Anyone recognize this?
- Thread starter KPM
- Start date
Danny T
Senior Master
Obviously not something you do...
My understanding of the system is it all relates. One doesn't have to do chum kiu with knives to learn knife however, I don't believe doing so is detrimental. It simply gives the one doing it a different pattern to work the knives and manipulating body unity with. Is it such a terrible thing to do extra curricular training with the knives? I think not and see no concern. But then I do so as well with knives on the mook jong; also do empty hands vs knives, knives vs pole, knives vs knives.
The problem though, is that the pattern is not one meant to be done with knives.
Most of the actions and underlying concepts are incompatible. Unless you don't know the concepts or disregard them, then you can treat it like just a dance routine and it doesn't matter that you're waving knives around.
You will have to change a lot about the form for it to make sense with knives, but why do that when there is already a perfectly good form specifically for the knives?
Extracurricular training is of course to be done, but you don't need another set pattern apart from the BJD form. Set patterns are the least important part of knife training, especially if the pattern is incompatible with the weapon.
If you want to do solo air training with the knives apart from the BJD form, it is more sensible and beneficial to do random "shadow slashing", working actual BJD footwork and actions in free combination with random directional changes, etc..
Doing CK with the knives is completely unnecessary and like I said, the squarest peg in the roundest hole. Useless at best, dangerous at worst.
^^^^^^ True for WSLVT maybe. Not true for TWC. Not true for Pin Sun Wing Chun. If the empty hands were derived from the knives....as you say....why wouldn't you be able to do the empty hand techniques with the knives in hand? If you can't, then likely your empty hands are not as "based upon the weapons" as you claim. If your concepts for the knives vary so much from that of the empty hands, then how can your empty hands be so directly derived from the knives????
Obviously the TWC Chum Kiu form is a bit different from the WSLVT Chum Kiu form. The TWC form DOES have footwork that is compatible with the knives. There are plenty of overlaps in the "Chum Kiu with knives" form and the TWC knife form itself. And after practicing the empty hand form with the knives and seeing how the moves adapt, when you go back to the empty hand form itself you have a new appreciation for the techniques and how they can be used. It gives you a different perspective that improves your actual empty hand form. Same with doing the empty hand form on the dummy. Can you do your WSLVT Chum Kiu form on the dummy? With all of your emphasis on "the forms teach concepts and not applications", one would think any of the forms could be done on the dummy as well as with the knives since they are all so "conceptual" and not technique/application based. But surprisingly, that doesn't seem to be the case!!!
Why train this way? Because the more things overlap and adapt the better you learn them and appreciate what they can do. Doing a form in various ways really ingrains that form and what it teaches in your muscle memory. If your system has some square pegs and some round pegs, and one piece isn't interchangeable with another, then maybe your system isn't as coherent as you think!
Obviously the TWC Chum Kiu form is a bit different from the WSLVT Chum Kiu form. The TWC form DOES have footwork that is compatible with the knives. There are plenty of overlaps in the "Chum Kiu with knives" form and the TWC knife form itself. And after practicing the empty hand form with the knives and seeing how the moves adapt, when you go back to the empty hand form itself you have a new appreciation for the techniques and how they can be used. It gives you a different perspective that improves your actual empty hand form. Same with doing the empty hand form on the dummy. Can you do your WSLVT Chum Kiu form on the dummy? With all of your emphasis on "the forms teach concepts and not applications", one would think any of the forms could be done on the dummy as well as with the knives since they are all so "conceptual" and not technique/application based. But surprisingly, that doesn't seem to be the case!!!
Why train this way? Because the more things overlap and adapt the better you learn them and appreciate what they can do. Doing a form in various ways really ingrains that form and what it teaches in your muscle memory. If your system has some square pegs and some round pegs, and one piece isn't interchangeable with another, then maybe your system isn't as coherent as you think!
I don't say that.
What is carried over to empty hands from knives are general tactical guidelines, but these manifest very differently given the very different nature of barehand and knife fighting.
If you emphasize concept over technique, why obsess with patterns and try to do them on or with things they weren't intended to be done on or with?
It takes quite a bit of forcing to redo things to fit where they don't belong. Measuring and shaving square pegs to fit in round holes, when you have round pegs. Innovative? No. Pointless waste of time.
Again, much more sensible and beneficial to do a little random action if you are looking for extracurricular training with either the dummy or knives.
If your system has some square pegs and some round pegs, and one piece isn't interchangeable with another, then maybe your system isn't as coherent as you think!
There are also square holes and round holes. The system is perfectly coherent if you know where everything goes.
It's not a fault of the system if you don't know what you're doing and misuse it.
Danny T
Senior Master
So really it isn't the pattern but how the knives are manipulated within the pattern. Doing CK with knives is unnecessary...that I can agree with that. But doing CK pattern with knives isn't necessarily wrong... provided it is performed with proper blade presentation. Maybe the way you perform your presentation of body and knives are different from with I was taught...but I doubt it. Maybe it is just a difference of understanding and perspective.
