Techs: From structure, to application, to ISOLATED SPARRING

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
61

Originally posted by KenWingJitsu
Lookit this thread…IT’S ALIVE!!!
Our use of the word ‘alive’ might differ, but it’s definitely moved on since my last post, so i’ll pick up from here.

Victor, that is my whole point on chi-sao. Notice I said “unless the applications are taken out and trained alive. We basically agree. My point is…only chi-sao has nothing to do with fighting if it is 'only chi-sao”. If you take the techniques and put it in a “fighting context”, (like the Isolated sparring example), THEN it now has something to do with fighting.
If the difference between “isolated sparring” and chi-sao is its “fighting context” - this distinction is entirely intellectual, and to do with your understanding of a) fighting and b) chi sao.

The sifu in the example I quoted does this, and like Victor said, it was trained in the same class…this way students get to learn the chi-sao, leand the application of it, and then apply the move under real pressure…even if its only in isolation…it’s still alive.
No he didn’t, he took a dead drill, and put gloves on. Dead drill + gloves still = Dead drill.

First basic mechanics SHow the form of the pak. elbow posititon, hip position and show the proper direction of the pak…(forward, not sideways). Show the power generation and practice it a few times without resistance…i.e. “dead”, but this is for building proper technique.
Dead drill, but usefull none the less.

Then in chi sau application : In most schools from poon-sao, this is done as an inside pak. So Have one person be the “paker” (lol) and the other the just rolls hands. The paker, once he feels his bong being rolled into ton uses that as the “cue” to pak and then punch. Repeat for reps or minute rounds tightening up mechanics.
Dead drill, but perhaps useful at certain levels.

Then in a non chi sau application : This is where I hope I dont lose anyone. This is where application comes in. To apply it for real, you are now taking it out of the “chi-sao environment”. have sone person be the puncher the other the punchee. Start form no contact, but from a distance. The instigator reaches & grabs the back of the neck (necktie & tries to pull him in -(snapdown). The ‘paker’ reacts by stepping fwd with the pull & trying to punch on the inside of the grabbing arm (ex. Say Attacker grabs defenders head with his left arm, defender punches with his right hand on the inside of A’s left elbow as the pull begins). IF A’s elbow is down and tight, the punch will be ‘jammed’ before it reaches his face (if it isn’t the punch lands - which is better) this is where the pak comes in. Defender inside paks the forearm to clear the “barrier” creating a path for the punch to smash the attackers face. There’s your application.
Dead drill, and probably quite pointless.

Then is a live non wing Chun environment DO rounds of it live, and unexpected, i.e. attacker doesn’t let the other know which hand you’ll grab with or when he’ll grab. He makes it “live” and really tried to pull the guy in to headbutt or punch. Next, switch roles, then next, both people try to grab (clinch-headbutt or punch) AND defend with the pak. This is isolated sparring.
Oh, so by “live” you mean a slightly different intent? Intention in training is another subject - but it sounds to me like all this hype about your “isolated sparring” just means taking a pointless drill and putting on gloves and a furrowed brow.

Then take it back to chi sau with newly gained experience. Next time you do chi-sao (doesn’t have to be the same class since you’ve already begun with chi-sao), you’ll KNOW the application of the inside pak from the poon-sao roll, so it’s not just an inside pak from chi-sao, but now you envision every time you roll in chi-sao that you are in fact defending a barrier such as a neck tie that pulls you in for a headbutt or clinch or for a punch. You’ll “see” the application every time you chi-sao, and this will give your chi-sao a different feeling and a different meaning as far as that technique goes.
“You’ll know” - this is key - so, are you trying to say that by doing this “live isolated sparring” all you’re doing is changing your understanding of the relationship between chi sao and real fighting?

62

Boxing

Theory and reality differ. Sure, in reality by engaging in a fight one must expect to get hit - and the possibility for training for this exists, whether as a by-product of regular training, or trained for specifically. A boxers theoretical assumptions (and therefore training) is very different to those in wing chun. Ever heard the saying “Glass head, tofu body …” ?

63

Sihing wrote:

“. . . but fighting to become better fighters is not the be all end all either.”

If you want to lose weight there is only one way: eat less calories and exercise more. Now, within that general approach there can be a great variety of “diet programs” – but the general approach is an absolute because that’s how we, as human beings, gain or lose weight.

With fighting, regardless of our method (WCK, bjj, boxing, etc.) there needs to be the same general approach to development because we, as human beings, only learn competitive physical skills a certain way: we first learn a form (technique) whether it is how to do a hip throw, a pak sao, or a rear cross; we next need to drill that particular item (practice it in a cooperative environment) to develop it to what I call the “comfortability stage” (where we feel comfortable doing it), then we need to try to put it to use in a fighting environment (where there is genuine intensity, resistance, and intent). This is what boxers do, wrestlers do, bjjers do, muay thai fighters do, etc. – all fighters do this, in one form or another, because that’s the only way to develop fighting skill (if there were an easier way, everyone would be doing it!). If you’re not using that approach, you will never develop the attributes, technique, strategies, etc. to fight at any significant level. Moreover, if you don’t continue to fight, you will begin to lose your attainments – the longer the “lay off”, the greater the loss.

sihing wrote: “ever heard of SENIOR CITIZENS, DISABALDED PEOPLE, SMALL PEOPLE IN GENERAL. . . ?”

