1)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guWUo8qS53U&search=wing%20chun
2)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6yCVL31XEY
What’s the difference between these two methods of chi sau?
What do you see in the areas of how they are applying energy, reacting, moving, applying centerline principal, etc..?
Not interested in really who is better or worse, so let’s try to keep this a technical discussion.
Thx
J
hello,
the first video shows a lot of footwork.
the wt footwork is not shown in the second video.
but in both vidio´s are good skills shown.
greetings from germany
esfwto:)
They seem diametrically opposed, yet they both come from the same system…
Amazing isn’t it?
I like the forward pressure/movement in the first one and the more uncooperative style..
Fan Sao was minimal as was actual release of energy in striking.
Forward body pressure was there, dynamic movement, breaking structure, but not a lot of flanking or "moving the line..
Too willing to separate <give up> distance and “restart.”
Typical WT precise use of fixed stances and turning.
Fan sao was shown but normally limited to chain punches.
A “non standard” move was used with the inside “upper cut” with outside lop–the partner should have dropped his elbow..
No attempt to recover..
No release of energy, body power, non contactuse of air punches.
Minimal forward pressure from the body or the elbows.
Luk sao was unvaried and rapid.
It’s hard to look at these vids without making a comparison and judgement:
The guy in the first vid with the black Chinese jacket is miles ahead of not only his partner in the first vid - but of both guys in the second vid.
As to the difference in chi sao approaches between the vids…without the footwork, forward pressure, and more acute sense of distance shown in the first vid (as the guys in the second vid had none)…absent those things…
it’s like comparing guys’ chi sao who have never learned anything more than SLT and the first section of chum kiu with guys who know all of SLT, chum kiu, bil jee, and wooden dummy besides.
All this praise being cited - nonetheless there are still holes in the first vids chi sao guys (including Mr. Black Jacket):
As Yung Chun said - there was no attempt to outflank - just straight ahead or straight back in retreat, as it were. And without flanking - there’s a big hole in your chi sao (and your fight) game.
Secondly, once the first vid guys broke apart into a gor sao (as happened often)…where were the stop kicks? Go back and look at how many times a stop kick to the knees/shins (hitting with the heel, of course)…could have cut down an attack right in it’s tracks…or how many missed opportunities there were to stop Mr. black jacket’s chain punch type attacks with pak or pak/chuen (coupled with sidestep flanking).
All in all, though…I enjoyed the first vid. Mr. black jacket is good.
its not possible to compare the vidio´s. the wt-guy´s are only showing the chi-sao-sektions.
its a kind of "death"working, because the other knowes what the other will do. they exercise positions thats all!
the scond video is more alive, they use a lot of space- i think they need too much spache!!! mir shifting would be good.
and why are there no kicks? for komplete chi-sao you need chi-gerk.
i hope i dont make too many misstakes in ortography:D
My understanding of the WT video is that it was NOT predetermined but more of a random form of chi sau. In most video of chi sau, I rarely see movement exibited when the exchanges are fast and furious, most just stay in one place and shift/hit/react from there. Once movement begins by one party the other usually fails to keep the distance and follow what leaves.
This is what I like the most about the first vid, they are in motion, not static and still exibit good intention towards centerline. They maintain structure but are free flowing not static. This is realistic of fighting, as motion is always present in a fight and one must flow with whatever happens, strike when it’s needed, trap/control/pull/push etc.. when it’s needed.
The second vid demonstrates good flow and speed in movement/technique. This is good at a beginner level, as you have to develop one thing at a time, but as the vid said that was a “Master’s demo”.
Regarding kicking, I’m sure all the players from both video’s could have done that at anytime. To me they were practicing at a specific range, trying not to incorporate kicks at that time. Chi sau is not fighting, but it is a good way to judge specific WC skills, as it’s an alive drill where most all aspects of WC can be demonstrated.
J
Flanking
Flanking or obtaining the Blindside is a good position to have, if you can get there. When I was in LA, I tried that alot and found that I was defeated as these guys would just track my center and attack it, taking my balance. Today, I can still use the strategy but it is something that must come to you, and not something that must be made to happen.
Sifu Gary talking about flanking and blindside fighting, as he teaches that they have access to 5 angles of attack when engaging someone. Some are more difficult to obtain than others and have to rely on engagement first. For me I was surprised to learn that they had these concepts present, as I was told it was only a TWC concept.
J
First up-
You’re looking at two entirely different situations.
#1). Guy sparring with his student with some dude chasing them with a camera
#2). Two guys (who’ve been training partners for 20yrs or so, as I understand it), who do many demos together, given a fixed lit mark in front of backdrop doing a ‘demo’ version of chi sao where both of them are on display, initially each letting the other in for a clean attack and followup, something that starts to break down towards the end as they begin to open up in the last 5-10 seconds of the vid.
This alone makes for some serious differences in what you wind up seeing.
#1). Crispy attacks, nice dynamicism, but I have some problems with the footwork as the retreats seem extremely linear (as does much of the attack)- this may be part camera angle, and part feeding/drill component, but I view going straight back as a serious flaw, and ideally like to see a quick offline back if necessary, following by closing up the line created by the offline (or an attempt at this). The chi sao is done at the range where it takes little footwork to get the hit, and is done with engaged body structure, pressuring fairly constantly. You see nothing of rolling here-no poon sao contact, everything is working from a cross-arm bridge sort of platform- nothing wrong with that, but it makes for a different dynamic as one hand is always free. The pace and delivery of actions is consistent with real-time application and speaks to direct translation to practical usage.
