Ho Kam Ming wing chun

[guy b.]

I don't think WSL was dogmatic-you are in some of your posts You don't have to agree with me- but your dogmatism gets in the way of understanding what I sad.

I don't feel that I am dogmatic having done several types of wing chun and several different systems, both traditional and modern but I have to say that I have trouble understanding what you are saying as well. I get that you don't mean it to be this way, but many of your posts come across as being very general. If you could be more specific then that would be incredibly useful. Even if the details seem obvious to you, maybe they aren't to us?

In dahn chi sao -jut from fuk can be very fluid. Dan chi sao trains one hand at a time... but it leads to two handed chi sane can use one or two hands depending on context.

Jut as a first action can be a jut with one hand while simultaneously striking with the other, or a jut with one hand followed by something else with either hand. In the first case as LFJ said you are simultaneously attacking and defending but using 2 hands against a one handed attack. Is it not more simple to punch with jam elbow and cut the attack? In the second case you are blocking then countering, a 2 step process. Can you explain why the jut first action? When would you choose to use it particularly?

 

[geezer]

Then we differ greatly right from setup.


...Before one has been through the stages to systematically develop coordination, elbow control, understanding of lines, force exchange, etc., I don't see how or why one would be trying to borrow an opponent's force and looking to exploit them, already being confrontational in DCS.

You say we differ greatly. That is correct. The rest of your post shows a deep misunderstanding of what I attempted to convey and of how we train.

My intent was to be brief. I'm sorry if I was unclear as a result. Honestly, it's quite difficult to address topics such as chi-sau verbally, and probably why more senior and wiser individuals like Joy are reluctant to post much at all.

Yes, we differ greatly right from the beginning. As my old sifu used to say, we are a different system stemming from a common source.

As for the second assertions about trying to exploit your partner ("opponent") and being confrontational, that is not what we do. In our system, Dan Chi is a cooperative training exercise that is not competitive. It is not about controlling an opponent as you say. It is about learning how to receive and dissolve the energies your partner feeds you. And it is not easy. In our system dan chi is an intermediate drill practiced after students have been prepared with other paired drills such as our basic "lat sau" curriculum.

 

[geezer]

I don't feel that I am dogmatic having done several types of wing chun and several different systems, both traditional and modern but I have to say that I have trouble understanding what you are saying as well....

Guy, you seem to sincere and genuinely curious about comparing different approaches ...which is why I tried to answer some of your questions in a previous post. Then LFJ comes along completely misunderstanding my comments and making some critical and incorrect assertions. The fact is that even if both parties are open minded and sincerely interested, words alone are insufficient to communicate much about chi-sau. Your hands have to talk and listen as well.

Without crossing bridges there is little I can share with you.

 

[guy b.]

Guy, you seem to sincere and genuinely curious about comparing different approaches ...which is why I tried to answer some of your questions in a previous post. Then LFJ comes along completely misunderstanding my comments and making some critical and incorrect assertions. The fact is that even if both parties are open minded and sincerely interested, words alone are insufficient to communicate much about chi-sau. Your hands have to talk and listen as well.

Without crossing bridges there is little I can share with you.

Please don't be discouraged. I fell that I have learned a fair bit about your approach from the detailed post you kindly took the time to write. I don't mind if you do things differently to WSL VT standard approach.

 

[Vajramusti]

I don't feel that I am dogmatic having done several types of wing chun and several different systems, both traditional and modern but I have to say that I have trouble understanding what you are saying as well. I get that you don't mean it to be this way, but many of your posts come across as being very general. If you could be more specific then that would be incredibly useful. Even if the details seem obvious to you, maybe they aren't to us?



Jut as a first action can be a jut with one hand while simultaneously striking with the other, or a jut with one hand followed by something else with either hand. In the first case as LFJ said you are simultaneously attacking and defending but using 2 hands against a one handed attack. Is it not more simple to punch with jam elbow and cut the attack? In the second case you are blocking then countering, a 2 step process. Can you explain why the jut first action? When would you choose to use it particularly?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guy- wing chun is best compared in person and I have done so with numerous persons in diverse lineages including WSL and WSL himself. Sticky hands are drills that develop wing chun skills-first with one hand then with another. In single chisao you seem to use jam and I use jut. That is the essential difference.I can use jam in many interactions including chi sao and self defense. But in basic single sticky, I prefer jut.
What is so unclear about that?

