# Finally found it - Version of Siu Nim Tao



## Xue Sheng (Jan 6, 2014)

I have only learned Siu Nim Tao but I have learned it twice from two different guys from two different lineages and 

One guy is a student of Ip Ching and the other was a student of Fong Chi Wing and Fak Tak Ling. 

The second teacher taught me Sill Um Tao a little different than the first and I assumed it came from Fak Tak Ling, since he was his most recent teacher and it was Fak Tak Ling who told him he could teach. So I looked all over for videos of Fak Tak Ling. Fak Tak Lings version of Sil Lum Tao and did not find it. So I went to his teacher Leung Sheung and found a few videos that allegedly show Siu Nim Tao from Leung Sheung. 

But here is the thing; they all looked similar to what I learned from the student of Ip Ching 






But today I was looking at videos and I found myself looking at Augustine Fong (Fong Chi Wing) and there it was






They do that double punch and all this time I thought it came from Fak Tak Lingbut then it might, I have not yet seen Fak TAk Ling do Siu Nim Tao


----------



## Marnetmar (Jan 6, 2014)

Yes, that's definitely derived from Leung Sheung's style, which does seem to differ a bit from what you see in most Wing Chun classes. I'm from the Kenneth Chung branch, so we still do things a bit differently but we also share a lot of things in common.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 6, 2014)

Actually the second one, the one I am talking about as the second one I learned, is not from Leung Sheung. They person doing that form is Augustine Fong and his teacher was Ho Kam Ming.

Now I am not disputing that Leung Sheung may do it the same way, it is just every video clip I have seen of Siu Nim Tao from Leung Sheung looks more like what I see Ip Ching doing that what Augustine Fong is doing


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 6, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> Actually the second one, the one I am talking about as the second one I learned, is not from Leung Sheung. They person doing that form is Augustine Fong and his teacher was Ho Kam Ming.
> 
> Now I am not disputing that Leung Sheung may do it the same way, it is just every video clip I have seen of Siu Nim Tao from Leung Sheung looks more like what I see Ip Ching doing that what Augustine Fong is doing


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The devil in the details again Xue sheng.----there are differences in the large circle of wing chun people.
In Fong Sifu's  slt video -old video-that you show- there is that double punch-a distinctive feature of 
Fong Sifu's slt. When he was learning from Sigung Ho in the 60-s, sigung had him do the double punch many times
and sifu practiced it hundreds of times while in yee gee kim yeung ma  and also in ma bo moving stances.
In his slt as a text Fong sifu put it at the beginning of the section of the slt which has two hand together movements- 
ding sao etc.The double punch as a drill- helps send out power evenly from both sides of the body.
Of course there is more to  it. I hope this helps.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 6, 2014)

Vajramusti said:


> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The devil in the details again Xue sheng.----there are differences in the large circle of wing chun people.
> In Fong Sifu's  slt video -old video-that you show- there is that double punch-a distinctive feature of
> ...



Yes there are differences in Wing Chun people, but there are differences in Xingyiquan people and Yang people and Chen people too 

Thank You

I have been trying to find out more about this version since it was taught to me but I was looking in the wrong places; in the Leung Sheung lineage and not in the Ho Kam Ming lineage


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 6, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> Yes there are differences in Wing Chun people, but there are differences in Xingyiquan people and Yang people and Chen people too
> 
> Thank You
> 
> I have been trying to find out more about this version since it was taught to me but I was looking in the wrong places; in the Leung Sheung lineage and not in the Ho Kam Ming lineage


------------------------------------

Who was teaching you?

You are right about differenced in taiji.

But they are not all co equal just because they are different,


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 7, 2014)

Vajramusti said:


> ------------------------------------
> 
> Who was teaching you?
> 
> ...



I believe I told you once before who I learned this from, and I just told you again 

And you are right being different under the same label, be that taiji or Wing Chun, does not make then equal.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 7, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> I believe I told you once before who I learned this from, and I just told you again
> 
> And you are right being different under the same label, be that taiji or Wing Chun, does not make then equal.


