# Footwork in second section Chum Kiu



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 10, 2009)

I'm having an interesting discussion with a WC friend of mine via email about the application of the second section Chum Kiu move. More specificaly the one where you move to the side while throwing out the Bong Sao(Jeet Bong Sao with one hand not the double Bong).

Anyway my question is, how do you guys interpret it? Do you apply it the way it is? Do you feel it shouldn't be applyed as done in the form? If not, why do we do it so/what is the purpuse of doing it so? I'm talking about moving forward *while *doing Bong.

I look forward to reading your responses!


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 10, 2009)

Some Lineages do it different. The Yip does it To side while moving forward...Other lineages throw the bong and Wu Sau in front of them using forward pressure. It has many different applications I have played around with.

As for in sparring or drills I would say to practice it the way it is in drills when you are comfortable apply it in sparring. But first one must drill. If you do not alter the move to much the bong can be use to intercept a Sun punch. The moving forward can be tweaked. When I spar I move backwards, to the side,forward and also around. One can practice circling your opponent by tweaking the front step. While you circling the opponent your center line is slightly facing him giving more use of both hands. Instead of just the side body stance. 

Or you can alter the bong sau into other techniques while stepping to side to circle or stepping out of striking range. For instance the bong sau can be a sun punch,palm Strike or another offensive deflection. Also the bong sau can used to intercept grab and pull the opponents arm.

Like I said there are many different applications. These may not be the ones that some sifu's teach but these are things I have notice when sparring doing chi sau an practicing the form. Envision three opponents while doing doing Chum Kiu. One directly infront of you and the other two centerlines are facing your left and right shoulders. Play around with it. See what you think. 


new Applications will be revealed!



			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1120919 said:
			
		

> I'm having an interesting discussion with a WC friend of mine via email about the application of the second section Chum Kiu move. More specificaly the one where you move to the side while throwing out the Bong Sao(Jeet Bong Sao with one hand not the double Bong).
> 
> Anyway my question is, how do you guys interpret it? Do you apply it the way it is? Do you feel it shouldn't be applyed as done in the form? If not, why do we do it so/what is the purpuse of doing it so? I'm talking about moving forward *while *doing Bong.
> 
> I look forward to reading your responses!


----------



## mook jong man (Feb 10, 2009)

The main application is to teach you to apply multiple vectors of force at once . An opponent can resist a force vector of one direction but two force vectors in different directions at once makes life very difficult for him .

 One use of the application I was taught is if a rather strong opponent has trapped your arms down very low from the side you can use the technique to repel him off of you . In one force vector your body is going forward and in the other force vector you are directing the revolving force of the Bong Sau into his body.

We used to do it as a drill with some one leaning both their forearms and weight from the side onto our low crossed forearms and we would attempt to shift them and throw them off by doing Chum Kiu stepping and Bong Sau's up and down the hall .

 It does wonders for your stance , but for it to work properly the movement has to be initiated from the hips and with perfect synchronisation of the arm movements , if they are out of kilter it will be hard for you to apply it against a strong force . 
Thats the first application that came to mind Im sure there is many more , I just can't remember them.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 11, 2009)

Thanks for all those applications Yoshi, but thats not quite what I was looking for. I'm not looking for applications of the Bong just the interpretation of this particular move.

But as I understood, both of you apply it the way it is in the form for various reasons/applications, right?

Anybody out there who feels it shouldn't be applyed that way or that it teaches you other stuff then a move for acctual application in fighting?

BTW, Mook, I like what you say about the move teaching you how to apply multiple vectors of force at once. Thats somwhere along my thoughts too.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Feb 11, 2009)

The whole 'theme' of chum kil is to get your arms and legs moving as one (instead of leaving structure behind)

The bong sao movement is to train the body moving structure whilst arrow walking. Like with most everything in the forms, DON'T TAKE EVERYTHING SO LITERALLY. You can apply certain things to fighting, but generally they are just to build stance, energy, footwork, power, etc.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 11, 2009)

Each technique teaches you multiple applications and techniques. Every move can numerous other techniques.


