the bone.
But having said that, Wingchun is a soft, internal art. Its not Choy lay fut or 5 Ancestor…
In the words of a Senior who gave me some tips in another wingchun lineage,
If Wingchun is hard versus hard, then we can forget about wingchun
Me thinks, Its never the style, its the stylist. Every style is great, if you train hard enough.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;908647]The concept should be the same. The sensitivity, the listening and the leaking etc. Except that in FA there is no rolling or fixed movements. You just make contact in the given position and then you “listen”.
[/QUOTE]
Chi Sao skills were definitely developed, and although some concepts were shared, certain body structures and occupation of space principles were not.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;908647]
Wow, you have a Five Ancestor Fist master studying Wing Chun?
From what little I know about Five Ancestor style, a master of this style would not need to study Wing Chun. It is my understanding that it is a higher level style when compared to most Wing Chun around nowadays.
[/QUOTE]
I would not agree. There is good and bad/ “higher levels” in many styles. The issue here is not what style is better. But to rise above the style mindset and realize that body methods and core structures when founded upon physics transcend across styles… making the notion of styles in themselves obsolete.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;908646]I have seen him rolling with WC players. He just jams and closes their limbs or he “leaks” through and bam!
Did you see Sifu Leung in Columbia or London ?
Its amazing you guys cant have a conversation without bringing up who is better rah rah rha ! It seems some of you have a long way to go 
[QUOTE=janemayday;908701]
Did you see Sifu Leung in Columbia or London ?[/quote]
In London of course.
Many kung fu practioners believe that there are higher and lower styles of kung fu. So in this case it is not about the who but about the style as well.
[QUOTE=Vajramusti;908663]I did play the video. Sifu Leong is doing his thing. The other fellow is not really doing wing chun.
where’s the beef?
joy chaudhuri[/QUOTE]
Oh you misunderstand Joy. There is no beef here. They were both doing Five Ancestor chi sao. We were just discussing the two styles (Wing Chun and Five Ancestor Fist) with our opinions thrown in.
[QUOTE=duende;908693]Chi Sao skills were definitely developed, and although some concepts were shared, certain body structures and occupation of space principles were not.[/quote]
Agreed. However that was a relatively short clip and I hope that sifu Yap Leong will put up more clips regarding this fascinating area of training so that we will see a bigger picture and gain more information regarding the concepts involved in this type of chi sao indeed in this style of kung fu.
That is very true but many kung fu practitioners classify styles as “low” , “middle” and “high” level. I am sure that many others don´t. So perhaps it depends on who you are and your kung fu background.
The main issue here is for Wing Chuners to see another type of chi sao so as to perhaps better understand what they are doing in theirs.
They can also see a little bit of Chi-na in that clip (finger grab and throat grab) and a take down. That can only enlighten Wing Chuners who do not use Chi-na in their chi sao training.
But many styles use “physics” in different ways and some are more efficient than others. Of course, people can argue on which system is more efficient til the end of time, but we are not here for that.
[QUOTE=Shadow_warrior8;908677]
In chi sao, he was very hard, strong, fast. Hard bridges, very tense. Like a truck, but not wingchun definately. And using mere slapping, or hand muscles to power your strikes would yield no results against him. Breaking structure moves like Larp sao against his tense arms, neck, shoulder strikes were effective.[/quote]
What I find contradictory there is the way you have described the master who came to you school. The descriptions of “hard bridges”; “very tense”; “like a truck” and “tense arms” do not correlate with any definition of a high level style of kung fu and do not certainly apply to Yap Leongs technique nor the Five Ancestor kung fu that he teaches.
It all about softness and fine-tuned “listening” abilities when it comes to what he practices and teaches.
These are abilities that all Wing Chun (and any other kung fu stylists) should aim for.
Again, you will find that Yap Leongs 5 Ancestor fist is VERY soft. However, I suppose just like Wing Chun there are “harder” or more external schools of Five Ancestors around and by definition these schools, just like their “harder” WC counterparts would be classified by some as low level kung fu schools.