Well, just like they must use the same general approach as the rest of us to lose weight, they must use the same general approach as the rest of us to developing fighting skills. It will be much more difficult for them, but if they don’t use the general approach, it will be impossible for them.

Again, if someone disagrees with this, it is a simple matter to prove me wrong.

And btw, KJ and others, if you think you’ve seen chi sao “approach fighting intensity” try this – go to a MMA gym or some other place where they actually fight and ask to begin a fight with one of them from the chi sao position (they’ll be happy to accomodate you, I’m sure). You’ll see it is apples and oranges. (I wonder why those that think their chi sao gives them fighting skills refuse to put their belief to the test?).

Regards,

Terence

64

t_niehoff, I agree with most of what you said, and the theory behind it. Form first then practical reinforcement of that form, no problem there. I honestly think though that one advantage we as WC people have is the element of surprise and just simply the fact that we use economy of movement and non-telegraphic movements to make it all work. The key to combat is definetly to attack first ask questions later, once a confrontation reaches that stage of violence. Because of the utter velocity and overwheleming nature of WC attacks, one should defeat another if they intiate the attack first. This is why WC works for smaller more frail people, they sort of have to “suck” their opponents in, then BAM, surprise them and use all their effort to take them out quick, this could mean using more than just the fists, elbows and fingers would have to be employed to get them through this situation. Any fighter can be surprised, especially if they underestimate them.

Sihing

65

Good Wing Chun doesn’t need George Forman or Vitor Belfort.

Just wear a mullet !!!

66

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
I didn’t see hardly any mantis, or wing chun… and some poorly-attempted TWC entry techniques.
Victor,
I definitely agree. That was my point.

Bill

67

Re: “take one to give one”

Originally posted by sihing
Lots of people train and are still sh!tty fighters. ¨
How did I know this come back was coming, lol.

It’s not just a “come back”, it’s a statement of my opinion. Or do you feel that your opinion is somehow more valid?

Did they improve at all? That is the point right.
Like you said, everyone improves to some degree. At some point however you may have to put it to the test and some guy that’s handing you your head won’t care less about how much you’ve improved.

Bill

68

(I wonder why those that think their chi sao gives them fighting skills refuse to put their belief to the test?).

It was tested a few times.Maybe not in a sport manner but the results were ok for me. Now,I wonder why those who don’t believe in Wing Chun principal development system even bother to stay in Wing Chun?..Why not simply join your local MMA gymn and start doing what you preach so well?..
:wink:

69

Matrix:
No, your opinion is just as valid as mine, I just anticipated the response that’s all. I don’t understand your statement though about putting it to the test, meaning what? I’ve never stated that you can learn to fight by just doing forms and praticing in the air, off course the techniques have to be put to the test, just that for me how many times do I have to test it, continually the rest of my life?? IMO when properly learned, trained and initially “tested” then you have the skill(which to me means all the attributes needed to defend ones self or fight), and it will remain there with less effort required than in the learning/testing phase of one’s progression through the system…

Victor: "Good Wing Chun doesn’t need George Forman or Vitor Belfort.

Just wear a mullet !!!"

So what's this supposed to mean.  That's no way to treat a senior of yours.  It sounds pretty judgemental of you, since you have never seen the man in action nor talked with the man. Besides "sneakers" are no fashion statement either, lol...

Sihing

70

Dhira,

found a nice counter to that twisting neck tie counter the other night working with Louvel.

Crimsonking,

in a sense, yes. Once you develop physical understanding of a tool and are able to cultivate it under moderate resistance, once you know more than shape, then you can work that tool and hone it more effectively through many routes, including chi sao.

Terence’s remarks on intensity independant and dependant attributes are particularily apt in this case. Thai boxers train very softly. Why does this work for them? Because they fight regularly and intensely, and the soft work is done based on the understanding of what they need to work on derived from their fighting. No fighting= no understanding.

Old jong,

excellent suggestion, why don’t you take it?

Later,

Andrew

71

Hey tough guys!..

Before this becomes a ‘chi-sao’ thread, let me just say that just chi-sao will make you good at one thing…chi sao. Period.

My question is: Do you still practice chi sau and if yes,why are you still doing something that has no value for fighting?..(IYHO)

72

Originally posted by sihing
I don’t understand your statement though about putting it to the test, meaning what?
James,
I may have been a little cryptic there. What I mean is that if your goal is just to “improve”, that smells like striving for mediocrity to me. So, if you’re happy with being mediocre, then one day when you need those skills they will probably not deliver the results that you expect.

I know that you’re concerned about the kids with ADD, the senior citizens, and disabled, and I share your concern for these people. However, these limitations do not apply to most of us in this discussion group and is non-sequitur to the debate. Although I may be getting close on the senior citizen category. :wink:

On the other hand most of us will never be great fighters in the sense of Ali or (insert your favorite name here). But, I think we need to strive for the higher ground within the context of our abilities. Settling for “just improving” doesn’t cut it, IMO.

