# The Bast@&D Son of WING CHUN has returned...



## graychuan (Sep 2, 2010)

No lineage, No Sifu....No Problem!

Questions, comments or insults are welcome!

SLT drills 1

SLT drills 2

SLT drills 3


----------



## wtxs (Sep 2, 2010)

graychuan said:


> No lineage, No Sifu....No Problem!
> 
> Questions, comments or insults are welcome!
> 
> ...



Since you said "Questions, comments or insults are welcome!"

So here we go ...

Granted what is been presented are training drills, but if we were to follow the maxim "Train the way you had to fight, or you will fight the way you've been trained".

I could very well be mistaken, just MHO, the pak sao in drill 1 had more of an semi circle parry element (also too close to the wrist), gives rise to a chance of an redirected attack due to lack of checking/control of the arm ... counter attack such as the second half of the lop sao technique.  Should it not be an forward driving pak to the arm and angles toward their center?  Imparting your forward momentum/force on the attacking limb, redirecting the attack and providing you a temporary pin/trap across their body for quick counters.  When time and done right, it disrupts their balance/structure caused by the turning of their upper torso enough that they scramble to recover in order to address you counter attack.


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 2, 2010)

graychuan said:


> No lineage, No Sifu....No Problem!
> 
> Questions, comments or insults are welcome!


 
No lineage, no Sifu, no problem = Not Wing Chun, period.

The drills have some semblance to Wing Chun, but missing a lot of things. You wouldn't by chance be training with coffeerox, or following his idea of instruction . . . . . . . . ONLINE Training?

No wait, I got it. You were hiding outside a Wing Chun school's closed window (like Chan Wah Shun) watching sifu teach class but couldn't hear what he said. So you copied the movements as best you could trying to learn Wing Chun.

You should have paid a few dollars to join the class and get the real thing.


----------



## WC_lun (Sep 2, 2010)

I looked at the elbows and knew this is not Wing Chun.


----------



## Danny T (Sep 2, 2010)

Looks like two beginner participants attempting to work drills they may have seen or were introduced to but don't really know what or how to do them.

From what is shown in these videos, If this is an instructor: hmm!


----------



## profesormental (Sep 3, 2010)

Greetings.

Those look like basic drills done at basic levels.

They can be evolved to higher levels.

Not enough for me to formulate any kind of opinion though.

Hope that helps.

Juan Mercado

P.S. Basic drills never really impress anyone. One time, a guy came to my school, and we were doing very basic drills. He left with the opinion that we didn't know sheet.

Had he come at another stage of practice, then it would've been a different matter...


----------



## cwk (Sep 3, 2010)

they shouldn't be slapping the wrist to the side when doing the pak sao drill.
The pak should be going forward towards the centre and make contact further up the arm. Doing it properly doesn't just teach you hand eye co-ordination, like everything else in wing chun, it comes down to structure and relaxation. if you pak to the centre and you're tense you find yourself getting knocked about by the returning energy. Relax and the pak should affect your partners structure instead. The ammount of tension in your partners punch will directly correlate to how much you effect his structure with your pak, so this drill is good for teaching relaxation for both sides.


----------



## Domino (Sep 3, 2010)

Different in all lineage and not flaming, but 'Wu sau' drill shows no wu sau and the 'Lop sau' drill shows no sticky.


----------



## l_uk3y (Sep 3, 2010)

I don't like to walk negatively about other peoples styles or clubs. However the techniques here seem to be more resembling WC then actual Wing Chun.

I.e   I am seeing the techniques. But i'm not seeing the structure holding them together.

Luke


----------



## geezer (Sep 3, 2010)

Chris, didn't you post here frequently a while back? Anyway, how about a little background as to where you are coming from and what you are trying to do with this material.


----------



## WC_lun (Sep 3, 2010)

profesormental said:


> Greetings.
> 
> Those look like basic drills done at basic levels.
> 
> ...


 
This is true and drills have to be introduced to a beginner at a level they can relate to it.  I just have trouble believing a person would purposely go through the trouble of filming and posting a drill that violated all kinds of Wing Chun principles and concepts.  It is more likly in my mind that they believed it to be something it was not.


----------



## wtxs (Sep 3, 2010)

CWK - Thanks for your additional post about the forward driving pak toward the center, for we both seen the same flaws ... possible we may think alike.


----------



## wtxs (Sep 3, 2010)

zepedawingchun said:


> No lineage, no Sifu, no problem = Not Wing Chun, period.
> 
> The drills have some semblance to Wing Chun, but missing a lot of things. *You wouldn't by chance be training with coffeerox, or following his idea of instruction . . . . . . . . ONLINE Training?*
> 
> ...



Do we rally need to go there?  



graychuan said:


> No lineage, No Sifu....No Problem!
> 
> Questions, comments or insults are welcome!
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is2B76uRVj8



However he did say insults are welcome, but to go so far as to equate him to Coffeerox is a bit much IMHO.


----------



## geezer (Sep 3, 2010)

_WTXS,_ I agree with your last comment. My impression is that _Graychuan_ _does_ actually have a WC background and _is_ genuinely interested in feedback. Also, I can't help but wonder if you come from a WT branch, judging both from your "user-name" and your discussion of pak-sau... sounding very much like the compact, forward-thrusting pak-sau used in WT "lat-sau" drills.


----------



## matsu (Sep 3, 2010)

geezer said:


> Chris, didn't you post here frequently a while back? Anyway, how about a little background as to where you are coming from and what you are trying to do with this material.


 
i think this is the way this thread should go forward!
so mr graychuan answer this for us please.

i used to like the threads u used to post up. i enjoyed sifu rahams vids... are you still associated there?
etc etc
matsu


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 3, 2010)

wtxs said:


> Do we rally need to go there?
> 
> 
> 
> However he did say insults are welcome, but to go so far as to equate him to Coffeerox is a bit much IMHO.


 
Oh sure, go ahead and flame me for teasing him. (J/K)  He asked for it.


----------



## wtxs (Sep 3, 2010)

geezer said:


> _WTXS,_ I agree with your last comment. My impression is that _Graychuan_ _does_ actually have a WC background and _is_ genuinely interested in feedback. Also, I can't help but wonder if you come from a WT branch, judging both from your "user-name" and your discussion of pak-sau... sounding very much like the compact, forward-thrusting pak-sau used in WT "lat-sau" drills.



You're right about Graychuan, he listed WC in his profile.

My user name is actually the letters of the company which I work for out here in west Texas.

I have no claims or ties to any WC branch/lineage, pick up WC and some snake style while I was stationed in the Phillipines back in early 70"s.  On occasions during my air force career I happened across a few chunners.  Currently I'm still training and sharing what I know with an small martial group here ... have folks trained in Tai Chi, Baugwa, JKD, Karate, Escrima and so on.