 

[guy b.]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guy- wing chun is best compared in person and I have done so with numerous persons in diverse lineages including WSL and WSL himself. Sticky hands are drills that develop wing chun skills-first with one hand then with another. In single chisao you seem to use jam and I use jut. That is the essential difference.I can use jam in many interactions including chi sao and self defense. But in basic single sticky, I prefer jut.
What is so unclear about that?

It's clear that you do do it, I just don't understand why, sorry! I'm happy to leave it at that if you don't wish to say more about it.

 

[LFJ]

I don't think WSL was dogmatic-you are in some of your posts You don't have to agree with me- but your dogmatism gets in the way of understanding what I sad.

A dogmatic person isn't open to criticism. I've taken the time to explain my perspective on things– very detailedly I might add. I've described how and why I do certain things, and I've explained how and why not to do other things.

You haven't addressed why my criticisms on your method might be wrong or misplaced. You also haven't critiqued my points on what I do. I'm open to hearing it. Only Danny has been willing to do that, although I've defended my method, describing how it actually works.

I am willing to take an honest look at criticism, and if it's valid, I'll adjust my thinking. To the exact opposite, you give only very vague and short responses saying "I do this move. It works. I can do it in many ways." which really amounts to saying nothing at all. Then you post to say all of this is just noise and a waste of your time, and call me dogmatic.

Over the years, seeing you post on two different forums, I've seen a trend in the way you post. Very occasionally, you'll post something insightful– which is a shame because you have many years of experience. But more often than not you post short, vague statements to seem as if you have something of depth. Yet you never go into much detail, which makes me think you either don't have much detail to speak of, or you want to be secretive for some reason while acting like an expert. In that case, I don't know why you post on forums.

It is especially pointless to come on with your nose in the air saying you've been busy teaching or training and don't have time for "chit-chat sites", as if no one else trains like you do because we spend maybe 20 minutes talking on a forum.

 

[LFJ]

Honestly, it's quite difficult to address topics such as chi-sau verbally, and probably why more senior and wiser individuals like Joy are reluctant to post much at all.

I don't see why that should be the case at all. The verbal transmission is extremely important to ensure the correct thinking has been passed on. Many never receive it. I've actually learned the most about VT when sat around a dinner table, then I apply that thinking to training. It's what leads training in the right direction.

I think you should be able to clearly explain how and why you do things, as well as how and why you shouldn't do things another way. VT should be simple. If you can't explain it in plain language, something is wrong.

As for the second assertions about trying to exploit your partner ("opponent") and being confrontational, that is not what we do. In our system, Dan Chi is a cooperative training exercise that is not competitive. It is not about controlling an opponent as you say. It is about learning how to receive and dissolve the energies your partner feeds you.

Exploiting deviation in your partner's springy energy was your phrasing. In any case, it seems a confrontational mindset to me because you are learning to deal with a partner's ("opponent's", another person's) energy, whereas what I do is all about developing the individual's understanding of things like elbow control and alignment. We only borrow each other's arms to train on, but things are in reference to our own structures and the center. Errors will appear at the center, like crossing with the wrist as a result of improper use of the elbow, or in the effect placed on the partner's arm which should be ballistically displaced, not blocked or absorbed into the joints... or stuck to and followed.

In our system dan chi is an intermediate drill practiced after students have been prepared with other paired drills such as our basic "lat sau" curriculum.

So a beginner learns mobile two-handed drills, before doing a stationary single-handed coordination drill? Everything you say, from my perspective, seems out of order... topsy turvy, upside down, inside out, and back to front.

 

[guy b.]

I don't see why that should be the case at all. The verbal transmission is extremely important to ensure the correct thinking has been passed on. Many never receive it. I've actually learned the most about VT when sat around a dinner table, then I apply that thinking to training. It's what leads training in the right direction.