#2). Starts from rolling, the roll happening from outside striking range, arms are pretty disconnected/light so as to give the other person no purchase on their structure initially and not compromise their ability to change as they go in. Feet, especially Ringheisen’s-the little guy, go with hands and you can see where he’s probing, looking for safe ways to go in at the end, getting shut down by Mannes as he tracks him and holds center. The footwork doesn’t have a nice crispy look to it, in part, because they’re both aborting their motion as the other shuts them down. (Compare with the steps on <http://www.youtube.com/watchv=K5bmbxlnPqI>, from the same tape). I dislike the lack of engagement of structure on the rolling, but I understand the rationale behind it (and have gotten my *ss handed to me by sifu Emin when I’ve tried to engage and pressure him, both by him engaging right back better, and by him going all ghostly and giving me nothing to crush through/into while he appears somewhere else).
More another time,
Andrew
I am not understanding all this. Chi Sau is not a form of fighting, or even entry to a fight form. It is simply a method of training ones blocks and attacks in a safe and uniform way. It is difficult to practice something such as a strike or block against air or a wooden arm, and is much better practiced against another person. The cooperation between the 2 persons is designed that each one can practice at the same time for greater effect. This Chi Sau we see where 2 people are working along and one breaks out and wails the heck out of the other person is silly. It is not reality. How many people have you ever defended yourself against that would do Chi Sau with you? I have never come up on someone that was even trained WC, and if someone attempted to make contact with my arms in an effort to use this as a fighting attack would get a surprise. Too much emphasis is put on Chi Sau as a fighting form.
i enjoyed both clips for what they were meant to show, different dynamics of chi sao within two different paradigms of WC.
the similarities are that the operators are working within their comfort zones, with partners who are mirror images. i like to watch chi sao where you see different lineages engaging.
i like the structure from clip one. shows some good mechanics. i like the closing footwork.
clip two, nice flurries but i prefer to see cleaner lines and better alignment in the striking.
both were good, imo.
sure chi-sao is not fighting. and both videos are showing that fact.
in the first video is from time to time too much weight on in the front(imo) they use a lot of space.
the wt guy´s dont use the space they have. and master chi sao should include chi gerk.
i liked both.
Depends on skill..
Any move that involves latteral energy, that is energy that “leaves the line” by the opponent could be addressed with just hands adjusting, or better yet, with hands and body adjusting position as one.. The body could just stay in one spot or you can move around them AS you do whatever hand techniques.. In other cases when you step in you can also be moving off line, in fact any time you step in or back you probably should or at least could move offline, either a little or a lot.. The idea is to maintain control of the the line and in some cases, to do so, you can “move the line” that is, you make a new line if they have already taken the first one.. Lateral movement <small or large> is as much a part of the system IMO as is linear movement is–what does Gary say? One is faster the other is safer.. 
Yeah, the more direct route is faster and going offline (blindside) is safer as you only in reach of two weapons of your opponent.
In TWC there are counters to moves like pak da and lop da where you step away, change the line while facing and then counter. This is all good when you have the distance and the proper stepping. These guys down in LA would be in much closer(they would always eat space) and when I would change the line and/or try to redirect or go for the blindside they stiffled it right away. They keep a constant pressure or lat sau jik chung towards your centerline which is hard to escape from when you are not familiar to that way. Obviously there are counters for it all, as I saw some of the posters here do just that to the guys that were on my ass earlier that day, lol. Skill is a factor, just that it has to be the right skill set.
J
Too much weight on front? Why? What’s wrong with it?
Is that bad? Have you seen how much space is taken in an actual fight when both parties have similar skills?
Says who and why? What is “master” Chi-Sao?
Just adding food for thought… 
Well I’m not generally talking about making space..
Meaning that, say you do a Running Tan Da-- or similar move–in response to his energy and position, well you could do that by essentially stepping, more or less, straight in, OR, you could do it with lateral movement AND stepping in at the same time.. 
Most moves can have some flanking in them..
What do we see in the Jong?
Wasn’t chi gerk invented after Yip Man’s death?
Most people start kicking when the hands are unable to do the job themselves. My philosophy towards using kicks when the hands are engaged first is only to do when you lose that hand contact range (trapping/clinch range), otherwise as soon as you raise up to use that chi gerk technique you land flat on you ass.
J
A wooden dummy? 
Good question..
Anyone?
Disagree..
Many folks teach that the best time to kick is when you have “three feet on the ground..” Which three?
What is the meaning of invisible kicks?
IMO most of the kicking is intended for inside use… Not to mention other leg moves, traps, immobilizations, breaks, etc…
The 2 of your opponent and your standing leg.
Nothing personal but trust me man, if you are trying to punch and kick simultaneously while in trapping range, it may work against some, but anyone with good lat sau jik chung training and the knowledge to eat space will put you on your ass 99.5 % of the time. The only reason someone would get away with that tactic is when the other guy is making a mistake and giving up to much space IMO. That’s more of a chance gamble action.
J