I presume that the master who came to your school was from an external school of Five Ancestors. Your school is internal Wing Chun and hence a higher level to that of his school which was of course external. As a result he found your training to be enlightening and eye opening to him.
I will also add that most WC that I have come across in the Uk while I was living there was hard or could be classified more hard than soft.
Some Wing Chuners that I had talked did not even know what internals meant. My past interactions with some of the US and European Wing Chun members of this forum have suggested that many of them do not see WC as internal. Others do not see the difference between the internal and external. This wouls suggest that in most (NOT ALL!) cases they practice an external or a mainly external Wing Chun.
That is why in my post I stated " It is my understanding that it is a higher level style when compared to most Wing Chun around nowadays" [My emphasis]. I know there are internal schools of Wing Chun as I practice in one:)).
Point taken, but I believe that there are better styles and worse ones.
Hey there Hardwork108
Let me qualify my answer by saying this, I dont do 5 Ancestor so I comment on it based on my experience with them, and some speculation
Compared to wingchun, it is hard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYSw0yUMZh8
I have been taught we would never be doing this. So when you see some Videos/Books like Randy Williams doing 3 star/ Sam Sing Blocking, its not the way. Sigung Yip Chun has said, the jong arms should never be used for bashing or hardening the forearms.
The hard soft theory is interesting. From my practice, Pakua to me is hard compared to taiji, Hsing i is harder than pakua, but coiling wise pakua is more sophiscated.
I believe the reason is wingchun is more widespread(thanks to guys like Bruce Lee, Yip Man, Yip Chun, Yip Ching, Wong Shun Leung, etc…too many great names),
As a side effect, the internal elements of wingchun are not taught, or people dont want to spend time to learn it. For internal practice, it takes a longer time, and faith in the Master. Internal training was always a closed door practice.
It helps to be able to read the kuen kuit and words(also because most chinese Sifus havent really learn english to any proficiency). Helps so you dont get pulled a fast one as well. I have found the protrayal of wingchun in China Forums very different from what is said in the western world.
Wingchun in the western world has largely become a physical practice, like boxing, muay thai etc… Not that it is wrong, just different, but still effective.
In the movie Yip Man, Donnie Yen says one thing, dont just talk about kuen kuit(just be able to quote) you must be able to hit the person.
That to me, is the function of Chi Sao, whether its white crane, wingchun, taiji or 5 ancestor.
Here’s a clip on internal wingchun
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_lI2qM2i60
Its also not mainland versus hongkong that makes its more internal or external. Look at Masters Kenneth Chung, or Chu Shong Tin, or Wan Kam Leung
Hongkong wingchun is 90(?) of wingchun in the world, hence along the way, many could have left out the internal training, rushing to learn to teach for a living.
While mainland wingchun styles are still close knit, hence, less chances of MAC Wingchun happening. Even though, these years, I have noticed some trend towards that, and increasing politics from Sifus wanting to make a living.
Here’s a sharing from Sifu Wong Nim Yi, Mai Gei Wong School in Guangzhou China on the 12 Fatt.
12
And the 12 Fatt are
Here’s a sharing from Sifu Wong Nim Yi, Mai Gei Wong School in Guangzhou China on the 12 Fatt.
“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”
Its slightly different from the YKS version. But it is the essence of WCK.
[QUOTE=Shadow_warrior8;908876]Hey there Hardwork108
Let me qualify my answer by saying this, I dont do 5 Ancestor so I comment on it based on my experience with them, and some speculation
Compared to wingchun, it is hard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYSw0yUMZh8[/quote]
Hard forearms seem to be a trademark of 5 Ancestor sifus. However inspite of the physically hard forarms some of them have very “soft” touches.
[Shadow_warrior8]The hard soft theory is interesting. From my practice, Pakua to me is hard compared to taiji, Hsing i is harder than pakua, but coiling wise pakua is more sophiscated.[/quote]
The internals of kung fu are very rich and confusing but well worth practicing eternally.
