# Shape or Action? **URL:** \ **Category:** Wing Chun\ **Created:** [September 29, 2013, 6:55pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807 "2013-09-29T18:55:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![KPM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c57346/32.png) [@KPM](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/KPM)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 10:57am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/21 "2013-09-30T10:57:02Z")
Are you PB guys trying to hijack and divert yet another thread? :rolleyes: Either contribute to a productive conversation, or shut the hell up! ---
**Author:** ![KPM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c57346/32.png) [@KPM](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/KPM)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 10:57am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/22 "2013-09-30T10:57:54Z")
[QUOTE=sihing;1250662]In the beginning one can say they are learning “shapes”, just to get the references in regards to where the “tan” should be in relation to their bodies, height/width/length, etc.. its not only about the end of the shape but the getting there too. With tan, one is also learning how to let the elbow lead the movement, and to bring it close as possible to centerline (elbows in habits..). Same goes for the rest of the “shapes”. Then one makes it into actions, primarily concerning tan-spreading strike when contact is outside forearm, fok-cutting strike when contact inside forearm, bong-upper arm deflection to permit secondary hitting action, and so forth… One is a learners way of looking at it, once that stage is done, they become doers, from noun to verb… J[/QUOTE] Good post James. Sounds like we’re on the same sheet of music. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![k\_gledhill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/aca169/32.png) [@k\_gledhill](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/k_gledhill)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 11:04am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/23 "2013-09-30T11:04:38Z")
[QUOTE=Graham H;1250675]…but Tan sau means spreading out hand. Fook Sau means controlling hand and Bong Sau means wing arm block. I think your teacher must have not understood the chinese and/or he has made it up! I’m telling the Yip brothers on you![/QUOTE] I keep my tan sao way up like a block and my dog walking hand controls it in case it spreads out, when i combat with my enemies in death match rolls, I can’t let that dangerous spreading happen. If anything tries to go over my arm I fly it away with my wing arm. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Graham\_H](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/graham_h/32/688_2.png) [@Graham\_H](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Graham_H)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 11:14am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/24 "2013-09-30T11:14:22Z")
[QUOTE=sihing;1250662] Then one makes it into actions, primarily concerning tan-spreading strike when contact is outside forearm, fok-cutting strike when contact inside forearm, bong-upper arm deflection to permit secondary hitting action, and so forth… [/QUOTE] We must stress that contact is only made should there be an obstacle and we don’t look to go to the arm to make some sort of bridge like most people think. If there are no limbs blocking the path of the punch we still strike in the same way regardless. ---
**Author:** ![BPWT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e56c9b/32.png) [@BPWT](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/BPWT)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 11:54am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/25 "2013-09-30T11:54:10Z")
[QUOTE=Graham H;1250675]…and “Bong Sau” means wing arm block.[/QUOTE] “” Nothing to do with ‘wings’. 😉 Edit: For that matter… Tan, Bong, Fook… nothing to do with ‘blocking’ either 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Graham\_H](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/graham_h/32/688_2.png) [@Graham\_H](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Graham_H)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 12:25pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/26 "2013-09-30T12:25:16Z")
[QUOTE=BPWT;1250686]“” Nothing to do with ‘wings’. 😉 Edit: For that matter… Tan, Bong, Fook… nothing to do with ‘blocking’ either ;)[/QUOTE] I agree for a change 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![T\_Ray](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b5ac83/32.png) [@T\_Ray](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/T_Ray)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 7:30pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/27 "2013-09-30T19:30:27Z")
Tan sao develops the elbow for the VT punch Fook sao develops the elbow for the VT punch. Bong sao is …a mistake 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Sihing73](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/sihing73/32/33_2.png) [@Sihing73](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Sihing73)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 7:51pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/28 "2013-09-30T19:51:52Z")
