Fook sau ( I was checking out a forum post on another site...)

[system]

I was on wingchunkuen.com and was checking out their forums…and saw something on fook sau. One guy was asking what the usage was outside of chi sau and siu lim tao, and here was the reply:

[i]"first off, one must understand that the fook sao done in sil nim tao isn’t typical. form a tan sao and turn your hand palm down. this is fook sao in practice. the energy used is similar to that of tan sao, but because the structure is different, so will the result.

situation: an opponent throws a hook on your left side. move in throwing a fook sao up with your left hand, and a punch up with your right (one might also choose a bil sao in this situation). follow up with a yan chun (open palm) to the face with the same hand that did fook, while doing a pak sao to the arm that was being blocked. you can repeat this portion of the attack a couple times.

generally, fook sao can be used interchangably with tan sao. more forward energy focused along the front plane of the arm is needed, but done properly, a good fook will pain the opponent."[/i]

Now call me crazy, maybe inexperienced, but I was always under the impression that although fook sau does have forward pressure, its mostly used as a suppressing energy, or a deflecting energy, not dispersing or intercepting energy like you would use a tan or biu sau with. I just couldnt imagine using a left hand fook sau to the inner gate against a hook to my left side. So that being the case, I just wanted to get some opinions on this - lets see what you all think.

“From one thing know ten thousand” - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

[system]

Fook Sao

If I had an issue with something someone wrote on another forum and didn’t understand or agree with them, I’d take it up with them directly on that forum, as you then have the best chance to thereby understand where they are coming from.

That said, I always understood fook to be have a suppressing or “smothering” energy. While people call it different names in use (like tarn, goi, ngoi, etc.), I find the shape of the arm works well in a number of situations, but best when blocking across your own body (your left arm against an attack to your right side), rather than in the situation mentioned in the post, which in my opinion is a lot more difficult to work effecively against a hook or elbow due to the angles of your arm and his.

It is a good defense against a circular elbow, i.e. blocking his left elbow strike with your left fook, just “smother” it with your forearm like it was made of plasticine, picture catching a ball in a baseball glove. Less reliant on accuracy than a pak sao.

[system]

thanks for the reply

I wanted to ask about it on here because Im familiar with the people on this forum, and respect their opinions. I also wanted to see how other lineages of wing chun approach the use of fook sau and their interpretation of this situation.

I had no problem with what the guy said, I just never heard of that situation being delt with that way. But thanks for giving me some of your insight…

“From one thing know ten thousand” - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

[system]

Where is the energy in Fook?

Hello,

I would like to stir the pot a little. I will borrow a technique from Whipping Hand and make my post somewhat cryptic requiring some thought from those that reply. :rolleyes: (Just kidding WH, LOL have enjoyed some of your posting of late).

Where is the energy in Fook Sau? Is it forward or does it withdraw? Think about this and also about how we perform the Fook Sau and Wu Sau in the form. Is the energy of the Fook and or Wu consistent with how it is performed in the form?

Peace,

Dave

[system]

fook sau part deux

I have already posted some of my thoughts on Fook Sau at the following link

http://forum.kungfuonline.com/1/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=126197291&f=769195302&m=9431987742

Fook sau is the concept of subduing or controlling but is not restricted to the specific hand shape used in the form. There is a distinction between concept and tool, but sometimes that distinction is blurred in application.

Vankuen, in the situation you mentioned, it is possible to use a fook sau from the inside. There is a difference, however, between just using the fook sau hand shape and applying the fook sau concept.

If, for example, we take a snapshot of the moment and examine just the external, we would see the opponent hook punching with the right hand and the WC man using a left fook sau hand shape to create the bridge. But is this really the case? All we can see is the external. We cannot feel or experience what is going on internally between the two people. Biu sau, fook sau, and lan sau can all have the same physical shape, but where is the intention? Is it to dart in with the hand, subdue/control with the hand, or obstruct with the hand?

IMHO, concept is not restricted to just the shape used in the form. We need to feel the opponents force and respond appropriately with our united body. After all, the arms are just the bridge to his center. The real battle is going on unseen in the internal realm as I try to find the right vector force to neutralize his punch using my entire body and root while also disrupting his balance.