How do you normally use the technique you are sharing...I am curious.





			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1121423 said:
			
		

> Thanks for all those applications Yoshi, but thats not quite what I was looking for. I'm not looking for applications of the Bong just the interpretation of this particular move.
> 
> But as I understood, both of you apply it the way it is in the form for various reasons/applications, right?
> 
> ...


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 11, 2009)

> The whole 'theme' of chum kil is to get your arms and legs moving as one (instead of leaving structure behind)
> 
> The bong sao movement is to train the body moving structure whilst arrow walking. Like with most everything in the forms, DON'T TAKE EVERYTHING SO LITERALLY. You can apply certain things to fighting, but generally they are just to build stance, energy, footwork, power, etc.


 
So if I understand correctly, you wouldn't apply this move as it is? So you would say the whole point behind this move is moving your structure? So the Bong doesn't realy play a significant role here? Are you saying the move is training you how to move with correct structure or are you saying it's training you how to step without leaving your arm structure behind? Didn't realy get what you ment with this, can you explain a bit more please? 

And yes, sure, *one* of the points of Chum Kiu is moving your structure yes. But again I'm only interested in this particular move.

And, yes I guess you could look at forms like that. But if you look at them just like that I feel you'd be missing on a big part of WC. It's a smart system and I have hardly found anything without a reason in it. So I feel this is a valid question if you feel the forms should be interpreted literly or not. There should be reasoning behind the moves you do or you could just practice WC moves not the forms, wouldn't you say?

It all came from an interesting discussion I had with a WC friend of mine. He knows I'm on a WC forum and I told him there are some people here with 20years+ experience and so he asked me if I could post a topic on this theme to see what other people are thinking. I was just wondering.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 11, 2009)

> Each technique teaches you multiple applications and techniques. Every move can numerous other techniques.
> 
> 
> How do you normally use the technique you are sharing...I am curious.


 
As you said yourself, each move in the forms has multiple applications/concepts/training methods behind it. Please don't make me go into all of them  That would be futile!

But to answer my own question; against a punch I realy don't see why it would make sense to step forward while doing Bong. So no I wouldn't use it that way. But I would use exactly as in a form against a pull/strong Lap for example. I feel it has many uses and applications but I realy wanted to hear from some of you people who have been in WC for a while on your thoughts about the purpose of the move. The question acctualy is: is there are reason we do it the way we do it? 

I've seen interpretation of the move done by diffrent people from diffrent lineages but most have looked very far-fetched to me and I feel WC is sopposed to be a no-boolsheet martial art.

I hope that answers your question!


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 11, 2009)

*Eru Ilúvatar*


> The question acctualy is: is there are reason we do it the way we do it?


 
Thats a very great question. To honest I don't have the answer to it. I think you mean. Is there a reason that the Bong Sau and Wu Sau is done that way in the form. I would gathered the creators of the form had various reasons for placing each technique where they did. But again great question. I also was taught the move you speak of is good for arm breaks. As a matter of fact my Sifu's Sihing share alot of arm breaking techniques out of Chum Kiu. My Sihing uses that technique to uproot an opponent...Its very interesting.


But I never created any form before So I can not give a really good answer on that. I know that forms are an encylopedia to the techniques of Wing Chun.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 11, 2009)

Well this is the kind of feedback I was hoping for! Never thought of it that way. Can you explain the arm break a bit more? Would you do it with a reversing Wu? But wouldn't the angle of the Bong make the arm hard to "trap"/easy to escape?

And Bong for uprooting, thats an interesting concept I haven't tryed before. Have to try it the next time I train with a partner!

What are some other thoughts on this move? I know some of you guys have been in WC for 20 years or more; I'm sure at least a few of you have asked a similar question. Or how do you racionalise it?


