# The ever more complicated training of some lineages...



## geezer (Jul 26, 2018)

Many of you may know that most of my training has been in Leung Ting's WT lineage and later, in on of its offshoots. Anyway, I just returned from a week of fairly intensive training out of state, and while I really enjoyed the experience, I have noticed a trend towards an ever expanding and complicated curriculum. This seems especially true of a particular aspect of training common in the WT lineage and offshoots called _"Chi Sau Sections"._ These are essentially choreographed paired sets of chi-sau movements designed to teach the proper application of movements trained in the forms, including position, timing, energy, and power.

As a starting point, I found this training useful. But over the decades, the number and complexity of these sessions has steadily increased until a_ huge_ amount of training time is devoted to memorizing these paired forms with great technical precision. Moreover, many if not most of the movements are specifically trained to use against WC style attacks, and seem to have little practical application against the kind of non-WC attacks we would be far more likely to face.

Finally, does this trend of adding so many complex patterned sets go against the general theme of WC being a streamlined and practical art? Isn't this streamlining and functionality what Grandmaster Yip Man was credited and praised for? If so, WT guys, especially EWTO WT guys, why are we going so far in the opposite direction?


----------



## lansao (Jul 26, 2018)

Yes yes yes ^^^ this! The way I've learned it we have 6 root chi sao sets that teach a basic premise of what can be done when you feel your arms cross from a position of:

both your arms on the inside
both your arms on the outside
one arm on the inside, the other on the outside
You can create new chi sao sets forever, in the same way you can compose music forever. That said, I've always maintained that the point was to learn how to counter for a counter for a counter in the simplest way possible and what ends up happening is that the same few structures can repeat. You don't have to invent a new response because you've learned that the same tan sao you used before may not actually have to move very much to defend the next counter. Or you might have tan'd, bong'd, and then tan'd again.

Also, if you have to memorize every single specific response to every single movement and give them a name (e.g. "downward flight of the soured sloth" run through Google translate), you're memorizing too much information and missing out on the value of just filling space in your zones/gates.


----------



## lansao (Jul 26, 2018)

Maybe $$$ is a motivator?


----------



## geezer (Jul 26, 2018)

lansao said:


> Maybe $$$ is a motivator?



That's certainly true in some groups. An endless curriculum means you can string a student along forever.

Another thing, if you have a reasonably dedicated but not-so-gifted student, rather than tell hm, "Gee, I think you've just about maxed-out your potential", you can always keep him happy by saying, "No problem. you just need to learn the next set..."

And then there are more genuine guys like my instructor. He has an incredible memory for physical movement. He learned the whole Hong Kong version of the sets right from LT and also the EWTO version from top European teachers including his si-hing Keith Kernspecht. Memory isn't an big problem for him and I think he includes almost everything he learned in his curriculum, both the good and the not-so-good material because he sees each piece as contributing something to the bigger picture.

The problem with the last case is that for a lot of students (like me) who don't learn and retain material so quickly, you end up spending a lot of time "filling and re-filling leaky buckets" when there are other more productive areas to work on.


----------



## geezer (Jul 26, 2018)

lansao said:


> ... "downward flight of the soured sloth"....



Whoa! You guys train that set too?


----------



## Danny T (Jul 26, 2018)

Interesting.
Training drills (sets) are tools to convey the concepts, develop specific responses based upon range & position, and examples for application/s. Other than that it is simply making students hang on thinking they are getting more material. There comes a time when more isn't better.


----------



## yak sao (Jul 26, 2018)

I've been beating this drum for years.
The sections are a great learning tool but as LT himself said, the goal is to forget the sections.

I really think we do ourselves and our students a disservice with so much material to perfect.

Ive asked this on MT before...how can WTers simplify without losing what the sections teach?


----------



## lansao (Jul 26, 2018)

I think it’s the pressure of maintaining revenue and the need to feel one step ahead of your students. These interests are unfortunately not aligned with what is best for students. A good sifu like a good parent will set you free to explore, experience, learn, and grow beyond what they could. 