I might start out with the biu sau to intercept, change my intention to lan sau to prevent the arm from entering my space, and then change my intention once more to subdue, smother, and control that arm by adjusting and sinking my horse slightly to overextend him. All this done just by feeling and without changing the shape of my hand or bridge. Or I could use lan sau first followed by fook sau. The real deciding factor is what the opponent feels like. It really is a case of his attack determines my technique, both on the external as well as the internal level.

regards,

Dzu

[system]

2

Good post DZU, and you too Sihing73.

I agree to a point about the tool/theory idea. Personally I believe that Wing Chun is a root based system to a point, and that line probably shouldn’t be crossed (for best results.) The mechanics (formation) of the block should remain the same–proper, as shown in the forms. The applications are endless–A tan can be performed at an angle or height to block any number of things, same with Wu and Pak and any other forward motion block (including Bong Sau, which is also a block in which the momentum is forward.)

On to the topic at hand–I was taught to use the Fuk as a supressing strike with a downward motion primarily for trapping. To apply the Fuk Sau is to follow 1/3 of the famous Wing Chun phrase:

“Rush in upon loss of contact”

The Fuk creates a loss of contact with a quick painful strike to the attacking or defending arm. The pain inflicted with a Fuk is also specially important because it adds to the distraction. After a Fuk should always be followed up with a strike, ideally a rolling back your arm into a punch.

Let us not forget that the very NATURE of the Fuk is offensive, the perfect set up for a strike rather than a redirection–the fingertips should be pointed straight at your opponents eyes when a Fuk is performed. The Fuk and Jut Sau blocks share an offensive trapping nature–they are fast, ‘attacking blocks.’

-Scott

“Life is hard, but so am I.” – The Eels.

[system]

An answer for Sihing (or at least my guess =P)

Here’s my attempt to answer Sihing’s riddle =P

I have never imagined the energy of a Fuk Sau as forward, though it would seem as though the Wu Sau’s momentum will always be forward. The Fuk to me does not seem to be the same as a Pak, which has undeniably forward energy (since it is a pushing block, a downward pushing motion would simply cause the attacker’s hand to circle around and hit you in the face.)

The Fuk to me is definetly a downward snapping motion, though it DOES (damnit) move inward as it attacks.

Now that you mention it…

If you examine the set Chum Kiu, somewhere near the beginning there are three arm breaks on each side followed by three Wu Sau’s. The top hand on each arm break is doing a Fuk, and it is moving inward because it catches the opponents force and moves it down into the break.

In the defense of the ‘downward energy’ statement, it is completely impossible to hold your arm out and move it down WITHOUT the motion being circules–humans are built that way.

But I digress, the Fuk does seem to be an inward motion. However, I do hold by my statement that it is a quick striking block rather than a supressing smothering block–leave that to the Pak Sau or dropping the bridge on an opponents body to trap attacks.

-scott

“Life is hard, but so am I.” – The Eels.

[system]

those arent fook saus; at least not what i was taught they’re pak saus (im assuming your talking about the part where you slap your palm into your arm 3 times and the proceed to do 3 palm strikes)

that may be part of your problem the fook saus in chum kiu are after you whisk your arms out to the side, then bring them back to the center with a chop

(for example: the part that follows when you place your fist on the inside of your elbow, lop and strike; then you whisk the striking hand and shift to the center and proceed to bring your hand back to center with a fook sau)

peace
trav

Receive what comes, Escort what leaves, and if there is an opening, rush in

[system]

Fook draws in

Hello,

Well, what I am getting at is that while performing the SNT most people have the Fook Sau going forward and the Wu is drawing back. In application is’nt it just the opposite Think about it, Wu has as a point of contact the wrist, fingers pointing more or less upward. Yet, the energy driven from the elbow is definitely forward in nature. Fook Sau on the other hand is drawing back, again with power from the elbow. Yet it is withdrawing. Fook is often referred to by my Sifu as being sneaky and is used for stalking. You sit on the opponent in Chi Sau and only react when the way is free. So my quesion remains why do we perform it the way it is done in SNT if the energy is contrary in application???