----------



## Si-Je (Feb 11, 2009)

I have a question. Are you speaking of the low bong sau movement with the step to tan sau movement repeated 3 times as you step?
If so, we use variants of that off a kick. Where you must step in with your low bong sau on say a hook/roundhouse kick, and as your stepping roll to tan sau to put the opponent to the ground.

A high bong sau and stepping in. We do that off a hook punch. Starting with Dai sau, getting turned into bong sau as you step forward to their side, and tan sau with the other hand or bil gee to a neck throw or take down, punch or palm strike to the kidney, or punching to side and back of the face. Yet on a high bong sau the foot work isn't as straight lined as in the form.

I thought the low bong and stepping to tan sau in the form was like 'garn sau' or for going into Chin na for arm breaks too. But, i guess it depends how you do the form.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 11, 2009)

No, I was talking about the high Bong Sao with step not the double Bong with step.

Interesting. So if I understand it corectly: you use a Bong as a "cover" against a hook like punch while stepping in at about 45 degrees?


----------



## Si-Je (Feb 11, 2009)

Eru Ilúvatar;1121640 said:
			
		

> No, I was talking about the high Bong Sao with step not the double Bong with step.
> 
> Interesting. So if I understand it corectly: you use a Bong as a "cover" against a hook like punch while stepping in at about 45 degrees?


 
Sure. Again that darn dai sau starts the cover then as your turned into bong sau due to opponent's force your stepping into their side while going under the punching arm.  You can add tan sau to turn their body as you step, or use bil gee, and bam-o! your at their side with their arm closest to you turned across their face/chest and have the ribs, side of the head, back, side of the knee, etc. to work over.  Sifu has been just showing me this stuff recently, it's pretty cool.

I'm not sure if we do a high bong sau in chum kiu.  It's been a while since I've done the form.   bad Si-Je.
We do the double bong with stepping then turn around and do a low single bong sau coupled with a pak sau on top of it, then roll the low bong sau to tan sau while stepping placing the Pak sau hand on top of forearm of tan sau. Basically, we bong sau and step with front foot, then as you roll to tan sau with same hand you step with back foot. Stepping in a one two fashion kinda. With the hands moving with each step.  Not sure why it's done like that.
Where do you do the high bong sau in the chum kiu form in your system?  Either we don't do that at all, or I'm forgetting it. Which is totally possible.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 11, 2009)

Interesting you mention Bong with Pak. I notice most people do Wu with the Bong but I do Pak too.

Well, high... The wrist is at about solar plexus height or a bit heigher.

In our system we did it after the whole turning Bong, Faak to Jum rutine; at the start of the new section we went out with a Jum then went to the side with a Lan like motion, kicked and then we did this throwing out Bong while stepping. My instructor liked to call it Jeet Bong Sao. Then after repeating the same at the other side we did the double Bong section.

Hope that makes sense


----------



## Si-Je (Feb 11, 2009)

oh! okay.  I think that's a little different that what hubbie taught me.  We just go to the double bong sau part without the high bong sau. (we lost a move there!   )
I like that.
I'd imagine that you could bong sau a hook type puch as you kick to take away their power in the punch too. Just off the top of my head.  Which kick do you do?  Hook kick, or heel kick, or side kick?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 11, 2009)

The Arm break is kinda of creepy thing. I never performed it on any one in a street fight. But The way I understand it is when you modify the Wu Sau to a gum or lop motion. In other words your hand is like grabbing their fist/wrist and pulling it down While your bong sau or bone is rotating and deflecting upward against their elbow. The force going upward and steep force going doward with a fast force will cause injury to elbow or snap it depending on the force and timing use. But I don't really like that application it takes alot of practice to be accurate. I practice other arm breaks where you use both hands oppose to arm and hand. But I have been reading up on Chin Na an they use alot of stuff where they use the arm and not the hand to apply pressure. But again you have to drill it over and over again for it to be useful. 

But this typical arm breaks work best on sun fist. There are other arm breaks that work better with a horizontal punch.

