# What is bong sau?



## fightingfat (Apr 29, 2006)

Can you define bong sau? What is it? How does it work? What are its' characteristics and what makes it different? What are its' weaknesses? What do you like or dislike about this technique?


----------



## jfarnsworth (Apr 29, 2006)

We're talking about the block right?


----------



## fightingfat (Apr 29, 2006)

So you think it's a block then do you??


----------



## Flying Crane (Apr 29, 2006)

fightingfat said:
			
		

> So you think it's a block then do you??


 
a-ha!  sounds like your initial question was really just a setup and no real question at all.  Please, enlighten us.


----------



## fightingfat (Apr 29, 2006)

Well spotted! I was trying to provoke a discussion  So come on- what do you think about bong?


----------



## Blindside (Apr 29, 2006)

I have always particularly disliked the unasked for Socratic method....

Lamont


----------



## Flying Crane (Apr 29, 2006)

Well, it is no new innovation to say that a block can be a strike, and a strike can be a block.  Most arts recognize that.

In my experience bong sau is taught as a block, but I have heard of people using it aggressively to actually break an attacker's arm with it.  My sifu's classmate did this to a guy.

On its base level, it is a block, but when understood more deeply, it can be a devastating strike.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 29, 2006)

fightingfat said:
			
		

> Can you define bong sau? What is it? How does it work? What are its' characteristics and what makes it different? What are its' weaknesses? What do you like or dislike about this technique?


 
Its a parry, although you often see it static, its purpose is not to stop and move into the next move.  It works by using correct energy to feed other techniques of which there should be limitless variations - at least limitless to type out here.  I can't think of a weakness itself in its idea and principle but maybe in certain ways of using or misusing the shape.


----------



## Flying Crane (Apr 29, 2006)

ed-swckf said:
			
		

> I can't think of a weakness itself in its idea and principle but maybe in certain ways of using or misusing the shape.


 
One idea that comes to mind is that your ribs are open during the execution of the bong sau.  Of course any time a technique is used, you will be open somewhere, so this is not unique to bong sau.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Apr 29, 2006)

I have always used it as a block. I suppose you could use it as a strike against the elbow. I just might have to try it.


----------



## samurai69 (Apr 30, 2006)

In its first instance it was taught to me as a block , but then later it becomes more of a fail safe, a sort of back up block, also the shooting out of it can be part of an arm bar/elbow break variation

many things.........yet nothing


also as part of a sticky hands exercise


:jedi1:


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 30, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> One idea that comes to mind is that your ribs are open during the execution of the bong sau. Of course any time a technique is used, you will be open somewhere, so this is not unique to bong sau.


 
Yeah but that would depend on how and when you use it, i mean if you use a right hand bong sau on the outside of a left punch you are exposed but the opponent has no way of exploiting that in that moment.  And like you say you will be open somewhere but its a perfectly valid point if you do find yourself exposed like that and hence the teaching of moving to a better position when you find yourself like that.


----------



## yipman_sifu (Apr 30, 2006)

A Bongsau is a passive move that works for controlling energy that comes toward you (opposite to Tansau). It is like most people already said used for continuing with fluid movement to regain the center position again. 
The Bongsau we execute in our forms is different that it looks really fancy and nice. A real application Bongsau would be much more down and little elbow raising. It is by what we know as the "Wing Arms technique".


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 30, 2006)

yipman_sifu said:
			
		

> "Wing Arms technique".


 
So do you think if you get good enough at wing chun, when you bong sau you could fly?


----------



## jfarnsworth (Apr 30, 2006)

yipman_sifu said:
			
		

> A real application Bongsau would be much more down and little elbow raising. It is by what we know as the "Wing Arms technique".


More of a yielding, block type of application if I read it how you posted your comments?


----------



## Jenna (Apr 30, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> One idea that comes to mind is that your ribs are open during the execution of the bong sau. Of course any time a technique is used, you will be open somewhere, so this is not unique to bong sau.


A good point! As I recall working the Bong Sau, we used the opposite arm high or low to protect the face or the ribs as necessary.