[QUOTE=T\_Ray;1250723]Bong sao is …a mistake ;)[/QUOTE] Must be why it appears so many times in the forms, like CK for example, not to mention on the dummy. Nothing like repeating ones mistakes over and over again. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![EternalSpring](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/eternalspring/32/946_2.png) [@EternalSpring](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/EternalSpring)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 7:57pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/29 "2013-09-30T19:57:17Z")
Tan/Bong/Fook/etc are concepts taught through shapes and expressed in action. ---
**Author:** ![sihing](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/sihing/32/521_2.png) [@sihing](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/sihing)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 8:05pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/30 "2013-09-30T20:05:57Z")
[QUOTE=Graham H;1250682]We must stress that contact is only made should there be an obstacle and we don’t look to go to the arm to make some sort of bridge like most people think. If there are no limbs blocking the path of the punch we still strike in the same way regardless.[/QUOTE] Yes totally agreed. The worst case scenario is that contact is made as this is more to “deal” with compared to no bridge contact and a clear path… We prepare for bridge contact, but don’t look for it and seek it, unless we want to. For me the primary habit to learn is too just hit (with accuracy, proper distance, connected power, ability to recover and hit again from whatever line, etc..), and let the reflexes take over is there is bridge contact. Then when that is mastered, you can take the “contact” reflexes you have gained as a side benefit of chi sau practice and use it if you want to, but this is secondary and not the primary thing learned in the beginning at least IMO.. I figure, why ignore the secondary skill set gained from the practice, might as well keep it in my back pocket and use it when I need to. In my line of work, I can’t always just “hit” first, I need to try to control and subdue at times, if that doesn’t work I will hit to end it.. J ---
**Author:** ![T\_Ray](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b5ac83/32.png) [@T\_Ray](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/T_Ray)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 8:48pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/31 "2013-09-30T20:48:34Z")
[QUOTE=Sihing73;1250724]Must be why it appears so many times in the forms, like CK for example, not to mention on the dummy. Nothing like repeating ones mistakes over and over again. ;)[/QUOTE] Yes!. Indeed, it is a mistake we will often make. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![KPM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c57346/32.png) [@KPM](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/KPM)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 10:46pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/32 "2013-09-30T22:46:46Z")
[QUOTE=T\_Ray;1250723]Tan sao develops the elbow for the VT punch Fook sao develops the elbow for the VT punch. Bong sao is …a mistake ;)[/QUOTE] Ok. I’ll bite! 🙂 Why is Bong Sao a mistake? Please explain! ---
**Author:** ![KPM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c57346/32.png) [@KPM](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/KPM)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 10:53pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/33 "2013-09-30T22:53:56Z")
[QUOTE=sihing;1250727]We prepare for bridge contact, but don’t look for it and seek it, unless we want to…this is secondary and not the primary thing learned in the beginning at least IMO.. J[/QUOTE] I agree James! We don’t look for bridge contact, but we certainly expect it and are prepared for it! If someone is wide open, just hit them! Who wouldn’t do that? 😉 Unfortunately that doesn’t happen often. And unless you stop them with the first blow, as long as they aren’t a complete idiot they are going to throw up an obstacle. THEN bridging happens and we seek to control and off-balance the opponent so we can continue to hit them at will. What WCK doesn’t do, is back off from contact because the opponent HAS put up an obstacle…like boxers might do. Once we have established a bridge we aren’t going to abandon it and have to form another one. At least that’s how I see my WCK. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Graham\_H](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/graham_h/32/688_2.png) [@Graham\_H](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Graham_H)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 7:55am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/34 "2013-10-01T07:55:42Z")