 The Arm break I perfer for the sun fist is using lop sau and tie sau or lop sau and tok sau motion. I believe there is more range when using Tok or Tie Sau because you drive the elbow upwards while pushing the wrist downward causing the elbow to go beyond its threshold of pain. But thats my mere opinion. I am not body special.


			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1121575 said:
			
		

> Well this is the kind of feedback I was hoping for! Never thought of it that way. Can you explain the arm break a bit more? Would you do it with a reversing Wu? But wouldn't the angle of the Bong make the arm hard to "trap"/easy to escape?
> 
> And Bong for uprooting, thats an interesting concept I haven't tryed before. Have to try it the next time I train with a partner!
> 
> What are some other thoughts on this move? I know some of you guys have been in WC for 20 years or more; I'm sure at least a few of you have asked a similar question. Or how do you racionalise it?


----------



## mook jong man (Feb 11, 2009)

From what I remember my Sifu saying , he said words to the effect that Sil Lum Tao is like the chassis of a car , Chum Kiu is the engine of the car and the Bil Gee is like installing a high powered turbo charger in the car .

 I still believe that most of the applications for the stepping Bong Sau are to do with repelling someone off balance who has your arms trapped down low and in the worse case scenario your arms are crossed .

 My logic in thinking this was because most of the time we used the revolving force of the Bong Sau to attack peoples balance and move them off their stance , I just see this as adding the "Engine " of Chum Kiu to increase that attacking , off balancing force.

 I do remember another application in Chi Sau , when somebody drops their Fook Sau down on your Bong Sau trapping you and trys to punch with their other hand , you immediately pivot and bring up your High Bong Sau with your Wu Sau and deflect the punch and then Lop and Fak Sau the throat . 

It is usually done with a pivot but I see no reason why you could not do it with a step into them and disrupt their balance and collapse their structure with your Wu and Bong , move in close , Lop then hit them with an elbow strike from your Bong arm .


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 12, 2009)

> From what I remember my Sifu saying , he said words to the effect that Sil Lum Tao is like the chassis of a car , Chum Kiu is the engine of the car and the Bil Gee is like installing a high powered turbo charger in the car .


 
I agree with that analogy. And here again is a reason why these forms are though in a certein order and why certein moves in cetein forms are in a specific form.



> It is usually done with a pivot but I see no reason why you could not do it with a step into them and disrupt their balance and collapse their structure with your Wu and Bong , move in close , Lop then hit them with an elbow strike from your Bong arm .


 
I'm having some trouble imagining this one. In this specific application you mention, would you use the Bong forward and sidestepping or going forward with the Bong infront of you?

If I understand the technique correctly we did something similar against a strong Lap or downward pull; we would move in with the Bong while (with a little luck) trapping his incoming punch. Then you would be free too pound with your free hand. Did you mean something similar?


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 12, 2009)

Si-Je said:


> oh! okay. I think that's a little different that what hubbie taught me. We just go to the double bong sau part without the high bong sau. (we lost a move there!  )
> I like that.
> I'd imagine that you could bong sau a hook type puch as you kick to take away their power in the punch too. Just off the top of my head. Which kick do you do? Hook kick, or heel kick, or side kick?


 
We do heel kicks in CK. But I think theres a low side kick in our wooden dummy form. My instructor also saw a low sweep like roundhouse kick to the leg in the Biu Tze.

Thats interesting. So you have the turning Bong and the double Bong but not the third one? I would appreciate if you could ask your Sifu some questions about that; did he discard it becouse something bothered him about that move or he was thought without it?

If I remember correctly you said once your lineage is Jim Fung/Leung Ting, right? Not sure about Fung but I think Leung Ting dose the Bong I mentioned in CK.


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 12, 2009)

Do any of you guys got videos of your Chum Kiu?


----------



## futsaowingchun (Feb 14, 2009)

I like to use that Bong sao as a way to regain lost space. To keep the opponent at a safe distance.


