Does your WC use an upward elbow?

[Danny T]

For me I am thinking about trapping from a boxing perspective. Where it is an attack.

That certainly can be and is a form of trapping. It can be performed as a tactic however, this form of trapping is not aligned with the strategies of WC. We may contact the limbs but to attack the limb vs the body or head is not within the confines of economy of motion or being simple and direct though we may attack through the limb.

 

[drop bear]

That certainly can be and is a form of trapping. It can be performed as a tactic however, this form of trapping is not aligned with the strategies of WC. We may contact the limbs but to attack the limb vs the body or head is not within the confines of economy of motion or being simple and direct though we may attack through the limb.

So as far as I can tell you are adamantly opposed to taking two dips at the arm.

So if you do a philipino or knifish style there are generally two dips.

The chun has one dip.

Elbows for me can get a bit of both depending on what I am trying to get.

 

[KPM]

In regards to the above videos....... This is a matter of range and control. Notice in the WCK video that Anthony STEPS first....he closes the range and then uses a simultaneous deflection and strike followed by another strike. In the FMA video the action starts from a little further out....so there are two parries on the attacking arm rather than just one. One parry would happen AS the stepping in to close the distance. I do that with my Wing Chun sometimes as well. I consider it as "closing with some control and protection." I see it in those cases as increased efficiency from a safety perspective, not decreased efficiency as some might say because I have used an extra "beat".

Secondly, remember that in FMA everything is referenced around weapons combat. The empty-hand methods essentially derive from dealing with a knife. If someone is trying to slash or cut you with a knife you want to maximize your protection by deflecting and controlling the knife-wielding limb as you close in. This is why you see multiple beat defenses as well as even strikes to the knife-wielding limb itself. The sharp pointing thing is the main threat you have to deal with BEFORE you can do to the torso or head with your own strikes. This makes the strategies in FMA empty-hand a bit different that those in WCK. In WCK we just worry about getting past the striking hand. In FMA that striking hand is assumed to be holding a knife, so you can't just "get past it", you have to take it completely out of the game....either by immobilizing it or trapping it.

Third....FMA movements are often centered around the idea of "flow." This comes from the double stick work. Here the idea is that of using patterned movement that can be applied in multiple ways. You can do the same motions with double stick, single stick, knife, and empty hand. This makes learning much easier. You set the pattern in motion....some parts may pick up the attack and some might not. It doesn't matter, you still just "flow." If all motions connect and work...great! If one or two aren't that effective you are still covered by the rest of the pattern. Its like having a backup or "fail safe" built into the technique. To WCK eyes this looks very inefficient with too much wasted motion. But it happens so fast that FMA guys don't see it that way. To FMA eyes WCK often looks somewhat "jerky" and "mechanical" without much "flow." To each his own! ;-)

I'm surprised Joy hasn't chimed it. Many years ago Augustine Fong wrote an article for one of the magazines titled "Trapping: The Heart of Wing Chun." Fong Sifu talked a lot about "trapping." Trapping the hands, trapping the stance, even trapping the "emotions." ;-)

 

[wckf92]

... In FMA that striking hand is assumed to be holding a knife

In WC too! Thought everyone trained like this, but I guess not.
(at least that's how one should be training)

 

[Vajramusti]

In regards to the above videos....... This is a matter of range and control. Notice in the WCK video that Anthony STEPS first....he closes the range and then uses a simultaneous deflection and strike followed by another strike. In the FMA video the action starts from a little further out....so there are two parries on the attacking arm rather than just one. One parry would happen AS the stepping in to close the distance. I do that with my Wing Chun sometimes as well. I consider it as "closing with some control and protection." I see it in those cases as increased efficiency from a safety perspective, not decreased efficiency as some might say because I have used an extra "beat".

Secondly, remember that in FMA everything is referenced around weapons combat. The empty-hand methods essentially derive from dealing with a knife. If someone is trying to slash or cut you with a knife you want to maximize your protection by deflecting and controlling the knife-wielding limb as you close in. This is why you see multiple beat defenses as well as even strikes to the knife-wielding limb itself. The sharp pointing thing is the main threat you have to deal with BEFORE you can do to the torso or head with your own strikes. This makes the strategies in FMA empty-hand a bit different that those in WCK. In WCK we just worry about getting past the striking hand. In FMA that striking hand is assumed to be holding a knife, so you can't just "get past it", you have to take it completely out of the game....either by immobilizing it or trapping it.

