The angles you use are wrong, you are getting away with it because the guy stops and doesnt follow in …
Oooo,K
Anyone can do an internet search on wing chun’s kau sau -or- kao sao and judge for themselves. Don’t take my word or his and from where he stands, that may be the case in something he never heard of.
Until then, I’ll just take his word on it, NOT.
LMAO,
Complete nonsense :eek:
[QUOTE=Graham H;1207605]Complete nonsense :eek:[/QUOTE]
Yep… utter nonsense!!
What he should be doing is showing his unmatched chi-sao skills, with compliant students, on endless youtube clips!!
Oh, too late… someone has already done that
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1207561]The angles you use are wrong, you are getting away with it because the guy stops and doesnt follow in …[/QUOTE]
My angles are correct for my Wing Chun.
[QUOTE=GlennR;1207620]Yep… utter nonsense!!
What he should be doing is showing his unmatched chi-sao skills, with compliant students, on endless youtube clips!!
Oh, too late… someone has already done that[/QUOTE]
My teachings are based on my having competed many times so I do know what will work against a resisting opponent. Btw, I’m demonstrating in those clips for my for students. What you think doesn’t really matter to me. I train fighters even now. And I can still fight with what I teach. Who ever said I had unmatched chi sao skills? You made that up on your own. LOL
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1207561]The angles you use are wrong, you are getting away with it because the guy stops and doesnt follow in …[/QUOTE] I got away with it when I fought CLF guys. 
When I’m in NY I can demonstrate it on you and you really try to hit me. I should be back in April. I’ll let you know when in advance when I’ll be there.
[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;1207640]I got away with it when I fought CLF guys. When I’m in NY I can demonstrate it on you and you really try to hit me. I should be back in April. I’ll let you know when in advance when I’ll be there.[/QUOTE]
Shame I’m not in NYC because you wouldn’t get away with that circling fook sau/ huen sau nonsense on me Phil. 
I like some of your stuff, but that’s not even a fuk-sau as I know it, although it has the hand shape from SNT. Fuk-sau is a suppressing energy concept, not a hook shape or technique.
The response doesn’t seem very direct or efficient to me. It’s 4 things in response to a single punch, on the wrong side, and trying to get to the outside of a round attack for no practical reason. There’s jat, hyun, paak + che-jeung. It should be over with the jat against any live opponent.
First of all, you do a jat-sau on the inside of the opposite arm and that’s not going to jerk their second punch straight into you before you can do the rest? Who’s gonna stand there like that and let you circle their hand around, step out, slap it away and hit them?
We have a somewhat similar hyun/jam action in the dummy form we were just discussing on the Wu-sau thread, keeping the elbow down and all that partially for the reason you were explaining… but it’s a recovery from being on the wrong side if we even end up there, which we shouldn’t. And the hyun-sau spins them and the jam-sau is the strike right away, in one beat. There’s no time for 4 things against a single punch. The jat-sau + che-jeung that sometimes follows in the dummy form may be a second response if they raise that arm again, but really none of it is a set sequence with 4 things in response to a single punch as you do.
Not only do you intentionally go to the wrong side, but you do it with a jat-sau and then follow up with 3 more things as if the jat-sau has no effect, where likely it’ll help pull them in as they keep coming with the second punch and more.
Why? You do anything to get to the blind side, even it means trying to get to the outside of a round punch? The jat-sau should be all you can get out of that and it’s helping the opponent more than anything.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1207645]Fuk-sau is a suppressing energy concept,.[/QUOTE]
I agree on the whole but explain suppressing energy concept??
Let’s do some image snapping.
Is this not the image in the Wing Chun Dictionary entry for “Chasing Hands”?
I wouldn’t want to find myself in such a position, especially not intentionally thinking it is good and I’m gonna pull off a few more moves before the next hand comes.
[QUOTE=Graham H;1207646]I agree on the whole but explain suppressing energy concept??[/QUOTE]
Think of how we use the jam-sau/ punch suppressing the opponent’s arm to cut the line. Elbow. That’s the fuk-sau concept as I know it, anyway. Suppressing energy is my translation/interpretation.
[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;1207638]My teachings are based on my having competed many times so I do know what will work against a resisting opponent. Btw, I’m demonstrating in those clips for my for students. What you think doesn’t really matter to me. I train fighters even now. And I can still fight with what I teach. Who ever said I had unmatched chi sao skills? You made that up on your own. LOL[/QUOTE]
Phil, i was being sarcastic and having a shot at Graham and Kevin
[QUOTE=GlennR;1207649]Phil, i was being sarcastic and having a shot at Graham and Kevin[/QUOTE]
A cyber shot that is. You’d be in trouble if it was a proper one poppet!
[QUOTE=LFJ;1207648]Think of how we use the jam-sau/ punch suppressing the opponent’s arm to cut the line. Elbow. That’s the fuk-sau concept as I know it, anyway. Suppressing energy is my translation/interpretation.[/QUOTE]
Ok I agree if that’s your interpretation but suppressing to me assumes contact has been made. I know a lot of people use arm contact to explain fook sau. Its wrong IMO. The elbow position/punching action derived from the fook sau concept should be the same regardless of whether there are obstacles in the way or not. I don’t like anything that suggests arms are glue together or contact has to be made for it to be Ving Tsun. Sticky Arms is a visual description and not that we should be stuck on arms in sparring.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1207647]Let’s do some image snapping.
Is this not the image in the Wing Chun Dictionary entry for “Chasing Hands”?
I wouldn’t want to find myself in such a position, especially not intentionally thinking it is good and I’m gonna pull off a few more moves before the next hand comes.
[/QUOTE]
We try and train these mistakes away in our system and aspire to correct those errors.
[QUOTE=Graham H;1207653]Ok I agree if that’s your interpretation but suppressing to me assumes contact has been made. I know a lot of people use arm contact to explain fook sau. Its wrong IMO. The elbow position/punching action derived from the fook sau concept should be the same regardless of whether there are obstacles in the way or not.[/QUOTE]
Right. It is the same. I call it a suppressing energy because that is the effect when met with an obstacle, and the meaning of the word fuk is to subdue.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1207655]Right. It is the same. I call it a suppressing energy because that is the effect when met with an obstacle, and the meaning of the word fuk is to subdue.[/QUOTE]
Gone are the days where I abide by the exact translations of Chinese into English. In Wing Chun, Fook/Fuk Sau seems to have many different translations even between Cantonese speakers.
I prefer to say the action of Fook Sau trains the elbow for the punch. Better for me that way.
Its the same for Bong and Tan. Most say Wing Arm and Palm up facing blocksc don’t they? Some say spreading arm deflection or Bong being the bone that connects the elbow to the shoulder. There are many more from lineage to lineage. You can see why we have so many versions.
I say elbow rotation (Bong) and Tan trains the punch. Simples.
[QUOTE=Graham H;1207656]I prefer to say the action of Fook Sau trains the elbow for the punch…
…and Tan trains the punch. Simples.[/QUOTE]
The problem with that is it makes fuk and taan sound like the same energy. They have different effects and are applied in different situations, sometimes to defeat the other. Different concepts require different interpretations, although in person there’s of course one quick way to clarify.