----------



## geezer (Feb 14, 2009)

Eru Ilúvatar;1121521 said:
			
		

> As you said yourself, each move in the forms has multiple applications/concepts/training methods behind it...
> 
> But to answer my own question; against a punch I realy don't see why it would make sense to step forward while doing Bong. So no I wouldn't use it that way. But I would use exactly as in a form against a pull/strong Lap for example... The question acctualy is: is there are reason we do it the way we do it?
> 
> I've seen interpretation of the move done by diffrent people from diffrent lineages but most have looked very far-fetched to me and I feel WC is sopposed to be a no-boolsheet martial art!



_Iluvatar,_ if you are looking for a literal application, just look at how the move is executed in the form. The second section of Chum Kiu, at least as performed in WT, begins with a defense against an attack coming from 90 degrees to the right. You defend with a lan sau and a side-thrust kick, and as "every kick is a step" you drop the kick into a step toward your attacker. You then defend against a mid-level punch coming from 90 degrees to your left with an intercepting bong sau delivered as you are  completing your stepping movement. Then your bong pivots back up into a tan-sau (seen as a crossed tan-sau in the form).

OK, look what happened. You defend against the first attack with your kick, and just as you are stepping, a punch comes in from your right side. You extend your right arm to defend and the incoming punch rolls your arm into bong sau on the inside gate of your attacker's arm. You are, of course exposed to his next punch, so you complete your step and roll your arm around his bridge into tan sau as you effetcively side-step around his body into a perfect position for a follow up strike. You will find this same movement in the Wooden Dummy set. It's just not quite as explicit in Chum Kiu. I fell that's because The movement is really not about a literal application as much as it is about how to respond to different kinds of force coming from different directions... as Mook already said. Anyway, try it out and see what you think.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 14, 2009)

I was not looking for a literal interpretation at all. I was merely asking how do you people interpret the move. There are obviously two kinds of answers; one could interpret it litteraly as you have, or one could find reasons/concepts/training methods behind the moves.

I liked how you answered my questiong tho. And if one were stepping in while being attacked from that angle a stepping Bong Sao (like done in the form) would indeed be a valid answer to the attack. Maybe a Pak with your other hand would be more to the point if you ask me. Also the move wouldn't be leaving you open plus it works well with a step in that kind of situation. You could also be striking at the same time. Maybe I should change the form to that. Or why not?

But I must point out that forms should *not* be looked at as moves done against virtual attackers! That is something Karate or Teakwondo might do. But I feel if you look at the forms from that perspective alot of stuff in the forms makes no sense.

And yes, I liked Mooks answer on the particular move training you how to apply diffrent vectors of force at once too.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 14, 2009)

> I like to use that Bong sao as a way to regain lost space. To keep the opponent at a safe distance.


 
Me too. But can I bother you a bit more and ask you if you apply it with a step "forward"?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 14, 2009)

Yea every techinque in forms can not be done verbatim in actual combat. You have to know when to use them. Correct timing and posistion an as Mook said judge the force that is being exerted. 

But I have a quesutio for Eru or any one else. I hear you guy speaking of this technique as intercepting punch and also a defense against a certain punch. 


Have you ever thought of it as door attacking technique. In other words using as an entry technique. Also How could this technique be used against a kick if possible?





			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1123220 said:
			
		

> I was not looking for a literal interpretation at all. I was merely asking how do you people interpret the move. There are obviously two kinds of answers; one could interpret it litteraly as you have, or one could find reasons/concepts/training methods behind the moves.
> 
> I liked how you answered my questiong tho. And if one were stepping in while being attacked from that angle a stepping Bong Sao (like done in the form) would indeed be a valid answer to the attack. Maybe a Pak with your other hand would be more to the point if you ask me. Also the move wouldn't be leaving you open plus it works well with a step in that kind of situation. You could also be striking at the same time. Maybe I should change the form to that. Or why not?
> 
> ...


