# Saving Wing Chun by Eliminating Chi Sau



## Nobody Important (Aug 8, 2019)

Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!

The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:

1. Do you truly believe that Chi Sau is the "Key" to making Wing Chun work?

2. If Chi Sau is really such an effective training process why don't arts like Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling or Jujutsu (all arts that have proven themselves effective in sport and street fighting) adopt the method?

3. For all those that say "Chi Sau isn't fighting", then why act like it is and put such emphasis on it as to make it integral to the functionality of the art?

Let the sh!t show begin! Geezer you're welcome, lol.


----------



## Highlander (Aug 8, 2019)

Wing Tsun is a very internal system. The Chi Sao is a important exercise to train relaxation and body unity when under pressure. However I agree it's given entirely too much credit. Dumping hundreds of hours into chi sao wont help you, if you dont pull the concepts out and practice them in different ways I.E. more realistic ways. BUT I think that removing chi sao would be the same as removing siu nim tao


----------



## Martial D (Aug 8, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...


Chi sau is just a drill for building sensitivity while maintaining contact. As an MMA guy with deep roots in WC, I can definitely say it's helped my clinch and ground game.

Have you even done it for ten seconds of your life?


----------



## Danny T (Aug 8, 2019)

Wrestling, boxing, Muay Thai, many of the FMAs, and other fighting arts have some form of chi sao or arm entanglement drill.
Chi Sao isn’t the problem. Teaching and practicing chi sao as a highest level of fighting and using it, as “a litmus test” for fighting skill is the problem. 
Imagine if wrestling’s litmus test was pummeling drills or muay thai’s was their clinch counter for counter drills, or the FMA’s sagang labo or hubud lubud drills. 
Chi Sao along with it’s many different aspects is a very important piece of training but it is not an indication of any individual’s fighting skill. 
I see it often with many in their first and second fights at mma events. In the back warming up their padwork is great; sharp punches, powerful kicks, or their pummeling and grappling drills are relaxed and smooth but when they get into the arena and get hit hard or kicked hard the adrenaline hits them and all that good looking drill skill leaves.
Drilling Is Not Fighting it is drilling.
Chi Sao is a drill and while pieces of it will be used in fighting, Chi Sao itself is not fighting.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 8, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...



Let see, Chi Sau isn't for fighting so illuminate it...ok.....so with that approach might as well get rid of Siu Nim Tau, Chum Kiu, and Biu Ji…those are forms, and not really for fighting either. May or may not keep the Muk Yan Jong, but then you are hitting it and it is not hitting back so that may or may not be fighting...so what's left of Wing Chun...the pole and knives...which are also pretty much useless these days so get rid of those too...now what...Wing Chun is....what......Oh I know, take Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling or Jujutsu....... they don't have Chi Sau....but they don't have the Muk Yn Jong either.....but then that may or may not be important...... IMHO, Chi Sau is an important part of Wing Chun training....if done, and trained, correctly....key word there being "correctly".

If something in a style really annoys someone then either suck it up butter cup and deal with it and take the rest with it or move on to another style with things less annoying to them. Change their style of choice, don't change the style to fit themselves.



Nobody Important said:


> 1. Do you truly believe that Chi Sau is the "Key" to making Wing Chun work?


To make it work correctly, like Wing Chun is supposed to



Nobody Important said:


> 2. If Chi Sau is really such an effective training process why don't arts like Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling or Jujutsu (all arts that have proven themselves effective in sport and street fighting) adopt the method?



If Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling and Jujutsu are so effective, why don't they use them on the battlefield, why not just give it up and go for knife and gun training.



Nobody Important said:


> 3. For all those that say "Chi Sau isn't fighting", then why act like it is and put such emphasis on it as to make it integral to the functionality of the art?



Because it is part of learning how to fight using Wing Chun because it is not Boxing, Muay Thai, Wrestling or Jujutsu


Want to fight like they do in Boxing, Muay Thai, Wrestling or Jujutsu...then go train them.


----------



## Martial D (Aug 8, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Wrestling, boxing, Muay Thai, many of the FMAs, and other fighting arts have some form of chi sao or arm entanglement drill.
> Chi Sao isn’t the problem. Teaching and practicing chi sao as a highest level of fighting and using it, as “a litmus test” for fighting skill is the problem.
> Imagine if wrestling’s litmus test was pummeling drills or muay thai’s was their clinch counter for counter drills, or the FMA’s sagang labo or hubud lubud drills.
> Chi Sao along with it’s many different aspects is a very important piece of training but it is not an indication of any individual’s fighting skill.
> ...



I'm not sure many people say it is. Even the 'wing chun is too deadly for the cage because it's for the streetz!' crowd will generally admit chi sau is not fighting.

However, it can get pretty competitive,


----------



## yak sao (Aug 8, 2019)

Just like there are different intensities of sparring, chi sau is done at different intensities as well...at least it should be.

I think this video is a good indication that chi sau is an effective means for increasing fighting skills.


----------



## Martial D (Aug 8, 2019)

yak sao said:


> Just like there are different intensities of sparring, chi sau is done at different intensities as well...at least it should be.
> 
> I think this video is a good indication that chi sau is an effective means for increasing fighting skills.


Hey look who's back. Hiatus fin?


----------



## yak sao (Aug 8, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Hey look who's back. Hiatus fin?



Nice to know I've been missed, a welcome back cake would have been nice.


----------



## Martial D (Aug 8, 2019)

yak sao said:


> Nice to know I've been missed, a welcome back cake would have been nice.


Remembered anyway. What made you swear off swearing off mt?


----------



## yak sao (Aug 8, 2019)

Actually I check a quite a bit, but WC Forum has been deader than a doornail


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 8, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...


I’ve never been aware of any of these “issues” that you bring up.  I guess the problem is already solved.  

Next...


----------



## geezer (Aug 8, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...



Am I alone in liking your deliberately provocative post? It certainly elicited some good responses. Here are my answers, in the order of the questions you posed:

1. Yeah, I think chi-sau training in a _balanced_ curriculum including basics, forms, paired drills, and the oft neglected areas of conditioning and sparring is very important to developing the practical side of WC skill.

2. As Danny pointed out, other close range arts do indeed have contact training methods that can be compared to chi-sau. In other striking arts you can see this to a degree in clinch work and this is especially true of grappling arts. Some grappling drills are almost like_ full body chi-sau._

3. I agree that it is a _mistake_ to approach chi-sau as "fighting". Sometimes it can be done as a form of controlled sparring, but it requires a high level of restraint, control, and a certain amount of cooperation by both participants or it quickly degenerates into crude sparring that is nothing like what chi-sau is supposed to be.

 I also believe that chi-sau is often  mis-characterized and given undue weight in training in WC schools that do not spar or fight, and hold that chi-sau is all the sparring you ever need to do. There is nothing wrong with seldom sparring and doing a lot of chi-sau _because that is what you enjoy doing_ ...if you are being _honest_ with yourself. There is _everything_ wrong with fooling yourself into thinking that chi-sau is all you need to become an effective fighter.


----------



## Nobody Important (Aug 8, 2019)

geezer said:


> Am I alone in liking your deliberately provocative post? It certainly elicited some good responses. Here are my answers, in the order of the questions you posed:
> 
> 1. Yeah, I think chi-sau training in a _balanced_ curriculum including basics, forms, paired drills, and the oft neglected areas of conditioning and sparring is very important to developing the practical side of WC skill.
> 
> ...


I tried to liven things up a little bit for ya Steve, but unfortunately my troll post didn't illicit too much vitriol, lol. I don't want to stir too much sh!t cause then I'd have to lick the spoon! But hopefully this post will generate some thought and different perspective into what TMA's can do to remain relevant in today's "prove it" society. Good response to the post BTW.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 8, 2019)

The Taiji system has the same concern too - to assume that arm contact will be given to you for free.






Instead of taking WC sticky hands out, some extra training should be added in. After the WC sticky hands and before the sparring, another training should be added in.

Why some MA systems don't have this kind of training - establish contact from far distance? IMO, "how to establish that contact" (not assume that contact will give to you for free) is very important.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 8, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The Taiji system has the same concern too - to assume that arm contact will be given to you for free.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nobody assumes arm contact is given for free.  But I know that you know this.

Push hands, like chi sai, is a drill.  Nothing more, nothing less.

But you know this as well.


----------



## yak sao (Aug 8, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The Taiji system has the same concern too - to assume that arm contact will be given to you for free.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 You're right . If you're not able to bridge the distance and get in close where you can wreak havoc on your opponent, or worse, get knocked out before you can move inside, then all of this chi sau training becomes nothing more than glorified exercise.

 In our lineage we train drills known as lat sau, which are drills we do to train  what to do when you're not necessarily in contact with your opponent's arms.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 8, 2019)

What's missing in the WC sticky hand training is

- you try to make your arm to touch my arm, but
- I try not to let your arm to touch my arm.

This is why I always like to use a

- clockwise downward parry followed by
- counter-clockwise upward arm wrap.

When my opponent tries to rotate his arm the same direction as my arm and try to avoid contact, if I reverse my arm rotation, I can contact his arm easily.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 8, 2019)

yak sao said:


> In our lineage we train drills known as lat sau, which are drills we do to train  what to do when you're not necessarily in contact with your opponent's arms.


I don't understand why the WC system doesn't emphasize on this training. IMO, this training has much more value than the WC sticky hand training.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 8, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The Taiji system has the same concern too - to assume that arm contact will be given to you for free.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I will post nothing after this about your view of taiji other than; obviously you never did, or trained push hands with my shifu.....  later


----------



## Danny T (Aug 8, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I don't understand why the WC system doesn't emphasize on this training. IMO, this training has much more value than the WC sticky hand training.


The wing chun system has this...well the system I have been trained in does...and a lot more.