I'd be interested to know how to use as a strike - I've never seen that but am always keen to learn...

Yr most obdt hmble svt,
Jenna


----------



## Robert Lee (Apr 30, 2006)

Forarm elbow block or wing block Bong sao. But its more of a defelting parry that can defelct and set up for a lop sao grabbing hand A trap or a counter move.  Any movement be it strike or deflction you have a opening Its put of the game. how well you protect your openings is how well you see beyond 1 move. You can coiunter a bong with a lop and forarm press But you can also flow on beyond it with a yield of your strike  But agin thats skill and training  Bong is a deflecting parry type block common training in wing chun ,Jun Fan and  different stages of JKD Blocks or parrys are used to not get hit or to be able to hit But not used to just do either As you hit evade hit agin Then only when need do you block or parry Just as trapping you trap to remove so you can hit never trap to just trap


----------



## fightingfat (May 3, 2006)

I would definitely agree with the definition of a parry. Also it is only strong as it goes forward, once this motion is complete, it is weak and collapses- would you agree?


----------



## ed-swckf (May 3, 2006)

fightingfat said:
			
		

> I would definitely agree with the definition of a parry. Also it is only strong as it goes forward, once this motion is complete, it is weak and collapses- would you agree?


 
I don't think that indicates weakness, like i said the bong sau never stops, it continues on into the next motion.  Like once its taken something off the line and parried it you are right that it then colapses from being a bong sau but its actually showing its strength in its ability to become flexible and turn into something else.  If you look at it in a different way the bong sau doesn't really collapse, the bong sau has done its job and when it no longer needs to be a bong sau then it collapses or changes to the next motion. If the bong sau collapses with an attack still on your line then something is wrong.  Its just one way of looking at it but its like a punch - on the way to its target its a punch, when its done its job its no longer a punch and is in fact a retreating hand (unless of course you are reusing it at its distance travelled to that point).  Same in case with the bong sau, theres a point when its just moving to its next shape and no longer needing to be a bong sau and fill that criteria of being one.


----------



## fightingfat (May 3, 2006)

Great points! I agree!


----------



## Flash25 (May 4, 2006)

The bong-sau is neither a block nor a parry. The bong-sau is merely a position that your arm takes in response to a specific type of force you receive. The purpose of the bong-sau is to allow you to control yourself in the presence of an opposing force and move closer to hitting your opponent. The same can be said of the other arm movements, like the tan-sau. In WT we recognize the force and move past it. If you train with someone extremely skilled, it barely feels like they are there.


----------



## fightingfat (May 4, 2006)

I like that Flash! So you are saying bong is transitional?


----------



## Robert Lee (May 4, 2006)

Flash25 said:
			
		

> The bong-sau is neither a block nor a parry. The bong-sau is merely a position that your arm takes in response to a specific type of force you receive. The purpose of the bong-sau is to allow you to control yourself in the presence of an opposing force and move closer to hitting your opponent. The same can be said of the other arm movements, like the tan-sau. In WT we recognize the force and move past it. If you train with someone extremely skilled, it barely feels like they are there.


 But then every action flows to another not being fixed on the one movement. But Bong would still deflect so it would be considered a parry . Just a moment in time


----------



## ed-swckf (May 4, 2006)

Robert Lee said:
			
		

> But then every action flows to another not being fixed on the one movement. But Bong would still deflect so it would be considered a parry . Just a moment in time


 
Thats the way i see it too.


----------



## monji112000 (Jun 2, 2006)

from what I have heard, bong sau means to "tie up" or a action like that.
it can be used two main ways. Soft/hard. Soft would be to redirect and Hard would be To jam. You can use it moving high to low, low to high, side to side , straight in. 

Bong sao alone (with the guarding hand and not a tan soa) isn't very good for stopping a straight punch. Its better for things like being grabbed or in chi sao.