> I agree James! We don’t look for bridge contact, but we certainly expect it and are prepared for it! If someone is wide open, just hit them! Who wouldn’t do that? 😉 Unfortunately that doesn’t happen often. And unless you stop them with the first blow, as long as they aren’t a complete idiot they are going to throw up an obstacle. Correct! > THEN bridging happens and we seek to control and off-balance the opponent so we can continue to hit them at will. Incorrect! How are you going to seek and control an opponent who might be a lot bigger than you or a wiry little f\*\*ker that is throwing everything but the kitchen sink at you? To think in any context that you can “hit somebody at will” is BS!! > What WCK doesn’t do, is back off from contact because the opponent HAS put up an obstacle…like boxers might do. Once we have established a bridge we aren’t going to abandon it and have to form another one. At least that’s how I see my WCK. 🙂 Jesus! What is all this “form a bridge” rubbish? Backing off from contact? :eek: Abandoning bridges and forming new ones? :eek: Can I ask you a question Keith? Have you ever had a proper vicious street encounter? It certainly doesn’t sound like it. I would guess that if you came up against somebody who was quite handy with their fists it would not be your day. ---
**Author:** ![BPWT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e56c9b/32.png) [@BPWT](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/BPWT)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 9:25am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/35 "2013-10-01T09:25:29Z")
For me, understanding bridge work and how we use it is vital. I think it is essential to WC/VT/WT. We are either working Lei Kiu or Chi Kiu, and this system specializes in the latter. 😉 Various students of Yip Man talked about how he could disrupt their balance at will, move them around, walk them out the door… basically play with them. 😃 And Yip Man was, what, 5’‘3’', and very slight. The majority of his students where probably taller and almost certainly heavier than him. Yet he had no problem controlling them. IMO, this had to be control via contact. ---
**Author:** ![Graham\_H](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/graham_h/32/688_2.png) [@Graham\_H](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Graham_H)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 9:43am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/36 "2013-10-01T09:43:08Z")
[QUOTE=BPWT;1250776] Various students of Yip Man talked about how he could disrupt their balance at will, move them around, walk them out the door… basically play with them. 😃 And Yip Man was, what, 5’‘3’', and very slight. The majority of his students where probably taller and almost certainly heavier than him. Yet he had no problem controlling them. IMO, this had to be control via contact.[/QUOTE] Yes of course but you are not seeing the big picture are you? These things are possible during the chi sau practice where contact is used for development purposes. I can move all the people I teach/train with around and unbalance them in Chi Sau because I have developed better structure and more power over the years. This has come via the correct training. In sparring it is a different story. There is no prolonged contact so I must use skill and LSJC to off balance them and this doesn’t come via arm contact. In fact where their arm go I do not because the correct way is to position yourself out of their direct firing line. Everybody who trains with me especially if they come from a system of “sticky arm” Wing Chun soon realizes that this idea is nonsense. I’m sure that Neil with his previous idea on Wing Chun will vouch for that. Now he is making the change because bridge based Wing Chun is useless. You have to ask yourself a question. How many of Yip Man’s students actually sparred with him? Nobody on this forum knows what Yip man did. You can only speculate and more often than not interpret what is written about him in your own way. There are many things you can do in chi sau that don’t relate to actual fights. It all looks very good and to the untrained person they feel helpless against it all but this is not the correct way of applying Ving Tsun and why most of the time it falls flat on its a$$ unless you are fighting VT vs VT within the confines of chi sau. ---
**Author:** ![Graham\_H](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/graham_h/32/688_2.png) [@Graham\_H](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Graham_H)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 9:48am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/37 "2013-10-01T09:48:43Z")
I have posted this article before written by my friend Ernie Barrios. He makes some valid points here. His ideas come from tried and tested situations. [http://www.abmvt.com/folio/chi-sau-misconception.pdf](http://www.abmvt.com/folio/chi-sau-misconception.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![BPWT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e56c9b/32.png) [@BPWT](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/BPWT)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 10:36am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/38 "2013-10-01T10:36:21Z")