As penned by Graychun, you can say I"m or could be an bastard son of WC.  And I'm also guilty of being an self trainner.:lol:


----------



## wtxs (Sep 3, 2010)

zepedawingchun said:


> Oh sure, go ahead and flame me for teasing him. (J/K)  He asked for it.



OK Zepe ... I'll forgive you this time :mst:.  Now give me one thousand chain punches with alternating shuffles steps!:whip1::whip1: 

And Keep those elbows in!:whip1::whip1:


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 4, 2010)

wtxs said:


> OK Zepe ... I'll forgive you this time :mst:. Now give me one thousand chain punches with alternating shuffles steps!:whip1::whip1:
> 
> And Keep those elbows in!:whip1::whip1:


 
Oh man, piece of cake.  I can do that in my sleep.  Make it a little more difficult, okay?


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 5, 2010)

geezer said:


> Chris, didn't you post here frequently a while back? Anyway, how about a little background as to where you are coming from and what you are trying to do with this material.




Geezer, Graychuan is from the Lousville Wing Chun under Sifu Ali Rahim of the Woo Fai Chang Wing Chun branch.  I have seen many of their videos and would personally LOVE to train there if I was local to them.  Sifu Rahim is from Detroit, MI.  That is the last i knew of Graychuan unless something had changed in his Martial Talk hiatus.

Graychuan has contributed more to this forum than many questioning him here IMVHO.  Not an insult to those, just an FYI.


----------



## matsu (Sep 6, 2010)

hi mate.
dont think anyone is having apop at graychuan.
i always really enjoyed his participation when i first joined here.
and the vids he has posted are def not as wing chun as i remember him so i guess we are all being nosey lol.
sifu rahim had some cool vids.cant find them anymore.
matsu


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 6, 2010)

matsu said:


> hi mate.
> dont think anyone is having apop at graychuan.
> i always really enjoyed his participation when i first joined here.
> and the vids he has posted are def not as wing chun as i remember him so i guess we are all being nosey lol.
> ...




I hear you Matsu.  Some posts had a tone of "who do you think you are..." the way I read them.


----------



## graychuan (Sep 6, 2010)

Gentlemen...

   Greetings and good blessings to all of you who responded so far. It is good to see a couple of you have remembered me since I have been off the forum for a while. For the last two years I have been finishing a Bachelors degree, completing a masters in Shaolin Kempo Karate (which I think all should make a mental note when considering ANY input I contribute regarding any art other than) and although I did study formally for 3.5 years I have fallen out of grace and no longer associate with them. Which is a shame because it was the best martial arts I had ever been exposed to yet. As they say though- nothing good comes without a price. My experience with WC has been bittersweet. I got myself savy(I thought) in all the nonsensical my lineage your lineage trifles but I came home from work one day and found myself in the middle of a Shaw Brothers movie. Water under the bridge.

Thus the Bastard Son of Wing Chun was born. 


  Anyway, in an effort to continue my own training and development I have had to invest in training partners. Thus I started a training club of people that I could bring along, introduce them to the art and continue my own training. Some of these I have known more than 15 years. Only the first video shows one of these pals. We claim no line. It is better to be a Bastard than to get these guys involved in what I was. They agree. It is also my hope that for me to come on here and put myself to the block then any of the active members for this forum would see that I am sincerely open to real discussion about WC. Besides...what does the bastard care what others say, right?

I was hoping for more commentary on the dummy drills actually but no problem. Now I try to not make any excuses so I will lay it down as it was. My friends in Logan county are all Kempokan as well. Save one but this is all the info you need to know about these private citizens.  These were very basic drills to a group whom has never practiced the art and since they live several hours away I dont see them often. 

  This clip was a short demo of 4 basic drills that were practiced on a 5ft5in 145-155lb 19 year old by a 275lbs 6ft1 37 yrold grown man. Other than this I dont really see how you are so privy to the contact and energies involved just based on the clip. As for the elbows...I also disagree. A fist-width from the body or a little more depending on your unique body. Now I welcome any discussion about asking energy or structure or all that in due time. 
  All that more than one dimension circle parry element stuff?!? whats that, man?!?:eye-popping: Its his first time doing the drill. Besides, how are you able to see all that on a 2 dimensional screen. Any real wing chun is about energies anyway. In any drill its important to keep it simple. Its important to know what you are doing and why you are doing it. SLT is not just a form its a training method in of itself. But thats your input and thats cool. My group uses this basic pak-sao drill as a Timing drill. Granted it could be used for other things. 

   As far as structure goes...well my guy was doing these drills for the first time. sorry hes not a 15 minute WSL. As for mine....no worrys, no hurts, no offense. Ill just say I disagree. My full intention is to submit more clips of my training and get more input from all you active guys in here and to respectfully contribute anything I can. 
   Zepeda, cant wait to read what you have to contribute.


----------



## matsu (Sep 7, 2010)

hi chris
i think you would have had a different reaction if you had explained yourself first and given us a bit of background rather than putting it up there for peeps to have a guess and critique.
it is almost as tho you are looking for a heated debate lol:angel:
-i think geezer actually asked exactly that( and i echoed it)
i can understand how difficult it must be to find training partners but for my own progression i would just hate not having someone more advanced than me to learn from and stretch me in my skill.
i think the guys you videoed were very "brave" allowing you to record them at this very raw stage so kudos to them

but i think if we are basing it on wing chun principles,it is still lacking!
and from a video i think you can still see wether something has substance.
for example-
in the 1st drill the punches were never gong to connect so we wouldnt have bothered with them we are taught to just punch through that sort of attack.
i am very much a beginner graychuan so i cannot comment on much but i look forward to your posts,as i have always done!
matsu


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 7, 2010)

How ya going Graychuan you old bastard. 
I've just watched your clips and these were some things that I noticed.
The Pak Sau drill was ok , I don't subscribe to the one Pak Sau fits all approach.

I can use my parry to drive forwards and collapse the structure if it is weak .
But I can also elect to parry the arm to the side , parry the arm upwards , or parry the arm down as is the case with the Chum Kiu parry.

The main point is that whichever you decide to use , that the force is generated from the elbow and out through the heel of your palm in line with your forearm.

Other than that it could have been a little bit more tidy and economical , but as you said the kid is a beginner  and tell the kid to sink his weight down if he wants to be able to stand his ground with a man mountain like you.

With Lap Sau try to maintain contact with the pivot point on his arm right through the whole cycle from punch to low Bong.

As you went from low Bong to punch you were losing contact with his arm which means you are not keeping continuous forward force on him and keeping pressure on his structure.