----------



## Danny T (Aug 9, 2019)

@Kung Fu Wang from the remarks you make on wing chun I often feel; either you trained wing chun for a very short period or the people you trained with had a very limited knowledge of wing chun. The above drill you posted is but one of many we use for intercepting, creating a bridge, developing timing, counter attacking, re-countering, controlling range, as well as other tactics.


----------



## Highlander (Aug 9, 2019)

Although to be fair.. a lot of the comments in the WT threads are clearly not WT people


----------



## Danny T (Aug 9, 2019)

Highlander said:


> Although to be fair.. a lot of the comments in the WT threads are clearly not WT people


This is true however, Kung Fu Wang has trained in wing chun.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 9, 2019)

Danny T said:


> @Kung Fu Wang from the remarks you make on wing chun I often feel; either you trained wing chun for a very short period or the people you trained with had a very limited knowledge of wing chun. The above drill you posted is but one of many we use for intercepting, creating a bridge, developing timing, counter attacking, re-countering, controlling range, as well as other tactics.


Did Yip men ever taught this training in his class, or was this training added in by his students later on?

I have met 3 of Yip men's students when I was a student in UT Austin. They all learned WC directly from Yip Men in Hong Kong during 1968 - 1971.

- Jimmy Kao (I learned WC from him in 1973),
- Jeffrey Law,
- Albert Law (Jeffrey Law's young brother). I had sparred with him. He used Tan Shou to block my punch. That made me to have interested in the WC system.

None of them ever told me that the Lat Shou training existed in Yip Men's class. None of them had ever shown me the training in this clip.

We went from 3 forms -> single sticky hand -> double sticky hands -> wooden dummy training






This is also true that the Chang style Taiji that I have learned, this kind of training (deal with incoming punch) also doesn't exist.





​


----------



## yak sao (Aug 9, 2019)

Lat sau means "free hand", not that I speak Cantonese but my Si-Fu does.

So it's not so much a series of drills as it is concepts of what to do if your hands are not in contact with your opponent's.

Whether they did these specific drills in his class  or if his students took this knowledge and developed their own drills, or if it's a combination of the two, I see this as a good thing.
Taking something and making it your own rather than just being a Mindless robot mimicking their teacher.


----------



## Danny T (Aug 9, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Did Yip men ever taught this training in his class, or was this training added in by his students later on?
> 
> I have met 3 of Yip men's students when I was a student in UT Austin. They all learned WC directly from Yip Men in Hong Kong during 1968 - 1971.
> 
> ...


Sorry you didn't learn such.
I never trained under Yip Man so I have no direct knowledge of what he taught all his students. I am in the Jiu Wan lineage (who was a very good friend of Yip Man) and I have trained with 2 of his students and both had us doing such entry drills. I also have a few sessions with one of Wong Shun Leung's students Gary Lam and he had me doing such drills as well.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 9, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Sorry you didn't learn such.
> I never trained under Yip Man so I have no direct knowledge of what he taught all his students. I am in the Jiu Wan lineage (who was a very good friend of Yip Man) and I have trained with 2 of his students and both had us doing such entry drills. I also have a few sessions with one of Wong Shun Leung's students Gary Lam and he had me doing such drills as well.


So we both agree that this is a good drill. Some WC schools may train it, some WC schools may not. Do you think this drill is more important than the WC single/double sticky hand drills?

IMO, if you want to be a wrestler, you may be interested in this WC sticky hand drill. But if you want to be a striker, you will be more interested in this kind of drill - dealing with incoming punch from distance.


----------



## Danny T (Aug 9, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> So we both agree that this is a good drill. Some WC schools may train it, some WC schools may not. Do you think this drill is more important than the WC single/double sticky hand drills?
> 
> IMO, if you want to be a wrestler, you may be interested in this WC sticky hand drill. But if you want to be a striker, you will be more interested in this kind of drill - dealing with incoming punch from distance.


They are good drills for what they are designed for. 
What's more important a fork or a spoon?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...


Thanks for posting this. I'm enjoying the view as an outsider, and have an observation (then some input that mirrors what some others have said). The vigor of some of the early responses in this thread suggest this is a sore spot for some. There's probably a reason for that, and it's probably worth some exploration within the WC community. I think it's an interesting question/proposition.

Whenever I see chi sau videos, I'm immediately reminded of some practices common in the aiki arts, and I think some of the issues are similar. There are drills/exercises that show up to varying degrees in different styles and different schools, which have some of the same focus (a bit internal, develop "feel", mimic specific movements that may or may not be used in combat, etc.). Where those drills are used "properly" (the definition of which can vary based on the needs and purpose of each group), they are beneficial. Where those drills become the focus, they actually become detrimental.

When a drill is detrimental, removing it is beneficial - even if it's part of the recognizable identity of the style. Aikido schools that over-emphasize light-touch drills (I don't know the name they use for the drill I have in mind, so can't search up a video for it) develop students who depend upon light touch and can't work with heavy touch (meaning what they do only works when the input is a gentle, flowing attack). In those schools, eliminating the drill would actually be useful, because it would be likely to force them to give more time to other aspects of their training. In schools where the light-touch drill is used as a way to soften beginners so they aren't dependent upon muscular exertion, or for advanced students to polish technique, the drill can be highly beneficial.

I wouldn't argue that drill should be removed from Aikido, in general. I would argue it should be removed from some schools, because it doesn't do what they think it is doing, and actually does the opposite.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

geezer said:


> There is nothing wrong with seldom sparring and doing a lot of chi-sau _because that is what you enjoy doing_ ...if you are being _honest_ with yourself.


I meant to include this in my prior post...

This is a key point. In those Aikido schools where that drill is highly emphasized, that's actually fine for some of them. Because they like it, aren't focused on developing fighting skills (part of later philosophy in Aikido), and are aware of the limitations. So, if a WC school/group just likes developing the movement chi sau develops, they enjoy the practice, and understand the limitations, they are okay doing exactly as much chi sau as they want.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What's missing in the WC sticky hand training is
> 
> - you try to make your arm to touch my arm, but
> - I try not to let your arm to touch my arm.
> ...


This is a common problem when training drills, because both people are the same style (in this case, WC). When two WC people clash, they both want (I think - going from what I've seen and heard here) that arm-to-arm contact. So nobody is avoiding it, since both want to use it. 

For your suggested drill to have much effect, there's going to have to be some "avoidance" training. Otherwise, it's like learning to defend against a takedown delivered by someone who doesn't really know how to do that takedown. Then we have to ask if there's enough benefit to the new drill to divert time into this new training, as well. Or is there another way that takes less diversion?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

Highlander said:


> Although to be fair.. a lot of the comments in the WT threads are clearly not WT people


Hey, I resemble that remark!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> "avoidance" training.


If you learn

- a technique, you learn how to counter it, and also how to counter those counters.
- WC sticky hand, you learn how to avoid arm contact, and also how to solve the avoiding issue.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

Highlander said:


> Although to be fair.. a lot of the comments in the WT threads are clearly not WT people


We can discuss WC only from the WC point of view. We can also discuss WC from the general MA point of view.

To suggest the Judo system to include no jacket wrestling may upset many Judo guys.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you learn
> 
> - a technique, you learn how to counter it, and also how to counter those counters.
> - WC sticky hand, you learn how to avoid counter, and also how to solve the avoiding issue.


True, where the technique is detrimental to you. If I want your arm connected to mine, then I'll learn how to connect our arms. But if I want it connected, I may not care to learn how to avoid that connection, since I wanted it in the first place - I'll just learn to use the connection once you initiate it.

Whether that applies to WC or not, I obviously don't know.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

If the "grabbing" principle can also be included and emphasized in the WC sticky hand training, the WC sticky hand can be an excellent bridge between the striking art and the wrestling art.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> But if I want it connected, I may not care to learn how to avoid that connection, since I wanted it in the first place - I'll just learn to use the connection once you initiate it.
> 
> Whether that applies to WC or not, I obviously don't know.


When you teach your student how to make arm contact, if you student asks you, "How can I avoid it?" 

What will be your respond?


----------



## yak sao (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you teach your student how to make arm contact, if you student asks you, "How can I avoid it?"
> 
> What will be your respond?



Kick him


----------



## Danny T (Aug 10, 2019)

yak sao said:


> Kick him


NO...stop that!! You aren’t allowed to be that logical!!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you teach your student how to make arm contact, if you student asks you, "How can I avoid it?"
> 
> What will be your respond?


That depends whether there's a reason (within the context of what I teach) to avoid it or not. If the system needs that contact (or at the very least always seeks it), then the answer could be, "Don't. Use it when it's given to you. It's a gift."


----------



## Callen (Aug 10, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...



The purpose of Chi Sau can vary between any given curriculum, school or group depending on their interpretation and overall intended goals. The methods in which a practitioner utilizes Chi Sau can in-turn shape their knowledge and use of the system in general.

Chi Sau is not exclusively for trapping or sticking (sensitivity) to an opponent’s arms, it is also trained to free the arms from obstructions and maintain the attack. Chi Sau develops automatic responses and reflexes for getting back to the center-line when blocked out or entangled by an attack. All of this compliments the idea of Lat Sau Jik Chung, influencing how the system is implemented as a whole.

Training Chi Sau can also be viewed as a way to let the opponent show you how to hit them. It is also often thought of as fixing a problem of access and not gaining an advantage of control. It is paramount to chase the center and never chase hands, Chi Sau should always develop the instinct to chase the center-line and take position.

IMO, these are key attributes to fully understanding the system. No serious Wing Chun practitioner should ever really consider eliminating them... no matter what century it is.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

Callen said:


> The purpose of Chi Sau can vary between any given curriculum, school or group depending on their interpretation and overall intended goals. The methods in which a practitioner utilizes Chi Sau can in-turn shape their knowledge and use of the system in general.
> 
> Chi Sau is not exclusively for trapping or sticking (sensitivity) to an opponent’s arms, it is also trained to free the arms from obstructions and maintain the attack. Chi Sau develops automatic responses and reflexes for getting back to the center-line when blocked out or entangled by an attack. All of this compliments the idea of Lat Sau Jik Chung, influencing how the system is implemented as a whole.
> 
> ...


