Cheun Sau

[KPM]

^^^^^^ Even the variation of the guard that LFJ has described in the past still qualifies as "center held directed at the opponent" as far as I'm concerned. Because, as I pointed out above, the alternative is a wide guard that leaves the center open. If he is trying to split hairs without explanation, then that's on him!

But I agree that any continued discussion with LFJ is not likely to be productive. Better to just drop it at this point.

 

[LFJ]

LFJ is not very clear or concise on what he means. He equated a center held guard directed at the opponent as being bad. But like you, I kind of think he was actually referring to the "gate theory" as what he believes leads to this "reactive strategy" and "chasing hands" (which I also disagree with). However, in typical fashion, he would rather argue than explain and elaborate.

I've been repeatedly saying it's "center guard + gate theory".

This gate theory comes from center guard and leads to said problems.

There really are only two options when it comes to guards. You either have your guard occupying the center so that the opponent is more likely to go around and come in at somewhat of an angle, or you have your hands held wide of center so that the opponent is more likely to strike down the middle between them. The best example of the first option is obviously Wing Chun. The best example of the second option is Muay Thai. There are western boxing versions of both, depending on the fighter.

Those may be the only two options you know, but not all that exist.

Not even all western boxing guards are one or the other, like the various forms of cross arm guards.

TCMA styles are even more unorthodox, with different types of "shields" and baiting guards that do not fall into either of your two categories.

By having your hands occupying the center, the opponent is more likely to be punching around at an angle. And since the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, you have a chance of hitting him before he can hit you simply because you will be punching straighter than him.

Straight lines can come at you at angles other that right up the center, and have better chances of cutting off your straight line stubbornly holding center.

If you are holding your hands away from the centerline, that means you will have to either punch at an angle rather than straight, or bring your hands back to centerline as you punch. Either way this is not as direct as having your hands on the centerline when you start the punch. This is Wing Chun 101.

You can punch straight to the target from any position.
You don't need to be on the centerline to throw a direct, straight line attack.

I'll point out that on that video that Sean shared, not only are the students using a center held guard directed at the opponent, but at times they are being "reactive"! At several points the partner threw a wide loopy punch and the student used a high cover rather than just stepping in and punching.

Their guard hands are not on the center when engaging opponents, and covering from inside a round punch is not comparable to standing at distance and throwing biu to the inside, then biu to the outside of the same posed punch.

And just so it is clear to everyone before LFJ starts to try and back-pedal on his statements, I asked:

So, you actually DO use a "center guard aimed at the opponent"??

To which LFJ answered:

No, I don't.

Which is why I provided pictures of WSL and PB standing in a center held guard.

Try as you may, you cannot learn VT from pictures of people posing for the camera.

 

[LFJ]

I believe that LFJ is focusing on the minutia that differentiates the WSL VT guard from every other branch of VT/WC and indeed every other form of pugilism in the world.

Although tactically different, YMVT guard strategy has a lot in common conceptually with many TCMA styles.

Attitudes like LFJ's are why some really competent fighters I know through the DTE circle think that all WC guys are idiots.

Attitude?

All I've done is pointed out some flaws in the center guard + gate theory, which have been acknowledged in the past by the very people arguing against them and agreeing with your post right now.

So, if someone disagrees with your method and points out perceived flaws with it, they are having an attitude?

If WC guys are idiots, I would say it's because of this aversion to criticism and possible insight from an outside perspective.

 

[KPM]

I've been repeatedly saying it's "center guard + gate theory".

This gate theory comes from center guard and leads to said problems.



Those may be the only two options you know, but not all that exist.

Not even all western boxing guards are one or the other, like the various forms of cross arm guards.

TCMA styles are even more unorthodox, with different types of "shields" and baiting guards that do not fall into either of your two categories.



Straight lines can come at you at angles other that right up the center, and have better chances of cutting off your straight line stubbornly holding center.



You can punch straight to the target from any position.
You don't need to be on the centerline to throw a direct, straight line attack.



Their guard hands are not on the center when engaging opponents, and covering from inside a round punch is not comparable to standing at distance and throwing biu to the inside, then biu to the outside of the same posed punch.



Try as you may, you cannot learn VT from pictures of people posing for the camera.

And once again, despite prompting several times from two different people you choose to NOT to simply summarize your own belief and practice so we all know exactly what you are talking about. Either state your case or go away. No one is going to participate in one of your long and drawn-out arguments where you criticize everything anyone else has to say while avoiding simply laying out your own approach and understanding in one concise post.

 

[LFJ]

you choose to NOT to simply summarize your own belief and practice so we all know exactly what you are talking about.

I'm not talking about my practice.

What I do is irrelevant to the problems of center guard + gate theory.

We should take things one step at a time.

No one is going to participate in one of your long and drawn-out arguments where you criticize everything anyone else has to say while avoiding simply laying out your own approach and understanding in one concise post.

In other words, all criticism is invalid until an alternative is provided??

But in fact, you have acknowledged the failings I've demonstrated before.

You have also been given clear and concise explanations of what I do, to which you've responded;

"Thanks LFJ! Nice direct responses and clear illustrations. I understand much better where you are coming from now!"