They’ll start you at their finish line by factoring down what they learned in a way that you “get” what took them 5 years to realize in a month. That doesn’t make money, but it advances the art and keeps the blades sharp and fresh from generation to generation.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 26, 2018)

Yep...learn the form/drill, train the form/drill, forget the form/drill...


----------



## DanT (Jul 27, 2018)

I prefer the way we do it:

Beginner Level:

- 5 beginner Chi Sao attacks and corresponding defences:

- Gum Da : Quan Sao
- Jik Jurn : Jut Sao
- Lap Da : Tan Da
- Tan Da : Chum Sao
- Bong Da : Jut Sao

Intermediate Level:

- Student must come up with 20 Initial attacks followed by two follow up strikes, created by the individual, not paved out for them in a curriculum. Student must also be able to defend.

Advanced:

- Free flow built up on intermediate level individualized inventions. Preferably focusing on Biu Jee / Mok Yan Jong / LDBG / Bat Jam Do concepts.


----------



## Martial D (Jul 27, 2018)

geezer said:


> Many of you may know that most of my training has been in Leung Ting's WT lineage and later, in on of its offshoots. Anyway, I just returned from a week of fairly intensive training out of state, and while I really enjoyed the experience, I have noticed a trend towards an ever expanding and complicated curriculum. This seems especially true of a particular aspect of training common in the WT lineage and offshoots called _"Chi Sau Sections"._ These are essentially choreographed paired sets of chi-sau movements designed to teach the proper application of movements trained in the forms, including position, timing, energy, and power.
> 
> As a starting point, I found this training useful. But over the decades, the number and complexity of these sessions has steadily increased until a_ huge_ amount of training time is devoted to memorizing these paired forms with great technical precision. Moreover, many if not most of the movements are specifically trained to use against WC style attacks, and seem to have little practical application against the kind of non-WC attacks we would be far more likely to face.
> 
> Finally, does this trend of adding so many complex patterned sets go against the general theme of WC being a streamlined and practical art? Isn't this streamlining and functionality what Grandmaster Yip Man was credited and praised for? If so, WT guys, especially EWTO WT guys, why are we going so far in the opposite direction?


I've gone in the other direction. I've abandoned everything longer than a beat. As such I've pretty much cut ck and bj out completely(the forms, not all of the movements persay)


----------



## geezer (Jul 27, 2018)

Martial D said:


> I've gone in the other direction. I've abandoned everything longer than a beat. As such I've pretty much cut ck and bj out completely(the forms, not all of the movements persay)



Please explain ...what do you mean by "longer than a beat"? What about short combinations, exchanges, and so forth? Do you do any flow-type drills or sequences that close from kick to punch to throw, etc.?


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 27, 2018)

geezer said:


> Please explain ...what do you mean by "longer than a beat"?



I think he is referring to timing, tool usage, etc. Why block (one beat) and then strike (second beat) if you can cut that process (and OODA loop) and accomplish the objective in one single beat.


----------



## Martial D (Jul 27, 2018)

geezer said:


> Please explain ...what do you mean by "longer than a beat"? What about short combinations, exchanges, and so forth?


A beat. One movement that happens before the opponent can really react. Let's say a quarter of a second. Sure, combos, but nothing in the combo is longer that a beat..like a tripple chain punch entry or front kick / straight punch combo.

One of my main issues with more traditional WC is the expectation of being able to do a 2+ beat movement before the opponent can do a single beat movement. It's just not practical for me, or most people that don't have superhuman speed and reactions, which I definitely do not.


----------



## geezer (Jul 27, 2018)

Martial D said:


> A beat. One movement that happens before the opponent can really react. Let's say a quarter of a second. Sure, combos, but nothing in the combo is longer...



Even in Chi-sau, I train every attack, as though it succeeds, following the first move with two more offensive moves to create a quick three move offensive combination. When countering an attack, I defend and then try to retake the offensive, again with a short three-shot combination. I do not know if this would be more than a _beat _as you describe it, but it trains flow and, more importantly, grabbing and keeping the offense.