As to the illustration from the Chum Kui here is my take; the section you are referring to when the two arms are struck together is less like a Pak Sau, IMHO, and more like Jut Sau and Tok Sau. I try to make contact with the wrist of one hand against the forearm of the other. The hand with the palm facing upward is lifted slightly as in a Tok Sau while it is the Jut down which catches the incomming “whatever” in the scissors between the two. While this could be used to cause some damage to the attacker it is more likely used to establish contact and even a control of the attacking weapon. Pak Sau, IMHO, is a slightly sideward forward energy. In other words when the attack comes in and is met with a Pak the arm extends on an angle in front of the body roughly at the same level, neither dropping nor raising, though some situations will require one or the other ;), going forward and off to teh side at about a 45’ angle or so.

BTW: Sifu Chow changed his performance of the Fook and Wu in SNT to reflect the energy. In other words, we now do Wu going forward and when we do Fook we draw back. What do you think? is this in keeping with the “concept” of Wing Chun or is it wrong?

Peace,

Dave

[system]

I have to disagree somewhat that the fook sau and the wu sau have opposite energies.

In SNT, the wu sau trains the intention so that the structure is there even when the hand and arm are moving. This is a very subtle point that can be seen during chi sau. For example, if I am receiving force on my wu sau, I can send my intent to the wu sau and still move my body without allowing the force to enter. Since in SNT we are stationary, we can simulate this by sending the intention forward but withdrawing the hand. In application, we keep the hand stationary and move the body. The opposite is also true: to let the opponent come in by withdrawing the wu sau slightly and then redirect and neutralize his force.

IMHO the fook sau can be both withdrawing, downward, forward, or to the side. Depending upon the situation, these types of intentions can all be used to subdue or control. The fook sau is one of the 3 seeds of WC because one concept (subduing/controlling) gives birth to many hands and applications such as gum, pak, lop, jut, etc. In a way, fook sau “the concept” is the trunk of the tree and fook sau “the technique” is one of the branches.

Why go forward with fook and back with wu? I can make several guesses:

1. to train the more subtle wu - hand remains but body moves
2. to emphasize the Buddhist nature aka wu sau being the Buddha hand
3. more emphasis on projecting power and coordinating the body in the beginning since this is used in striking as well
4. emphasis on tan sau/fook sau transition and their interdependence
5. more offensive nature of fook compared to wu

regards,

Dzu

[system]

well sh*t, i messed up my post
i had a brain fart

i was thinking jut not fook… anyhow a good example of those is in biu jee, i cant think of anywhere else in a form you use them at the moment

bla

anyhow, as to switching up the wu and fook in siu lim tau, i think this messes with the energy we’re trying to cultivate and feel in our forearms

im not sure you can get the same feeling doing these in reverse… ideas on that?

i also totally agree with dzu about the body movement; in SLT we train to feel our center of gravity, when we perform the fook in SLT, our center stays the same, but the body moves back; while with wu the the body moves forward while the wu moves back… in application the hand motions are different, but the body movements are the same - this reinforces the idea that we have the power of our body/structure behind our motions, not muscle

peace
trav

Receive what comes, Escort what leaves, and if there is an opening, rush in

[system]

Okay anyone else?

Hello,

Well so far I have two who disagree with switching the Wu and Fook in SNT. Anyone else want to disagree and give reasons for not making the switch :)?

I agree about SNT giving one structure and also with the idea of presenting energy. However I do not see any reason that switching the movements has to be adverse. I belive that the application of the energy will show one that Wu projects forward while Fook, while able to go forward, will more often than not withdraw. Going back to the seeds think about what comes from Fook, Jut and Jum for example, is the energy more forward or downward? Is the arm extended during performance or brought inward and back? I would agree that you can extend the fook forward I just think this is the exception and only a minor part of the application.

Well, how wrong am I?

Peace,

Dave

We don’t have to agree but we do need to think about it.

[system]

It’s not that I disagree with you about changing the forms, it’s just that in the big picture, what’s important is training the intention and knowing where it is being directed.

The way I see it, we have 2 coins in this discussion: 1 for fook sau and 1 for wu sau. You practice heads with fook and tails with wu, while the conventional method might be tails with fook and heads with wu. With both sides for both coins, you have 2 whole coins that can buy a lot of things. With only one side of each you don’t even have 1 complete coin.