You are absolutely right in what you say. I would add that some other styles of kung fu have the same problem and they include Five Ancestor Fist among others. I have seen “hard” and “soft” versions of other kung fu styles here in the West.
Over commercialism has had a very negative effect on the quality of kung fu available especially here in the West.
I have met a Wing Chun sifu in London that did know of the existance of the internals in this style. I believe that he was a good fighter but in my opinion his Wing Chun was incomplete.
And I have always talked about this here in the forum saying that if the internals are missing from one´s kung fu training then the training is incomplete.
I believe you wholeheartedly!
But yet unfortunately incomplete when compared to the original design of the style.
Agreed. But to get there Chi Sao training will help with distancing, sensitivity,listening etc. All of which come together to give you the ability to hit the person.
Thank you, good clip.
That is what has happened in the West hence all the misunderstanding about the internals here.
You are right. I practice Mainland Chinese Wing Chun and I suppose that is why that we place such importance on “softness”/internal training.
Unfortunately that is an universal phenomenom.
I don´t speak or read Chinese. Is there a translation of the above available?
[QUOTE=chusauli;908989]Here’s a sharing from Sifu Wong Nim Yi, Mai Gei Wong School in Guangzhou China on the 12 Fatt.
“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”“”
Its slightly different from the YKS version. But it is the essence of WCK.[/QUOTE]
Is there a translation of this available, sifu?
Cantonese romanisation.
Get Rene’s Book on Yuen Kay San Wingchun, it explains these concepts very well.
Copied this from Somewhere(thanks to whoever wrote this), but its a great explaination of the 12 Fatt.
Slightly different from the chinese words above
Dap (Da) derives from the hand joined like many mouths in agreement and means to join to bridges
Jeet (Jie) derives from a lance hitting a sparrow and means to intercept, cut off, or sever
Chum (Chen) derives from a stool submerged beneath the water and means to sink
Biu (Biao) derives from metal pointed like flame and means to dart.
Chi (Chi) derives from glutinous millet ground by a horned animal (yak) and means to stick
Mo (Mo) derives from hand like the sun dispearing behind the foliage and means to touch or feel
Tong (Yun) derives from a hand using a hot iron, and means to press or iron clothes
Dong (Dang) derives from soup swaying in the saucer and means to swing or sway
Tun (Tun) derives from mouth enlarged as heaven and means to swallow
Chit (Qie) derives from to cross with a knife, and means to cut or slice into.
Tao (Tou) derives from a person assembling a boat (to cross a river) and means to steal
Lao (Lou) derives from rain water leaking through the roof and into the house and means to leak.
[QUOTE=Shadow_warrior8;909186]Get Rene’s Book on Yuen Kay San Wingchun, it explains these concepts very well.
Copied this from Somewhere(thanks to whoever wrote this), but its a great explaination of the 12 Fatt.
Slightly different from the chinese words above
Dap (Da) derives from ‘the hand joined like many mouths in agreement’ and means ‘to join to bridges’
Jeet (Jie) derives from ‘a lance hitting a sparrow’ and means ‘to intercept, cut off, or sever’
Chum (Chen) derives from ‘a stool submerged beneath the water’ and means ‘to sink’
Biu (Biao) derives from ‘metal pointed like flame’ and means ‘to dart’.
Chi (Chi) derives from ‘glutinous millet ground by a horned animal (yak)’ and means ‘to stick’
Mo (Mo) derives from ‘hand like the sun dispearing behind the foliage’ and means ‘to touch or feel’
Tong (Yun) derives from ‘a hand using a hot iron’, and means ‘to press or iron clothes’
Dong (Dang) derives from ‘soup swaying in the saucer’ and means ‘to swing or sway’
Tun (Tun) derives from ‘mouth enlarged as heaven’ and means ‘to swallow’
Chit (Qie) derives from ‘to cross with a knife’, and means ‘to cut or slice into’.
Tao (Tou) derives from ‘a person assembling a boat (to cross a river)’ and means ‘to steal’
Lao (Lou) derives from ‘rain water leaking through the roof and into the house’ and means ‘to leak.’[/QUOTE]
Thanks.