I think you should be able to clearly explain how and why you do things, as well as how and why you shouldn't do things another way. VT should be simple. If you can't explain it in plain language, something is wrong.

I find this to be a frustrating position that many people revert to when faced with a written or verbal argument about how their system works. I agree that it should be simple to explain why and how you do whatever it is that you do. I don't understand at all why people sometimes appear to get cagey when asked specific technical questions like these. Isn't it fun to talk about your wing chun?

You should be able to boil your thoughts down to a few key ideas. I thought this was happening on the pads work thread with KPM and his control before striking idea, but he now wants to dissociate himself from what he said. It is as if people are afraid to believe in something.

I would agree that most of the actual learning comes from discussion; the hard part is trying to make your body do what you understand to be the right idea!

 

[guy b.]

Very occasionally, you'll post something insightful– which is a shame because you have many years of experience. But more often than not you post short, vague statements to seem as if you have something of depth. Yet you never go into much detail, which makes me think you either don't have much detail to speak of, or you want to be secretive for some reason while acting like an expert. In that case, I don't know why you post on forums.

I would reluctantly agree with this assessment, although I guess he could just be busy and only have time to read and make short posts?

 

[KPM]

I

You should be able to boil your thoughts down to a few key ideas. I thought this was happening on the pads work thread with KPM and his control before striking idea, but he now wants to dissociate himself from what he said. It is as if people are afraid to believe in something.
!

And, you are full of sh1t! Pardon my French. ;-) I am not "dissociating" myself from anything other than trying to discuss anything in any detail with you. The "dogmatic" comment from Joy was directed primarily at you, from what I could tell. When its clear that someone is not even trying to understand what you are saying, or when you start to get the impression that someone is asking repeated questions and saying they don't understand in an attempt to get you to post something you can latch onto and say how wrong it is...well, people tend to stop talking to you. Its really pretty simple.

 

[Phobius]

Also to talk about DCS, you can not talk about jam or jut with the person doing it. Someone has to talk with your training partner. Whatever technique you feel like using is based on how your training partner acts and "attacks".

For me, I am still not at the level where my skill is easily transferable from feeling to words. I know how it feels in my body, but for some reason I cannot at least in English find the proper words to describe it in any more than a generic manner that would sort of describe any DCS training no matter how you do it in most cases.

Where I train we don´t have DCS as a very frequent training method, we left it behind us quite a while ago and primarily just bring it back every now and then to center our mind and sense of touch to the present once more. Will it take a larger part of my time in the future? Perhaps, some day it might be found to hold more value to us but for now we are trying not to root ourselves and as such other drills has become more prominent. It always changes however in order for us to learn the entire system and focus on the things we deem working. The rest we keep researching and studying to find out why it does not or whether it should simply be one of those unused things.

One thing we keep doing now is to get more familiar with the unknown, not repeatable patterns.

Systems need to evolve by the way, stagnation means that people become ill fitted to deal with new situations. Just as a new rule in MMA would change the focus of techniques, the change of the world and general view on fighting will need to alter the martial art you practise.

 

[guy b.]

And, you are full of sh1t! Pardon my French. ;-) I am not "dissociating" myself from anything other than trying to discuss anything in any detail with you. The "dogmatic" comment from Joy was directed primarily at you, from what I could tell. When its clear that someone is not even trying to understand what you are saying, or when you start to get the impression that someone is asking repeated questions and saying they don't understand in an attempt to get you to post something you can latch onto and say how wrong it is...well, people tend to stop talking to you. Its really pretty simple.

Lol you argue against everything I say, even when I am quoting something you said or something that can be proven simply by checking some pics of google images or videos on youtube. You seem like quite a frustrated guy overall. I hope you can relax a bit.

 

[KPM]

Lol you argue against everything I say, even when I am quoting something you said or something that can be proven simply by checking some pics of google images or videos on youtube. You seem like quite a frustrated guy overall. I hope you can relax a bit.

And when you are a condescending prick, people are even LESS likely to want to discuss anything with you. ;-)

 

[Danny T]

And resorting to name calling or using derogative terms certainly does not further or enhance discussion.

