Footwork in second section Chum Kiu

[futsaowingchun]

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

 

[geezer]

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 Ilúvatar]

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 Ilúvatar]

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]

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?

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 Ilúvatar]

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]

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]

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!

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?!

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.

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.

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 Ilúvatar]

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]

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]

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 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.

 

[Eru Ilúvatar]

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]

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.

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?