Even in light chi-sau exchanges, I advocate each person attack with intent to complete the combination rather than anticipating and facilitating their partner's counter. I've always had trouble with coaches that tell me to be patient and _wait for the attack_. Honestly, defensive, counter-for-counter thinking has never worked for me!


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 27, 2018)

geezer said:


> Even in Chi-sau, I train every *attack*, as though it succeeds



Yup...however, some WC out there does one, two, sometimes even three defensive "moves" before launching their own attack...


----------



## KPM (Jul 28, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> Yup...however, some WC out there does one, two, sometimes even three defensive "moves" before launching their own attack...



From a boxing perspective, I see nothing wrong with being "defensive."  The sub-text name that Lyte Burly uses for 52 Blocks is "A.O.D" or "Art of Defense."  He will tell you that this is where 52 Blocks really shines and what separates it from other methods.   Because you cannot do a "tit for tat" kind of defense!  When someone can throw fast combinations of strikes from multiple angles you just cannot match them move for move.  Eventually one of those blows is going to get in!   In FMA a general rule is often used that no combination should be more than 3 counts long.  This is because if the combo (whether defense or offensive) hasn't worked within 3 counts you have failed and need to reset/readjust the angle, approach, etc that you are using!  One 3 count combo may flow smoothly into the next 3 count combo, but this wouldn't really be considered as a 6 count combo.  It all just flows and adapts. 

So in 52 Blocks and boxing in general it is acknowledged that doing a "tit for tat" kind of defense where you are trying to match the opponent's attack move for move is simply not a good idea.  So emphasis is placed on evasiveness and covering up.  Be a hard target to hit and put a wall around that target so that the blows that you know are going to get through  can do no damage.  Let the opponent get tired battering against your wall or chasing the target so that he gets sloppy and leaves openings, and THEN launch your own attack.  The Wing Chun strategy of charging in on the offense and trying to overwhelm the opponent is good, but it is limited.  What happens if that opponent has a good defense?  The Wing Chun strategy of sticking the opponent to control him and then create openings for your attack can also be good.  But what happens when that opponent won't stand still and allow you to stick to him or won't stay in the Chi Sau range?  I think this is why we so often see Wing Chun guys not do very well sparring against someone that can box, or we see Wing Chun guys reverting to something that looks a lot like boxing when they spar.   Throwing fast combos from multiple directions is what takes people out, and covering up and moving around is the best way to defend against someone throwing said fast combos from multiple directions!  

So back to the OP....yes indeed these long and elaborate curricula we often see are really unnecessary.  But you have to keep people interested and coming back month to month to pay those fees!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

geezer said:


> Many of you may know that most of my training has been in Leung Ting's WT lineage and later, in on of its offshoots. Anyway, I just returned from a week of fairly intensive training out of state, and while I really enjoyed the experience, I have noticed a trend towards an ever expanding and complicated curriculum. This seems especially true of a particular aspect of training common in the WT lineage and offshoots called _"Chi Sau Sections"._ These are essentially choreographed paired sets of chi-sau movements designed to teach the proper application of movements trained in the forms, including position, timing, energy, and power.
> 
> As a starting point, I found this training useful. But over the decades, the number and complexity of these sessions has steadily increased until a_ huge_ amount of training time is devoted to memorizing these paired forms with great technical precision. Moreover, many if not most of the movements are specifically trained to use against WC style attacks, and seem to have little practical application against the kind of non-WC attacks we would be far more likely to face.
> 
> Finally, does this trend of adding so many complex patterned sets go against the general theme of WC being a streamlined and practical art? Isn't this streamlining and functionality what Grandmaster Yip Man was credited and praised for? If so, WT guys, especially EWTO WT guys, why are we going so far in the opposite direction?


Knowing the almost nothing I know about WC/VT/WT, I have to wonder if these Chi Sau Sections might be more useful as an alternative to forms. In other words, could they be used to teach basic movement patterns (as forms often are used for), with a bit of application mixed in (which forms aren't generally good for)?