I honestly cannot say which I use more because it is the opponent’s energy that dictates my energy. Ideally, I will be able to control the centerline and just go straight in and destroy his structure. In that case, I would go forward to collapse him. If my timing is off, I have a bad position, or the force is too much for me to handle, I will try to lead him first to overextend and then redirect him so that I am strong and he is weak. IMHO this is using Yin and Yang. My above responses are true of whatever hand technique I use and not limited to just fook sau.

There is a danger to being both dogmatic or radical without understanding the other half. Keeping to the old ways without understanding why they are done that way will not lead to self discovery or understanding. Changing things without understanding why they need to be changed is just a lateral movement and not doing anything to imporve your art. Ultimately, all that matters is what you get from your training, and if you understand the WC concepts and can apply them.

Since you have a different sequence in the form, do you transition from the first tan sau to a withdrawing fook sau and then to an extending wu sau?

regards,

Dz

[system]

I have to agree with Dzu at this point…

I have always learned that there is a myriad of ways to perform the wing chun movements. What were dealing with here is both form and energy, in which any hand form can just about be paired with any energy. This is what is termed by some as “live” wing chun. Whereas the wing chun that has only one way to do a hand form is called “dead”, because it has no adaptablility, no spontaniality with its movements.

Its true that tan, biu, wu, and even fook can have dispersing/intercepting energy, just as both tan, fook, etc… can have withdrawing energy, depending on what the situation calls for.

The reason I asked about this in the first place…was to see how people actually use their movements, to see whether or not they have adaptability in their physical form or not.

To be honest, I would never use fook in the fashion stated in that first post that I made…I dont ever intercept with it, unless Im doing chi sau or am already in contact with the bridge. But thats just me. I would think in my humble opinion, that biu, wu, or even tan would be better in that particular case…but thats just what Im comfortable with.

What I love about wing chun is that its concepts are soo adaptable to many forms. This is the jewel of it. This is the reason we can all discuss the same forms…in so many different ways…and thats what makes wing chun great!

But for me to sum things up…this is commonly what I use the hand forms with:

Intercepting or dispersing energy: tan, biu, wu, fak, pak…

Suppressing energy: tan, jut, gam, fook…

deflecting energy: bong, lan, pak, tan, biu…

This is just off the top of my head that comes naturally to me. Obviously I place alot of importance on the tan sau, as I believe its one the most useful in the wing chun trinity.

but thats just my two cents! Im so glad this thread is doing well. Thanks so far for the intellegent comments, and mature debate.

“From one thing know ten thousand” - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings

[system]

As usual

Hi guys!

I know I’m a little late with answering (I started working - no time left for being online so often ), but ok, here’re my thoughts on the subject.

You can use your movements in a lot of different ways with totally different directions. E. g. we use the Fok Sao for controlling the arm from the outside (right before a Jut/Jum and punch) as a sort of energy-forwarded contact-block and we use the Fook as a movement to pull e. g. the opponents head.

You could use your Fok Sao with a lot of forward power to intercept the attack or you could use your Fok Sao as a measurement device with very low pressure as a preparation for shifting out of the way.

I believe that’s the point in Wing Chun - everyone is “allowed” to use a movement in a way that fits best to his/her abilities and to the situation.

E. G. Fak Sao: For me, the Fak Sao is a nearly straight (as straight as possible) movement with the wrist or the hand turning outwards/inwards a little bit). But if my hand is starting from the “outside” it’ll be a movement from out- to inside and if it starts from the center or the outside its vice versa.

I think, it depends on your style or teacher, which possibilities of application you learn - it’ll be YOUR Wing Chun. IMO here’s the biggest point on critics on most Wing Chun teachers: Yes, they teach you the whole system, but no, they don’t teach you the applications you want to learn. It’s like a filter that goes deeper and deeper - your teacher learned the “filtered” applications from his teacher, his teacher learned the filtered applications from his teacher … E. g. I once had a teacher and he told us, that there was only one way to perform an ellbow-strike: from outside to inside (like in the Biu Dji sets). All other ways are bull, because he never had to apply them. See what I mean?