What other ways can those attributes be trained?


----------



## Callen (Aug 10, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> What other ways can those attributes be trained?


That could sponsor a completely different debate of course, but those attributes are _the_ mothership of Wing Chun. They are main concepts that are apparent throughout the entire system, trained and honed constantly. Everything we do is in the name of making these attributes more effective.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2019)

Callen said:


> That could sponsor a completely different debate of course, but those attributes are _the_ mothership of Wing Chun. They are main concepts that are apparent throughout the entire system, trained and honed constantly. Everything we do is in the name of making these attributes more effective.


I think I was being unintentionally indirect. My point was that if those are fundamental to WC, then they were likely being trained in many ways (as you replied here), so removing one exercise likely wouldn't remove any of those attributes - you'd just have to make sure you had them properly balanced in other exercises.

Though, frankly, I like the concept of chi sau. I've done a vaguely similar exercise in Aikido training for some (not all) of the same reasons. I suspect the issue is more a matter of balancing areas of training, rather than a need to eliminate a specific drill.


----------



## geezer (Aug 10, 2019)

[/QUOTE]
Squirrel Alert! Am I the only one with a weird reaction to the uniform tops in the photo above???

A former co-worker of mine, a teacher at the same High School, was the daughter of a nazi concentration camp survivor. On one occasion, she brought her father's old concentration camp uniform to show her class and raise awareness about the Holocaust. Her father had kept it all those years as it was what he was wearing when the camp was liberated and at that moment was his only possession left in the world. This is what it looked like:






Yeah, and it was even the same color. Kinda grey with darker grey-blue stripes. Talk about a really unfortunate coincidence. Yikes!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

My primary long fist system doesn't have this kind of training. My long fist teacher didn't teach me this. I believe my long fist teacher's teacher didn't teach him this either. If I can re-live my life all over again, I will spend more time in this kind of training than in the solo form training. IMO, every single hour that one can spend in this kind of training, he will get good benefit from it.

I don't like 2 men form. I do like 2 men drill. For any striking art system, what other kind of training can be more important than this? ​


----------



## geezer (Aug 10, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I think I was being unintentionally indirect. My point was that if those are fundamental to WC, then they were likely being trained in many ways (as you replied here), so removing one exercise likely wouldn't remove any of those attributes - you'd just have to make sure you had them properly balanced in other exercises....



If you did that -i.e. eliminated chi-sau and used other methods to train the same concepts, you could still have a good fighting system, but IMO it wouldn't be Wing Chun. It would be like training Shotokan or TKD and eliminating all kata. You would have a different art.

Now on the other hand, different WC groups train chi-sau very differently. And frankly, I'm getting kinda fed-up with the way some of the groups in my own lineage train it. But that doesn't mean I reject chi-sau in general as a key training method, along with paired drills, forms, and sparring.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> My primary long fist system doesn't have this kind of training. My long fist teacher didn't teach me this. I believe my long fist teacher's teacher didn't teach him this either. If I can re-live my life all over again, I will spend more time in this kind of training than in the solo form training. IMO, every single hour that one can spend in this kind of training, he will get good reward from it.
> 
> For any striking art system, what other kind of training can be more important than this?


It is a useful tool, among many useful tools.  Forms are also a useful tool, among many useful tools.  The key is, use a variety of tools to balance your training and develop your skills.

You have a tendency to present things as an “all or none” choice.  I don’t understand why you do this.  Reality does not work this way.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> You have a tendency to present things as an “all or none” choice.  I don’t understand why you do this.  Reality does not work this way.


The following is what I have said. 

A + B > A



Kung Fu Wang said:


> Instead of taking WC sticky hands out, some extra training should be added in.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

geezer said:


> If you did that -i.e. eliminated chi-sau and used other methods to train the same concepts, you could still have a good fighting system, but IMO it wouldn't be Wing Chun.


This is why we should add things in and not take things out.

boxing + kicking = kick boxing
kick boxing + throw = Sanda
Sanda + ground game = MMA

A + B > A


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The following is what I have said.
> 
> A + B > A


Unless B is a negative.  But I take your meaning.  And yet this does not answer my question:  why do you present things as if they are all-or-none?


----------



## Danny T (Aug 10, 2019)

Forms = the cliff notes of the system. Study form only your art will be lacking
Drills = help develop the attributes needed to function as well as to understand range, timing, cadence, rhythm, angles, proper use of footwork, entries, countering, re-countering, set-up, primary attacks, contingencies, and follow ups plus many other needs for physical movement for fighting.
Exercises = conditioning and strengthening the body.
Free Movement training = shadow boxing or equivalent 
Padwork and bag work for power, targeting, movement and conditioning.
Restricted Sparring = Working specific parts of your game. 
Technical Sparring = playing to put it all together with resistance, speed, and not knowing what is coming at you or when.
Hard Sparring = Hard sparring (should be limited, too much gets people burnt or damaged)
Weapons work.
Scenario work, multiple opponent work, different environment work.

All of the above important aspects for a complete program of training.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is why we should add things in and not take things out.
> 
> boxing + kicking = kick boxing
> kick boxing + throw = Sanda
> ...


Adding things can violate methodology and consistency.  It can also make the system cumbersome and unwieldy and in-practiceable.  While it can be an improvement, It is not automatically an improvement.  It is not always a good idea.

Martial systems were created by people, not gods.  They had the same failures and faults as you and I and all people.  Not everything put into a martial system was a good idea.  Some things would be better eliminated.  It depends on what that thing is, and in what context.  

Adding things is not always good.  Eliminating things is not always bad.

A+B is not always > A.  It depends on what A is and what B is.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 10, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Forms = the cliff notes of the system.


I see forms as more than cliff notes.  Maybe more like a text book.


----------



## Danny T (Aug 10, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I see forms as more than cliff notes.  Maybe more like a text book.


I used to think as such or maybe a catalog of movements/techniques. However, over the years and with deeper understanding I realized not everything is in the forms but most all is referenced within them therefore, I see forms more as cliff notes or memory minders to much more than is presented.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 10, 2019)

I would suggest do Chi sou to pummeling.

Contested and uncontested.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 10, 2019)

Danny T said:


> The wing chun system has this...well the system I have been trained in does...and a lot more.



I don't think that sort of drilling achieves very much.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 10, 2019)

yak sao said:


> Just like there are different intensities of sparring, chi sau is done at different intensities as well...at least it should be.
> 
> I think this video is a good indication that chi sau is an effective means for increasing fighting skills.



That teaches a lot of bad habits along with the good ones. 

Not favoring head movement and lateral footwork.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 10, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> why do you present things as if they are all-or-none?


Where did I say that?


----------



## Danny T (Aug 10, 2019)

drop bear said:


> I don't think that sort of drilling achieves very much.


Okay.

For me it depends on what level you are on. This would be a very low level drill for us and but a start toward much more. We would also be working on re-countering the counter attacker.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 10, 2019)

Danny T said:


> I used to think as such or maybe a catalog of movements/techniques. However, over the years and with deeper understanding I realized not everything is in the forms but most all is referenced within them therefore, I see forms more as cliff notes or memory minders to much more than is presented.


It contains the theory and the method and how to go about things.  In mind, that is a textbook.  You still need to handle the real problems yourself, but the textbook showed you how to go about it.

To me, cliffs notes just give the highlights.  Not the full method.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Where did I say that?


It is in how you present things.  It is the subtext.  You want to dismiss something like chi-sau but cannot acknowledge its place as one of many tools.  You present it as if chi-sau (or forms, in other instances) are the only thing, and it cannot possibly be a successful way to train.

Step back and think about what you have written, before you hit the post button.


----------



## Danny T (Aug 10, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> It contains the theory and the method and how to go about things.  In mind, that is a textbook.  You still need to handle the real problems yourself, but the textbook showed you how to go about it.
> 
> To me, cliffs notes just give the highlights.  Not the full method.


Okay.

I've yet to see where forms gave the full method.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 10, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Okay.
> 
> I've yet to see where forms gave the full method.


Forms give you a way of practicing the method (which is not the same as saying they contain every technique or every conceivable combination).

Have you read a textbook that contains every real-life problem you may need to deal with?  No, a text book shows you how to approach and deal with a problem.  But you still need to take what you have learned and be able to figure out how to apply it to a real problem.

Maybe the forms in my system are fundamentally structured differently from yours.  I dunno.


----------



## geezer (Aug 11, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Forms give you a way of practicing the method (which is not the same as saying they contain every technique or every conceivable combination).Have you read a textbook that contains every real-life problem you may need to deal with?  No, a text book shows you how to approach and deal with a problem.  But you still need to take what you have learned and be able to figure out how to apply it to a real problem.
> 
> Maybe the forms in my system are fundamentally *structured differently* from yours.  I dunno.



^^^^Yeah they _are_ to a certain degree. I've watched your impressively performed Crane forms clips in the _Members in Motion _forum, and would say that the Wing Chun forms, especially those from the Ip Man lineages tend to be considerably more abbreviated than what I've seen you post of Tibetan White Crane. In that sense maybe WC is more "Cliff Note-ish" and Crane forms more like a text. Just guessin' here.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 11, 2019)

geezer said:


> If you did that -i.e. eliminated chi-sau and used other methods to train the same concepts, you could still have a good fighting system, but IMO it wouldn't be Wing Chun. It would be like training Shotokan or TKD and eliminating all kata. You would have a different art.
> 
> Now on the other hand, different WC groups train chi-sau very differently. And frankly, I'm getting kinda fed-up with the way some of the groups in my own lineage train it. But that doesn't mean I reject chi-sau in general as a key training method, along with paired drills, forms, and sparring.


An interesting take. It's my opinion that the forms don't make Shotokan, etc....but I know many people would disagree with that view. If I took out the Classical forms from NGA (which I almost did 10 years ago), it'd still be NGA. Nothing else would change except that this set of drills would be gone. Would it change how people move, etc.? Yes. But I think the changes would be the same ones I'm getting from students with other adjustments I made. 