I also noticed that you were latching down only with your forearm , keep the angle in your arm and sink the arm from the elbow , this uses the mass of the whole arm and engages the big back muscles and makes for a much more powerful and efficient latch.

With the dummy I can't comment too much as there were some movements there that were unfamiliar to my lineage.
But I will say that I would stop doing that inside Tan Sau and punching around the arm with your other hand.

Stand off to the side of one arm pierce on the outside of the arm and still let your punch go through the centreline , rather than standing in front of both arms and trying to punch around the dummy arm.

Maybe try raising your guard on the inside of the dummy slightly piercing forward both hands from the elbow so that the dummy is jolted backwards and let your forward arm turn into Tan Sau and pierce through.

Another thing I will say is to try and keep in more contact with the arms of the dummy using economy of movement as you flow around the arms  from one technique to the next , try to minimise the time that you are out of contact with the arms of the dummy.

Just let your arms pivot around the arms of the dummy so that the dummy arms are always being controlled , and try to project your elbow force into the dummy.

Those were the things that caught my eye and as such they are seen through the filter of my lineage so you can take them for what they are worth.


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 7, 2010)

graychuan said:


> Zepeda, can&#8217;t wait to read what you have to contribute.


 
Mook Jong man, Matsu, and everyone else has pretty much said it all.

However, my contention with lineage is always important. There are too many Wing Chun qwacks out there teaching incorrectly. It's nice to know where someone comes from so you can at least get an idea of what to expect when it comes to knowledge. It doesn't mean you have the skill, but at least legitimacy is established. I'm proud to let you know with whom I've trained and studied with. And you should be too if you are genuine and sincere. Then any input you have is respected. I may not agree with it, but I'll respect it.


----------



## matsu (Sep 7, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> How ya going Graychuan you old bastard.
> I've just watched your clips and these were some things that I noticed.
> The Pak Sau drill was ok , I don't subscribe to the one Pak Sau fits all approach.
> 
> ...


 
dammit.... just re read this and its stuff like this that makes me wanna emigrate just to train you mr mooooook!
matsu


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 7, 2010)

matsu said:


> dammit.... just re read this and its stuff like this that makes me wanna emigrate *just to train you mr mooooook*!
> matsu


 
I would consider it an honour to become your disciple and be trained by you  Matsu.    :asian:


----------



## Poor Uke (Sep 7, 2010)

Howdee,

i though the drills were OK. A little static for my liking but you did point out that they were beginners drills.

As for the dummy work, well mook kinda covered most of what I was gonna say. Except maybe start thinking about being off at an angle to the dummy and having to move into an effective position or finding techs that work from the position you are in.

I now this is all SLT stuff and hence the static stance (some evidenceof turning but not done well IMO) but not always being face on can add to your training.

Hope that helps.....


----------



## matsu (Sep 7, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> I would consider it an honour to become your disciple and be trained by you Matsu. :asian:


 
omg oops i really did mean train *with...with with with* you. be taught by you lol
what a day.. its been mental here at work. 13hrs and it means i cant train tonight either damn damn
sorry off topic
matsu


----------



## graychuan (Sep 7, 2010)

wtxs said:


> Since you said "Questions, comments or insults are welcome!"
> 
> So here we go ...
> 
> I could very well be mistaken, just MHO, the pak sao in drill 1 had more of an semi circle parry element (also too close to the wrist), gives rise to a chance of an redirected attack due to lack of checking/control of the arm ... counter attack such as the second half of the lop sao technique.  *Should it not be an forward driving pak to the arm and angles toward their center?  Imparting your forward momentum/force on the attacking limb, redirecting the attack and providing you a temporary pin/trap across their body for quick counters.  *When time and done right, it disrupts their balance/structure caused by the turning of their upper torso enough that they scramble to recover in order to address you counter attack.





   I find this post, especially the bold part, to be of particular concern. I am wondering which one or both of us you are referring to.  If you look at basically all the drills you will see this guy bounce back off my structure for at least the first half of each drill if not all. Why is he bouncing back if his motherline is not being attacked? Though I outweigh him Im still shaking his whole structure. This is clearly seen. Later he relaxed and I also supplemented the drill to keep him going. So I understand your example and you are right in that context but it is clear here that he is being shown the right way but there is consideration in the fact that this was his very first Wing Chun lesson.
 Just my opinion. 
This was a good question and EXACTLY the kind of stuff I'm looking for. So thank you.


----------



## graychuan (Sep 7, 2010)

l_uk3y said:


> I don't like to walk negatively about other peoples styles or clubs. However the techniques here seem to be more resembling WC then actual Wing Chun.
> 
> *I.e   I am seeing the techniques. But i'm not seeing the structure holding them together.*
> 
> Luke



And why do we use structure? So we can channel the energy properly with minimal muscular force and as much sensitivity as possible. Therefore structure is something felt and  not seen anyway. Now this doesn't mean that people can just get away with anything! Obvious deviations are obvious deviations! But if structure is used properly...you will see very little movement when on the defensive. The attacks are what the eyes catch the most, but its the subtle structure that stops them.
  Now I think this is a good point to take this particular discussion into a moment where we define what out respective ideas of proper Wing Chun structure actually is and then this can get really good.

Another excellent exchange. Looking forward to more. Thank you.


----------



## graychuan (Sep 7, 2010)

dungeonworks said:


> I hear you Matsu.  Some posts had a tone of "who do you think you are..." the way I read them.




I am The Bastard Son! :mst:


----------



## graychuan (Sep 7, 2010)

matsu said:


> but i think if we are basing it on wing chun principles,it is still lacking!
> and from a video i think you can still see wether something has substance.
> for example-*
> in the 1st drill the punches were never gong to connect so we wouldnt have bothered with them we are taught to just punch through that sort of attack.*
> ...



This is the only part of the statement I disagree with. Again, not trying to knock your level of practice(We are all beginners as far as Im concerned. Myself more so than others.), but I just don't see how you can see energy in a video. Especially since no advanced level of drilling or technique was shown. Just basic drills. It is because of my training and what I understand about Wing Chun that prompts me to make this statement, ' you cant see energy only feel it'. its nothing we all haven't heard before. This is all.
 I think Juan made the best assessment based on what was shown. 

This is fun, gentleman.


----------



## matsu (Sep 7, 2010)

Glad ur having fun mate. Welcome back lol
to disagree is to continue the debate. 
Perhaps energy is the wrong word so I'll use 'intention' 
matsu


----------



## graychuan (Sep 7, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> *With the dummy I can't comment too much as there were some movements there that were unfamiliar to my lineage.*
> But I will say that *I would stop doing that inside Tan Sau and punching around the arm with your other hand.*



This here, especially the bold part is of high importance. Im sure I dont need to remind anyone that a Wooden man is not a physical representation of an opponent but an energetic one. 
 Now we all know that the hand is faster than the eye. Professional baseball pitcher, Magicians, Sharp shooters all bank on this fact. That being the case then if one relies on eyes to track a hand to hand attack then eventually your eyes will fall behind. But your own hands wont. Especially if you use bridge contact and sensitivity channeled through a proper structure to deal with the incoming energy(attack). Your eyes become almost irrelevant. this is why we see a many blindfolded chi sao videos and demos.