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 15, 2009)

I must admit I'm not sure if I understand what you are asking. But I presume that by an entry technique you mean a technique by which you want to get pass the opponents guard; like a Pak Da from the side?

If thats what you meant by an entry technique that no I wouldn't use this kind of Bong Sao as an entry technique. Maybe a Bong/Biu Tze elbow hybrid but just a Bong no. My reasons for this are that I see a Bong a bit diffrently than most. Infact if I can help it I want to do it as little as possible. I say this becouse Bong Sao, I feel, is a more defensive than offensive technique when applyed *most *of the time. This is becouse while doing a Bong in *most* of it's applications you cannot defend and attack at the same time(which is one of the main principals of WC). I like it as an "oh no" move tho. Sure you can Lap and go with a follow up but thats one step slower. If I can help it and the opponents arm is on my right hands outside gate I rather guide it with a left Pak pass my head while simultaneously punching.

This are mainly the reasons why I wouldn't like to use it as an entry technique. Ofcourse the Bong can be applyed with a simlutaneous strike to, but in any case not the Bong I am speaking of on this thread. But a Bong which you can apply it in that way, I believe, is not this particular Bong I'm discusing.

Acctualy now that I think about it; at WT I was thought one could strike under the Bong or over the Bong while doing it. But this I feel is an advanced concept(Biu Tze) and I have no idea why they thought me that as a WT beginner at that time becouse it's very easy to trap a guy who doesn't know what he's doing when applying Bong that way/how to do it properly.

I would also avoid doing Bong against a kick. Especialy that kind of Bong. Maybe against an ideal straigt kick against a bad kicker... But definately not against a roundhouse kick if thats what you had in mind.

This is all just my opinion. Hope this answers your question.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Feb 15, 2009)

Eru Ilúvatar;1123222 said:
			
		

> Me too. But can I bother you a bit more and ask you if you apply it with a step "forward"?




NO, because you would be to far away to hit the opponent. You need to move into the opponent not away.


----------



## geezer (Feb 15, 2009)

_Iluvatar_... Having dialogues like this is what I like about this forum. You seem to think about things a lot like I do, but have a different background, so you bring different things to the table!



			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1123220 said:
			
		

> I was not looking for a literal interpretation at all. I was merely asking how do you people interpret the move. There are obviously two kinds of answers; one could interpret it litteraly as you have, or one could find reasons/concepts/training methods behind the moves.



Yep. I agree that the "literal interpretation" is usually of the least importance and the _concept_ behind the movement is what really matters. In this case, I was thinking along the same lines as what you proposed earlier about the using the side step in response to a lateral jerking force, like you might get in a really powerful lop-sau. 

Another thought came to mind from escrima (and I'll probably get flack from WC/WT purists for this). In WT we typically always press forward, toward our opponent's center, unless his force pushes us away or turns us aside. But, adding a short side-step to your turn gives you a very effective angle to counterattack. In escrima we call it "off-lining" and, when your opponent is swinging a piece of heavy rattan (or other, even scarier weapon) at you, _it makes a whole lot of sense_. Since I've been training in this, I think I've been picking up the same concept in Wing Chun/Tsun... of course I could just be hallucinating again?! 



			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1123220 said:
			
		

> I liked how you answered my questiong tho. And if one were stepping in while being attacked from that angle a stepping Bong Sao (like done in the form) would indeed be a valid answer to the attack. Maybe a Pak with your other hand would be more to the point if you ask me. Also the move wouldn't be leaving you open plus it works well with a step in that kind of situation. You could also be striking at the same time. Maybe I should change the form to that. Or *why not?*



_Why not?_ Because I was probably _wrong_ in the first place!!! We both know that there is more to these forms than meets the eye. Besides, even with the "literal" scenario I described, you are turned 90 degrees to the side when the second, punching attack comes from your left. You thrust out your right arm to defend, but a left pak-sau is impossible. A right pak followed by a left strike would work, if the punch comes on your inside gate, along your palm. But what if it crosses your bridge, rolling you into bong? Well there we are again. And, if you _were_ to change the form to a pak-sau and punch, we'd lose the whole stepping sequence and have _nothing left to debate!_ And, personally, if someone jumped me with a sucker-punch from the side, I'd probably just flick out a fak-sau at his face. And _we just did that_ at the end of the first part of the form. 