But, as I said, I think a lot of folks likely share your view - maybe most of them.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 11, 2019)

Danny T said:


> Okay.
> 
> For me it depends on what level you are on. This would be a very low level drill for us and but a start toward much more. We would also be working on re-countering the counter attacker.



Yeah. I would have though chi sau would be a bit more functional because at least it has some sort of timing element.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 11, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> That depends whether there's a reason (within the context of what I teach) to avoid it or not. If the system needs that contact (or at the very least always seeks it), then the answer could be, "Don't. Use it when it's given to you. It's a gift."


Here is an example that when your opponent tries to control your wrists and switch a striking game into a wrestling game, you may need to respond differently.

Besides the sticky hand (arm) training, should the sticky leg training that your leg make contact on your opponent's leg also be included too?


----------



## yak sao (Aug 11, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Besides the sticky hand (arm) training, should the sticky leg training that your leg make contact on your opponent's leg be included too?



Yes, we refer to it as chi gerk (sticking leg).
I've heard that not all Yip Man lineages do this training though.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 11, 2019)

yak sao said:


> Yes, we refer to it as chi gerk (sticking leg).
> I've heard that not all Yip Man lineages do this training though.


As far as I know, that training was not part of Yip Man's school regular daily training. I believe many training were added in by his students later on which is a good thing.

Did I learn that kick and punch before the hip throw from my teacher? I didn't. It was added in later on.

wrestling + kick/punch > wrestling
WC sticky hand + sticky leg > WC sticky hand


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 11, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Adding things can violate methodology and consistency.


Can ground game make the WC fight more complete?

WC + ground game > WC


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 11, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Can ground game make the WC fight more complete?
> 
> WC + ground game > WC


I don’t know and don’t care, to be honest.  I just dont buy into the mainstream concept that everyone needs to mix BJJ with whatever else it is that they are doing.


----------



## Saheim (Aug 11, 2019)

Callen said:


> The purpose of Chi Sau can vary between any given curriculum, school or group depending on their interpretation and overall intended goals. The methods in which a practitioner utilizes Chi Sau can in-turn shape their knowledge and use of the system in general.
> 
> Chi Sau is not exclusively for trapping or sticking (sensitivity) to an opponent’s arms, it is also trained to free the arms from obstructions and maintain the attack. Chi Sau develops automatic responses and reflexes for getting back to the center-line when blocked out or entangled by an attack. All of this compliments the idea of Lat Sau Jik Chung, influencing how the system is implemented as a whole.
> 
> ...




I had to scroll back up and see your name, check if my instructor was posting this, it sounds familiar 

OP - let's carry your logic to the extreme.  No boxer ever steps into the ring against a speed bag or jump rope, ditch 'em.  It's a fight, not calisthenics, no sense in doing any burpees or running.  Why hit a heavy bag, it doesn't even have arms.  In favt, let's not practice ANYTHING other than the actual act we're attempting to improve - (if that is fighting) just fight.... every class, nothingelse is actually fighting except fighting right?  I don't subscribe to that logic.  I think there are several important aspect of training - partner drills (including chi sao), bag work, kata, weight training, cardio, stretching, etc.

Do I think one should be careful not to let the drill become the objective? Of course! Eliminate it? Definitely not.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 11, 2019)

Saheim said:


> Eliminate it? Definitely not.


The long fist system doesn't have sticky hand like the WC system has. So WC system is already more advance than the long fist system.

IMO, we should not eliminate it but expand it.

WC sticky hand + sticky leg + wrist grabbing + under hook + over hook + head lock > WC sticky hand


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 12, 2019)

Saheim said:


> I had to scroll back up and see your name, check if my instructor was posting this, it sounds familiar
> 
> OP - let's carry your logic to the extreme.  No boxer ever steps into the ring against a speed bag or jump rope, ditch 'em.  It's a fight, not calisthenics, no sense in doing any burpees or running.  Why hit a heavy bag, it doesn't even have arms.  In favt, let's not practice ANYTHING other than the actual act we're attempting to improve - (if that is fighting) just fight.... every class, nothingelse is actually fighting except fighting right?  I don't subscribe to that logic.  I think there are several important aspect of training - partner drills (including chi sao), bag work, kata, weight training, cardio, stretching, etc.
> 
> Do I think one should be careful not to let the drill become the objective? Of course! Eliminate it? Definitely not.


I don't think that's at all the logic the OP is using. He's saying there's a problem directly related to this drill. Imagine if boxers who spent a lot of time on the speed bag turned out not to do well. We could argue the drill's being used wrong (so fix the approach to it); that it's being used too much, so it's taking time away from other drills and is instilling static stances (reduce the use dramatically); or that it's problematic enough that removing it is less harmful than helpful.

Now, we could easily argue that this one correlation might or might not be a clue to causality, and I think that's an important question.


----------



## geezer (Aug 12, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I don’t know and don’t care, to be honest.  I just dont buy into the mainstream concept that everyone needs to mix BJJ with whatever else it is that they are doing.



Yeah, and now that I'm in my mid-60s with joint issues cropping up, I don't thing grappling is really for me. Too bad -I like it. But for self-defense or all out sparring, it's hard to reject that a striking game and good ground work are both necessary.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 12, 2019)

geezer said:


> Yeah, and now that I'm in my mid-60s with joint issues cropping up, I don't thing grappling is really for me. Too bad -I like it. But for self-defense or all out sparring, it's hard to reject that a striking game and good ground work are both necessary.


It depends on what you want to get into.  If you want to spar with grappling included in the ruleset, then yes.  

For self defense, I do not agree that it is necessary.  If one likes it and wants to include it in their training, then they should do so.  But no, I do not agree that it is necessary.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 12, 2019)

geezer said:


> with joint issues cropping up, I don't thing grappling is really for me.


If you compare the

- front kick with foot sweep, the front kick is bad for the knee, the foot sweep is easy for the knee.
- straight punch with hook punch or uppercut, the straight punch is bad for the elbow, the hook punch or uppercut is easy for the elbow.

When you get older, you may not want do too many front kick or side kick, but you don't mind to do more inner hook, or outer hook.

IMO, the wrestling art is much easier on the body joint (more circular motion) than the striking art on the body joint (more straight line motion).


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 12, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you compare the
> 
> - front kick with foot sweep, the front kick is bad for the knee, the foot sweep is easy for the knee.
> - straight punch with hook punch or uppercut, the straight punch is bad for the elbow, the hook punch or uppercut is easy for the elbow.
> ...


I disagree with most everything here.  Front kick is not hard on the knee.  Straight punch is not hard on the elbow.


----------



## geezer (Aug 12, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I disagree with most everything here.  Front kick is not hard on the knee.  Straight punch is not hard on the elbow.



It really depends on how you do what you do. Our lineage of wing chun punches to _full extension_, letting the elbow lock out (if we are "air punching" or, perhaps if we miss our target).

If you use the classical WC vertical fist and keep the elbow pointed down, and are very relaxed, it doesn't seem to cause any problems. But if people are stiff and use force,jamming against the joint, they may cause problems for themselves.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 12, 2019)

geezer said:


> It really depends on how you do what you do. Our lineage of wing chun punches to _full extension_, letting the elbow lock out (if we are "air punching" or, perhaps if we miss our target).
> 
> If you use the classical WC vertical fist and keep the elbow pointed down, and are very relaxed, it doesn't seem to cause any problems. But if people are stiff and use force,jamming against the joint, they may cause problems for themselves.


That’s easy to fix: train smart.


----------



## pdg (Aug 12, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I disagree with most everything here.  Front kick is not hard on the knee.  Straight punch is not hard on the elbow.



A full extension front kick and full extension straight punch to no resistance at all can be hard on the knee/elbow.

Into resistance, that's the direction the joints are designed to accept force so are not hard at all.

Conversely, a sweep to nothing is really easy on the knee, a sweep to a planted foot (or even a bag/pad) puts sideways pressure on the knee and can cause significant pain/injury (unless it's a hook sweep, where you're bending your leg the way it's designed to go).


Waving in the air and letting your joints hyperextend, I agree with KFW - putting realistic resistance into it, I agree with you


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 13, 2019)

pdg said:


> A full extension front kick and full extension straight punch to no resistance at all can be hard on the knee/elbow.
> 
> Into resistance, that's the direction the joints are designed to accept force so are not hard at all.
> 
> ...


You don’t snap you knees and elbows when you practice punches and kicks.  You always protect your joints.  Ive never seen it suggested that practicing these things are hard on these joints.  I’ve been training since 1984, never had a whiff of a problem in this way.  People need to take responsibility for training smart.  Seriously, this is a real surprise to me that this is suggested as a general problem.  I could see where some individuals who have problematic joints might experience difficulties, but not most people; if this is a problem, it should be rare.


----------



## Buka (Aug 13, 2019)

In my professional opinion, full extension front kicks and full extension punches really have no place in fighting arts. Besides not being the best thing for the joints if done repeatedly with force against air - look at it in an application sense....you never try to hit somebody with the very end of your kick or the very end of your punch. When it's at full extension and touches something, the power is already over.

One might argue that "I'm going to hit you in the midst of my extension and follow through to full extension".
While somewhat viable in training for power, in application it doesn't usually work that way, especially for the punches. And if it hits a fighter and you try to keep extending it, you are going to get countered so quickly you won't even see it.


----------



## Eric_H (Aug 14, 2019)

To the original question, I think that there are versions of chi sao that probably are due to be downplayed. I can't remember how many times I've heard the phrase: "Chi sao isn't for fighting". Some people come from the school of thought that it's a sensitivity drill and if you try and add fighty bits to it, you're doing it wrong. I used to think this way too, to a degree. 