Bong sao with a tan sao can cover just about anything above your waist. Its very good for high round kicks, boxers jabs, hooks , side kicks ect..
It Chi sao its very hard to stop. (JMO)
Bong sao can be used to hit also, the elbow is a powerful tool. Wing chun elbows should be straight and not round like Muy Thai elbows.

JMO based on experience. I know this isn't what styles like Emi B.  and Leung ting say.  

Its a strike, its a cover. Wing chun doesn't block.:mp5:


----------



## monkey (Jun 3, 2006)

I see a lot of JKD & Wing chun responces.On the JKD side-Bruce stated (There re no passive motions in JKD)So the position of the arm at slight 40 degree(may very art to art or teacher to teacher.)was utilised as 4 things from a JKD point.1- as you use it the in coming force has centrific & kenitic energy.So a good placed Bong sau to the forarm (will break it).This is (offence) as 1!2-When you are in a Clinch (for 1 example of ref.)You can bong sau to the throat or side of temple.This gives the bend hand part to lock into place around the head & pull down into the knee.This is( defence )as #2!Now the traditional bong sau as the wing chun useage seems to be for some blocking.I will tell you it is not as it is embeded with what we call (Fa-jing.)Think of a mouse trap.It is all ready coiled & when you touch it-It uncoils & reveals its true power.This is the bongsaus hiden useage or (internal aspect )for #3.Now we come to 4-When you step or addavane you genarate power.This power coupled with (tourque & speed & maybe a hint of internal release).This is called (Combat.)Nothing is held back & it becomes tactical.So yes bong sau can be utilised as great wepon to deploy.It all depends on your arena of combat skills.


----------



## monkey (Jun 3, 2006)

The bong sau has 4 useage points.I see there are diiferant views of wing chun & JKD.So I will tell the 4 useage ways.1-offencesivle  it can counter a strike,2-defencivly it can be deployed as a strike.3-Internaly it can be deployed to uncoil(example.-a mouse trap is set but, it uncoils with great force.This is known as fa-jing,Internal release.4-It can be deployed as a 2 part tatical move.part 1-Ill take Example of a clinch for lack of close range applications,The elbow can be deployed to the temple part 2 the fook or hooking hand can be deployed to back of neck-ear-hair-any part to pull the head tothe knee.This is seen in silat alot as part of putakapolla.So 4 is combative  tactic.But this depends on your arena os combat skills & if your open to the useage forsaid.So for those who said for JKD,let me state 1 quote from Bruce Lee(There are no passive motions in JKD)from the basic to sifu Oakland manual (1st page.)Dojosai


----------



## Jimi (Jun 4, 2006)

I like the Bong Sao, I enjoy working trapping hands, though this skill alone may not win a street encounter. When training trapping hands, I like the fact that a natural follow up to a successfull Bong Sao can be to roll the elbow over, levering over the opponents arm to Gua Choi or backhand and maybe even flow thru to underhook into an armbar etc... Just the fun of it, different strokes for different folks. PEACE


----------



## monkey (Jun 4, 2006)

I clearly understand what you said.But, in a multi attack 1 dose not have the time for such as trapping.This is why Bruce dropped the junfan. To get a better responce from that same possition. Dont bong sau but a simple non telegraphic & scientificly deployed wedge.Your tansau  & pak sau  should be used as wepons first off.They dont block Unless the ways were watered down. The Tan has the knife edge that digs into the attacking limb.The pac has the heal palm bone that the iron palm deployed.No like a pac with the iron palm application(use that same hit to springboard into the eyes of throat with belgee.Now a quick lap but,no traping to ballance your flow exchange of hands to a pac & this ties the as though it were trapped but,you must alternat hands & belgee   again.This can be done given you 4-5 hits to there 1,I demoed this at my seminars in Whitter Ca.


----------



## monji112000 (Jun 4, 2006)

OK I had not really seen the Bong sao in JKD.  If you understand how to "trap" then its prefect for fighting. The problem is that you can't always trap, and sometimes things turn into other things. for a fast 1 2 boxer punch combo a double qwan sao then elbow in then uppercut would work perfectly. If you can grab with the lop sao elbow in and "trap" but if you don't trap the uppercut works very well. IF you get the trap you can do something else. Its all about strategy and flowing.