Third....FMA movements are often centered around the idea of "flow." This comes from the double stick work. Here the idea is that of using patterned movement that can be applied in multiple ways. You can do the same motions with double stick, single stick, knife, and empty hand. This makes learning much easier. You set the pattern in motion....some parts may pick up the attack and some might not. It doesn't matter, you still just "flow." If all motions connect and work...great! If one or two aren't that effective you are still covered by the rest of the pattern. Its like having a backup or "fail safe" built into the technique. To WCK eyes this looks very inefficient with too much wasted motion. But it happens so fast that FMA guys don't see it that way. To FMA eyes WCK often looks somewhat "jerky" and "mechanical" without much "flow." To each his own! ;-)

I'm surprised Joy hasn't chimed it. Many years ago Augustine Fong wrote an article for one of the magazines titled "Trapping: The Heart of Wing Chun." Fong Sifu talked a lot about "trapping." Trapping the hands, trapping the stance, even trapping the "emotions." ;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct on Master Fong. But many including JKD folks mean somewhat different things by "trapping".
"Control" is the most appropriate referrent

 

[Danny T]

So as far as I can tell you are adamantly opposed to taking two dips at the arm.
Elbows for me can get a bit of both depending on what I am trying to get.

"adamantly opposed" - Not willing to change one's opinion, purpose, or principles; unyielding.
Not really.
The spatial relationship between the opponents becomes a deciding factor on how one responds.
I did use the term tactic as well as strategy. There is a difference.

In WC too! Thought everyone trained like this, but I guess not.
(at least that's how one should be training)

I believe WC is all about defending against a bladed weapon.

 

[wckf92]

I believe WC is all about defending against a bladed weapon.

Heck yeah it is.

 

[PiedmontChun]

If a Sifu were to say to his students "Ok now we are going to learn some trapping" as if they were teaching trapping as its own thing or concept, I think I might head for the door and not waste my time. To agree with Geezer and a couple others here, I don't think that's the norm for WC/WT/VT though really. I think you would see that more in JKD circles where trapping can be seen as technique(s) and not an extension of everything else.

Trapping happens, but it should naturally follow your forward pressure and other principles at work. You can control a limb after removing it from your path without chasing it; simply having forward pressure / intent can allow you to keep contact with that limb instinctively without overcommitting to trapping that limb. The various Gum Sau movements from SNT and also Pak come to mind as often morphing into a trap when an opponent gives the opportunity. Why not take it? Plenty of experienced strikers won't give you the opportunity though.

On that note, the multiple pre-arranged chi-sau sections found in WT often are criticized as overly elaborate "trapping scenarios", but its really more individual responses being trained and concepts within being explored, just in a pattern that makes it easy to transmit between teacher / student and student / student .

 

[KPM]

In WC too! Thought everyone trained like this, but I guess not.
(at least that's how one should be training)

No. That is not at all typical for Wing Chun. And it makes no sense. How would Chi Sau allow for the idea that the other guy is holding a knife?

 

[KPM]

"


I believe WC is all about defending against a bladed weapon.

Huh? Where does that come from? Because I can tell you, from an FMA perspective, using the same Wing Chun methods and techniques you use against an unarmed attacker....against a knife-wielding attacker will get you killed quick! But maybe a topic for another thread??

 

[Danny T]

Huh? Where does that come from? Because I can tell you, from an FMA perspective, using the same Wing Chun methods and techniques you use against an unarmed attacker....against a knife-wielding attacker will get you killed quick! But maybe a topic for another thread??

No. That is not at all typical for Wing Chun. And it makes no sense. How would Chi Sau allow for the idea that the other guy is holding a knife?

Chi Sao is but a drilling platform.
Maybe you should do so vs a knife. Actually is a great learning experience. Do you have and BDJ experience and if so besides the form. Single vs empty hand, single vs single, single vs double, double vs double. We do quite a bit of it.
I also have over 25 years experience in Pekiti-Tirsia kali and have a very good understanding of close quarter blade work. Though some of the methodology is different the positions and pressure are very much the same.
You may have a different understanding and use by from my experience, training, and perspective wc is very much about bladed weapon defense.

 

[Vajramusti]

Chi sao is not fighting but it is an important IP Man wc method for developing one's body and mind for martial purpose.
You don't throw common sense out of the window or good judgment about the context of an encounter.