  As for this particular technique....it is one of my bread and butter ones. I am not punching 'around' the arm. I am using bridge contact and bridgewalking to take the space offensively on that arm and at the same time I am using 'chum'(sinking energy) with the tan sao on the inside to control the other arm. BOTH sides of my triangle are attacking structure, sinking, and scoreing. Double Arm Control is the concept that applies. Now stepping outside of the center is not incorrect, we do it often in the Muk Yan Jeong. But we also work on the inside as much as the out. But this was not the form. This was a drill. It will make more sense once I post me doing it on an actual attacking opponent. 
  However, in moving to the outside many find themselves 'flanking' and mostly only dealing with one arm. Flanking works and Im not knocking it ,BUT why do we do Chi Sao?  And my personal opinion is if you are not controlling both arms then you have not fully realized the potential of Wing Chun. So although you describe the _physica_l appearance of the clip accurately, the actual ENERGY that was manifested remains unseen. 
Later, as I bring my guys along (and as long as they are comfortable with it) we will demonstrate. 

  Now This was one heluva exchange! Thanks, Mook!






mook jong man said:


> *Another thing I will say is to try and keep in more contact with the arms of the dummy using economy of movement as you flow around the arms  from one technique to the next , try to minimise the time that you are out of contact with the arms of the dummy.
> 
> Just let your arms pivot around the arms of the dummy so that the dummy arms are always being controlled , and try to project your elbow force into the dummy.*



THIS I completely dig! Thank you. I bet this has a lot to do with sensitivity which I am sure we will talk a lot.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 7, 2010)

graychuan said:


> _*As for this particular technique....it is one of my bread and butter ones. I am not punching 'around' the arm. I am using bridge contact and bridgewalking to take the space offensively on that arm and at the same time I am using 'chum'(sinking energy) with the tan sao on the inside to control the other arm. BOTH sides of my triangle are attacking structure, sinking, and scoreing.*_


 
Ok , I can understand that.
Essentially what you are doing is what we call a "Chark Jong" technique (smashing defences).
That is using two hands to control and penetrate the guard of the opponent.

I think you can make that technique more effective by using a Tan Sau on your outside hand as well so that you are using two Tan Sau's.
 I believe it has a greater ability to pierce and displace than anything else.

It depends greatly on the position of the opponents hands but my preferred option is always to try and get both hands on the inside so that I have the " inside running " so to speak and can both penetrate the guard and uproot the person out of their stance.

I think if at all possible its probably better you practice "Chark Jong" techniques on a person rather than the dummy , the dummys arms do not move a great deal so you always will be stuck with one arm out to accommodate that rather than having the minimal movement from your guard and centreline to the point where you intercept the opponents wrists.


----------



## wtxs (Sep 8, 2010)

graychuan said:


> I find this post, especially the bold part, to be of particular concern. I am wondering which one or both of us you are referring to.  If you look at basically all the drills you will see this guy bounce back off my structure for at least the first half of each drill if not all. Why is he bouncing back if his motherline is not being attacked? Though I outweigh him Im still shaking his whole structure. This is clearly seen. Later he relaxed and I also supplemented the drill to keep him going. So I understand your example and you are right in that context but it is clear here that he is being shown the right way but there is consideration in the fact that this was his very first Wing Chun lesson.
> Just my opinion.
> This was a good question and EXACTLY the kind of stuff I'm looking for. So thank you.



Thanks for the kind respond. I have high respect for you in sticking your neck out there and hope the axe don't fall.   

Going over the the video again, those aging eyes of mine are not what they used to be.  As in the execution phase, I see the first half of the forward driving pak in contact, but failed to see it made contact with therefore control the forearm/elbow, causing the attacking arm to be driven  across or down & across the body before the pak is cycled back.  

Different strokes for different folks (lineage). I was taught to quickly drive the pak forward and aims towards the inner defense zone/center (before rotation of hands) when drilling face to face or side advancing, to effect the end result as I had posted.

Hope this don't muddle things up a little bite more, I'm not well versed in explaining myself at times.


----------



## graychuan (Sep 9, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> I think you can make that technique more effective by using a Tan Sau on your outside hand as well so that you are using two Tan Sau's.
> I believe it has a greater ability to pierce and displace than anything else.
> 
> It depends greatly on the position of the opponents hands but my preferred option is always to try and get both hands on the inside so that I have the " inside running " so to speak and can both penetrate the guard and uproot the person out of their stance.



NOW I see what you are getting at. I have never heard the term 'Chark Jong'.  This is a new one to me. I get what you are saying but ultimately its something I would have to feel. Same as with these drills. The only thing about the double tan sao is that Im in the habit of having attack AND defense at the same time at all times. But of course there are always exceptions.... such as a bong & wu.


----------



## graychuan (Sep 9, 2010)

wtxs said:


> ... I was taught to quickly drive the pak forward and *aims towards the inner defense zone/center (before rotation of hands)* when drilling face to face or side advancing, to effect the end result as I had posted.



Im right with you here now. Funny thing is I had shown them this very thing just before we started practicing the drill. Your example was right on. I even did it with eyes closed to see if he could still stop my attack just to show the timing element. Ill do a clip of this the next time we get together. Its not magic...we all have or can get this skill... if you haven't already.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 10, 2010)

graychuan said:


> NOW I see what you are getting at. I have never heard the term 'Chark Jong'. This is a new one to me. I get what you are saying but ultimately its something I would have to feel. Same as with these drills. The only thing about the *double tan sao is that Im in the habit of having attack AND defense at the same time at all times.* But of course there are always exceptions.... such as a bong & wu.


 

 Generally speaking in most cases you would use the double Tan Sau on the *outside* of both his hands to simultaneously trap and strike through , in training we usually strike through with both fists to the chest. 

 But if it was for real you could strike the face or pierce through to both sides of his throat then jerk down on his arms with a double Jut Sau and low heel kick and then finish with a double palm strike.

In the configuration that your doing with one hand on the inside and one hand on the outside you can do exactly the same technique except one Tan is on the inside piercing through and the other Tan is on the outside of his wrist piercing through.

Due to the angles of his arms and whether they are tense or relaxed etc either both your hands will strike through or it may only be one , the difference is that we can't do the double Jut Sau because one arm is inside his arm.