I do see this in other TMA (and T-ish MA) over time. As someone (KPM, I think) postulated, I think this comes from instructors leaving their stamp on the system. Unfortunately, they often find something they like better, but are hesitant to remove the part they liked less. Hell, I'm guilty of that, too, now that I think of it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

lansao said:


> "downward flight of the soured sloth"


Best laugh I've had this morning, lansao!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

lansao said:


> Maybe $$$ is a motivator?


I suspect it was at one point (add material for folks to keep working on), and may be a minor motivator at times (something I have that nobody else has), but it's likely mostly just instructors who are trying to improve things.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 28, 2018)

KPM said:


> From a boxing perspective, I see nothing wrong with being "defensive."  The sub-text name that Lyte Burly uses for 52 Blocks is "A.O.D" or "Art of Defense."  He will tell you that this is where 52 Blocks really shines and what separates it from other methods.   Because you cannot do a "tit for tat" kind of defense!  When someone can throw fast combinations of strikes from multiple angles you just cannot match them move for move.  Eventually one of those blows is going to get in!   In FMA a general rule is often used that no combination should be more than 3 counts long.  This is because if the combo (whether defense or offensive) hasn't worked within 3 counts you have failed and need to reset/readjust the angle, approach, etc that you are using!  One 3 count combo may flow smoothly into the next 3 count combo, but this wouldn't really be considered as a 6 count combo.  It all just flows and adapts.
> 
> So in 52 Blocks and boxing in general it is acknowledged that doing a "tit for tat" kind of defense where you are trying to match the opponent's attack move for move is simply not a good idea.  So emphasis is placed on evasiveness and covering up.  Be a hard target to hit and put a wall around that target so that the blows that you know are going to get through  can do no damage.  Let the opponent get tired battering against your wall or chasing the target so that he gets sloppy and leaves openings, and THEN launch your own attack.  The Wing Chun strategy of charging in on the offense and trying to overwhelm the opponent is good, but it is limited.  What happens if that opponent has a good defense?  The Wing Chun strategy of sticking the opponent to control him and then create openings for your attack can also be good.  But what happens when that opponent won't stand still and allow you to stick to him or won't stay in the Chi Sau range?  I think this is why we so often see Wing Chun guys not do very well sparring against someone that can box, or we see Wing Chun guys reverting to something that looks a lot like boxing when they spar.   Throwing fast combos from multiple directions is what takes people out, and covering up and moving around is the best way to defend against someone throwing said fast combos from multiple directions!
> 
> So back to the OP....yes indeed these long and elaborate curricula we often see are really unnecessary.  But you have to keep people interested and coming back month to month to pay those fees!



Good post KPM. 
Yeah in the past I've used the sword and shield analogy. Sometimes you can just thrust in and skewer the guy; other times you must use your shield to take the incoming blow WHILE your sword is also in use; and often times you just have to weather the storm with just a shield! 
I think this is why the Duncan guys/camp get a lot of grief because DL knows that you must weather the long range game and ultimately get passed it to even do the close body stuff...as a result, his WC "covers" a lot; and they primarily use hands in a 'sword and shield' manner and it gets other WC hurling "that's karate WC" slurs at them.    Oh well. My opinion is that based on his personal fighting experience he came to realize what you've typed above and as a result his method of WC prefers to cause damage to the nearest enemy limb (in / during the long bridge moments) before closing in further to attack the core of the bad guy.


----------



## geezer (Jul 28, 2018)

KPM said:


> * In FMA a general rule is often used that no combination should be more than 3 counts long*.  This is because if the combo (whether defense or offensive) hasn't worked within 3 counts you have failed and need to reset/readjust the angle, approach, etc that you are using!  One 3 count combo may flow smoothly into the next 3 count combo, but this wouldn't really be considered as a 6 count combo.  It all just flows and adapts.



I wasn't aware that the 3-shot combo ^^^ was an FMA thing. Come to think of it, I probably first heard it from one of my FMA instructors, but those guys also box, and some even do WC, so I just figured it was_ generally good advice_.



KPM said:


> ...Throwing fast combos from multiple directions is what takes people out, and covering up and moving around is the best way to defend against someone throwing said fast combos from multiple directions!