----------------------------

thanks


----------



## Thunder Foot (Jan 19, 2014)

So be clear, is that 2nd video the format of Ho Kam Ming's SLT? Or is that Augustine Fong's creation?
And then my 2nd question would be if they are disciples of Ip Man's Wing Chun, why do the movements of the 2nd video deviate from those found in the 8mil film?


----------



## Marnetmar (Jan 19, 2014)

There's nothing stopping them from deviating from Yip Man's classical style according to what they find more practical.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 19, 2014)

Thunder Foot said:


> So be clear, is that 2nd video the format of Ho Kam Ming's SLT? Or is that Augustine Fong's creation?
> And then my 2nd question would be if they are disciples of Ip Man's Wing Chun, why do the movements of the 2nd video deviate from those found in the 8mil film?



How did Chen style Taiji become Yang style, how did Yang become Wu, how did Chen and Yang become Hao and how did Hao become Sun. How Dia Xinyi become Shanxi Xingyiquan how did Shanxi become Hebei XIngyiquan? Some guy changed it to work better for him or thought he had a better idea or decided he was not bound by tradition.. It happens

Now don't MAKE me start listing Bagua styles :uhyeah:


Note
It is also my understanding that Ip Man was not teaching exactly what he learned from his Shifu either


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 19, 2014)

Sometimes certain movements in the form were modified with Yip Man's permission after his students experiences in actual fights.

My master's master Sigung Tsui Seung Tin apparently had the height of the Tan Sau raised.
Originally the Tan Sau was performed lower than solar plexus height , but in an exchange with a Praying Mantis practitioner the young Tsui Seung Tin was hit in the chest.
So he asked Yip Man if they could now perform the Tan Sau a bit higher in the form and Yip Man said yes.


----------



## Thunder Foot (Jan 19, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> How did Chen style Taiji become Yang style, how did Yang become Wu, how did Chen and Yang become Hao and how did Hao become Sun. How Dia Xinyi become Shanxi Xingyiquan how did Shanxi become Hebei XIngyiquan? Some guy changed it to work better for him or thought he had a better idea or decided he was not bound by tradition.. It happens
> 
> Now don't MAKE me start listing Bagua styles :uhyeah:
> 
> ...


Sorry, so was it Augustine Fong or Ho Kam Ming?
I understand people change things, but when they do I like to examine the reasons. Without knowing the reasons and being exposed to the original, we miss out on the moment of clarity experienced by our teachers and are then merely mimicking.  Isn't it the responsibility of our teachers to pass this down? In addition, as we know Wing Chun is more than form practice so the forms don't necessarily need to be changed in order to pass down such ideals of personal practiality, but to each his own. Just my personal opinion.
As for as Ip Man's form, I don't know that he taught differently from what he learned. I'd be interested in hearing more and it's sources.


----------



## geezer (Jan 19, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> Sometimes certain movements in the form were modified with Yip Man's permission after his students experiences in actual fights.
> 
> My master's master Sigung Tsui Seung Tin apparently had the height of the Tan Sau raised.
> Originally the Tan Sau was performed lower than solar plexus height , but in an exchange with a Praying Mantis practitioner the young Tsui Seung Tin was hit in the chest.
> So he asked Yip Man if they could now perform the Tan Sau a bit higher in the form and Yip Man said yes.



Good story. My sifu also changed or adjusted a couple of moments in SNT and Chum Kiu, and was very open with us about the reasons. On the other hand, all his published versions of the forms in books, on DVDs and posters are either older versions or incomplete ones _--deliberately so_. That way any "online" student of _"Sifu Youtube"_ or dabbler from another school can be immediately spotted. Unfortunately, this very cagey old-school Chinese way of thinking gives rise to a lot of false ideas about how things are done.