I don't really like the fact that Bruce Butchered Wing Chun.  I don't follow the whole taking the most deadly BS stuff. I believe he wasn't shown or didn't understand the things that "arn't deadly" or "not realistic" as they say.


----------



## monkey (Jun 4, 2006)

He didnt butcher it.You cant punch ethnic or style.We all have 2 arms & legs & punch & kick the same.A round line-a curve line-& a straight line.How we use it be came style or laws.Let me be so kind to sugguest another of the multi ways to use the bong sau.This is for those that see it as a block.If you are grabbed from the rear.The bong sau can contur the body strernum to the chin & exstending the arm up ward moves attacker back enough for a palm to strenum or punch.From one of the Late Grandmaster Ed Paker teachings.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Jun 4, 2006)

monkey said:
			
		

> He didnt butcher it.You cant punch ethnic or style.We all have 2 arms & legs & punch & kick the same.A round line-a curve line-& a straight line.How we use it be came style or laws.Let me be so kind to sugguest another of the multi ways to use the bong sau.This is for those that see it as a block.If you are grabbed from the rear.The bong sau can contur the body strernum to the chin & exstending the arm up ward moves attacker back enough for a palm to strenum or punch.From one of the Late Grandmaster Ed Paker teachings.


 

Oh yes, Bruce defintily butchered it, sorry you are wrong, I have yet to see a JunFan, whether gung fu or JKD successfully apply Wing Chun


----------



## monkey (Jun 4, 2006)

Jun fan is wing chun based.The foundations of junfan are -Wing chun-boxing-epie-tomtoy-oongob-& a few others.Jeet kune do dosnt use blocks.There are no passive motions in JKD.Basic to Sifu Oakland Manual page 1!Jeet kune do dropped most of thejun fan.Heres why.In the beginning the Chinese Gung fu had  lot of wing chun to it.Loseing some fights & not winning some fast enough-Bruce had Junfan or it was to make it so you couldnt get trapped & deployed trapps with heavy boxing & Epie influance.Now in fights with a new tool -still not gettin the results he wanted.Him & james came up with Scientific street defence.This became Jeet kune do.The way of Interceping fist.Bruce trained long & hard with Kajukempo people-Jhoon Ree & others.Intercepting fist means to break the knee with side kick when the step.90% of JKD dose not have wing chun.If there is then it is not JKD but wing chun people or some one who studied it & now riding the coat tails of the name JKD.Leo Fong is a good wing chun player & will tell you  Bruce did not butcher it.He dropped it.It was to struckerd.It did not have self exsploring.Example You have to do Chum qui exactly or it is not seen well or as such.Bruce had no style.So to say he butcherd a style is to say wing chun butcherd its original art & could not be wing chun.It just a poor vertion of the shaolin art it stems from.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Jun 5, 2006)

monkey said:
			
		

> Jun fan is wing chun based.The foundations of junfan are -Wing chun-boxing-epie-tomtoy-oongob-& a few others.Jeet kune do dosnt use blocks.There are no passive motions in JKD.Basic to Sifu Oakland Manual page 1!Jeet kune do dropped most of thejun fan.Heres why.In the beginning the Chinese Gung fu had  lot of wing chun to it.Loseing some fights & not winning some fast enough-Bruce had Junfan or it was to make it so you couldnt get trapped & deployed trapps with heavy boxing & Epie influance.Now in fights with a new tool -still not gettin the results he wanted.Him & james came up with Scientific street defence.This became Jeet kune do.The way of Interceping fist.Bruce trained long & hard with Kajukempo people-Jhoon Ree & others.Intercepting fist means to break the knee with side kick when the step.90% of JKD dose not have wing chun.If there is then it is not JKD but wing chun people or some one who studied it & now riding the coat tails of the name JKD.Leo Fong is a good wing chun player & will tell you  Bruce did not butcher it.He dropped it.It was to struckerd.It did not have self exsploring.Example You have to do Chum qui exactly or it is not seen well or as such.Bruce had no style.So to say he butcherd a style is to say wing chun butcherd its original art & could not be wing chun.It just a poor vertion of the shaolin art it stems from.