So, what has changed? Amnesia or just trolling?

It seems, as in your last long post, you are still trying to rationalize the method that you previously acknowledged fails against even straight punches, because it's the best you've been able to learn so far.

If you are happy doing so, please continue. No need to worry about what I do. If you want to stick to that method and look for ways to plug the holes on your own, I wish you success.

 

[KPM]

So further arguing it is? Go away troll! (sorry Jonathan )

 

[LFJ]

So further arguing it is?

What?

 

[Juany118]

We use it quite frequently but call it Biu Sao.

Two things, I think the second video @KPM posted better illustrates it. Unlike a biu sau (to my understanding) the arm can be at ~90 degrees. Here is another video illustrating how it can be used to "jam" the opponent up by Master Keith Mazza.

I think especially in this video the difference is better illustrated. I am a big fan of it and use it in sparring and even real encounters quite a bit as it can be used as a cover during the entry because, as Master Mazza says, you know that other hand is coming and especially on the initial entry you can rarely, if ever, control/predict your opponent's action.

 

[DanT]

Two things, I think the second video @KPM posted better illustrates it. Unlike a biu sau (to my understanding) the arm can be at ~90 degrees. Here is another video illustrating how it can be used to "jam" the opponent up by Master Keith Mazza.

I think especially in this video the difference is better illustrated. I am a big fan of it and use it in sparring and even real encounters quite a bit as it can be used as a cover during the entry because, as Master Mazza says, you know that other hand is coming and especially on the initial entry you can rarely, if ever, control/predict your opponent's action.

Yeah we use it the same way, but just call it Biu Sao.

 

[Juany118]

Yeah we use it the same way, but just call it Biu Sao.

That's cool. The only thing I can think of as to why TWC they name them differently is that at least the way I am caught the angle of the elbow when you're performing a biu sau is very different. So it may simply an educational construct just to ram home what a "proper" biu sau is.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

 

[DanT]

That's cool. The only thing I can think of as to why TWC they name them differently is that at least the way I am caught the angle of the elbow when you're performing a biu sau is very different. So it may simply an educational construct just to ram home what a "proper" biu sau is.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I think you're right. It's probably to distinguish them.

 

[KPM]

That's cool. The only thing I can think of as to why TWC they name them differently is that at least the way I am caught the angle of the elbow when you're performing a biu sau is very different. So it may simply an educational construct just to ram home what a "proper" biu sau is.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

As noted earlier in the thread, I think Cheun Sau is more conceptual and was given its own name just to bring attention to the concept. The idea is one hand threading past the other....usually to change the line. You can "thread" into a Biu Sau, you can "thread" into a Fook Sau, or you can "thread" into a lifting guard position like a Man Sau. Phil shows all three of those variations in the videos that started this thread.

 

[Martial D]

That's called "switching hands".

- You use right arm to block your opponent's punch.
- Use your left arm to take over that blocking.
- Free your right arm.
- You then strike your right hand again.

If you then

- Change your right striking hand into a blocking hand, and
- Punch your left hand.

that will be called "double switching hands".

This hand skill exist in almost all the CMA systems such as WC, long fist, preying mantis, Baji, Taiji, Bagua, ...

I was taught "Replacing hand", but that was applicable to a variety of positions. It's actually really cool when someone with good energy control does it to you, you don't even feel the switch. Some Houdini sh#t.

 

[ShortBridge]

I was taught "Replacing hand", but that was applicable to a variety of positions...

Yeah, there is something that we do that I usually call "exchanging the bridge" which is more of a concept than a specific technique. This is perhaps under that umbrella.

 

[Vajramusti]

As noted earlier in the thread, I think Cheun Sau is more conceptual and was given its own name just to bring attention to the concept. The idea is one hand threading past the other....usually to change the line. You can "thread" into a Biu Sau, you can "thread" into a Fook Sau, or you can "thread" into a lifting guard position like a Man Sau. Phil shows all three of those variations in the videos that started this thread.

------------------------------------------------------Cheun sau/ Just a name used by some William Cheung folks

 

[KPM]

------------------------------------------------------Cheun sau/ Just a name used by some William Cheung folks

Another drive-by one-liner post that contributes nothing?

 

[Bino TWT]

Chuen (threading) refers more to the actual mechanical action of the hand than the hand itself. A Biu is a Chuen if it is threading through. Our version of the Laap Sao drill is called Jut Chuen because of the way it is mechanically performed.

Leung Ting Wing Tsun

 

[geezer]

Chuen (threading) refers more to the actual mechanical action of the hand than the hand itself. A Biu is a Chuen if it is threading through. Our version of the Laap Sao drill is called Jut Chuen because of the way it is mechanically performed. ...Leung Ting Wing Tsun

Posting on Cantonese meaning? Yes this is how I understand the word as used in WT. But....

.... Jason, er ....you haven't met LFJ yet. He will test your ability to stay chill ...to the max. When he get's back, just be like a zen (chan) master. And remember there's one like that in every crowd.

 

[Bino TWT]

Lmao can't wait...

 

[KPM]

Lmao can't wait...

Just read this thread from the beginning and you'll see exactly what geezer is talking about!