Personally, I have only had formal instruction for a _brief_ period in one other lineage beside the one I currently practice ...and that was the Augustine Fong/Ho Kam Ming lineage which we have been discussing. The differences in stance, steps, form and chi-sau from my current VT system are significant. Although my second sifu derided the stuff Fong Sifu taught, it's obvious to any objective practitioner that each has its own strengths. If more of us could get together and honestly evaluate different takes on WC/WT/VT the way people in other sports do we might actually get a better idea of the scope and profundity of our art rather than looking like a bunch of bickering fools to the rest of the MA world.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 19, 2014)

Thunder Foot said:


> Sorry, so was it Augustine Fong or Ho Kam Ming?
> I understand people change things, but when they do I like to examine the reasons. Without knowing the reasons and being exposed to the original, we miss out on the moment of clarity experienced by our teachers and are then merely mimicking.  Isn't it the responsibility of our teachers to pass this down? In addition, as we know Wing Chun is more than form practice so the forms don't necessarily need to be changed in order to pass down such ideals of personal practiality, but to each his own. Just my personal opinion.
> As for as Ip Man's form, I don't know that he taught differently from what he learned. I'd be interested in hearing more and it's sources.



No worries, and it is good to ask questions. I will have to see if I can find where I read about the change. I did recently post a video of an interview with the last living Ip Man student in Foshan (who I believe recently passed away) and he did say Ip Man did not teach the Baat Jaam Do in Foshan but he did teach it in Hong Kong so Ip Man did not always teach the same.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 19, 2014)

geezer said:


> My sifu also changed or adjusted a couple of moments in SNT and Chum Kiu..., On the other hand, all his published versions of the forms in books, on DVDs and posters are either older versions or incomplete ones _--deliberately so_. That way any "online" student of _"Sifu Youtube"_ or dabbler from another school can be immediately spotted. Unfortunately, this very cagey old-school Chinese way of thinking gives rise to a lot of false ideas about how things are done.


My Sifu has changed his teachings several times over the years. Some for those who claim they train with him but don't, some for different individuals abilities or personalities, sometimes what works for one doesn't work for others. As I have continue to training and teach I have changed a lot of what I do and how I do it.



> ...,The differences in stance, steps, form and chi-sau from my current VT system are significant. Although my second sifu derided the stuff Fong Sifu taught, it's obvious to any objective practitioner that each has its own strengths. If more of us could get together and honestly evaluate different takes on WC/WT/VT the way people in other sports do we might actually get a better idea of the scope and profundity of our art rather than looking like a bunch of bickering fools to the rest of the MA world.


Agreed. I've long been puzzled by so many arguing about stylistic and/or form differences all the while inferring WC is a system that is a principle based vs technique oriented. Arguing over the manner one does something (technique) is pointless in my mind. If one holds to the principles there is no right or wrong there is only the consequence. Discussing the manner and the what, when, where, and why would be far more productive.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 19, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> No worries, and it is good to ask questions. I will have to see if I can find where I read about the change. I did recently post a video of an interview with the last living Ip Man student in Foshan (who I believe recently passed away) and he did say Ip Man did not teach the Baat Jaam Do in Foshan but he did teach it in Hong Kong so Ip Man did not always teach the same.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some opinions on questions raised on this thread.

1Physics is physics but different textbooks arrange the subject matter in varying ways and physicists can also  vary in their philosophies of science.
More variances in the humanities and the arts.
Even good teachers vary in their methods of pointing to the truths of their subject.

2. Ip Man evolved as a teacher. He did not teach his fatshan students including Lun Gai as long as he taught some of his key Hong Kong students.The learning of 
extensive and correct usage of the bot jam do was the final capstone of Ip Man wing chun instruction. He taught only about 4 students the bot jam do and only one of those 4 are still alive. While there were many who had some exposure to Ip Man wing chun- a considerable number added their own interpretation on what they had not been taught Also, well known in academia is after receiving terminal degrees or instruction student/teachers strike out on their own. Some advance knowledge of their subjects- others do not.

3 Augustine Fong was a top notch student and fighter for Ho Kam Ming. HKM spent as much time with Ip Man as anyone. Fong studied with HKM 
for 8 years in HK in the 60s before coming to Arizona  and stayed in touch with his sifu. Recently in December 2013 there were several celebrations of HKM's birthday in HK and Macao. Fong was there for a Macao reunion. HKM is now about 90 years old.

4 HKM changed and expanded on some things of Ip Man. Fong also changed and expanded on a few things that Ho Kam Ming did.
A key thing was the double punch in the sil lim tao HKM used the double punch a lot- with good reason- in training but does not have it in his slt form. The double punch which HKM had Fong sifu do in training but is not in the slt form. But the principles are important in two handed work such as po pai jeung on the jong. So Fong with explanation to his own students incorporated the double pinch in a relevant two handed  section of the slt-so that people will not forget the related principles.