Yes that is the popular story albeit not very accurate


----------



## monkey (Jun 5, 2006)

i did train with Bruce & James.Did you train under Bruce & get some secret that no one got.Of you just suporting wing chun?I like wing chun As Steve Lee Swift is a friend of mine.But Bruce didnt conform to styles.Why argue whos box or forms to fight is better.Its on who you are & how well do you use  it in the fight.


----------



## monji112000 (Jun 5, 2006)

I would never presume to know much about Bruce or His training. I have seen many videos and books (I own) and I have visited some "JKD" schools (Inosanto). I respect Bruce for his movie presence and introducing many people to MA.

I will stand by my statement I believe his use of Wing chun is mainly watered down, and isn't very good. Obviously we can speculate why, but really he is dead, its silly to talk about him like we know him.. who cares.

Its very clear that his use of Wing chun doesn't have some of its most powerful tools. His foot work isn't at all Wing Chun. His original foot work wasn't very good, (judging by other peopls books with his notes). 

I have no problem with JKD or MMA.

Wing Chun (Ip Man's)  or may not have come from Shaolin.  Its really only a legend and many people say many diff things. It really doesn't matter where WC comes from. If JKD players are able to benefit from what they understand of WC then great. Its just not a correct statement that He took the "most deadly aspects", thats simply BS. He took what he understood, and that he could get to work.

Bread and butter stuff like lop sao, Qwan sao, Gun sao are not in JKD. WC foot work is very powerful, and its not in JKD. 

yes in the end its the fighter not the art that matters, but its the art that he uses. Its like a tool and a mechanic, a great mechanic can use really bad tools to fix a car. But the reverse doesn't hold true.


----------



## monkey (Jun 5, 2006)

Good come back.Ive said it for years (Unite the arts & not claim Who is best or more trophies ect.)Good post


----------



## Kensai (Jun 5, 2006)

Both good posts Monkey.  Rep points all round. A good, healthy debate before the Stanley Cup finals... All good.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Jun 5, 2006)

monkey said:
			
		

> i did train with Bruce & James.Did you train under Bruce & get some secret that no one got.Of you just suporting wing chun?I like wing chun As Steve Lee Swift is a friend of mine.But Bruce didnt conform to styles.Why argue whos box or forms to fight is better.Its on who you are & how well do you use it in the fight.


 
That is the standard argument, however there are different qualities of Wing Chun, a deprture from the original sound principals menas that his way of Wing chun became diluted, and therefore weaker than pure Wing chun. And my perspective on why Bruce changed it to JKD is from a former Yip man student who also knew Bruce and the politics behind what had happened to forge Bruces desicion to change to JKD. I have touched hands with other JKD students whos way of wing chun is hard and inflexible, there is no softness, and no proper use of biomechanics behind it. The hands are tense and many of the subtle Wing Chun principles just are not there.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Jun 5, 2006)

monji112000 said:
			
		

> I would never presume to know much about Bruce or His training. I have seen many videos and books (I own) and I have visited some "JKD" schools (Inosanto). I respect Bruce for his movie presence and introducing many people to MA.
> 
> I will stand by my statement I believe his use of Wing chun is mainly watered down, and isn't very good. Obviously we can speculate why, but really he is dead, its silly to talk about him like we know him.. who cares.
> 
> ...


 
good post


----------



## monkey (Jun 5, 2006)

Ok here it is Bruce got white sash fromYip man & did Sil Lum Tao.I have him doing it & teaching it in Washington.Later due to loseing a fight He decided against its ways & only took out parts of what He needed from others arts.(This dose not nor ever will justify the concepts people to do total arts & get guru in silat ect.Bruce took a few things only).In escance  the pirate of the arts.Take what you want-teach as you take-pilage on those that conform.Dose that tell it better.This is the way it was.


----------