But what I can do is with the hand that was on the outside I now drop my whole forearm down horizontally (_like one half of a Lan Sau that just drops_ _straight down_) ,trapping both his hands as I disengage my inside hand from underneath and hit him again or elbow strike.


----------



## graychuan (Sep 10, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> Generally speaking in most cases you would use the double Tan Sau on the *outside* of both his hands to simultaneously trap and strike through , in training we usually strike through with both fists to the chest.




This is where we will have some difficulty I believe. When you speak of using TanSao's on the outside of the arm it seems, from the context you provided, that you are using the pinky finger side of your forearms. This is where we have a difference.
  In the the wing chun that I practice, that movement is called a Garm Sao(forearm chopping/cutting hand). We do not refer to this movement as a Tan because although the 'posture' may be the same the energy and supporting structure is not. Bridge contact on the thumb side with the palm up is our definition of the Tan Sao.
 Now, This is not just some arbitrary definition that I decided to use. Anyone who has an idea of the concept of the 'Three Treasures(or Families) of Wing Chun' will have an idea of what Im talking about. The Tan,Bong and Fook are VERY specific in how they are defined. In Chi Sao or a fight...The bridge contact may not always be as definite though. So any Tan-like contact is dealt with with Tan energy. Any Bong-like bridge contact is dealt with with bong energy, and Fook-like Contact is dealt with with Fook Sao energy and structure. ALL bridge contact will happen on the Ulna(pinky side of the forearm), Raduis( thumb side), or the Fook(fleshy space in between the radius and ulna). Sometimes the bridge contact is a combination of any two and transitions between all three in the flurry of a fight or chi-sao techniques. Sensitivity and structure off of bridge contact is what tells you which 'sao' to use.
  If anyone wants to follow up on this and not wait for one of my wonderful videos(lmao) I suggest you look on the website of Augusten Fong and you will fine a series of awesome articles co-written by Master Fong and one of his veteran students, Joy Chaduri (Im almost positive I didn't spell Joy's last name correctly). Although they have written about this concept and published it to their website my original training included these skills. *However  I claim no affiliation, certification, or connection to Master Fong's club. They have put the info on their site for free for anyone with internet access to read. *It is wonderful information. It has been a while since I visited the site but Im sure good information always has a page on this site. I wouldn't expect anything less for a credible WC Sifu.

All this being said though, I completely understand the technique you are describing. I just have a different terminology or nomenclature for the moves maybe?


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 10, 2010)

graychuan said:


> This is where we will have some difficulty I believe. When you speak of using TanSao's on the outside of the arm it seems, from the context you provided, that you are using the pinky finger side of your forearms. This is where we have a difference.
> In the the wing chun that I practice, that movement is called a Garm Sao(forearm chopping/cutting hand). We do not refer to this movement as a Tan because although the 'posture' may be the same the energy and supporting structure is not. *Bridge contact on the thumb side with the palm up is our definition of the Tan Sao.*


 
That is interesting , in our lineage a Tan Sau is just a Tan Sau , it doesn't matter if I pierce through on the inside of his arm with the thumb side of my hand, or use it to deflect his straight punch on the outside of his wrist with the pinky side of my Tan , the intent is exactly the same we are maintaining the angle on contact deflecting the punch and striking through.

The main benefit of using the pinky finger side of the Tan Sau on the outside of his wrist is that after I have struck through or in the case of his force being too great for me to get through I simply convert my Tan Sau to a *cut down* to force his arm down , trapping his arm and clearing the path for striking with my other hand.

But this really depends on what he is giving you , if the punch is coming straight down the centreline I will *counterpierce *on the outside of his wrist , but if there is a slight deviation off the centreline then I will use my Tan on the inside of his arm as you do.

In our lineage unlike the Tan Sau which pierces in a forward direction , the Garn Sau in our system rises in an upward direction until the fingertips are head height and the forearm rotates until it is diagonal .


----------



## wtxs (Sep 10, 2010)

graychuan said:


> Im right with you here now. Funny thing is I had shown them this very thing just before we started practicing the drill. Your example was right on. I even did it with eyes closed to see if he could still stop my attack just to show the timing element. Ill do a clip of this the next time we get together. Its not magic...we all have or can get this skill... if you haven't already.




:asian::asian::asian:


----------



## wtxs (Sep 10, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> That is interesting , in our lineage a Tan Sau is just a Tan Sau , it doesn't matter if I pierce through on the inside of his arm with the thumb side of my hand, or use it to deflect his straight punch on the outside of his wrist with the *pinky side of* my *Tan* , the intent is exactly the same we are maintaining the angle on contact deflecting the punch and striking through.



Now that's what I would called an bastard son of WC.:lol:

Mook is also correct in the dual applications of the Tan Sau, same be applied to the Bong, Huen ...etc.  It all follows the :yinyangrinciple.
What do you mean "dual applications"?  Quoting an saying from another forum ... "We need to empty our minds, so it can begin to be refilled again." :bangahead:


----------



## profesormental (Sep 12, 2010)

Greetings Mr. Gray.

Good to read you again, and I'm glad you have survived adversity as to continue your growth and training. Sheet Happens, you know...

And similarly to you, I consider myself a Wing Chun "Mutt".

As I'm sure you know, your discussions here will propel you to new discoveries and paths that otherwise would be closed off, even though it is written word, and not direct instruction.

Thus I am happy that you have returned, and if I can be of help in anything, including asking and/or answering questions, let me know. I'm open to even chatting a bit on the phone with anyone here on the forums, given enough time to open a slot of time. As I've been told here on the forum, I'm known as King Night Owl too... 

I'm moving away from a lot of the specific Wing Chun terminology for english/spanish terminology and using the basic notions for informal reference while smashing people, I mean, teaching.

For example, Tan Sao can have applications and even different PATHS of ACTION that end up in the Tan Sao position, yet the forces and energies are in different directions and purposes.

As said, you can have it Thrusting forward, Sliding inward, Chopping inward, etc. Each has a SPECIFIC PATH and points of reference that HAVE to be passed in order to achieve maximal power, stability, strength, force and energy. This is easily verified.

We call those points of reference, as in a book, Indexed Positions.

Thus basic drills must evolve to more sophisticated drills that ingrain skills for specific application stimulus to be effective.

My question is the following:

What are specific evolutions of the drills presented in the videos that teach effective defenses and martial actions against full force strikes with intent to do harm? (please specify the specific attack and defense scenarios for clarity.)

I think this is the best way to actually be able to judge the effectiveness of the drills. Also, it is the only way to efficiently find ways to improve them for efficiency.

Hope that helps.