5 The important thing in kung fu  IMO  including wing chun is to put serious effort in finding a good teacher and to stick with him or her for a significant amount of time.

Have to go without proofreading.....good wishes,,,,,


----------



## Thunder Foot (Jan 20, 2014)

In terms of Wing Chun with simplicity being an important principle, do we believe that these changes presented here are simplifying the Art? And if so in what way?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 20, 2014)

Thunder Foot said:


> In terms of Wing Chun with simplicity being an important principle, do we believe that these changes presented here are simplifying the Art? And if so in what way?


Some changes just simply remove certain physical limitation. I was told that in WC, you suppose to use your 

- right Tan/Bon Shou to block a left punch,
- left Tan/Bon Shou to block a right punch.

If you use right Bon Shou to block a right punch, it's even called "wrong Bon".

In one HK Kung Fu tournament, a CLF guy used a right haymaker on a Yeh Man student. The Yeh Man student used a left Tan Shou to block it. The CLF guy's right haymaker knocked through the WC guy's left Tan Shou and still hit on the WC guy's head. The WC guy went back and asked Yeh Man, Yeh Man then removed that "left against right, and right against left" limitation after that.

I have also seen some WC guys not only protect center from inside out but also protect center from outside in.


----------



## geezer (Jan 20, 2014)

Thunder Foot said:


> In terms of Wing Chun with simplicity being an important principle, do we believe that these changes presented here are simplifying the Art? And if so in what way?



Fair question. Simplicity is one core concept in WC, but so is _effectiveness_. Combine simplicity with effectiveness and you get _efficiency_. Efficiency can be roughly defined as getting the job done effectively with the least time and effort. I believe the changes my old sifu made, like those made by Yip Man before him, were done to this end. In the name of simplicity, some forms were shortened, movements were streamlined, and duplicated movements were eliminated. In other cases important movements that had be dropped were re-inserted into the forms for completeness and effectiveness. 

Whether or not these changes are truly warranted is a legitimate subject for discussion, and people will disagree. Ultimately it's up to you, for example, to practice the 108 movement or 116 movement Mook Yang Jong form. Or go back to some of the old Fo'shan versions that were much longer. And what really matters most is can you actually apply the movements when necessary?


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 20, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Some changes just simply remove certain physical limitation. I was told that in WC, you suppose to use your
> 
> - right Tan/Bon Shou to block a left punch,
> - left Tan/Bon Shou to block a right punch.
> ...



If that story is correct , then he deserved to get hit in the head , it sounds like he just passively threw up a Tan Sau without throwing out his own strike  at the same time.
The passive method will see you taking the full brunt of the impact on your Tan Sau , however aggressively moving in with your own simultaneous strike will disrupt the ability of your opponent to generate power and certainly lessen the amount of force that your Tan Sau has to deal with.

Regarding the use of "Inappropriate Bong Sau" , it is actually practiced in the Wooden Dummy Form.
The founders of this art in their infinite wisdom realised that we are only human and prone to error , and sometimes may use the wrong arm , so there are certain techniques used to recover from that somewhat less than optimal position.

Not really getting what you mean when you talk about this -_* I have also seen some WC guys not only protect center from inside out but also protect center from outside in.


*_As far as I know we only one centerline and if my hands are on it , that's good enough for me.


----------



## Thunder Foot (Jan 20, 2014)

geezer said:


> Fair question. Simplicity is one core concept in WC, but so is _effectiveness_. Combine simplicity with effectiveness and you get _efficiency_. Efficiency can be roughly defined as getting the job done effectively with the least time and effort. I believe the changes my old sifu made, like those made by Yip Man before him, were done to this end. In the name of simplicity, some forms were shortened, movements were streamlined, and duplicated movements were eliminated. In other cases important movements that had be dropped were re-inserted into the forms for completeness and effectiveness.
> 
> Whether or not these changes are truly warranted is a legitimate subject for discussion, and people will disagree. Ultimately it's up to you, for example, to practice the 108 movement or 116 movement Mook Yang Jong form. Or go back to some of the old Fo'shan versions that were much longer. And what really matters most is can you actually apply the movements when necessary?


