Shape or Action?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
61

[QUOTE=Neil-Y;1250972]Any particular reason why my comments were mederated and taken off?[/QUOTE]

I wouldn’t worry about it Neil. There was nothing in your posts that was derogatory in any way. They probably just didn’t like the fact that your idea on Wing Chun has changed and what you USED to think is what they STILL think.

I think it’s bang out of order that some posts that contain some good information get deleted why others with poor ideas on Wing Chun are allowed to delete things or allow theirs to remain. :mad:

This one will probably be in the bin as well. C***s!

62

I think it’s bang out of order that some posts that contain some good information get deleted why others with poor ideas on Wing Chun are allowed to delete things or allow theirs to remain. :mad:

Its a crime Garham, a crime… mine get deleted all the time and are full of useful information!!

63

[QUOTE=Graham H;1250781]Chi Kiu? “sticking bridges” ? :eek::eek::eek::eek:
[/QUOTE]

Actually, HFY’s chi sau platform includes kiu sau and chi kiu. This is quite different than the Yip Man approach.

Apparently this is a new term for you, which also means PB doesn’t teach it.

64

[QUOTE=GlennR;1250983]Its a crime Garham, a crime… mine get deleted all the time and are full of useful information!![/QUOTE]

Yeah I have a lot deleted that contain secrets from Yip Man himself! :smiley:

65

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;1250984]Actually, HFY’s chi sau platform includes kiu sau and chi kiu. This is quite different than the Yip Man approach.

Apparently this is a new term for you, which also means PB doesn’t teach it.[/QUOTE]

Well if its different from the Yip Man approach then why has Leung Ting got it in his system. After all Leung Ting claims to have been a closed door student of Yip Man (which is complete nonsense BTW)

If its not in the Yip Man approach it probably means its useless.

Leung Ting is probably just making more rubbish up and is watching the $ roll in! :wink:

66

[QUOTE=Graham H;1250988]
If its not in the Yip Man approach it probably means its useless.
[/QUOTE]
Yip Man was awesome but there’s some other great stuff outside the scope of his approach.

67

[QUOTE=Graham H;1250987]Yeah I have a lot deleted that contain secrets from Yip Man himself! :D[/QUOTE]

Including the 4th empty hand form which I learnt last night.

68

[QUOTE=Graham H;1250988]Well if its different from the Yip Man approach then why has Leung Ting got it in his system. After all Leung Ting claims to have been a closed door student of Yip Man (which is complete nonsense BTW)

If its not in the Yip Man approach it probably means its useless.

Leung Ting is probably just making more rubbish up and is watching the $ roll in! ;)[/QUOTE]

No idea. LT is nowhere associated to anything I do. I have no knowledge of the guy beyond general talk.

Regarding your Yip Man approach comment I would just have to say it’s obvious you’ve never met Garrett Gee. When you do you might come away with a different perspective.

69

[QUOTE=Graham H;1250988]Well if its different from the Yip Man approach then why has Leung Ting got it in his system. After all Leung Ting claims to have been a closed door student of Yip Man (which is complete nonsense BTW)

If its not in the Yip Man approach it probably means its useless.

Leung Ting is probably just making more rubbish up and is watching the $ roll in! ;)[/QUOTE]

Chi Kiu is a term used in the art. You find it used by most lineages outside of YM. It simply refers to bridge work (hence the name). In Wayfaring’s lineage I think they have a specific part of their curriculum based around it. LT does not, however - it’s simply a blanket term for contact via the bridge.

So no extra $ associated with it. A basic term heard in any HK lesson someone might attend. Nothing new, either - LT mentions it in books first published in the 70s. A Chinese term, found in a Chinese art, and LT is Chinese. :slight_smile:

LT took private lessons with YM after YM had officially retired from teaching. Thus, ‘closed door student’. Not sure why you think that is “nonsense”, Graham. The whole YM Wing Chun community was aware of it at the time of it happening. YM even stated it publicly.

Why so hostile?