			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1123220 said:
			
		

> But I must point out that forms should *not* be looked at as moves done against virtual attackers! That is something Karate or Teakwondo might do. But I feel if you look at the forms from that perspective alot of stuff in the forms makes no sense.



Damn straight! That's what makes our forms so deep. Each form is like an alphabet that you can use to write out whatever you need. In Karate, and TKD, the forms seem more like a collection of little formulated responses from one of those travelers' foreign language phrase books. Useful, but limited in application.



			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1123220 said:
			
		

> And yes, I liked Mooks answer on the particular move training you how to apply diffrent vectors of force at once too.



Me too. After all, Chum Kiu seems all about dealing with energy coming at you from straight-on, 45 degree, 90 degree and 180 degree angles. It pretty much covers "all the angles" so to speak.


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 15, 2009)

It seems we pretty much agree.



> _Why not?_ Because I was probably _wrong_ in the first place!!! We both know that there is more to these forms than meets the eye. Besides, even with the "literal" scenario I described, you are turned 90 degrees to the side when the second, punching attack comes from your left. You thrust out your right arm to defend, but a left pak-sau is impossible. A right pak followed by a left strike would work, if the punch comes on your inside gate, along your palm. But what if it crosses your bridge, rolling you into bong? Well there we are again. And, if you _were_ to change the form to a pak-sau and punch, we'd lose the whole stepping sequence and have _nothing left to debate!_ And, personally, if someone jumped me with a sucker-punch from the side, I'd probably just flick out a fak-sau at his face. And _we just did that_ at the end of the first part of the form.


 
You did seem to missunderstand me on this particular point. The reason for this is becouse you seem to start the section to the right while I start it to the left? Anyway, imagine that your are turned/pivoted to the right in a position you would be while performind this particular part of the form. A punch comes to your face travelling at a line which is aprox. 90 degrees to the line your heels make. You sudgested that one should react with a left Bong while stepping "forward". What I meant was that instead of intercepting the punch with you left hand, Pak it with your right hand instead, and you are free to strike with your left hand. Now, even if a punch croses your left arm(your bridge as you put it) instead of rolling into a left Bong one could guide the punch with the Pak with his right hand while striking with a "cutting angle" with the left hand which now has just enough space to strike threw(becouse of the space you created with a guiding Pak). I still ment that you do this particular technique with a step. Acctualy this technique works very well with a step in comparison to a Bong which in my opinion in acctual application against a punch does not. Now, if you understand why I have just said you will see that this application would be very "true" to a WT mindset; I have seen Emin, Tassos and Leung Ting do something very similar. It is also simultaneus attack and defence in opposition to a Bong technique many interpret from this part of the form.

I acctualy have no intention to changing that part of a form from a Bong to a Pak  It was merely a statement to provoke a question: Why do we do it the way we do it? Is it the best way to teach us whatever it teaches us? If you feel it is not, why do you still stick to it?

Hope I eplained what I meant well...



> Me too. After all, Chum Kiu seems all about dealing with energy coming at you from straight-on, 45 degree, 90 degree and 180 degree angles. It pretty much covers "all the angles" so to speak.


 
That is very true! I'm not sure what Mook realy ment but I think we interpret his statement a bit diffrently. I feel that *one *of the functions of this part of the form is to teach *us* how to apply diffrent vectors of force at the same time. Allthough it could be said that Chum Kiu teaches us how to deal with diffrent vectors of force comming from diffrent directions. Acctualy WC teaches that period


----------



## geezer (Feb 15, 2009)

Eru Ilúvatar;1123538 said:
			
		

> It seems we pretty much agree.
> 
> You did seem to missunderstand me on this particular point. The reason for this is becouse you seem to start the section to the right while I start it to the left?