Agreed, and as you said what matters most is what we can actually apply... so in my eyes effectiveness is subjective to what we can apply as well and shouldn't dictate what's effective for someone else. I envision the forms to be much like the alphabet. With this alphabet, you can put words and sentences together and try your hand at conversation. But take some letters away, and you're limited with the words you can spell, and thus dialog is broken at best. Just some personal thoughts on the subject.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 20, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> Not really getting what you mean when you talk about this -_* I have also seen some WC guys not only protect center from inside out but also protect center from outside in.
> 
> 
> *_As far as I know we only one centerline and if my hands are on it , that's good enough for me.



He is talking about Wing Chun's adaptability when it comes to where your hands are located when the **** hits the fan. Think about it. When wing chun guys always say "my hands are always on my centerline" (or similar)...that IMO is ridiculous. Yes, it is desirable, but not 100% all the time can you achieve it. Good wing chun (and I say that carefully   ) will contain both aspects: "inside to outside, and outside to inside". This "little idea" is seeded in the first form.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 20, 2014)

Thunder Foot said:


> I envision the forms to be much like the alphabet. With this alphabet, you can put words and sentences together and try your hand at conversation. But take some letters away, and you're limited with the words you can spell, and thus dialog is broken at best




Well said.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 20, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> Not really getting what you mean when you talk about this -_* I have also seen some WC guys not only protect center from inside out but also protect center from outside in.
> 
> 
> *_As far as I know we only one centerline and if my hands are on it , that's good enough for me.



What if your hands are not on it for any reason? To set a such limitation on yourself will restrict yourself from moving your hands out of your centerline.


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 21, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What if your hands are not on it for any reason? To set a such limitation on yourself will restrict yourself from moving your hands out of your centerline.



If I am on guard , and I am facing my opponent then my hands will be on the centerline.
If somebody tries to take my hands off the centerline , then there are ways and means such as "running palms " to get your hands back on the centerline.

I was not talking about if you are walking around just minding your own business and you are suddenly attacked from the side or from an angle that you should waste time trying to square up and get your hands on centre.

You would respond with your closest weapon to the target , then square up and get your hands on center.
The Wing Chun forms teach many things , but they don't teach you to be bloody stupid that's for sure.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 21, 2014)

This is what I'm talking about:

- Your hands are not in your center line and you are not on guard.
- Suddenly your opponent attacks you.

You will have 2 options here:

1. Move your hands on guard, and use your Tan Shou to block your opponent's punch from "inside out" (this may be too slow).
2. Use your Fu Shou to block your opponent's punch from "outside in" (this is much faster).


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 21, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is what I'm talking about:
> 
> - Your hands are not in your center line and you are not on guard.
> - Suddenly your opponent attacks you.
> ...



Is this hypothetical opponent directly in front of us , or is he coming in from the side ?

You are aware that you can use your Tan Sau on the outside of his arm and still strike through aren't you?
Tan Sau is not limited to being used only on the inside of the opponents arm.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 21, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is what I'm talking about:
> 
> - Your hands are not in your center line and you are not on guard.
> - Suddenly your opponent attacks you.
> ...



That is what the 3rd empty hand form is about. Having lost center or being off center when the attack occurs. 
All actions can happen on the inside or outside simply depends upon where the bridge happens. It is important to seek the bridge and go from that moment in time. Seek the bridge, read what is happening and respond making no judgement only responding with what is given.


----------



## geezer (Jan 21, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is what I'm talking about:
> 
> - Your hands are not in your center line and you are not on guard.
> - Suddenly your opponent attacks you.
> ...



Or ...just punch him. 

_Attacking hand is defending hand._ If you have good elbow position, your punch can hit him and can often deflect and control his attacking arm at the same time.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 21, 2014)

geezer said:


> Or ...just punch him.


Yeap... Where there is nothing - Strike.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 21, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> Is this hypothetical opponent directly in front of us , or is he coming in from the side ?