 

[geezer]

And when you are a condescending prick, people are even LESS likely to want to discuss anything with you. ;-)

Keith, take a deep slow breath. Count slowly as you exhale. Go to your special place. Yes, re--la-a-a-axe. The annoying little people cannot bother you here.... .

@LFJ and Guy-- I actually agree that a person should be able to communicate useful ideas about WC verbally, but only provided that:

a. Both parties share sufficient knowledge in common, and...
b. Both parties are interested and open to what the other has to say.

My old sifu, for example, had very limited time physically training with GM Yip Man at the end of his training in WC, having already learned the basic system form others. However, after his physical training ended he continued to spend a lot of time meeting and discussing WC with GM Yip over tea, lunch, or dinner. He once told us, that reflecting back, these were some of the most valuable learning sessions he ever had.

I believe this was possible only because both of the conditions mentioned above were met. And in addition, the two were physically present so GM Yip could use body language and gestures at any moment to illustrate and clarify his remarks.

In my discussions with you guys I find that neither of these conditions are met. First of all, we practice different branches of WC and do not share the same basic knowledge and assumptions about WC.

Secondly, I don't feel that either of you, and especially LFJ, are very open to different approaches to WC. Although you may ask questions, they often seem more rhetorical in nature, as though your minds are already made up. You both have some pretty strong opinions. That's OK, but it doesn't really help in encouraging productive dialogue.

And finally, exchanging remarks on a forum is a long way form having a deep conversation over tea, with your own sifu and hing-dai (kung-fu brothers).

In short, I am reluctantly finding myself in the same frustrating place as KPM and Joy, where I feel that it is pretty much a waste of time to continue this discussion. Perhaps we should let it go and not wait until an admin. has to lock this thread too.

 

[Danny T]

Guys the most important aspect of this form at least for me, is that it is a respectful 'discussion' forum. One must be open to the ideas and thoughts of others to have a discussion. We all have our points of view. When one gets to the point of having to prove their opinions then discussion turns to argument. Make your point and let others make their point. Ask for clarification if you don't understand but be aware your lack of understanding may well lie with you. Just because your experience is one thing doesn't mean others are wrong and we are to disrespect it or them. Their opinion is just different. Maybe we should embrace the differences play with them with the goal of understanding them. We may learn something along the way.

 

[geezer]

And, you are full of sh1t! Pardon my French. ;-)

Er ...I believe that expression is closer to old Anglo-Saxon than French or other Latin based languages, and this forum (though this may seem rather ethnically biased) discourages the use of Old-English expletives. Stick to French, ...or Latin, Greek etc. and you'll be better received.

Merde! Your friend and counselor on all things fecal.

 

[KPM]

Keith, take a deep slow breath. Count slowly as you exhale. Go to your special place. Yes, re--la-a-a-axe. The annoying little people cannot bother you here.... .

.

Ommmm Mani Padme Hummmmm.......Ommmmm Mani Padme Hummmm.....Ommmm Mani Padme Hummmm.........

 

[Vajramusti]

Ommmm Mani Padme Hummmmm.......Ommmmm Mani Padme Hummmm.....Ommmm Mani Padme Hummmm.........

------------------------------------------------------------------
The jewel is indeed in the center of the lotus.
But in the symbolism the roots of the padme are in xxxx
That is it's beauty.
We really should move on. And who am I to
destroy a stereotype/characterization of me that LFJ
says he has developed
by reading my posts in two sites over time.I choose to forget all the
ad hominem labels that he used.

On a serious note, verbal discussions of skills in ordinary
language can indeed be misleading. More so with ad hominem
labels being applied.

FWIW-I have friends and discussions and interactions with people who have learned
from a wide array of lineages.

I think that in ordinary language, I am quite clear about single sticky hand
by reasonable standards of communication.

1. Single Sticky hand is a very important tool for developing the right contacts'
and controls in the major 3 contact points of the bridge

2 Jut does it on the thumb side of the bridge. With the rotation of the controlled elbow
the jut can both close and open a line. One can use jam or wu after fuk... but in
my experience jut has higher percentage effectiveness in teaching developmental lessons.

Doing jut and attacking with the other hand is a different context and not directly
relevant to single sticky hand training.