[QUOTE=Syn7;1041836]wow, youre wound up pretty tight, huh… relax… you dont have to fight everyone that disses you…
i dont think that pic is of himself…[/QUOTE]
LOLOLOLOL… I love this place!
[QUOTE=stan4900;1041832]First get that makeup off your face a real man dont need makeup I am hard core I can never be soft. You think you are good looking but you look like ***. Post a video of your Skils and then we will talk. You put a 1983 picture of yourself on line, you look like Little Richard not a fighter. Nothing related to Martials arts but you are a great fighter Ha! Like I said before where is your video with your forms and Fighting you dont have one AND you are no fighter.[/QUOTE]
why the hell did you quote me with this response? i wasnt talking to you dummy:D
[QUOTE=Syn7;1041836]
i dont think that pic is of himself…[/QUOTE]
or is it!:eek:
nah, youre a whiteboy…
[QUOTE=stan4900;1041832]First get that makeup off your face a real man dont need makeup I am hard core I can never be soft. [/QUOTE]
I’m supposed to take this seriously after seeing some 50 yr old out of shape dude posting up videos of Form #1 in WCK? Hard core? You mean like hard core after the McDonald’s drive thru, right?
Here’s a clue. “Hard core” videos of fighters look something like this:
“When using Pak Sao, avoid the inner gate.” - Moy Yat Kuen Kuit
[QUOTE=couch;1041882]“When using Pak Sao, avoid the inner gate.” - Moy Yat Kuen Kuit[/QUOTE]
funny thing is, one of our basic chi sao drills uses a pak to the inner gate… ! 
i know the reasoning behind it, however.
[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1041905]funny thing is, one of our basic chi sao drills uses a pak to the inner gate… !
i know the reasoning behind it, however.[/QUOTE]
Can you tell me WHY (the reason behind it) pak avoids the inner gate?
[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1041905]funny thing is, one of our basic chi sao drills uses a pak to the inner gate… !
i know the reasoning behind it, however.[/QUOTE]
Since the Kuen Kuit refers to your hands and not your opponent’s, I suspect that one of your “basic chi sao drills” actually does not go counter to the adage. Regardless of whether you actually use an indoor PakSao as one of your “basic chi sao drills”, I am skeptical of the reasoning. If you could, please describe your basic PakSao drill and the reasoning behind its “indoor” status from your point of view.
[QUOTE=Tom Kagan;1041928]Since the Kuen Kuit refers to your hands and not your opponent’s, I suspect that one of your “basic chi sao drills” actually does not go counter to the adage. Regardless of whether you actually use an indoor PakSao as one of your “basic chi sao drills”, I am skeptical of the reasoning. If you could, please describe your basic PakSao drill and the reasoning behind its “indoor” status from your point of view.[/QUOTE]
45 degree pak (its the only one we do…)
the pak arm cuts above the opposing arm to pak the opposite (obvs!) taking that one off line for that ones opposing arm to strike… the pak forearm jams the opponents arm like lan would, but not lan energy…
only when the opponent makes the mistake on the opposite hand and comes too low…
the defense to it is mun? then the continuation would be to open with the thumb part of the retreating hand and indoor pak again
if that makes sense? if not i’ll try to find a video somewhere
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1041922]Can you tell me WHY (the reason behind it) pak avoids the inner gate?[/QUOTE]
if my understanding is correct, then pak doesnt come to you opponents inside gate becaue if one hand is defending then the other should be attacking… thus making your arms crossed
LSWCTN1: As I suspected, your description of your “basic chi sao drill” does not run counter to the Kuen Kuit. Whatever your reasoning as to why your “basic drill” would not align with essentially a “basic rule of thumb”, it stems from a flawed premise.
[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1041931]
if my understanding is correct, then pak doesnt come to you opponents inside gate becaue if one hand is defending then the other should be attacking… thus making your arms crossed[/QUOTE]
What are you trying to accomplish (your objective, goal) when you perform a pak sao?
Hey Yea Kung Fu Stan Pointed out to me that I had posted the wrong video up. I meant to post the Yip Man video up…
I got the right up now…anyone wants to see Stan doing Yip Man SLT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZT0V...eature=channel
sorry for posting the wrong video..I like his energy in this video!
also what did u guys think about the few applications!
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1041643]He seems to have changed the name of what he used to call the YKS SLT to the Yip Man SLT (btw, YM does a Siu Nim Tao – Yip changed the name of the first form) – but regardless of what he calls them, they are simply terrible.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Xiao3 Meng4;1041658]A) How the hell is that Yip Man ANYTHING
B) It’s exactly the same form, actually exactly the same VIDEO, as the one posted earlier by Yoshiyahu claiming that it shows Yuen Kay San SLT.
C) How the hell is that Yuen Kay San ANYTHING[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1041936]What are you trying to accomplish (your objective, goal) when you perform a pak sao?[/QUOTE]
in this drill its to open a gap after the opponent has made a mistake. But sometimes displacement, sometimes press, depends on the ‘feeling’? i guess…
in essence; i always want to be able to hit, without being hit
[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1042240]in this drill its to open a gap after the opponent has made a mistake. But sometimes displacement, sometimes press, depends on the ‘feeling’? i guess…
in essence; i always want to be able to hit, without being hit :D[/QUOTE]
Thanks. That’s what I thought.
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1042263]Thanks. That’s what I thought.[/QUOTE]
in line with your methods?
[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1042285]in line with your methods?[/QUOTE]
No. Pak sao is a way of establishing a bridge (you can’t “slap” something you are already in contact with), and ideally should join, cut-off an opponent’s offense, and break his structure.
As such, pak sao doesn’t bat or knock force away - like what Stan is doing.
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1042363]No. Pak sao is a way of establishing a bridge (you can’t “slap” something you are already in contact with), and ideally should join, cut-off an opponent’s offense, and break his structure.
As such, pak sao doesn’t bat or knock force away - like what Stan is doing.[/QUOTE]
Doesn’t Pak sao translate to Slap hand?
Thanks in advance,
Buby
[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1042363]No. Pak sao is a way of establishing a bridge (you can’t “slap” something you are already in contact with), and ideally should join, cut-off an opponent’s offense, and break his structure.
As such, pak sao doesn’t bat or knock force away - like what Stan is doing.[/QUOTE]
sounds similar to me… 
pak can be an ‘oh sh!t’ reaction when you have seen something late (from the initial attack, for example)
or it can be the press that i also mentioned. if done at the 45 degree (second one in most snt’s) it will invariably be fooking with their structure and stealing it from them
i have shared correspondance with Robert, as i am interested in seeing his method first hand. the more i see (hear) of it the more similar it sounds
[QUOTE=LSWCTN1;1042535]sounds similar to me…
[/QUOTE]
No, it’s night and day.
pak can be an ‘oh sh!t’ reaction when you have seen something late (from the initial attack, for example)
or it can be the press that i also mentioned. if done at the 45 degree (second one in most snt’s) it will invariably be fooking with their structure and stealing it from them
You seem to be thinking of pak sao as some “reaction” or defense – it’s not, It’s not a block or a parry. It is an ATTACK.
Pak sao is a slapping hand that connects and drives through and into your opponent’s center, breaking his structure and setting up control.
It has nothing to do with any 45 degree angle.
Is this how you train to do it? Because if not, then you won’t be able to do it. Every time I perform a pak sao, my intent and objective is to destroy my opponent’s structure – nothing less.
i have shared correspondance with Robert, as i am interested in seeing his method first hand. the more i see (hear) of it the more similar it sounds
What Robert teaches is simply WCK.