So, the way I see it, it's better to maintain the offense ...except when it's smarter to cover up and be defensive.  Clear as mud to me. Just like fighting. Guess that makes it true!

BTW, now that you mention it, the methods I use to cover up in WC I really learned outside of WC. Like from those boxing/FMA guys. Don't tell anybody. 

Examples:

--Classic extended man-wu sau guard (a la Ip Man movies) folds back like a "peek-a-boo" guard, or even more, like an FMA "brush-back your hair" move to cover the front and sides of the head. If done while closing, the elbows in front of your face can be converted into a fierce close range offense.

--Double Lan sau pulled in tight with forearms crossed in front of the face, best used at a slight angle, leading (for me) with the left elbow. covers the face and head well, and converts directly to an offensive fak-sau or pie-jarn (the hacking elbows in Chum-Kiu form). Negative- leaves the ribs open.

-- Sideward bong-wu or bong-fook sau... kind of a WC version of the "Philly shell". Not my favorate, but I've seen others use it effectively.

.....You know what Keith? As I get older, I find that figuring out these kind of universal conceptual connections across systems is way more interesting than just memorizing new forms and sequences. 'Cause I keep doing it even though some instructors keep telling me to "empty my cup" and just learn what they are teaching. I blame it on ADD and generally a _bad attitude._


----------



## yak sao (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Knowing the almost nothing I know about WC/VT/WT, I have to wonder if these Chi Sau Sections might be more useful as an alternative to forms. In other words, could they be used to teach basic movement patterns (as forms often are used for), with a bit of application mixed in (which forms aren't generally good for)?



While the original term for these drill are chi sau sections, the European guys have taken to referring to them as two man forms.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jul 28, 2018)

yak sao said:


> While the original term for these drill are chi sau sections, the European guys have taken to referring to them as two man forms.


So, do you think they could be used in place of the traditional forms? Do they cover enough of the same function?


----------



## yak sao (Jul 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> So, do you think they could be used in place of the traditional forms? Do they cover enough of the same function?



I think you need both. The 2 man sets/ sections, pick up where the solo forms leave off and the solo forms reinforce the structures used in the 2 man sets.


----------



## KPM (Jul 29, 2018)

yak sao said:


> I think you need both. The 2 man sets/ sections, pick up where the solo forms leave off and the solo forms reinforce the structures used in the 2 man sets.



I think it likely that this is how many of the old systems were done.  Ku Lo Wing Chun was taught this way by Leung Jan when he retired to Ku Lo Village.  Some said he was returning to an older way of doing the system.  It was taught is short sets that had a 2 man drill that went with each to teach how to apply it.  Tang Yik Weng Chun's fundamental form has 11 sections, each of which has a 2 man drill that teaches how to apply it.  I'm told "ancestral" White Crane was organized the same way.


----------



## Bino TWT (Jul 29, 2018)

Geezer, I do feel that the EWTO side made things overly complicated and mechanical and spends way to much time with choreographed drills. The actual sections themselves are very short. They are there to teach you a core idea and train reflexive impulses, focused around specific techniques. Things are much more simplified and streamlined on the Hong Kong side of WT, and a lot more emphasis is put into functional flow and application, as opposed to a fluffed up curriculum.

For instance, in the EWTO curriculum, Chum Kiu Chi Sao Section 1 -the shortest section of the seven- is stretched out across 3 student grades (6, 7, & 8). In the HK system, student grade 8 is already on Section 5.

On top of the Chi Sao sections, the EWTO also has the Lat Sao program, so double double your enjoyment.

BTW, I've never heard of the Chi Sao sections being called "2 man forms"; maybe there's just a mistranslation into English from German/Swedish/Dutch/whatever? And to answer some of the questions up there, no they do not replace the forms, nor do they serve the same function.


