How to flow out of a pinned hand.

[wckf92]

I am not necessarily saying that move would would work. I wouldn't know.

In wing chun, during the chi sau training drill (as per the OP video)...the guy on the left would have been punched in the ribs by the guy on the right immediately upon him releasing to go for the "pinned arm" move. It is not about whether or not the "move would work" or not. It is all about training the limbs and joints to explode forward to hit/strike. By him doing that (going for the arm pin) and his partner also going for an arm pin release (or whatever), they are both de-training a keystone on which the wing chun system is built. Just my 2 cents of course. Folks can do whatever they want...apparently. But if you took the punching out of boxing would it still be boxing? If you took the grappling out of grappling would it still be grappling? And so on and so forth...
As for whatever kung fu wang is trying to get at...who knows. He has a knack for steering threads away from their original topic. He sometimes makes valid points but his delivery is a bit incomprehensible at times.
Meanwhile...I need an adult beverage! Carry on!

 

[Callen]

Which is completely limiting to understanding your martial art.

If the core principles can be destroyed. Then they should be.

What exactly is the benefit of preserving a principle that is broken?

Definitely some good points in terms of evolving, but my comments were directly related to the OP’s post.

I am not discussing destroying a principle. I am discussing the dangers of the OP's admission of taking away the principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung in exchange for the pursuit of his hypothesis. Through my experience, the removal of the core principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung altogether places the functionality of the Wing Chun system at risk. Leaving out, or omitting certain core principles can destroy what the Wing Chun system is teaching.

Out of curiosity, how much do you understand about Lat Sau Jik Chung and how it relates to the development of the concepts and principles of the Wing Chun system as a whole? Specifically, do you know what happens to the Wing Chun system if Lat Sau Jik Chung is not included as a continual compass in physical training?

 

[drop bear]

Definitely some good points in terms of evolving, but my comments were directly related to the OP’s post.

I am not discussing destroying a principle. I am discussing the dangers of the OP's admission of taking away the principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung in exchange for the pursuit of his hypothesis. Through my experience, the removal of the core principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung altogether places the functionality of the Wing Chun system at risk. Leaving out, or omitting certain core principles can destroy what the Wing Chun system is teaching.

Out of curiosity, how much do you understand about Lat Sau Jik Chung and how it relates to the development of the concepts and principles of the Wing Chun system as a whole? Specifically, do you know what happens to the Wing Chun system if Lat Sau Jik Chung is not included as a continual compass in physical training?

No idea. I am more of an advocate of using scientific method for the understanding of practical martial arts.

Than an ideological approach.

So if you chi sau betterthan him because of these principles then you should keep them.

If you are being beaten then his principles have merit.

You can't argue after the fact if you were beaten that you were not really beaten because he didn't use Wing chun.

 

[Callen]

No idea. I am more of an advocate of using scientific method for the understanding of practical martial arts.

That's good. If you were a Wing Chun practitioner, you would find that its scientific method is embedded in the principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung.

Than an ideological approach.

To which we agree. All of the principles and concepts in WSLVT serve to develop effective actions. That is why we train them.

 

[Callen]

So the system is incapable of evolving or growing?

It is easy to take things of context by mistake, we've all done it.

My comments have nothing to do with evolution. In fact, as a WSLVT practitioner, I'm actually an advocate of evolving Wing Chun. In fact, I could write a whole thread on that topic.

I was actually commenting on the OP's removal of the Lat Sau Jik Chung principle from the Wing Chun system. From my experience, if the foundational principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung is taken away, it places the functionality of the Wing Chun system at risk.

 

[drop bear]

That's good. If you were a Wing Chun practitioner, you would find that its scientific method is embedded in the principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung.


To which we agree. All of the principles and concepts in WSLVT serve to develop effective actions. That is why we train them.

This scientific method?

 

[Oily Dragon]

This is an important point. I agree with Drop Bear's idea of testing what works and what doesn't. At the same time, not everything that works belongs in WC.

If you create a martial art out of everything that works in every situation, you'd end up with an overcomplicated mess.

Wing Chun is defined as much by what we don't do as by what we do. By simplifying and limiting our scope and trying to get more from less, we seek greater efficiency and spontaneity. Sometimes less is more.

Wing Chun is like a triple distilled whiskey, with the raw grains sewn across all of China and the fermented treasure at the end of the rainbow somewhere around Canton, picked up by sailors and spread like venereal disease across the rest of the world. Warts and all.

Unfortunately what this means is that very, very few people are genuinely capable of turning what they're taught into a real, moving orchestration. Even kept simple, Wing Chun can boggle the noggin for decades. 40 years might not even be enough! Sometimes it takes 40 years and a few more days, then BING!

What doesn't work? Your body, without 功.

 

[APL76]

Chasing hands is a thing for some but for me I don't follow the crowd and it's not an issue for me..

fair enough.

 

[APL76]

My point is stick/follow is not good enough. Connection is better. If my hand can hold on your arm (chasing arm?), when you move back, your body will pull my body with you.