If you emphasize concept over technique, why obsess with patterns and try to do them on or with things they weren't intended to be done on or with?
---Who is "obsessing"? A concept should be able to be used in multiple ways. So having forms that are conceptual means they should be able to be performed in multiple ways. "Intended" is irrelevant in that context. It either works or it doesn't. If it doesn't work for WSLVT that's Ok. But that doesn't mean you can then say negative things about others for which it does work!
It takes quite a bit of forcing to redo things to fit where they don't belong. Measuring and shaving square pegs to fit in round holes, when you have round pegs. Innovative? No. Pointless waste of time.
---I assure you that I "forced" nothing! It is very natural! Again, what you say may apply to WSLVT. But why do you assume that it applies to other versions of Wing Chun? That is very narrow-minded on your part!
Again, much more sensible and beneficial to do a little random action if you are looking for extracurricular training with either the dummy or knives.
---We do that too! I can't help it if WSLVT is missing out on one aspect of good training because it doesn't work for that system! ;-)
There are also square holes and round holes. The system is perfectly coherent if you know where everything goes.
----Well, it seems that some systems must be more coherent than others! ;-)
It's not a fault of the system if you don't know what you're doing and misuse it.
---True! And you obviously don't know what I'm doing!!! Nothing being "misused" here!!! Maybe you should limit your opinions to WSLVT and not comment about other people's Wing Chun!!!
---Who is "obsessing"? A concept should be able to be used in multiple ways. So having forms that are conceptual means they should be able to be performed in multiple ways. "Intended" is irrelevant in that context. It either works or it doesn't. If it doesn't work for WSLVT that's Ok. But that doesn't mean you can then say negative things about others for which it does work!
It takes quite a bit of forcing to redo things to fit where they don't belong. Measuring and shaving square pegs to fit in round holes, when you have round pegs. Innovative? No. Pointless waste of time.
---I assure you that I "forced" nothing! It is very natural! Again, what you say may apply to WSLVT. But why do you assume that it applies to other versions of Wing Chun? That is very narrow-minded on your part!
Again, much more sensible and beneficial to do a little random action if you are looking for extracurricular training with either the dummy or knives.
---We do that too! I can't help it if WSLVT is missing out on one aspect of good training because it doesn't work for that system! ;-)
There are also square holes and round holes. The system is perfectly coherent if you know where everything goes.
----Well, it seems that some systems must be more coherent than others! ;-)
It's not a fault of the system if you don't know what you're doing and misuse it.
---True! And you obviously don't know what I'm doing!!! Nothing being "misused" here!!! Maybe you should limit your opinions to WSLVT and not comment about other people's Wing Chun!!!
If you have to force your technique to adapt to a new situation, you are forcing your technique. Technique carries concepts, and should be adaptable to different applications (including looking at weapons) by using the concepts to adjust the technique. The result may or may not be useful (application), but the exploration will nearly always be useful.
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
From my own perspective:
The movements and patterns in forms, in and of themselves, carry no meaning, save that which we apply to them.
Concept is not bound by form, and as such, can be carried out in a multitude of ways.
Unless a form is specifically designed to illustrate and function in a certain set of parameters, it is narrow minded to believe that no overlap can occur, especially since the likelihood of overlap of function (ie; hand to weapon, weapon to hand) is bound to occur. We are limited in function and only have so many ways to grab, push, squeeze, carry, thrust, strike or embrace.
Kum Na theory states that there are a number of ways in which a technique can be applied, displacing the bone, grasping/tearing the muscle, sealing the breath or vein and cavity press. Add this to Tek, Da, Sow and Na and many interpretations of a pattern develop.
If weapons are an extension of the hand, overlap in principle, theory, mechanics and application will occur. There may be more economical ways to perform, but without exploration and investigation, how is one to know?
More often than not, the more I investigate and question I find the movements and patterns of forms to be generic. The applications applied to them being based solely on the understanding of the person performing or teaching them. Their understanding could be, and often times is, limited in scope. Often this is due to lack of knowledge, unwillingness to accept alternative theories, dogma etc.
Sometimes its best not to turn your nose up at something if the golden rule can be applied, "Does it work?".
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Bxxh8hrELNw/VTNjmoPTLJI/AAAAAAAAcR8/RdFSM2kBpKQ/s640/CastNet.gif
Fisherman Casts a Net:
A traditional throwing pattern in many styles of TCMA that was named because of its similarity to how fishermen cast a net. One of many such utilitarian patterns that can be found in TCMA.
The movements and patterns in forms, in and of themselves, carry no meaning, save that which we apply to them.
Concept is not bound by form, and as such, can be carried out in a multitude of ways.
Unless a form is specifically designed to illustrate and function in a certain set of parameters, it is narrow minded to believe that no overlap can occur, especially since the likelihood of overlap of function (ie; hand to weapon, weapon to hand) is bound to occur. We are limited in function and only have so many ways to grab, push, squeeze, carry, thrust, strike or embrace.