----------



## jlq (Jul 30, 2018)

Bino,

the term "two-man form" was not an original term used in Germany. It was introduced a couple of years ago, when Keith Kernspecht changed his system. Before that, they were called "sections" (or "Sektionen" to be precise  ). There is an editorial on the EWTO site where Keith Kernspecht is explaining his rationale for changing the term, if one cares to spend some time finding it. These chi sao sections are not some "original" part of Leung Ting's system. They were first created after he started coming to Europe regularly to teach. An old friend of mine, a HK Chinese student at the IWTA Headquarters (he was the training partner of Tam Yu Min) told me that when he started training, they didn't have any sections, but then he had to travel for work, and when he came back after a no. of years and took up training again, suddenly they had. But since he was already an advanced practicioner of that school, he would always practice free-flow chi sao and thus never learnt any sections of any kind. When I was learning from Leung Ting in Seundak, China, he was very explicit about the sections just being some crutches to learn the basics and that one should abandon training them very soon, and even when training the sections, one shouldn't blindly follow the choreography but use the proper bin fa to counter the opponent. Keith Kernspecht and the way he structured his grading system is to be blamed for the sections becoming well-nigh useless, as the overall goal was forgotten, and the sections became a goal in themselves. As far as what the students were learning at Leung Ting's IWTA HQ in HK at the time I was their, they would have finished the first section CS for their 8th student grade and had to demonstrate free-flow chi sao fighting. The other sections were taught later. So, at least in Leung Ting's school it was not as you describe, but maybe some of his students and grandstudents who run their own organisations have their own curriculum. Anyhow, you are correct, the HK sections are very simple and rather short and can be learnt in a short time, however in Germany, some teachers teach longer and more elaborate versions.


----------



## Bino TWT (Jul 30, 2018)

Jlq, Thanks for the response. To my understanding, the sections were always a part of the LTWT system, although I haven't had the chance to speak with many people that trained with LT in HK pre-1980. I have been known to be wrong lol. 

My first Sifu was a student of KK at the castle and a classmate of Emin, who after coming to America in the early 80's, began touring the states with LT and opened an IWTA school. LT taught him the sections. He later left the IWTA and went under an organization that was an offshoot of the EWTO (since there is no EWTO presence in America) with Simon Mayer (an instructor from KK's castle), and Martin Hofmann (left the EWTO after 5th Practitioner) so I learned the EWTO system from them. 

My current Sifu started in the EWTO under KK in the 80's as well but left, and has been under CCF and Chris Collins, before finally settling in under Tam Yiu Ming, who we are under now. I originally learned KK's version of the sections, but have since learned the sections (and the system) as they are (currently) taught in HK by LT,  CCF and Tam Yiu Ming. 

As far as the difference between KK & LT's views on the sections, you are spot on brother. The Germans drastically over-complicated things and drug even the simplest things out over many many years. Under Tam, we use the sections as a core idea to highlight techniques and explore situations and possibilities that arise.They are more of a guide than etched in stone, and one is encouraged to constantly be able to switch up responses from various sections instead of following the choreography, and "lose" the sections once one has absorbed the skill it has to offer. 

I understand that the curriculum and the grading system has changed many times over the years in both the HK and EWTO sides of WT (not to mention the offshoot organizations, like you said). LT comes to Texas a few times a year, and the way he teaches it now and the material for the student grades in his IWTA kwoons is as I described earlier. Like all things though, change comes with time.  

I'm a little jealous that you got to train at HQ lol... I'm hoping to make it over there one day; it's on my bucket list. 

I'd really love to pick your brain sometime bro.


----------



## geezer (Jul 30, 2018)

Bino TWT said:


> On top of the Chi Sao sections, the EWTO also has the Lat Sao program, so double double your enjoyment.



When I learned under LT, he had a handful of supplemental drills that he called "lat-sau". As you point out, the extensive EWTO Lat-sau program was developed separately. I had relatively little exposure to those EWTO drills since I left WT in the early nineties. When I returned to the art and affiliated with my current WT offshoot organization, I had to learn their version of the Lat-Sau program which is somewhat simpler than the EWTO program.

Although at first I didn't care for Lat Sau, I now find it a lot of fun, and believe it is a very practical way to introduce students to technical applications, as well as timing, distance, and flow ....making their transition down the road to sparring and chi-sau much easier.