70

[QUOTE=BPWT;1251023]Chi Kiu is a term used in the art. You find it used by most lineages outside of YM. It simply refers to bridge work (hence the name). In Wayfaring’s lineage I think they have a specific part of their curriculum based around it. LT does not, however - it’s simply a blanket term for contact via the bridge.[/QUOTE]

Putting aside the absurdity of the definition you use for ‘bridge’ this time, apparently Wayfaring is saying in HFY they have this term in some part of their chi-sai training. But you’re saying in LTWT this is a blanket term for “contact via the bridge” in fighting, outside of chi-sau?

So you even call it “sticking to the bridge”. As if calling it a bridge weren’t misleading enough, now you have a special term talking specifically about sticking to it. If this is not your actual method (sticking to the bridge), your terminology is just all kinds of f-ed up!

71

[QUOTE=LFJ;1251491]Putting aside the absurdity of the definition you use for ‘bridge’ this time, apparently Wayfaring is saying in HFY they have this term in some part of their chi-sai training. But you’re saying in LTWT this is a blanket term for “contact via the bridge” in fighting, outside of chi-sau?

So you even call it “sticking to the bridge”. As if calling it a bridge weren’t misleading enough, now you have a special term talking specifically about sticking to it. If this is not your actual method (sticking to the bridge), your terminology is just all kinds of f-ed up![/QUOTE]

LFJ, I think your definition of “sticking” may be a bit too rigid. “Chi” or “sticking” simply means to make contact and use that contact to sense the opponent’s reaction or intention. The actual “stick” or contact may be very brief.

Have you ever worked with the Pole? There is “Chi Kwun” or “sticky pole” methods as well. Do you really think that means you are going to stick to and follow the opponent’s pole all around? No. It refers to making contact with the opponent’s pole briefly, and working from that.

And I don’t know what your hang-up about the term “bridge” might be, but this this is a common term in southern gung fu systems. Including Wing Chun! And most systems use the term “bridge” to refer to use of the forearm.

There is nothing wrong with BPWT’s terminology. You just need to broaden your base of knowledge a bit. :wink:

72

[QUOTE=KPM;1251492]LFJ, I think your definition of “sticking” may be a bit too rigid. “Chi” or “sticking” simply means to make contact and use that contact to sense the opponent’s reaction or intention. The actual “stick” or contact may be very brief.[/QUOTE]

Yeah? Not in VT anyway, or as Neil-Y said, not outside of chi-sau drilling.

73

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;1250984]Actually, HFY’s chi sau platform includes kiu sau and chi kiu. This is quite different than the Yip Man approach.

Apparently this is a new term for you, which also means PB doesn’t teach it.[/QUOTE]

It is new to me. What does it involve?

74

[QUOTE=BPWT;1251023]Chi Kiu is a term used in the art. You find it used by most lineages outside of YM. It simply refers to bridge work (hence the name). In Wayfaring’s lineage I think they have a specific part of their curriculum based around it. LT does not, however - it’s simply a blanket term for contact via the bridge[/QUOTE]

What does your bridge work involve? By “contact via the bridge” I assume you mean arm to arm contact?

75

[QUOTE=guy b.;1251495]It is new to me. What does it involve?[/QUOTE]

Most southern CMA arts have kiu sau of some kind HFY kiu sau is seen in SNT, and involves things like intercepting a blind side attack. kiu sau is learned in HFY before any chi sau. Most other southern arts flow from kiu sau to kam na. Chi kiu flows from a jong structure based kiu sau to the sticking of chi sau, but with an emphasis on control points without grabbing.

76

LFJ,

As Keith was saying. ‘Stick’ is one of those unfortunate words in English, as it conjures up an image of something not letting go (I said in an earlier post to Graham that this makes people think of something like a fly stuck to fly paper), but this NOT what the term means in this system. It is referring to contact - and it is rarely prolonged contact. It can be, literally, ‘touch and go’.

If you don’t agree with the term ‘bridge’, fair enough. But the definition as I (and others) are using it is found in various (most) Wing Chun lineages, and other Southern CMA too. We had a huge thread on this a while ago, and the end result was that many people from WSL lineage disagreed as they/you define it as something different. :slight_smile: No skin off my nose.

But Chi Kiu, because it is talking about contact with a bridge, can be seen in Chi Sau, or in a fight. Things are either Chi Kiu or Lei Kiu.

[QUOTE=guy b.;1251496]What does your bridge work involve? By “contact via the bridge” I assume you mean arm to arm contact?[/QUOTE]

For the most part, yes, Kiu being used to describe hand to the elbow.