It’s true that none of us here ever met Yip Man. My point is that of all the ‘names’ who did, they all stress the importance of bridge work and controlling. The one possible exception is WSL… but even this is debatable, as some of his students (e.g. DP) also talk about using bridging to control. Your branch of VT pretty much rejects these ideas, as you explained. And that’s cool. But with all due respect to PB, he (like you and I) never met Yip Man either. Ernie’s article has some very valid points, though I would argue that the recovery system he speaks about (allowing us to keep hitting) is actually part and parcel of the art’s bridging and controlling methods. But he’s right in saying CS is not fighting, of course. For me, the bigger picture is how do I strike without being struck. How do I keep attacking center without exposing my own. How do I do this without relying purely on visual cues, which are limited at the range we want to control. How does Chi Sau and Lat Sau give me the tools and skillset required to do all of this. For me the answers are in understanding and effectively using Chi Kiu. This idea isn’t just unique to people who learned from Yip Man - it’s found in other Wing Chun lineages too. For what it’s worth, Neil’s experiences are similar to my own, including how he used to do Dan Chi Sau and why it was, let’s say, problematic. ---
**Author:** ![KPM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c57346/32.png) [@KPM](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/KPM)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 10:52am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/39 "2013-10-01T10:52:45Z")
[QUOTE=Graham H;1250774]Correct! Incorrect! How are you going to seek and control an opponent who might be a lot bigger than you or a wiry little f\*\*ker that is throwing everything but the kitchen sink at you? To think in any context that you can “hit somebody at will” is BS!! Jesus! What is all this “form a bridge” rubbish? Backing off from contact? :eek: Abandoning bridges and forming new ones? :eek: Can I ask you a question Keith? Have you ever had a proper vicious street encounter? It certainly doesn’t sound like it. I would guess that if you came up against somebody who was quite handy with their fists it would not be your day.[/QUOTE] Whatever dude! :rolleyes: If you can’t carry on a civil conversation without resorting to insulting people, then don’t even bother. ---
**Author:** ![Graham\_H](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/graham_h/32/688_2.png) [@Graham\_H](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Graham_H)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 10:57am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807/40 "2013-10-01T10:57:24Z")
> It’s true that none of us here ever met Yip Man. My point is that of all the ‘names’ who did, they all stress the importance of bridge work and controlling. The one possible exception is WSL… but even this is debatable, as some of his students (e.g. DP) also talk about using bridging to control. I think if you met both guys and moved around with them a little you would see within seconds which methods work and which methods do not. You should stop thinking that just because somebody was taught by WSL that they are all going to be the same. They are not! It’s very easy to repeat what somebody else has said and show things through a drill or whatever but getting stuck in and sparring with hand, foot, pole and knives takes things to a new level. This test your knowledge on Ving Tsun and also reveals what you can apply and what you can’t! Playing chi sau all day everyday is futile without the rest. > Your branch of VT pretty much rejects these ideas, as you explained. And that’s cool. But with all due respect to PB, he (like you and I) never met Yip Man either. Yes and my opinion is that through hard work and training with many people from all over the place has shown PB what can work and what cannot. > Ernie’s article has some very valid points, though I would argue that the recovery system he speaks about (allowing us to keep hitting) is actually part and parcel of the art’s bridging and controlling methods. He would disagree with you point blank and has done a lot of research with other trained fighters. > But he’s right in saying CS is not fighting, of course. …but many think it is. > For me, the bigger picture is how do I strike without being struck. How do I keep attacking center without exposing my own. How do I do this without relying purely on visual cues, which are limited at the range we want to control. How does Chi Sau and Lat Sau give me the tools and skillset required to do all of this. Becoming sensitive to what an opponent is or isn’t doing is got from years of reactive chi sau - gor sau and sparring practice. It is not made from touching arm methods. This is the main reason why so many people are ditching their old lineages. They can’t all be wrong mate! That would not make sense. > For me the answers are in understanding and effectively using Chi Kiu. This idea isn’t just unique to people who learned from Yip Man - it’s found in other Wing Chun lineages too. Chi Kiu? “sticking bridges” ? :eek::eek::eek::eek: > For what it’s worth, Neil’s experiences are similar to my own, including how he used to do Dan Chi Sau and why it was, let’s say, problematic. Had Neil not exposed himself in person to our way he would still be none the wiser today. How do you think he would feel if I told him via text that his ideas on Wing Chun (that stem from a son of Yip Man) are flawed? He would react the same way most of you lot do. Of course he would. Fortunately for Neil he discovered his own short comings first and that has led him down a better path. [Previous page](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807.md?page=1) [Next page](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/shape-or-action/55807.md?page=3)