Juan Mercado
Wing Chun Mutt
El Sato del Wing Chun (in Spanish, we call mutts "satos". And everyone knows mutts don't get sick, and survive anything, and last longer than any "purebreed", because they survive the streets and adapt to anything.    )


----------



## matsu (Sep 12, 2010)

*proff mental says*
*My question is the following:

What are specific evolutions of the drills presented in the videos that teach effective defenses and martial actions against full force strikes with intent to do harm? (please specify the specific attack and defense scenarios for clarity.)

I think this is the best way to actually be able to judge the effectiveness of the drills. Also, it is the only way to efficiently find ways to improve them for efficiency.
*
this is a really insightful question that will develop this thread further.....
i think if graychuan had presented his vids in a more informative way
we could have got to the nitty gritty of the discussion quicker and without the "debate".... 
but methinks mr graychuan has the devil in him and is enjoying the cut and thrust of the differences of opinions *LOL!*

*and i will repeat myself......*the guys on vid desree some kudos-no way would have i allowed myself to been recorded at such an infant stage of my training.
matsu


----------



## graychuan (Sep 13, 2010)

matsu said:


> *proff mental says*
> 
> *and i will repeat myself......*the guys on vid desree some kudos-no way would have i allowed myself to been recorded at such an infant stage of my training.
> matsu



Thanks. Im sure they appreciate it. Their motivation was the fact that I dont see them very often and they needed a reference for the basics to practice. As far as the cut and thrust of debate. You got me there as well. I just hope that so far I have not offended anyone.:ultracool

 I also sincerly see your point about the way I came back into the forum. But from earlier times there were some who knew me and my training background. I just wanted to get the whole 'no sifu' thing out of the way because I can not rightly or honorably claim any. I guess you can take the Chunna out of the kwoon but not the knoon out of the Chunna. 

 Last thing I'd like to contribute is regarding a couple of earlier posts. Its clear that we understand the techniques involved on the Tan Sao thing. We all know the significance of using the thumb or pinky side of the wrist. I would like it to be clear that in my particular training we differentiate between the two as a Tan Sao and a Garm Sao respectively, and that it was not something that I just pulled out of my ****. Thats all. I think it will make it easier to discuss other techniques among the forum. Now that I know how you guys distinguish them, we now know each other better and we have moved right along. Thanks.


----------



## geezer (Sep 13, 2010)

graychuan said:


> ...and a Garm Sao respectively, and that it was not something *that I just pulled out of my *****...


 
Well thank god for that! (Ouch!)


----------



## graychuan (Sep 13, 2010)

LMAO @ the Geez!


----------



## matsu (Sep 16, 2010)

i doubt anyone had taken offence after the past few months lol
i think poss you would have gotten a little more feedback had you told us all about it first up.
i for one ,glad ya back fella.
keep posting:jediduel:
lol

matsu


----------



## graychuan (Sep 24, 2010)

graychuan said:


> ... If anyone wants to follow up on this and not wait for one of my wonderful videos(lmao)* I suggest you look on the website of Augusten Fong and you will fine a series of awesome articles co-written by Master Fong and one of his veteran students, Joy Chaduri (Im almost positive I didn't spell Joy's last name correctly).* Although they have written about this concept and published it to their website my original training included these skills. *However  I claim no affiliation, certification, or connection to Master Fong's club. They have put the info on their site for free for anyone with internet access to read. *It is wonderful information. It has been a while since I visited the site but Im sure good information always has a page on this site. I wouldn't expect anything less for a credible WC Sifu....



Fong's Site is a goood one but I was wrong on the source articles I was talking about. They are available HERE at the site of Tempe Wing Chun. Again, i am not affiliated nor do I train with this group. I just appreciate the info they make available. THIS ONE is the particular article I was referring to about the Three Families of Wing Chun.


----------



## graychuan (Nov 30, 2010)

Muk Yan Jong 1.1


----------



## graychuan (Jan 18, 2011)




----------



## zepedawingchun (Jan 19, 2011)

graychuan said:


>


 
Well, it's been 14 hours since you posted this link and no comments.  Either people are affraid to say something or everyone is happy with this link.  My Sifu says if you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all.  So I was going to keep my mouth shut.  However, in this instance, I can't let it go.  And the reason is because someone commented on YouTube 'good looking vid, you put together a nice video'.  Which means (to me) they think the drills are being done correctly.  

Maybe it is put together good, but the way the drills are being done is unacceptable.  If I caught any of my intermediate or advanced students doing it that way, I'd step in and bounce them off the walls because the way they are doing it wrong allows me to.  Then I'd send them back to the beginners and spend the rest of the night teaching them how to do it correctly (again) so I can't bounce them off the wall.

From what I see in the clip, the drills are being done just for the sake of doing the drills, just arm motion.  The two people are not trying to learn and understand what the drills are defining and teaching, just moving the arms to make it look like the drills.

Let the chop bustin begin.


----------



## wtxs (Jan 19, 2011)

zepedawingchun said:


> Well, it's been 14 hours since you posted this link and no comments.  Either people are affraid to say something or everyone is happy with this link.  My Sifu says if you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all.  So I was going to keep my mouth shut.  However, in this instance, I can't let it go.  And the reason is because someone commented on YouTube 'good looking vid, you put together a nice video'.  Which means (to me) they think the drills are being done correctly.
> 
> Maybe it is put together good, but the way the drills are being done is unacceptable.  If I caught any of my intermediate or advanced students doing it that way, I'd step in and bounce them off the walls because the way they are doing it wrong allows me to.  Then I'd send them back to the beginners and spend the rest of the night teaching them how to do it correctly (again) so I can't bounce them off the wall.
> 
> ...



OK then ... I'll be the smart a$$ and get this started ... :argue::argue::argue: ... or should I? :deadhorse:deadhorse:deadhorse


----------



## graychuan (Jan 19, 2011)

wtxs said:


> OK then ... I'll be the smart a$$ and get this started ... :argue::argue::argue: ... or should I? :deadhorse:deadhorse:deadhorse





I've sparred with you both on this forum before, Its nothing new to me. But, Zepe, you of all should know better. But its ok. As far as 'getting it started' and the 'dead horse' goes....how about this. Instead of coming out with some lame criticism that is just for its own sake, how about either/both of you say something more specific as to why you think so. This would be helpful. This '* I'd step in and bounce them off the walls because the way they are doing it wrong allows me to* '  does not. And I feel sorry for your students because if there is ONE thing that is obvious is that we were having fun. I don't think your students do. Especially if you treat them this way. 

And, Zepe, as for you not seeing any attempt at instruction or learning anything I suggest you watch the video again. Especially in the dan chi sao section where I was clearly taking my time and correcting my pal's posture and such. You will also see a progression of slower execution in the beginning for both guys doing their drill and then a faster flow later in their sections of the clips. For someone who is an instructor and practitioner of so many years it concerns me that you missed all that.