When I transitioned to HFY in the early 2000s, one of the differences that came up very early is how HFY looks at chi sao and bridging in general. Everything is for fighting, we don't do purely attribute development drills outside of some chi-gung. If you perform a move with the wrong structure or energy and a punch/kick/grab is open, we're expected to take it (though obviously being controlled with the amount of force applied). If your structure can't last for at least a "one thousand and one" count - it's not considered very good.

It's not a perfect method, but it got me closer to fluency under pressure compared to the YM chi sao method.


----------



## geezer (Aug 15, 2019)

Eric_H said:


> ...It's not a perfect method, but it got me closer to fluency under pressure compared to the YM chi sao method.



The statement above is very well put. There´s no judgement about what others do, just an honest statement about your own experience. I wish everybody in WC could discuss their experience so objectively.

What was it about the YP method that did not work for you, Eric ...I believe you trained in the Yip Man -Moy Yat Lineage?


----------



## Eric_H (Aug 15, 2019)

geezer said:


> What was it about the YP method that did not work for you, Eric ...I believe you trained in the Yip Man -Moy Yat Lineage?



My first teacher had something of a blend with a strong Moy Yat base, afaik he also workshop studied with Ip Ching and a number of the other Senior YM folks here and there (the name Mak Po is coming to mind). His official credentials were a Sifu title, Chops given by his Sigung Moy Yat, and a 7th degree from the VTAA, so for that method, he was clearly very good.

Some of the flaws I found in the method mostly related to range control (How would I even get to Chi Sao in the first place?), deficient structure in a vertical sense (though strong forward to back and just ok side-to-side), a heavy (over?)reliance on bursting power, and a misalignment of focus. Also I think the YM bong sao is largely garbage, but that's a debate for another day.

One example of focus misalignment is that we would punch to the center of the chest, using the logic "if I can hit there, his most defended point, then I can hit him anywhere." I have found that statement to be untrue. The chest is a low value target, and often you open up your own vertical leverage by lunging for it. It's similar to how in saber fighting, going for the legs at range is a risky move - it exposes the head to be taken clean off.


----------



## geezer (Aug 16, 2019)

Eric_H said:


> ... Also I think the YM bong sao is largely *garbage*, but that's a debate for another day...



Dang, Eric,_ this_ is just the kind of debate that has been missing from this forum for  long time now. I am very interested in hearing honest opinions about what has worked for you and what hasn't.  How about starting a new thread on the topic?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 16, 2019)

Eric_H said:


> Also I think the YM bong sao is largely garbage, ...


Many people may not know the term "wrong Bong" that you use right Bong Shou to block a right punch.


----------



## geezer (Aug 17, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Many people may not know the term "wrong Bong" that you use right Bong Shou to block a right punch.



"Wrong bong" isn't always wrong. Sometimes you have to use a cross-bong or "wrong bong" (right vs. right or left vs. left). You just can't stay there, or you are very vulnerable. Instead you immediately continue into offense. "Bong never stays".


----------



## Danny T (Aug 17, 2019)

Wrong bong isn't that it's wrong but more that your execution of bong has a much smaller window of precision and the length of time one can afford to be in bong is significantly reduced. We say, "never get caught in bong sao".


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Aug 17, 2019)

geezer said:


> "Wrong bong" isn't always wrong. Sometimes you have to use a cross-bong or "wrong bong" (right vs. right or left vs. left). You just can't stay there, or you are very vulnerable. Instead you immediately continue into offense. "Bong never stays".


When you use right Bong against your opponent's

- left punch, his right hand can't reach to your right elbow joint.
- right punch, his left hand can reach to your right elbow joint.

Old CMA saying said, "Never expose your elbow to your opponent." Wrong Bong violates that guideline.



geezer said:


> "Bong never stays".


When you punch with right, if you detect that your opponent will use right Bong, your left hand also move toward his raising right elbow. How do you allow your opponent's Bong Shou to change? Your opponent tries to raise his right elbow. All you need is to help his elbow to raise a bit higher than he really wants to.

In the following picture, he can use his left hand to push up his opponent's right elbow joint.


----------



## geezer (Aug 17, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In the following picture, he can use his left hand to push up his opponent's right elbow joint.



In the picture above, Sam Kwok is doing a typical "Lap Sau" drill. It is a drill, mind you, designed to train certain attributes, so it does not translate exactly to sparring and fighting. However, what you say is very true. As pictured, Sifu Kwok could use his forearm (or could have used his hand) to force his partner's elbow upward while pulling down on his partner's wrist leading into a "chicken wing", "hammerlock", or similar elbow lock.

In our lineage, we do _not_ do Lap Sau exactly this way leaving two arms on one as Sifu Kwok is demonstrating above. We prefer a "Jut-Chuen-Da" variation which avoids this. Furthermore we _do_ practice exactly the locking technique you suggested, as well as several very effective counters, ...the simplest and best being a very fast front punch under the bridge (kiu dai chung kuen) delivered the instant our opponent attempts to lift our elbow.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Aug 24, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> INTERESTING, I PRACTICE Yuen Kay San Wing chun. In our system we have several things we practice.
> 1. Strength and conditioning
> 2. Chi Sau
> ...





Martial D said:


> Chi sau is just a drill for building sensitivity while maintaining contact. As an MMA guy with deep roots in WC, I can definitely say it's helped my clinch and ground game.
> 
> Have you even done it for ten seconds of your life?



American Wrestling has form of chi sau. too most arts practice bridge work. Chi sau is just bridge work thats all. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> I don't understand why the WC system doesn't emphasize on this training. IMO, this training has much more value than the WC sticky hand training.



WC has partner drills both like the video you posting which works from the bridge and also partner training when there is no bridge. Before chi sau we learn how to defend against punches and kicks from long range and medium range when there is no bridge. We learn how to enter first before training chi sau. But Chi sau just trains your ability to fight in close, and feel your opponent. 

WC and art, But its a fighting art. ie Martial(war) Art. But the Art can be studied and theorized alone. But the fighting part takes practice too. ONE must fight Non-chunners to be able to utilize and truly understand WC. Some training will help. But when you begin to attack and hit people you will learn what certain parts of WC is for.


----------



## wckf92 (Aug 24, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Though, frankly, I like the concept of chi sau.



Have you learned chi sau yet?


----------



## wckf92 (Aug 24, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> I see forms as more than cliff notes.  Maybe more like a text book.


Cool. 
I see them (all of them) as an alphabet. Then it's my job to make words, learn syntax, learn grammar, etc along the way.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 24, 2019)

wckf92 said:


> Have you learned chi sau yet?


I've learned precisely nothing of WC. What about me posting in the WC forum makes you think I have any experience with it, at all?


----------



## wckf92 (Aug 24, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I've learned precisely nothing of WC. What about me posting in the WC forum makes you think I have any experience with it, at all?



Haha...no worries dude.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Aug 25, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If the "grabbing" principle can also be included and emphasized in the WC sticky hand training, the WC sticky hand can be an excellent bridge between the striking art and the wrestling art.



YKS WC has Grabbing and Jerking techiques and locking techniques as well. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you teach your student how to make arm contact, if you student asks you, "How can I avoid it?"
> 
> What will be your respond?



Simple fight on the outside. WC should have both outside and inside fighting. You should know how to feign attacks and how to keep your opponent at bay or how to bridge if you so choose. Some people by denying them a bridge use have an advantage. The key is to spar and when you spar use both inside and outside fighting strategies.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 1, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...




Goju Ryu which is an authentic Okinawan Karate has sticky hands. exhibit A. As a mainstream flavor or brand of Karate, it may not be as widespread as Shotokan... but it shows that something besides WC utilizes Sticky Hands.
Which responds your question about  "*why don't arts like Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling or Jujutsu (all arts that have proven themselves effective in sport and street fighting) adopt the method?"*

Now, not all brands karate is created or practiced equally but Goju has been used in the streets for self defense, and some number of gojuka have competed in the All Okinawa Full Contact and done quite well.






A good breakdown of the sticky hands in Karate...
found here.

Ryukyu Martial Arts: Crossing Hands in Okinawan Martial Arts

And here is a screenshot showing Kyokushin guys in Brazil practicing Kakie or pushing/sticking hands... which is a brand of karate that is no joke.


----------



## Anarax (Sep 1, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Do you truly believe that Chi Sau is the "Key" to making Wing Chun work?


The skills that chi sau is meant to develop are important for martial artists especially WC practitioners. 



Nobody Important said:


> If Chi Sau is really such an effective training process why don't arts like Muay Thai, Boxing, Wrestling or Jujutsu (all arts that have proven themselves effective in sport and street fighting) adopt the method?


There are multiple arts that train sensitivity/tells through contact, they only have different methods to train such.



Nobody Important said:


> For all those that say "Chi Sau isn't fighting", then why act like it is and put such emphasis on it as to make it integral to the functionality of the art?


I think your comment "then why act like it is" hit the nail on the head. Unfortunately there are many practitioners that want to "win" at chi sau opposed to develop the skill sets it's meant to train. I've had more than a few training partners that miss the point of chi sau and try to treat it as an opportunity to stroke their ego. People with this mentality don't usually do well in sparring for they haven't developed the skills that are utilized in sparring.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 1, 2019)

If WC sticky hand can go into this level, the WC system has already moved from a striking art into a throwing art.

IMO, a training like this should exist in all MA systems.


----------



## Poppity (Sep 2, 2019)

I think sticky techniques exist in all martial arts, bjj applies a lot of sticky body.

I do agree that wing chun has overemphasized the importance of chi sau to the point that it has harmed the application of the style. I can't help but feel that this arose from the general practice of "touch hands if you want to know how good they are" and some people going well I will just specialise in touching hands so other people will think I'm a Don.

Its a bit like a driving examiner looking to how well a candidate finds the clutch biting point as a quick insight into their driving ability, so lots of schools open teaching this ability, on hills, in traffic etc. but neglecting to teach the studetns how to actually drive.