BTW, one reason I might like the Lat-Sau better these days is that I will shamelessly experiment and change the sequences as I see fit! 

I can't really get away with that so much with the Chi-Sau sections ...and stay in my current Assn. 



Bino TWT said:


> BTW, I've never heard of the Chi Sao sections being called "2 man forms"; maybe there's just a mistranslation into English from German/Swedish/Dutch/whatever? And to answer some of the questions up there, no they do not replace the forms, nor do they serve the same function.



I haven't heard the Chi Sau sections called two man forms either, but IMO that _is _....pretty much... what they are.


----------



## geezer (Jul 30, 2018)

Bino ...do you guys do Lat Sau? ...And if so, do you ever mess with it? Like go from the Lat Sau base platform (repeating pak-da) to ....whatever? Like maybe pak-pak-clinch and throw (kinda in our Lat Sau 5 anyway) or pak upward, change levels and shoot under the incoming punch, ...or duck under and take the back, ...or arm drag, ....or ...or ....or?

Well, _I do_. All the time ...since my instructor is over a thousand miles away and can't yell at me.


----------



## Bino TWT (Jul 30, 2018)

Lol Geezer, I learned the entire Lat Sao program up to 1st Tech before my exodus (now I'm 1st tech in HKWT too, which is much further in the system). The curriculum I teach now is the Hong Kong system, but I have retained some of the Lat Sao elements into what I teach and shuffled it into the HK curriculum where it parallels. Mostly in the first few student grades. For instance, I teach Lat Sao 1 to learn proper punching & Pak'ing and occupation of the center, and the program 1 trap sequence, and the key elements of each of the first 5 Lat Sao levels (5 is pretty awesome, yes), along with a lot of the Chi Sao drills from 6. I teach Lat Sao 3 in it's entirety (Lat Sao 3 is an amazing program!) but by student grade 3, we are using "real" Lat Sao (free hand, no contact) instead of the Pak Da platform. I pretty much discarded everything from the EWTO program after SG-6. In the HK system, our main training platform in the early stage is Jut Chuen, but I have my students test their techniques under pressure from every range, every platform. When they learn something, they have to be able to make it work from Pak Da, Poon Sao, Jut Chuen, and of course no contact range. We flow in and out of the platforms as well, so they learn to react to the changes. We go from Poon Sao to Pak Da to Jut Chuen, break  contact then reengage, all while flowing in and out of all of the sections randomly, so you are making intelligent strategic impulse responses to real pressure in real time without knowing what's coming. 

Especially in the beginning levels, the Lat Sao program is excellent for fine tuning the mechanics and technical aspects, and getting the students familar with certain techniques, responses, and situations, although I feel that as a platform it reaches a point of diminishing return, and I feel that there are quite a bit of "flaws" in the choreography, especially in the upper levels. It (Lat Sao platform) does make it easier to train between high and low level students, like if one is Biu Tze level and one is pre-Chi Sao level though. 

My sifu is currently overseas training with Tam Yiu Ming at th moment, but he will be back to kick my *** in the next month or so lol.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Aug 2, 2018)

I trained under an instructor in an organization that formed as rebel outcasts of sorts from LT / EWTO, and they took the EWTO's sections and updated them somewhat. I was frustrated by them. What you were able to learn depended on your student grade, and your student grade relied upon remembering and executing chi-sau sections and drills flawlessly (enough) for testing. My memory sucks, and having to stand mostly stationary for most of the sections and drills was torture for me sometimes personally.

I will give my instructor credit for the fact that once a main section was learned to the point that students could execute it without having to pause and think of the next movement, he would encourage unscripted lat-sau / gor-sau and say "use attacks from section X". This made you then apply it - actively think and look for opportunities to use specific ways to trap / attack. That sort of felt like a rubber meeting the road kind of moment and what kept me interested, made me feel like I was progressing.

Forms are obviously important to WC, and drills are important in about every martial art for good reason, but the combo of forms + chi-sau sections + more drills, it gets very esoteric and tedious without a good amount of sparring to balance it out.


----------