~The Bastard Son


----------



## wtxs (Jan 19, 2011)

graychuan said:


> I've sparred with you both on this forum before, Its nothing new to me. But, Zepe, you of all should know better. But its ok. *As far as 'getting it started' and the 'dead horse' goes*....how about this. Instead of coming out with some lame criticism that is just for its own sake, how about either/both of you say something more specific as to why you think so. This would be helpful. This '* I'd step in and bounce them off the walls because the way they are doing it wrong allows me to* '  does not. And I feel sorry for your students because if there is ONE thing that is obvious is that we were having fun. I don't think your students do. Especially if you treat them this way.
> 
> And, Zepe, as for you not seeing any attempt at instruction or learning anything I suggest you watch the video again. Especially in the dan chi sao section where I was clearly taking my time and correcting my pal's posture and such. You will also see a progression of slower execution in the beginning for both guys doing their drill and then a faster flow later in their sections of the clips. For someone who is an instructor and practitioner of so many years it concerns me that you missed all that.
> 
> ~The Bastard Son



Chill my friend, and reread what I've posted ... there's not one word of criticism.  The intent is to highlight the needless thrashing we do to each other over demo videos and what it suppose to convey ... when will it ever stop ...


----------



## zepedawingchun (Jan 19, 2011)

graychuan said:


> I've sparred with you both on this forum before, Its nothing new to me. But, Zepe, you of all should know better.


 

_I should know better? I think you better go back and clarify that statement. I do know better and that is why I commented on the link_




graychuan said:


> But its ok. As far as 'getting it started' and the 'dead horse' goes....how about this. Instead of coming out with some lame criticism that is just for its own sake, how about either/both of you say something more specific as to why you think so. This would be helpful.


 

_Okay, here is what I see immediately wrong in the lop bong da drill. _

_Incorrect elbow position from the punch, too much elbow sticking out and not in or down. This allows your opponent to slip inside, past the arm for a strike. _
_Punch or da pushing to far up or forward traveling through the bong sau. In essence, your arms are in contact forearm to forearm and not wrist to wrist. In that position, someone should be hitting someone or breaking something. With your fist that high from the punch, I&#8217;m able to pak sau (the punching hand), then fat sau (or mun sau) immediately straight to your center because there is nothing stopping me from doing that. Or I can hyper-extend your punching elbow by performing a jut sau (downward) with the hand that would lop sau, to the wrist of the punching hand, and slapping or snapping the elbow upward with the other hand (see Chum Kiu form)._
_Improper location of the punching arm, should stop or post at the wrist and not the forearm. See #2_
_Wu sau or guard hand is no where to be found. It should support the bong sau at execution instead of traveling down the arm once the bong sau has completed. For this, go back to Chum Kiu, do the form, and execute your bong sau. Wu sau supports (meaning helps defend with) the bong or executes to wedge the attackers punch against the bong sau to prevent the punch from continueing forward (if needed) at the same time as bong sau executes. You should also do this like in the form, during the bong lop da drill._
_On the lop sau&#8217;s the elbow is not down covering the center, which allows someone to come foreward with a mun or fat sau and strike straight to your chin._
_I don&#8217;t even want to go into the don chi sau drill. Too much to correct._




graychuan said:


> This '* I'd step in and bounce them off the walls because the way they are doing it wrong allows me to* ' does not. And I feel sorry for your students because if there is





graychuan said:


> ONE thing that is obvious is that we were having fun. I don't think your students do. Especially if you treat them this way.


 
_I didn&#8217;t say you couldn&#8217;t have fun. But fun doing bad kung fu, I don&#8217;t do that. Go back and read my post, I said if my intermediate and advanced students did this I&#8217;d bounce them off the wall. Not beginners. By the time they are intermediate or advanced, they should know how to do it properly. Know better and definitely do it correctly. If I did the drills with them and they do them incorrectly, they would expect me to bounce them off the walls (as I would expect them to do it to me) and would be grateful I corrected them that way. I&#8217;m there to teach them not baby or let them slide on how to use the Wing Chun system and do it so it doesn&#8217;t fail them (or they the system). And if you think my students don&#8217;t have fun and enjoy my class, and learn something, ask them. I have several students on the forum who lurk and check in from time to time to read the threads. Start a new thread if you like. Ask them to comment on my teaching ability, skill, and how meticulous I am with structure, position, energy, flow, relaxation, proper execution, the whole system, ask them anything._




graychuan said:


> And, Zepe, as for you not seeing any attempt at instruction or learning anything I suggest you watch the video again. Especially in the dan chi sao section where I was clearly taking my time and correcting my pal's posture and such. You will also see a progression of slower execution in the beginning for both guys doing their drill and then a faster flow later in their sections of the clips. For someone who is an instructor and practitioner of so many years it concerns me that you missed all that





graychuan said:


> ~The Bastard Son


 
_I didn&#8217;t miss anything. I didn&#8217;t say you weren&#8217;t attempting to instruct anyone. I said you weren&#8217;t doing the drills in a way to learn *what* the drills were attempting to teach. Big difference! ! ! You do the drills for a reason, not just to go through the motions. Get rid of the music, cause I couldn&#8217;t hear one word you said during the instructions. And just because you went faster in the clip, it doesn&#8217;t mean it was being done correctly. It should be done slowly until it can be done properly._

_I said I wasn&#8217;t going there, but I guess I need to. So you corrected your students posture in don chi sau, that&#8217;s not all that was wrong with him (and you). Just off the top of my head from what I remember seeing._


_Palm strike too short, not enough forward._
_Jut sau too downward and not going forward._
_Both motions in 1 and 2 were not going forward enough to learn to use properly._
_Elbow positions too much on quarter line and not on center._
_Bong sau elbows not high enough. Also too much energy in the wrist (watch position of the hand, it doesn&#8217;t lie), telling me your using your hand and not lifting with your elbow to do bong sau. _
_Punch or da progresses too far forward, it should relax and ride the bong sau (see #5) and not push it's way too far forward. _
_You wanted it, I told you what I see just off a glance. It would be much easier to correct your mistakes in person and how how and why t's done that way. Then you would know. I stand by what I said in the earlier post. And like I said in my PM to you, it&#8217;s just plain sloppy and does a dis-service to a wonderfully efficient martial arts system._

_Oh, and the name is zepedawingchun or Zepeda, not zepe, or zip, or zupeeda._

_I&#8217;ll get off my high horse now. You may continue busting my chops . . . . zepe_


----------



## graychuan (Feb 1, 2011)




----------



## wtxs (Feb 1, 2011)

graychuan said:


> No lineage, No Sifu....No Problem!
> 
> Questions, comments or insults are welcome!



From your first post



graychuan said:


>



How would you wish we proceed with this?