What does the bridge work involve?

That’s a short question with a potentially huge answer. :smiley:

Lots of WT’s concepts and principles apply to bridge work, as you want to hit the opponent and control the situation so you can keep hitting. There’s bridging whenever it’s needed to aid the above, sometimes it happens when things go wrong, sometimes the opponent makes the bridge, etc, etc.

But in brief, LTWT’s Chi Sau sections include most of the bridging ideas, and so too does the Lat Sau training (because this is connected to lessons learned in the Chi Sau sections). To explain in more detail would mean breaking down all of the Chi Sau sections, all of the Lat Sau work, etc.

77

To add, if someone’s particular lineage defines ‘Kiu’ in a different way, then it seems reasonable that terminology like ‘Kiu Sau’ and ‘Chi Kiu’ will either have a different meaning too, or perhaps no meaning at all (in relation to their VT).

Again, no problem for me.

78

[QUOTE=BPWT;1251503]As Keith was saying. ‘Stick’ is one of those unfortunate words in English, as it conjures up an image of something not letting go (I said in an earlier post to Graham that this makes people think of something like a fly stuck to fly paper), but this NOT what the term means in this system. It is referring to contact - and it is rarely prolonged contact. It can be, literally, ‘touch and go’.[/QUOTE]

It’s an equally unfortunate word in Cantonese because it doesn’t mean what you think it means.

It has the possible meanings of ‘to stick’; ‘sticky’; ‘wood-glue’; ‘birdlime’. None of those mean “touch and go”.

Chi-kiu means ‘to stick to the bridge’. In either language it means to remain attached by adhesion.

If you’re not actually doing this in your system you should reconsider your terminology. If you want to say ‘to touch’ or ‘to make contact with’ the bridge you should say something like chuk-kiu. But even then, people would tend to want to specifically train to seek contact with the opponent’s arms, taking chuk-kiu as some sort of method leading to only another kind of mistake.

79

[QUOTE=LFJ;1251513]It’s an equally unfortunate word in Cantonese because it doesn’t mean what you think it means. It has the possible meanings of ‘to stick’; ‘sticky’; ‘wood-glue’; ‘birdlime’. None of those mean “touch and go”. Chi-kiu means ‘to stick to the bridge’. In either language it means to remain attached by adhesion.

If you’re not actually doing this in your system you should reconsider your terminology. If you want to say ‘to touch’ or ‘to make contact with’ the bridge you should say something like chuk-kiu. But even then, people would tend to want to specifically train to seek contact with the opponent’s arms, taking chuk-kiu as some sort of method leading to only another kind of mistake.[/QUOTE]

Well, I wasn’t the person who created the word :slight_smile: But defining a word for what it is, and then defining the process of how it is implemented in use, are surely different, even if connected by the original term(s). For example, the word ‘engine’ implies mechanical motion, but doesn’t necessarily imply ‘travel’, though the engine in a car, when used, usually results in travel and most people when thinking of the word ‘engine’ would assume travel.

Either way, someone could rename Chi Sau if they wanted, I guess. My point is that when you learn Chi Sau, you are not taught to remained glued/stuck to your partner’s arms at all times - even though you start with stick in Poon Sau, and use stick/contact to your advantage when attacking, counter-attacking, etc. If people are uncomfortable with the word ‘stick’, as a result, then don’t use the word.

Perhaps it is a good word to use and a bad word too. Bad for the reasons stated, good because I would argue that forward force and momentum does create adhesion if your attack and that of your opponent’s meet on the same line. When you yield to greater force, do you want to always break out and then break back in?

In WT, you stick/connect when it is needed, or when certain circumstances make it happen. If you do things differently in your WSLVT, fair enough.

But regarding Kiu Sau, Chi Kiu, Lei Kiu, etc, these are terms that fit within the method I train, and are terms found within the art (though if you say this is not true of WSLVT, then I’ll take your word for it - and say again, fair enough). :slight_smile:

80

[QUOTE=KPM;1250587] When we talk about a Bong Sao or Taan Sao or any other Wing Chun hand form/technique, what are we really talking about? Is it a shape/form? Or is it an action/movement?

Sao is a verb and not a noun. Of course a good sao has some requirements for good action.