Armin.

[system]

Here is our take on the fook sao thing.
Fook is prying forward, always. That way a fook becomes a punch. Or a punch becomes a fook if necessary. Same movement.

If you have to draw back, use jum sao, covering the centre. You can then punch forward, or, indeed fook forwards. Then the other guy is fooked.

I agree with Dzu on the wu sao thing. Wu is used to practice lut sao de chung. Although it is drawn back, the intent is forward, at any point on the withdrawal, you can still punch. So although the movement is back, you are still thinking about going forward.

The other reason wu is drawn back is to teach you to keep good structure when withdrawing. This is done so you remember that the weakest point of a punch is when withdrawing it. (If the other guy is “meeting what comes, and following what goes”, you need to make sure his following wont trouble you).

Too many people collapse their hands when withdrawing a punch, or wu sao, so their forearm points too much to the left, or even up. The wu needs to point as much as possible forward, given the constraints of your elbow not being able to enter your own rib cage

For the record, our WSL school is with Sihing on the Chum Kiu section, we do it as Tok sao and Jut sao.

Not saying its right or wrong, just different. Good thing about this forum is that people seem to be mostly able to discuss differences without automatically assuming others are “wrong”.

“Computer games don’t affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we’d all be running
around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music.”

[system]

All roads lead to the same end, or do they?

Hello,

Well, I kind of expected to be the minority here. After all for quite a few years I practiced exactly like everyone else. Sifu Chow and I began discussing our take on the Fook drawing in and Wu going forward several years ago. The change in the form was not done over night. As a matter of fact, I am willing to bet that most people have made subtle changes to their forms over the years. Look at some early students of Leung Ting for example and tell me if they do the forms differently than later ones. I know that he changed the forms, particularily Chum Kui at least a couple of times :).

Dzu is right on about the opponent dictating what you do. It is his or her energy which creates your shape, so to speak. I also like the idea of the two sided coin. In answer to his question we do Taun Sau and then convert that to Fook, draw in and then press forward with the Wu. Still got three Fook Saus and do the Pak/Palm from Fook rather then Wu. If you look at his video tape you will see the form done in the traditional manner rather then the way we are doing it now.

In my view, by learning to perform the movements both ways I have more options for expressing my energy. I belive that you should train the way you actually use things, and I belive that Wu should exert forward pressure. While it can be drawn back, as a result of the opponents energy the intent is always forward. Like wise, Fook can go forward but, I feel, it is more likely to draw in or go slightly downard and forward such as in Jum. Still, the only limits we hqve are the ones we place on ourselves. In other words if I stated there was only ONE correct way of doing the movements I would definitely be wrong, of course it looks like I am wrong on this point anyhow, :).

I think that in application it would be easier to show my point. I also agree that it is good to discuss things in a mature manner without resorting to I am right and you are wrong statements. Even though I am alwys right, LOL. Seriously, I have been known to be wrong, just ask my wife. To make a change in the forms just for the sake of change is, IMHO, wrong. To make a change based on the successful application of a different method is growth, maybe. The forms are like the alphabet, many different words can be made up from a finite number of letters. The forms are a guide. Where they lead us depends entirely on our openness to make the exploration.

Thanks for the input from everyone, keep it coming.

Peace,

Dave

[system]

Sure, I can dig dat, dat, DAT!

“I’m your boogie-man; that’s what I am”–KC (of The Sunshine Band fame)

[system]

Original post.

I posted that on wingchunkuen.com’s forums. Perhaps I could have gone into more detail, but I didn’t expect to see my post draw so much attention on a completely different list. Regardless, I don’t believe what I said was incorrect, albeit incomplete. What concept of kung fu is not when written down. If you could learn a technique with words only, then we would all have books as sifus!

Here is the original post in the context it was written. This should shed a little light on why I wrote the description of fook sao the way i did.

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/board/?topic=topic3&msg=956

Anyhow, I am happy that it spawned such a good discussion.

–
chi kwai

[system]

whats tok sau?

I dont think Ive ever used that term…what is tok sau?

“From one thing know ten thousand” - Miyomato Musashi, Book of five rings