----------



## geezer (Sep 2, 2019)

Snark said:


> I think sticky techniques exist in all martial arts, bjj applies a lot of sticky body.
> 
> I do agree that wing chun has overemphasized the importance of chi sau to the point that it has harmed the application of the style. I can't help but feel that this arose from the general practice of "touch hands if you want to know how good they are" and some people going well I will just specialise in touching hands so other people will think I'm a Don.
> 
> Its a bit like a driving examiner looking to how well a candidate finds the clutch biting point as a quick insight into their driving ability, so lots of schools open teaching this ability, on hills, in traffic etc. but neglecting to teach the studetns how to actually drive.



Interesting analogies. BTW apparently I _am_ a Don. 

Just ask Juan, my yard guy. He always calls me "Don" ...or sometimes Don Esteban. I asked him why, and he said, "Primero porque Ud. es el jefe que me paga, y además Ud. me parece bastante viejo. Ja ja ja ja ja...." --Basically because I'm the boss and I´m old. 

Now tell me. where you come from they test people on driving a _clutch?_ Out here most youngsters hardly know what a clutch is. I had a heck of a time this summer selling my old car with a manual transmission.


----------



## Poppity (Sep 3, 2019)

Respects to you and your family Don Geezer... And belated happy birthday wishes.

The clutch analogy is more of an indicator of ability, back from my dad's heavy sighing and rolling of the eyes when teaching me to drive. With me first forcefully over revving the engine without engaging the clutch (aggresively going nowhere) or  gently accelerating so slowly Christmas repeatedly passed us by. 

I really enjoy driving manual, but typically, I drive an automatic now.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 3, 2019)

Snark said:


> Respects to you and your family Don Geezer... And belated happy birthday wishes.
> 
> The clutch analogy is more of an indicator of ability, back from my dad's heavy sighing and rolling of the eyes when teaching me to drive. With me first forcefully over revving the engine without engaging the clutch (aggresively going nowhere) or  gently accelerating so slowly Christmas repeatedly passed us by.
> 
> I really enjoy driving manual, but typically, I drive an automatic now.


Man, that takes me back to my days teaching motorcycle classes. We spent so much time getting people ready to control the clutch...


----------



## Poppity (Sep 3, 2019)

Motorbikes are cool. Now I'm too old to learn to ride one as I would have to go through the humiliating process of learning on a series of hairdryers before I got to the beasts.


----------



## pdg (Sep 3, 2019)

geezer said:


> Now tell me. where you come from they test people on driving a _clutch?_ Out here most youngsters hardly know what a clutch is. I had a heck of a time this summer selling my old car with a manual transmission.



Automatic cars aren't really popular here, never have been.

I've been driving 25 years, owned around 40 cars and have driven auto three times. Once was for about 30 miles, once for about 150 yards, once for 10 yards. I didn't own any of those cars.

When you take your car test here, the default is manual. If you test in an auto, your licence is restricted to automatic only and you have to retest if you want to drive manual. Manual test covers all options.


----------



## pdg (Sep 3, 2019)

Snark said:


> Motorbikes are cool. Now I'm too old to learn to ride one as I would have to go through the humiliating process of learning on a series of hairdryers before I got to the beasts.



Over 21s are spared the pootler stage here, can do 'direct access' on something like a 600.


----------



## Poppity (Sep 3, 2019)

pdg said:


> Over 21s are spared the pootler stage here, can do 'direct access' on something like a 600.



Watcha fella, i am a fellow Brit. I checked the RAC calculator which seems to suggest that after passing the CBT I would need to own a bike license for 2 years before being able to ride anything over a 125cc. Admittedly having never learnt I am only assuming this to be correct. Cheers


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 3, 2019)

My car has nothing automatic.  Not transmission, not windows, not locks, no internet connection, no cell phone connection, barely a working radio with a CD player.  But it does have power steering and power brakes.  2003 Pontiac Vibe, base model.  Closing in on 200,000 miles.


----------



## geezer (Sep 3, 2019)

pdg said:


> Automatic cars aren't really popular here, never have been.



I like that. Here in the States, most models and makes aren't even available in a manual transmission version, or at least would require a special order. Other things like electric windows are on pretty much all cars. Some years back, my brother tried to special order a Tacoma pickup with manual (crank up) windows and found it really a pain, and that it would cost him a lot more than the deal he could get on one with the standard electric windows.

I guess the car companies and dealers make their profits when the power windows wear out and you have to get the motor or electric parts replaced.

Now I'm not sure how this relates to chi-sau, but there's probably a connection. 

OK, how about this. When I drive a manual transmission, I get a better feel for the what
is happening with the car and the road. Basically I have a better tactile sense for how the vehicle is handling, from the power train to the traction of the tires. Like the connection chi-sau gives you with your training partner, you develop a physical sensitivity to what's going on with your car that you can't get with an automatic.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 3, 2019)

geezer said:


> I like that. Here in the States, most models and makes aren't even available in a manual transmission version, or at least would require a special order. Other things like electric windows are on pretty much all cars. Some years back, my brother tried to special order a Tacoma pickup with manual (crank up) windows and found it really a pain, and that it would cost him a lot more than the deal he could get on one with the standard electric windows.
> 
> I guess the car companies and dealers make their profits when the power windows wear out and you have to get the motor or electric parts replaced.
> 
> ...


It does suck however, when you need to replace a clutch.  That is something that typically happens a lot more than replacing a transmission on an automatic.


----------



## MetalBoar (Sep 3, 2019)

geezer said:


> I like that. Here in the States, most models and makes aren't even available in a manual transmission version, or at least would require a special order. Other things like electric windows are on pretty much all cars. Some years back, my brother tried to special order a Tacoma pickup with manual (crank up) windows and found it really a pain, and that it would cost him a lot more than the deal he could get on one with the standard electric windows.
> 
> I guess the car companies and dealers make their profits when the power windows wear out and you have to get the motor or electric parts replaced.
> 
> ...


My current car is a manual and most of the other cars I've owned over my life have been too. Still, if I were to buy  new car today it would be an auto. The traffic here in Seattle is so bad that my driving experience most of the time seems to be; let the clutch out, roll 5-10 yards, push the clutch in, stop, wait, let the clutch out, roll 5-10 _feet,_ push the clutch in, stop, let the clutch out, no, no, back in, back in! brake! - STOP! wash, rinse, repeat for about 90 minutes. Now if I move back to Arizona, which I'm considering, my opinion might change, but the only thing I'm developing here by driving a manual is how to control my road rage.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 3, 2019)

MetalBoar said:


> My current car is a manual and most of the other cars I've owned over my life have been too. Still, if I were to buy  new car today it would be an auto. The traffic here in Seattle is so bad that my driving experience most of the time seems to be; let the clutch out, roll 5-10 yards, push the clutch in, stop, wait, let the clutch out, roll 5-10 _feet,_ push the clutch in, stop, let the clutch out, no, no, back in, back in! brake! - STOP! wash, rinse, repeat for about 90 minutes. Now if I move back to Arizona, which I'm considering, my opinion might change, but the only thing I'm developing here by driving a manual is how to control my road rage.


I normally much prefer to drive a manual, but in traffic I start to hate them - especially on a motorcycle. Man, I remember my clutch hand getting so sore when stuck in accident traffic. I won't personally own a car I can't easily change gears on, so even with an automatic, I look for a decent auto-stick.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 4, 2019)

Hoping my next car is full electric.  I had a Nissan Leaf on lease, but gave it back when the lease ended.  I liked it a lot, but the range was not yet what it needs to be.  The technology is getting to the point where it makes sense to own one now, with the new generations of electric vehicles.


----------



## pdg (Sep 4, 2019)

Snark said:


> Watcha fella, i am a fellow Brit. I checked the RAC calculator which seems to suggest that after passing the CBT I would need to own a bike license for 2 years before being able to ride anything over a 125cc. Admittedly having never learnt I am only assuming this to be correct. Cheers



I got the 21 bit wrong, it's 24...

But, if over 24, you do CBT on a sub 125 (which is usually less than a day course), then take the theory, then mod1&2 practical tests on any bike up to 46bhp, like a restricted 900 my local training centre has.

No minimum time in grade  some places do the whole lot in like 3 days. If you can handle a bike.



That 2 year thing is if you're 17-23 and do mod1&2 on a 125, then you can claim a full licence - I think.

DA was introduced specifically to allow older people to avoid pootling for 2 years.


----------



## pdg (Sep 4, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> It does suck however, when you need to replace a clutch.  That is something that typically happens a lot more than replacing a transmission on an automatic.



A lot more is a bit strong 

I'd hazard that most cars these days never need a clutch replacement.

Some of it depends how it's driven of course.


----------



## pdg (Sep 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> especially on a motorcycle. Man, I remember my clutch hand getting so sore when stuck in accident traffic.



Filtering (lane splitting) isn't a legal thing in most places over there is it?

From the highway code, last bit bolded by me :

*Rule 151*
*In slow-moving traffic.* You should:


reduce the distance between you and the vehicle ahead to maintain traffic flow
never get so close to the vehicle in front that you cannot stop safely
leave enough space to be able to manoeuvre if the vehicle in front breaks down or an emergency vehicle needs to get past
not change lanes to the left to overtake
allow access into and from side roads, as blocking these will add to congestion
*be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side*


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 4, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Hoping my next car is full electric.  I had a Nissan Leaf on lease, but gave it back when the lease ended.  I liked it a lot, but the range was not yet what it needs to be.  The technology is getting to the point where it makes sense to own one now, with the new generations of electric vehicles.


Since most folks only tool around town, the limited range of an electric makes a lot of sense. Won't catch on as well in more rural areas, though, because parking spots are too often not right at the house, making charging more problematic. They're even getting close to solving the problem for distance travel - you can get a fast charge in the time it takes to have a meal. I think too many people look at the limitation of ~200 miles and think only about the 2-3 long trips they take a year, and forget how easy it is to rent for those, anyway.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 4, 2019)

pdg said:


> A lot more is a bit strong
> 
> I'd hazard that most cars these days never need a clutch replacement.
> 
> Some of it depends how it's driven of course.