- You are in the south and facing north.
- Someone is in your north and facing south.
- He asks you for direction.
- You use your both arms (don't know why) and point to the east direction for him.
- He suddenly punches at your chest with a south force vector.

In this example, it doesn't matter which Shou that you may use, you have to bring at least one of your arms back to block his punch from "outside in" (since none of your hands are in your center line).

What I'm trying to say is the on guard is not always available. That's why I believe to be able to "protect your center from outside in" is also important.


----------



## yak sao (Jan 21, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - You are in the south and facing north.
> - Someone is in your north and facing south.
> - He asks you for direction.
> - You use your both arms (don't know why) and point to the east direction for him.
> ...



A good wing chun man would have kept his hands on his centerline and motioned with his head.....


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 22, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - You are in the south and facing north.
> - Someone is in your north and facing south.
> - He asks you for direction.
> - You use your both arms (don't know why) and point to the east direction for him.
> ...



Oh ok , now I get ya.
In that case , the first one that comes to mind is a move from Chum Kiu , where the arm is out to the side after the Fak Sau and then sweeps back in to intercept the attack and recover the centerline.

You could also use the similar moves   from Biu Sze  that come back into center directly from the side , which are probably even more appropriate for the situation.  

Depending on how far away he is , if I have the time I may low heel kick his knee as he steps in so he can't even get into punching range.

If both your hands are out to the side , a very strange position but anyway , and assuming the punch is coming directly at you , at a very basic level you could just swing both your hands back into the guard position and intercept that way and go from there.

Quite a few things you could do , if you wanted to get fancy , pivoting back in with a Bong Sau , a simple Pak Sau
But a flinch response would  probably be to just to swing your hands back into center and let the guard deal with it 

Just for the record I would not be using two hands to indicate directions to a complete stranger , one hand maybe.
I would be just out of range and the other hand would be sneakily up near my face pretending to scratch my nose or my chin as I am talking to the stranger.

In other words one hand would be on my centerline up near my face and ready to go .


----------



## JPinAZ (Jan 22, 2014)

Wing chun isn't about 'moves' IMO. What John (kung fu wang) is talking about is covered by the first half of the kuit: No shape, target shadow. Typically accomplished with a faat sau if a name_ must_ be given to the action. 

And, to anyone that argues about not using 2 hands to point with, scratching their nose, etc - I REALLY hope you were joking - it was just a _hypothetical!_ He could just as easily said "there's a guy that walks up on your left/blind side". You can't honestly tell me that you would be so on guard every second of your life?


----------



## mook jong man (Jan 22, 2014)

JPinAZ said:


> Wing chun isn't about 'moves' IMO. What John (kung fu wang) is talking about is covered by the first half of the kuit: No shape, target shadow. Typically accomplished with a faat sau if a name_ must_ be given to the action.
> 
> And, to anyone that argues about not using 2 hands to point with, scratching their nose, etc - I REALLY hope you were joking - it was just a _hypothetical!_ He could just as easily said "there's a guy that walks up on your left/blind side". You can't honestly tell me that you would be so on guard every second of your life?



I am absolutely serious.
If a stranger approaches me out in public , my hands will automatically come up in a type of non threatening guard.
It comes from a time when I was a young branch instructor and people would wander in off the street , you never knew who you were dealing with.


Sometimes they were drunk , drug affected and therefore unpredictable.
Why leave yourself open to a cheap shot when you don't have too.

In this age of wankers running around with mobile phones filming  themselves knocking people out , I'd rather be thought of as a bit paranoid and still have my teeth in my head , than be a funniest home video on some halfwits camera phone.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 22, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> If a stranger approaches me out in public , my hands will automatically come up in a type of non threatening guard.


In the following Miao Dao short clip, her Miao Diao is behind her body. When her opponent attacks her, she then pulls her Miao Diao forward, upward, deflects her opponent's weapon, and then counter attacks. To protect your center from "outside in" by 

- open your center, 
- invite your opponent to attack, 
- you then deflect your opponent's attack, and
- counter attack,

is a very common TCMA strategy. The Miao Dao is just an extension of the arm. Same strategy can be applied in open hand as well.


----------