 

[JPinAZ]

In regards to the above videos....... This is a matter of range and control. Notice in the WCK video that Anthony STEPS first....he closes the range and then uses a simultaneous deflection and strike followed by another strike.

Not to go too far off subject, but I also notice Anthony has a (bad?) habit of always moving off centerline when he steps before or during engagement. So I'd argue he's not exactly closing range if he is also giving up position by moving off centerline line when he does. I'd say he's 'sorta' closing range

 

[KPM]

Not to go too far off subject, but I also notice Anthony has a (bad?) habit of always moving off centerline when he steps before or during engagement. So I'd argue he's not exactly closing range if he is also giving up position by moving off centerline line when he does. I'd say he's 'sorta' closing range

Probably just semantics, but I'd say he is stepping off and creating a NEW centerline. ;-)

 

[guy b.]

In WC too! Thought everyone trained like this, but I guess not.
(at least that's how one should be training)

Why?

 

[KPM]

Chi Sao is but a drilling platform.

---And if you did the standard Ip Man Chi Sau with me while I had a knife in my hand, I would be slicing you to pieces. ;-)

Do you have and BDJ experience and if so besides the form. Single vs empty hand, single vs single, single vs double, double vs double. We do quite a bit of it.

---Ah! Maybe that is the disconnect? I am talking about a tactical folder, not Wing Chun Short swords/knives. But then how in the world would you do Chi Sau while holding two short swords?????

I also have over 25 years experience in Pekiti-Tirsia kali and have a very good understanding of close quarter blade work. Though some of the methodology is different the positions and pressure are very much the same.

----Then let's please take this to the other thread I started. Sounds like a good foundation for an interesting discussion!

 

[Danny T]

Chi Sao is but a drilling platform.

---And if you did the standard Ip Man Chi Sau with me while I had a knife in my hand, I would be slicing you to pieces. ;-)

Not under Ip Man. We may practice differently but really don't believe so.

---Ah! Maybe that is the disconnect? I am talking about a tactical folder, not Wing Chun Short swords/knives. But then how in the world would you do Chi Sau while holding two short swords?????

We use pocket folders, combat tactical knives, bowie type knives, curved blades etc. Try it you may gain a different perspective.

 

[geezer]

----Then let's please take this to the other thread I started. Sounds like a good foundation for an interesting discussion!

Great idea. KPM, my initial response was to agree with you that basic WC (not Bart Cham Dao) does not directly translate to blade work. In fact, I feel a lot of WC guys look clueless about knife work, and their standard approach to fighting leaves them pretty vulnerable. Then Danny (who is not one to say dumb things) re-affirms his position and brings up his considerable Pekiti experience. Frankly intrigued to hear more on the subject. Please go ahead and start that new thread.

 

[JPinAZ]

Probably just semantics, but I'd say he is stepping off and creating a NEW centerline. ;-)

I hear ya, but how many does he need?? haha
When talking A-to-B centerline for engagement (which what I mean here by 'centerline'), it only really exists if one point, in the case A, is stationary. You can't really have a usable A-to-B centerline if both points are always moving.

If we can deal with the incoming attack where we are, there is no reason to even 'create a new centerline' as you suggest. And sure, there are plenty of times we will have to move. But this is typically AFTER there is a bridge. And if we fail to deal with initial the attack on the original CL, sure, we move as necessary to maintain proper range & structure, gain superior position and/or as our opponent leads us to. And we won't this unless we at least try to deal with what's coming on the original CL yeah?
In the clip provided, from what I see Anthony isn't even trying to do this - in most cases he's immediately running away from the original centerline/attack by stepping off before he even makes contact. What's he so afraid of? lol

Ok, different approach I guess, but I think we can both at least agree that this doesn't exactly coincide with WC's ideas of maximum efficiency yeah? (given that's an excepted goal of WC's principle fighting methods)

And you keep winking at me, people are going to start to talk! haha

 

[KPM]

Ok, different approach I guess, but I think we can both at least agree that this doesn't exactly coincide with WC's ideas of maximum efficiency yeah? (given that's an excepted goal of WC's principle fighting methods)

Maybe your idea of what is WCK and what isn't is a bit more rigid than mine. Because stepping off the line to avoid a strong attack and establish a new centerline that is more to one's advantage is an accepted part of any Wing Chun system I have studied. "Flanking" is one term that is sometimes used and is found in both TWC as well as Pin Sun.

Maybe in the video demo Anthony wouldn't have HAD to step off like he did, but it was a demo and he was illustrating a point.