I put 250,000 miles on my last manual. I killed the synchronizer towing with it, but the clutch lasted the entire 250K.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 4, 2019)

pdg said:


> Filtering (lane splitting) isn't a legal thing in most places over there is it?
> 
> From the highway code, last bit bolded by me :
> 
> ...


In some places it is, in others, it isn't. In bad traffic, it's sometimes not safe (where drivers aren't doing that last point). And on a big bike, it's not really feasible in a lot of places.


----------



## pdg (Sep 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Since most folks only tool around town, the limited range of an electric makes a lot of sense. Won't catch on as well in more rural areas, though, because parking spots are too often not right at the house, making charging more problematic. They're even getting close to solving the problem for distance travel - you can get a fast charge in the time it takes to have a meal. I think too many people look at the limitation of ~200 miles and think only about the 2-3 long trips they take a year, and forget how easy it is to rent for those, anyway.



Electric really wouldn't suit me at all with current or publicised next gen tech - if they release one with solar charging efficient enough with cloud cover to never need to plug in then yeah, that'd work...

Fast charging in the time it takes to have a meal? I don't like eating at service stops - I'm a splash and dash kinda guy - and they're going to have to massively increase the charging points too. Every charge point on the motorways I see has a queue, and that's with the current low numbers of electric cars...

Then there's infrastructure - the power requirements to charge (especially fast charge) means that the distribution grid is going to be on it's knees soon... Imagine the load if every house hooked to the local tranny starts sucking 50+ amps out at the end of commute time and/or 10 amps all night every night.

That said, I know a couple of people who have full electric and it suits them perfectly.


Either way, I really think the days of personal motorised transport are nearly over.


----------



## pdg (Sep 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> In some places it is, in others, it isn't. In bad traffic, it's sometimes not safe (where drivers aren't doing that last point). And on a big bike, it's not really feasible in a lot of places.



I always managed on my BMW with wide Motorcross handlebars and full panniers - but the majority of drivers here are kinda used to it, which makes a huge difference.

It's another thing that's highlighted in driving lessons and tests.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 4, 2019)

pdg said:


> Electric really wouldn't suit me at all with current or publicised next gen tech - if they release one with solar charging efficient enough with cloud cover to never need to plug in then yeah, that'd work...
> 
> Fast charging in the time it takes to have a meal? I don't like eating at service stops - I'm a splash and dash kinda guy - and they're going to have to massively increase the charging points too. Every charge point on the motorways I see has a queue, and that's with the current low numbers of electric cars...
> 
> ...


Yep, there are still some challenges. I haven't paid much attention to charging stations here in the US, except where they exist in parking lots (which is becoming pretty common in some areas). I've seen some stations advertising the chargers, but never noticed them in use (either because they weren't, or because I've no idea where they are so wouldn't notice).

In the US, on the major motorways, many fuel stations also have standard restaurants (usually fast food, but at least not the old standard gas station fare), and folks often stop there for a quick bite, anyway. Of course, if the trips are rare, I still think renting is a logical fix. For someone like me (I travel distance by car 10-30 times each year, plus the rural issues), electric cars aren't a good solution yet.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 4, 2019)

pdg said:


> I always managed on my BMW with wide Motorcross handlebars and full panniers - but the majority of drivers here are kinda used to it, which makes a huge difference.
> 
> It's another thing that's highlighted in driving lessons and tests.


My last bike was more like this:


----------



## pdg (Sep 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> My last bike was more like this:
> View attachment 22454



Yeah, that's not really a bike though is it


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 4, 2019)

pdg said:


> Yeah, that's not really a bike though is it


Sofa on two wheels.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 4, 2019)

pdg said:


> A lot more is a bit strong
> 
> I'd hazard that most cars these days never need a clutch replacement.
> 
> Some of it depends how it's driven of course.


Driving in the hills of San Francisco, I’ve had it replaced twice.  In a flat environment without heavy traffic, yeah you might never need to do it.


----------



## pdg (Sep 4, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Driving in the hills of San Francisco, I’ve had it replaced twice.  In a flat environment without heavy traffic, yeah you might never need to do it.



It's not mountainous around here, but it's not exactly flat either.

And the traffic is a bar steward most of the time.

And my car has a trailer on for like 80% of it's life.

I'd be very disappointed if I didn't get at least 100k miles out of a clutch 

When I drove a taxi I got 250k without replacing it and sold it - in and out of airports and stuff, so hours queuing in traffic.




Edit to add:

In general, cars here appear to be smaller and lighter than cars there, so less load for the majority.

That's going to make a difference.


----------



## geezer (Sep 4, 2019)

pdg said:


> I'd be very disappointed if I didn't get at least 100k miles out of a clutch
> .



I had to replace the clutch in my last car at just under 100k mi. The original clutch was really tight and awkward to engage smoothly compared to my previous vehicles ...which may have contributed to wear, ...or more likely because I gave it to my 18 year old son to learn how to drive a manual? It took him a while to catch on.

But regardless, a new clutch is nothing compared to replacing an automatic transmission. Now if I could just get a rebuild on my ankles...


----------



## geezer (Sep 14, 2019)

Just had a really random thought regarding the title of this thread. If, in fact, you train the way you are traditionally supposed to ...that is if you eat, drink and breath chi-sau at every possible opportunity, then of course you will have to _eliminate _chi sau.

Otherwise you'd... I dunno... explode?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 14, 2019)

geezer said:


> Just had a really random thought regarding the title of this thread. If, in fact, you train the way you are traditionally supposed to ...that is if you eat, drink and breath chi-sau at every possible opportunity, then of course you will have to _eliminate _chi sau.
> 
> Otherwise you'd... I dunno... explode?


No more WC for you. I'm cutting you off, mate.


----------



## Willzzz (Oct 14, 2019)

Question: If you remove chi sao then what does Wing Chun have to offer as a martial art? 

 It seems like to me that if wing chun is supposed to offer you _anything_, it's the ability to strike in hand-fighting or clinch range while still grappling with your opponent's arms. Same with tai-chi or any style of kung fu where the arms are in contact with opponent's arms. Take that away, and what exactly is wing chun bring to the table?


----------



## DanT (Oct 15, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> Geezer this post is in your honor, happy belated birthday by the way!
> 
> The question has been asked "What does Wing Chun need in the 21st century?" My answer, eliminate Chi Sau or at least minimize its "importance" as a litmus into the efficacy of martial prowess. My questions to Chunners everywhere is:
> 
> ...


I think it could exist without the Poon Sao (bong-tan) platform (it does in other Wing Chun systems), but Chi Sao training is still the core, but could be trained using other platforms.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 15, 2019)

Willzzz said:


> Question: If you remove chi sao then what does Wing Chun have to offer as a martial art?


To protect your center from

- inside out, WC can do better than all the MA styles that exist on this planet.
- outside in, boxing can do better.


----------



## Zeno Bokor (Oct 29, 2019)

The use of chi sao is mainly to teach you what to do after you've defended against the incoming attacks and you've closed distance with the enemy, it trains positions that you can recognize when in an actual fight. If you cannot get into or keep chi sao distance with the enemy then you lose but that's true of all other martial arts and sports: if a boxer can't get close to a taekwondo practitioner then he loses, if a jiu jitsu guy cannot get into grappling range with a boxer then he will lose, etc.


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 29, 2019)

Zeno Bokor said:


> The use of chi sao is mainly to teach you what to do after you've defended against the incoming attacks and you've closed distance with the enemy, it trains positions that you can recognize when in an actual fight. If you cannot get into or keep chi sao distance with the enemy then you lose but that's true of all other martial arts and sports: if a boxer can't get close to a taekwondo practitioner then he loses, if a jiu jitsu guy cannot get into grappling range with a boxer then he will lose, etc.



First of all...welcome to the forum.
Second, what I got from your post is that your wing chun ONLY works in chi sau range. Is this accurate?


----------



## Zeno Bokor (Oct 29, 2019)

Thanks. The way i see it, wing chun was made for chi sao range, why else would the second form be called "closing the bridge" (getting close to the adversary)? Wing chun wasn't made for fighting at jabbing/kicking distance which is why you see so many videos online where the wing chun guy loses to such opponents because he fails to close the gap. Wing chun used at that distance becomes bad kickboxing


----------



## Danny T (Oct 29, 2019)

Zeno Bokor said:


> The use of chi sao is mainly to teach you what to do after you've defended against the incoming attacks and you've closed distance with the enemy, it trains positions that you can recognize when in an actual fight. If you cannot get into or keep chi sao distance with the enemy then you lose but that's true of all other martial arts and sports: if a boxer can't get close to a taekwondo practitioner then he loses, if a jiu jitsu guy cannot get into grappling range with a boxer then he will lose, etc.





wckf92 said:


> First of all...welcome to the forum.
> Second, what I got from your post is that your wing chun ONLY works in chi sau range. Is this accurate?





Zeno Bokor said:


> Thanks. The way i see it, wing chun was made for chi sao range, why else would the second form be called "closing the bridge" (getting close to the adversary)? Wing chun wasn't made for fighting at jabbing/kicking distance which is why you see so many videos online where the wing chun guy loses to such opponents because he fails to close the gap. Wing chun used at that distance becomes bad kickboxing


In my training and opinion good wing chun has an excellent distance game when utilized properly and using good timing for entries. Problem, as I see it, is most don't practice the outside game enough to gain the need skills to set up entries. Much of the drills associated with both the sword and pole learning give insight to required skills for playing the outside game into the inside close range and back out. Because of that what is more often than not seen is the WC person just rushing in with their arms extended out in front of them and getting punished for it.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Oct 29, 2019)

Danny T said:


> the WC person just rushing in with their arms extended out in front of them and getting punished for it.


What do you mean "getting punished for it"?