Kum Na theory states that there are a number of ways in which a technique can be applied, displacing the bone, grasping/tearing the muscle, sealing the breath or vein and cavity press. Add this to Tek, Da, Sow and Na and many interpretations of a pattern develop.
If weapons are an extension of the hand, overlap in principle, theory, mechanics and application will occur. There may be more economical ways to perform, but without exploration and investigation, how is one to know?
More often than not, the more I investigate and question I find the movements and patterns of forms to be generic. The applications applied to them being based solely on the understanding of the person performing or teaching them. Their understanding could be, and often times is, limited in scope. Often this is due to lack of knowledge, unwillingness to accept alternative theories, dogma etc.
Sometimes its best not to turn your nose up at something if the golden rule can be applied, "Does it work?".
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Bxxh8hrELNw/VTNjmoPTLJI/AAAAAAAAcR8/RdFSM2kBpKQ/s640/CastNet.gif
Fisherman Casts a Net:
A traditional throwing pattern in many styles of TCMA that was named because of its similarity to how fishermen cast a net. One of many such utilitarian patterns that can be found in TCMA.
Last edited:
I like this approach. I even think movement can be used for exploration without knowing what the intention of the movement is (or its underlying fundaments). One of the thing that got me visiting the WC forum was watching WC videos. I'd find a movement that looked very foreign to me, then play with the movement. I wasn't trying to figure out the right way to do it (from a WC perspective), I was looking for where that movement either already occurs in my NGA practice, or where it might be useful.
So, even if the fundamentals were/are entirely different between empty hand and weapons, there's still good exploration to be had by divorcing the movement from the fundamentals and seeing where those same ingrained movements could be used in a different context. Of course, if there's significant overlap in the fundamentals, then it becomes even more useful.
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
There are many martial dance rituals from around the world, still practiced today, that are no longer associated with fighting application, outside the convention of the ritual itself. They are still practiced per tradition and are often part of some Mystery Play for religious ceremony. However, some people are now looking into those practices to see if there is any correlation with native combat traditions. In some cases overlaps have been found, shedding light onto the development and evolution of the areas aboriginal fighting methods and religious ceremonies. Its all one big circle.
Last edited:
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
Very true, and some people may be surprised to find that what is available in that movement lends itself best to sewing some trousers, casting a fishing net or hammering a nail, because that was what gave inspiration to the movement to begin with. Everything is relative to the perspective from which it is viewed, nothing is written in stone.
IMO. eventually everyone has to walk the path of martial arts by themselves, at some point your instructor can no longer hold your hand and you will have to venture forth alone. What knowledge you gain before this happens, and at what point they let go of your hand, will determine how easily the path ahead is traversed.
I think a lot of times, it may not even be necessarily what inspired the movement, but was the best/easiest way to communicate it others. Once you use that comparison, the movement will graduate more toward the example used, if that graduation is at least as functional. There is a movement I describe as "looking at your watch, without bending your neck, and you need reading glasses" to get people to turn over their wrist, keep their head up, and keep the arm extended. Theirs looks a bit more like the description than mine, and seems to work just as well.
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
Good post! It's certainly true that the opposite can work to gain the desired effect, sign language is an example. Context and naming convention sometimes have no relationship in the beginning, it's only through time and use that it becomes part of the culture/tradition. Often associating something with a culturally understood daily living example is the only way to convey what you are trying to communicate. In reality, the two may have nothing in common, simply a vehicle necessary for effective communication. This is essentially how Key Words in TCMA were created, a mnemonic used in association with physical movement. This can be seen throughout the world from dance to martial arts.
Danny T
Senior Master
In all honesty I don't put stock in what inspires movement. It's more, the potential applications available within the movement. Of course any potential will be based upon the spacial relationship of the participants at the time, what the other person is doing, and what is the contact point/s when contact is even established.
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
Agree, and from my perspective and understanding, while I also believe in the potential of application based on situation in relation to the movement expressed, those things are still based on mnemonic association. To me understanding that association can lead to a deeper understanding of the structure, force generation, mechanics, principles etc. inherent in the movement. For me this allows for less of a need to learn numerous techniques and applications, focusing instead on fully learning what a movement can be used for and what is most effective for maximizing my inherent ability. Thanks for the input Danny T, different perspectives give pause for contemplation and a chance to re-examine my own understanding.
When someone speaks of what inspired a movement, I tend to read it as referring to why they originally did the movement instinctively, rather than a cerebral inspiration. In other words, not "that's an interesting motion - I'll bet it would work as a throw", but an "oh ****, do something!" (and out comes a habitual motion). So, a fisherman who was trying to throw down an attacker (or opponent in competition) might instinctively reach for that net-casting motion, because his muscles know how to do it. Then, that motion works, so he teaches it to someone else.
Of course, some probably were cerebral inspirations, but I consider them less likely, so less common.