Whoops. I always did have trouble keeping left and right straight, especially when just sitting here and writing... sorry.

BTW you seem to have _a lot_ of WT experience, even though you now identify yourself as a WC guy. I'd really like to hear more about who you've trained with and any personal observations you'd be willing to share. Feel free to PM me on the subject any time--Steve, aka "Geezer".


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 15, 2009)

When I stated by a kick. First you use kwan sau to trap the kick and then use the bong sau and pak to dump the kicker...does that make sense. But it has to be done in one motion. Kwansau+BongPak-dump






			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1123409 said:
			
		

> I must admit I'm not sure if I understand what you are asking. But I presume that by an entry technique you mean a technique by which you want to get pass the opponents guard; like a Pak Da from the side?
> 
> If thats what you meant by an entry technique that no I wouldn't use this kind of Bong Sao as an entry technique. Maybe a Bong/Biu Tze elbow hybrid but just a Bong no. My reasons for this are that I see a Bong a bit diffrently than most. Infact if I can help it I want to do it as little as possible. I say this becouse Bong Sao, I feel, is a more defensive than offensive technique when applyed *most *of the time. This is becouse while doing a Bong in *most* of it's applications you cannot defend and attack at the same time(which is one of the main principals of WC). I like it as an "oh no" move tho. Sure you can Lap and go with a follow up but thats one step slower. If I can help it and the opponents arm is on my right hands outside gate I rather guide it with a left Pak pass my head while simultaneously punching.
> 
> ...


----------



## Eru IlÃºvatar (Feb 16, 2009)

> When I stated by a kick. First you use kwan sau to trap the kick and then use the bong sau and pak to dump the kicker...does that make sense. But it has to be done in one motion. Kwansau+BongPak-dump


 
I personaly don't like the Kwan against a roundhouse kick. I see it is very popular tho. I just feel it's to much of a clash. I know, I know you take away most of the power from the kick with simultaneusly kicking but... To me this looks more like something I would put in the Ip Man movie than something I would acctualy use. 

I feel that against a guy who has trained a kicking art this would be dangerous to do. As Kamon said on another thread, kicks are a lot stronger than hands. If you can, avoid doing hand techniques against kicks and if you must try to use the cutting angle or something like the WT "wedge"-preferably with the legs. And simultaneously hitting is important, especialy against round hits as you have to take away the power.

If you are perhaps speaking of Kwan against the front kick/side kick I feel there are simpler ways of dealing with that. All of them include the "wedge" in one way or the other.

But reading the technique you mention again, I don't thin I understand it. How do you trap the kick with the Kwan? Do you intercept with the Bong and "grab" with a Tan? Against which kick? And can you please explain how to do an entry technique with the Bong?


----------



## Yoshiyahu (Feb 16, 2009)

Yea usually you grab the round kick after the kwan sau. Side kicks and front kicks...i wouldnt use kwun sau.

As for entry with Kwan sau i usually use first certain types of gurads. I crash the guards to shock their stance an huen sau the leading arm an go in to pak da. Thats one technique.



			
				Eru Ilúvatar;1124011 said:
			
		

> I personaly don't like the Kwan against a roundhouse kick. I see it is very popular tho. I just feel it's to much of a clash. I know, I know you take away most of the power from the kick with simultaneusly kicking but... To me this looks more like something I would put in the Ip Man movie than something I would acctualy use.
> 
> I feel that against a guy who has trained a kicking art this would be dangerous to do. As Kamon said on another thread, kicks are a lot stronger than hands. If you can, avoid doing hand techniques against kicks and if you must try to use the cutting angle or something like the WT "wedge"-preferably with the legs. And simultaneously hitting is important, especialy against round hits as you have to take away the power.
> 
> ...


----------