May be the "extended arm" has not been fully utilized in the WC system yet. The extended arm/arms can be used for:​
1. Sense the environment.
2. Use it as a octopus arm that can wrap around anything it touches.
3. It can borrow any outside force, spin around with knock down power.
4. Drill a hole through your opponent's strong defense.
5. Separate your opponent's arms away from his head.
6. Occupy the attacking space and force your opponent's attack to go around.
7. It can be used as a bait.
8. ...

I can list at least 7 different usages of the extended arm/arms. I'm sure there are more that I have not listed here. It has more advantage than the boxing guard that you can only use it to protect your head.

In this clip (20.38 - 20.45), his extended arm rotated with his opponent's arm and ended with a strike (usage 3 from the above list).


----------



## Zeno Bokor (Oct 30, 2019)

Danny T said:


> In my training and opinion good wing chun has an excellent distance game when utilized properly and using good timing for entries. Problem, as I see it, is most don't practice the outside game enough to gain the need skills to set up entries. Much of the drills associated with both the sword and pole learning give insight to required skills for playing the outside game into the inside close range and back out. Because of that what is more often than not seen is the WC person just rushing in with their arms extended out in front of them and getting punished for it.



of course you need outside game, rushing headlong into close range usually ends in failure and also the opponent isn't comfortable with staying in chi sao range so he will back up very quickly.

My point is that the outside game of wing chun is based on getting to chi sao range. if you train for self defense then that's easy because you start from the idea that your opponent comes towards you, you just wait for your timing; tricky part comes when you train for fights.


----------



## skyeisonfire (Nov 3, 2019)

Everyone should have some Chi Sao in their life. lol.  It's fun as bleep as long as you don't technique yourself to death or too long.  Get around your opponent and strike with speed and authority.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 3, 2019)

There is nothing wrong with the WC sticky hand training. But one should start with

- kick to the groin, punch to the face, or
- sweep the leading leg, jam the leading arm,
- ...

When your arm make contact with your opponent's arm, your WC sticky hand game then start after that.


----------



## Nobody Important (Nov 7, 2019)

What if I were to suggest that Chi Sau wasn't originally part of the Wing Chun system?

Can your method of Wing Chun be effective without it, or has it been completely reformatted around Chi Sau to the point that it is integral and cannot be separated?


----------



## geezer (Nov 10, 2019)

Nobody Important said:


> What if I were to suggest that *Chi Sau wasn't originally part of the Wing Chun system?*



On some level this is certainly the case. the mid 20th Century, Hong Kong and mainland lineages all emphasize some form of chi-sau to the point that we assume that Wing Chun was always that way. But Wing Chun evolved from earlier fighting arts. Those old "proto-wing chun" systems (perhaps influenced by southern Hakka systems and/or Yongchun baihe) may have also had some "sticking" type drills, but probably not emphasized to the same degree. And even earlier, ancestral fighting forms likely had no chi-sau at all.

So _yes,_  originally, chi-sau was probably not a part of the Wing Chun martial heritage. And perhaps, in many schools today, Chi-Sau has become so hyper-refined and over-emphasized that it actually _detracts_ from the fighting functionality of the art.

With my little club, I admit that work entirely _too much chi-sau_, and not enough sparring and physical training to reach optimal functionality. As I tell my students, this is because _it is what I enjoy._ If they really want to fight well, they can (and should) seek out additional and more diverse training to address these deficits. They need to spar and work with diverse opponents and they need some foundation in grappling beyond what I address.

I've been told that such advice is "breaking my rice-bowl. I cal BS. Why not give honest advice?. After all, I don't teach this to make a living.

Still I have to be dicreet.  Our WT-offshoot association preaches that this chi-sau heavy format is the secret to real and complete martial mastery.  And they take Chi-sau way beyond what I can do, teaching dozens and dozens of complex "Chi-Sau Sections" or routines that solve all kinds of "energy puzzles". Practicing these endless, interwoven patterns has pretty much become the core of their intermediate to advanced curriculum. And frankly, although intricate and fascinating, I find that it has become a rabbit hole that ultimately leads away from realistic fighting skill. 

Hey _Yak Sau_ and all you other WT lineage guys, whattya say? As Dennis Hopper's character said to Christopher Walkin's mobster in _True Romance,_  "Am I lying?"


----------



## Zeno Bokor (Nov 10, 2019)

My problem with chi sao sections is that they have a habit of only working within the same school. We also have them but at a more basic level - recognize certain positions and what is the best way to deal with them. Multi step sections don't really work when practicing against other lineages because they won't react "the correct way" (don't even try them against somebody who hasn't learned wing chun). Our sigung preaches feeling above everything else during chi sao (and everything else) because you won't be able to predict what your opponent will do anyway.



geezer said:


> I've been told that such advice is "breaking my rice-bowl. I cal BS. Why not give honest advice?. After all, I don't teach this to make a living


let me guess, the guys that told you that were making a living off of teaching wing chun, right? i also agree that it's better to teach what you like and not what most people want to learn because you won't be able to retain those guys long term anyway.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 10, 2019)

If we look at both single sticky hand and double sticky hand, we can find something are missing in the training.

- power generation.
- establish clinch.
- disconnect.

The more that you have trained this, the less that you may think about "1 punch to kill".

The WC sticky hand is between clinch and disconnect. IMO, both extreme cases should be trained as well such as:

What will you do if

- clinch has happened?
- arm contact is disconnected?


----------



## yak sao (Nov 10, 2019)

geezer said:


> On some level this is certainly the case. the mid 20th Century, Hong Kong and mainland lineages all emphasize some form of chi-sau to the point that we assume that Wing Chun was always that way. But Wing Chun evolved from earlier fighting arts. Those old "proto-wing chun" systems (perhaps influenced by southern Hakka systems and/or Yongchun baihe) may have also had some "sticking" type drills, but probably not emphasized to the same degree. And even earlier, ancestral fighting forms likely had no chi-sau at all.
> 
> So _yes,_  originally, chi-sau was probably not a part of the Wing Chun martial heritage. And perhaps, in many schools today, Chi-Sau has become so hyper-refined and over-emphasized that it actually _detracts_ from the fighting functionality of the art.
> 
> ...



No, thou speakest the truth.

The goal of the sections is not to get good at doing the section.The goal is to learn what the sections are teaching and then move on.

I think LT was brilliant in developing them as a way to pass along chi sao skills and concepts, but they have taken on a life all their own. Too many WT people see them as the end rather than the means to an end.


----------



## yak sao (Nov 10, 2019)

Zeno Bokor said:


> My problem with chi sao sections is that they have a habit of only working within the same school. We also have them but at a more basic level - recognize certain positions and what is the best way to deal with them. Multi step sections don't really work when practicing against other lineages because they won't react "the correct way" (don't even try them against somebody who hasn't learned wing chun). Our sigung preaches feeling above everything else during chi sao (and everything else) because you won't be able to predict what your opponent will do anyway.
> 
> 
> let me guess, the guys that told you that were making a living off of teaching wing chun, right? i also agree that it's better to teach what you like and not what most people want to learn because you won't be able to retain those guys long term anyway.



When I see people try to perform a pre arranged chi sau sequence/ section on someone, it tells me they've missed the point. 
You wouldn't do that any more than you would try to use a sequence verbatim from one of the forms.


----------



## geezer (Nov 10, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If we look at both single sticky hand and double sticky hand, we can find something are missing in the training.
> - power generation.
> - establish clinch.
> - disconnect.



All these can be trained in a Chi-Sau format. Power generation is a bit tricky since you need to stay soft and flexible, and you don't want the drill to degenerate into force on force brawling. Still, you should always be working on good position, structure and kinetic linkages that can translate into good power generation, and you should discount useless slaps and taps that devolve into a pointless game of  "I gotcha".





Kung Fu Wang said:


> The WC sticky hand is between clinch and disconnect. IMO, both extreme cases should be trained as well such as: What will you do if
> - clinch has happened?
> - arm contact is disconnected?



Agreed, IMO all the above should be included in the Chi-Sau training. It is advantageous to have advanced students or training partners with solid experience in these areas so you can legitimately test and improve your responses. More often sifus badly imitate grappling, boxing, kicking systems, etc. creating a mere straw man for their students to play against, building flawed defenses and a false sense of security.


----------



## wckf92 (Nov 11, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If we look at both single sticky hand and double sticky hand, we can find something are missing in the training.
> 
> - power generation.



I disagree. Nothing is "missing". You may be viewing it differently is all. Big different between drilling and applying. Chi sau isn't about power generation. It's just a training drill used in a training environment to internalize certain attributes which should be ingrained in the body to eventually be used in life...i.e. a "fight" or altercation.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> - establish clinch.



See above. Attributes learned during the drilling of chi sau can be utilized during the clinch. If you think about it, it's all the same stuff, just different body geometry perhaps. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> - disconnect.



If you disconnect during the drill then your limb moves forward to strike. If you and your training partner are constantly disconnecting during chi sau then something may be wrong and you need further guidance from an instructor; or you are being asked to practice a drill that is beyond your current skill. If you and your training partner are at the chi sau / rolling level and disconnect often then perhaps you are working a specific skillset? I think some call it gor sau? or Lat sau? Or _____ ?



Kung Fu Wang said:


> What will you do if - clinch has happened?



Use the learned/internalized body mechanics trained during chi sau to deal with it. You can use these attributes whether you are standing clinch or horizontally on the ground (whether in mount or guard).



Kung Fu Wang said:


> - arm contact is disconnected?



If arm contact is disconnected, then punch the mofo!  



yak sao said:


> The goal is to learn what the sections are teaching and then move on.



Heck yeah!


----------



## FinalStreet (Aug 3, 2020)

yak sao said:


> When I see people try to perform a pre arranged chi sau sequence/ section on someone, it tells me they've missed the point.
> You wouldn't do that any more than you would try to use a sequence verbatim from one of the forms.



It's true. You can't learn any type of fighting, through repetition, because the practice is too isolated. And not organic.


----------