----------



## graychuan (Feb 1, 2011)




----------



## Poor Uke (Feb 4, 2011)

At the end of each section I do a double jut then a double tok sau, as opposed to the stroking movement you do. Could you explain your reasons for doing it the way you do?


----------



## graychuan (Feb 11, 2011)

Lop Sao Commentary


----------



## zepedawingchun (Feb 11, 2011)

graychuan said:


> Lop Sao Commentary


 



zepedawingchun said:


> My Sifu says if you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all. . . . .


 
No comment.


----------



## graychuan (Feb 14, 2011)

corrected a typo...


----------



## wtxs (Feb 14, 2011)

zepedawingchun said:


> My Sifu says if you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all..





zepedawingchun said:


> No comment.



I'm with you man ... what else can you say to someone who asked for *questions , comments or insults* from novice and experienced WC practitioner of this forum, yet turn around and rejects feedback or constructive criticisms offered.


----------



## Poor Uke (Feb 15, 2011)

wtxs said:


> I'm with you man ... what else can you say to someone who asked for *questions , comments or insults* from novice and experienced WC practitioner of this forum, yet turn around and rejects feedback or constructive criticisms offered.


 
Seconded. I've stopped watching them as I dont see the point if there is no dialogue about them. 

We could of course talk amoungst ourselves.......


----------



## graychuan (Feb 28, 2011)




----------



## zepedawingchun (Mar 1, 2011)

graychuan said:


>


 
No comment.


----------



## Nabakatsu (Mar 1, 2011)

I'm a complete newb to chi sau, but it looks like there is very little forward energy, I watched like 15 seconds, and it seems like arm swinging to me..
if your student dropped his arm looks like you'd be following the same path as if he had not.
This could of course be due to the fact my lineages Chi Sau stresses different things.. 

May I ask your TRUE intent for posting up these videos of yourself?


----------



## wtxs (Mar 1, 2011)

Nabakatsu said:


> I'm a complete newb to chi sau, but it looks like there is very little forward energy, I watched like 15 seconds, and it seems like arm swinging to me..
> if your student dropped his arm looks like you'd be following the same path as if he had not.
> This could of course be due to the fact my lineages Chi Sau stresses different things..
> 
> *May I ask your TRUE intent for posting up these videos of yourself?*



Careful there Nabakatsu, your comments may be viewed as negative criticism.  We all see what you saw ... or is it saw what you see?

Maybe he's looking for validation or something like it. :idunno:


----------



## Nabakatsu (Mar 1, 2011)

Can't hurt to be willing to drop everything you've learned at least mentally, and perhaps seek out a sifu to resume training with. Wing Chun is a great way to express oneself, and the benefits are many, Either way best of luck, looking forward to your response Gray.


----------



## zepedawingchun (Mar 2, 2011)

Nabakatsu said:


> I'm a complete newb to chi sau, but it looks like there is very little forward energy, I watched like 15 seconds, and it seems like arm swinging to me..
> if your student dropped his arm looks like you'd be following the same path as if he had not.


 
Right you are.  And the arm(s) definitely need to be higher, speaking about the tan sau position.



Nabakatsu said:


> This could of course be due to the fact my lineages Chi Sau stresses different things..


 
Sound like some of the same stuff my lineage stresses, so it may not be as different as you think. 



Nabakatsu said:


> May I ask your TRUE intent for posting up these videos of yourself?


 
Ah, that I would like to know too.


----------



## graychuan (Apr 25, 2011)




----------



## Nabakatsu (Apr 26, 2011)

lol, I think gray is trolling us.
Most find it amusing posting this kind of crap and imaging us pulling our hair out.
good game


----------



## zepedawingchun (Apr 26, 2011)

graychuan said:


>


 
I have to say, I have seen the forms done many different ways.  But this is the most creative thus far.  Not very good, but creative.  Looks like a cross between Wing Chun, Kenpo, and William Cheung's TWC.

Is that why you won't tell us your lineage Graychuan, you're from the William Cheung line and have added your Kenpo to the mix?


----------



## graychuan (Apr 26, 2011)

zepedawingchun said:


> ...Ah, that I would like to know too.




One who speaks does not know, One who knows does not speak. - TTC


----------



## zepedawingchun (Apr 26, 2011)

graychuan said:


> One who speaks does not know, One who knows does not speak. - TTC


 
Ah, yes, you are correct. I do not know how or why you do it the way you do, but I do know how it should be done correctly.  Therefore, that is why I ask.


----------



## wtxs (Apr 28, 2011)

graychuan said:


> One who speaks does not know, One who knows does not speak. - TTC



"Don't ask don't tell."


----------



## zepedawingchun (Apr 28, 2011)

wtxs said:


> "Don't ask don't tell."


 
This is *NOT* the U.S. military.  Enquiring minds want to know.


----------



## wtxs (Apr 28, 2011)

wtxs said:


> "Don't ask don't tell."





zepedawingchun said:


> This is *NOT* the U.S. military.  Enquiring minds want to know.



Same principle, you don't ask if some one is gay, and none will voluntary tell you he/she is gay.  If you do ask, they won't tell ... just like we had ask of gray's lineage, and he' not telling.  Sorry about that, maybe I have been as clear as mud?


----------



## yak sao (Apr 28, 2011)

His teacher was Ali Rahim. Originally from Detroit, now in Louisville.

Some stuff from you tube

For the record, I don't think he's gay....not that there's anything wrong with that





 




 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFAII5o7SaI&NR=1


----------



## geezer (Apr 28, 2011)

graychuan said:


> One who speaks does not know, One who knows does not speak. - TTC


 
My old Chinese sifu used to say, " The bottle which is but half full makes the most noise."


You know... shake an empty bottle...nothing. Shake a full bottle... same thing. Shake a bottle with a little water and it makes a lot of noise!


----------



## wtxs (Apr 28, 2011)

yak sao said:


> His teacher was Ali Rahim. Originally from Detroit, now in Louisville.
> 
> Some stuff from you tube
> 
> ...




???????? ... had never said that, only riding along with Zepeda about the lineage thing.


----------



## yak sao (Apr 28, 2011)

my sense of humor ( or lack thereof) is wasted on you people


----------



## zepedawingchun (Apr 28, 2011)

yak sao said:


> His teacher was Ali Rahim. Originally from Detroit, now in Louisville.


 
Oh so you were making a joke cause his Sifu was Ali Rahim. . . . .whomever he may be.


----------



## wtxs (Apr 29, 2011)

yak sao said:


> For the record, I don't think he's gay....not that there's anything wrong with that



If the above quote is intended with humor, I would have "got it" if you had followed with an , :wink1: or some thing along that line .

Thanks for the clarification.


----------