Bill

That was Zen, this is Tao.

73

Originally posted by t_niehoff
And btw, KJ and others, if you think you’ve seen chi sao “approach fighting intensity” try this – go to a MMA gym or some other place where they actually fight and ask to begin a fight with one of them from the chi sao position (they’ll be happy to accomodate you, I’m sure). You’ll see it is apples and oranges.

I’m not sure what it is you think I (or others) aren’t getting, but no worries in any event.

You do pose another interesting question regarding terms and usage. It’s our human tendency to assume a common understanding of common terms. Yet I suspect that if you polled a dozen or more people on what chi sau means to them, you’d likely get an interesting variety in the answers. Which brings me to your statement on “the chi sao position.” This phrasing would indicate that you may consider chi sau as essentially something in fact constrained to a “position.” Does that indeed reflect your view of the meaning and range of chi sau? And if so, what do you believe the chi sau position is?

We (the communal we) may not ever fully agree on certain terms and meanings. Nonetheless, getting a clearer picture of the meaning the writer intends can be useful and instructive.

Regards,

  • Kathy Jo
74

Originally posted by kj
We (the communal we) may not ever fully agree on certain terms and meanings. Nonetheless, getting a clearer picture of the meaning the writer intends can be useful and instructive.

Confucius says “Never fight with a wooden legged librarian about terminology, for she will kick your sorry butt.” :smiley:

75

Originally posted by Matrix
I know that you’re concerned about the kids with ADD, the senior citizens, and disabled, and I share your concern for these people. However, these limitations do not apply to most of us in this discussion group and is non-sequitur to the debate. Although I may be getting close on the senior citizen category. :wink:

Methinks your own present good station may color your view on this just a tad. ;):slight_smile:

Then again, to my sensibilities, many if not most mainstream forum discussions seem fraught with all manner of assumptions. Consequently, judgements of what “others” ought to do are easily uninformed or overgeneralized. IMHO, they are thus to be interpreted with a healthy grain of salt and one’s own personal good judgement.

If the general tenor of this forum was an accurate barometer, there are many of us who would have no business practicing martial arts at all, myself included. Perhaps I can understand the concerns Sihing has expressed better than some. It will be a sad and ironic day when martial arts training exclusively benefits the young and robust.

As for getting closer to the senior citizen category … let’s hope so! The alternative sucks. :wink:

Regards,

  • Kathy Jo
76

As for getting closer to the senior citizen category … let’s hope so! The alternative sucks.

It is not so bad,at least we will be able to fight the nurses for a clean diaper!..

77

Let me say it this way, if one had the similar natural physical attributes similar to Vitor and George, and was willing to put in the same training time and intensity into TWC that these two gentlemen put into their respective arts, and with proper instruction from a instructor I know, I would put my money on the TWC guy, in a streetfight.

It would be easy enough for the instructor concerned to prove this, train a fighter and put him in Pride, the K-1 or UFC. Go for it.

78

crimsonking, obviously you do not know the meaning of “dead” vs alive. Obviously. Its not the technique that makes it dead or live. it’s the energy timing and motion performed while using the techniqe. if the students are REALLY trying to hit each other with real intent, and they get hit,…or they sucessfully defend,…the intent and unexpectedness is the key. If you disagree, I definitely want to hear your definition of dead and alive training…

anerlich is correct about everything!!! Dang bro…you are taking peeps to school. Nice posts.

79

"Hey tough guys!..

quote:

Before this becomes a ‘chi-sao’ thread, let me just say that just chi-sao will make you good at one thing…chi sao. Period.

My question is: Do you still practice chi sau and if yes,why are you still doing something that has no value for fighting?..(IYHO)"

Look…Michel (old jong):

I personally think that frequent chi sao gives ENORMOUS benefits and value to one’s overall training…but the real issue is not whether or not to do chi sao…

the real issue is whether-or-not the chi sao skills, principles, strategies, techniques, etc…ARE BEING TRANSLATED…on a FREQUENT basis…into a more “realistic” setting (ie.- isolated sparring drills…free form sparring/fighting, etc.)

80

Originally posted by kj
If the general tenor of this forum was an accurate barometer, there are many of us who would have no business practicing martial arts at all, myself included.
Now let’s not talk crazy-talk. :smiley: I don’t think that anyone here believes that. I know I certainly don’t.

Originally posted by kj
It will be a sad and ironic day when martial arts training exclusively benefits the young and robust.
Wasn’t it George Bernard Shaw who said " Youth is wasted on the young."? Quite frankly I think that a greater number of “mature” people should train in the martial arts. I guess there’s some sort of stigma against it, but who cares about that. I’m not one who is very good at “acting my age”, whatever that means… :rolleyes:

Originally posted by kj
As for getting closer to the senior citizen category … let’s hope so! The alternative sucks. :wink:
I was thinking more about the discount at the movie box-office. :wink:

Regards,
Bill