It does that anyway with or without needing to hold onto the opponent's arm. As soon as you have contact , i,e, connection, you should have the intention and forward force required to move in as necessary. When the other guy pulls back he will pull your attack in. That's the entire point.

 

[Flying Crane]

Definitely some good points in terms of evolving, but my comments were directly related to the OP’s post.

I am not discussing destroying a principle. I am discussing the dangers of the OP's admission of taking away the principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung in exchange for the pursuit of his hypothesis. Through my experience, the removal of the core principle of Lat Sau Jik Chung altogether places the functionality of the Wing Chun system at risk. Leaving out, or omitting certain core principles can destroy what the Wing Chun system is teaching.

Out of curiosity, how much do you understand about Lat Sau Jik Chung and how it relates to the development of the concepts and principles of the Wing Chun system as a whole? Specifically, do you know what happens to the Wing Chun system if Lat Sau Jik Chung is not included as a continual compass in physical training?

Could you please define and explain the principle?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This scientific method?

I believe Callen is talking about, "When you can detect your opponent's weakness, you should run him down."

I do agree that all MA demo should include "momentum". Your opponent will not attack you without forward motion. You also will not counter your opponent without forward motion.

The "scientific method" is to "run your opponent down when you have a chance." Your run down can be either knock down, or take down.

IMO, the OP's demo is just too "static".

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Could you please define and explain the principle?

I believe this is the WC principle - 甩手直衝 Run your opponent down when you can detect his weakness.

 

[Flying Crane]

I believe this is the WC principle - 甩手直衝 Run your opponent down when you can detect his weakness.

Well, I’ll let the wing Chun folks define it for me. But I would consider that a strategy, and not a principle. Any person can adopt any strategy they like. A strategy isn’t definitive of a martial system.

 

[futsaowingchun]

But in the WC sticky hand, you suppose to be able to control both of your opponent's arms. In the OP's clip, both his left arm and his opponent's left arm are free.

what i demoed was not chi sao..

 

[futsaowingchun]

Personally, I’m starting to get the impression that the OP’s "Center Point" theory might really just be his way of coming to the realization that the chasing center concept 追形 in Wing Chun is about the opponent’s centerline, not our own centerline. I fear that in an attempt to think outside the box, he is also in danger of mistakenly reinventing the wheel.

While the OP’s breakthrough may not necessarily be new or unique, the take-away I get is that it’s a new discovery for him… and ultimately in my opinion that can be a good thing. However, it is never a good idea to sacrifice core concepts in the process of personal discovery because it can put the functionality of the system at a risk.

This is a solid reminder to all of us. We need to be cautious not to place so much value on our own ideas that they become a justification for destroying the foundation of what the Wing Chun system is teaching us.

I don't believe in sacrificing any key concepts but am not bound by then either..I use them when they need.I dont believe in becoming a slave to my martial art..Its a tool that I use like a hammer or a scewdriver thats all. C.P.T is not a replacement for any of the Wing Chun tenets but a progessive development that one uses to reach a new development in your Wing Chun.. To Me the whole idea of keeping wing chun pure not questioning its core prinicples sounds like a CULT!!! and ive written about that to.. That mind set is toxic and renders any martial art in a state of obsolescence.

 

[Oily Dragon]

C.P.T is not a replacement for any of the Wing Chun tenets but a progessive development that one uses to reach a new development in your Wing Chun.. To Me the whole idea of keeping wing chun pure not questioning its core prinicples sounds like a CULT!!! and ive written about that to.. That mind set is toxic and renders any martial art in a state of obsolescence.

But you have yet to really question any of Wing Chun's core principles, and by those I mean the three Shaolin animal styles that comprise Wing Chun. Whatever you're questioning is a mystery to me right now.

Like, you haven't asked me one single question, and I'm hurt. Let's get to the bottom of it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

what i demoed was not chi sao..

Let's talk about the CMA principle 來留去送 if you come, I'll keep you. if you go, I'll follow you.

1. Your opponent uses left arm to push up your right arm, and uses right arm to press down your left arm (separate hands).
2. He then use his right arm to take over his left hand control, and free his left arm (switch hands).

During step 2, if your left hand can follow his right arm (stick/follow), and push his right elbow to your right, and spin your body to your right (let your opponent's right arm to push into the thin air), you will have a perfect skill demonstration video - 來留去送 if you come, I'll keep you. if you go, I'll follow you.

 

[Oily Dragon]

This thread made me think of Tai Yi Wu Xing Quan Crane. I could be mad but I think it sums up the poster's dilemma: the need to learn more, and train harder.

 

[geezer]

Say old mate was doing chi sau. (Which I assume is the context) and is pulling off that move, regardless if it is core principles or not. Then you just have to deal with that.

Yeah, you absolutely have to deal with it ...but that doesn't make it good Wing Chun.

For example, if your WC partner closes-in and throws a short, straight-line high punch or elbow (a typical WC attack). You might choose to slap it upward and aside (high pak-sau), simultaneously changing levels and shooting a double-leg and then proceed by grappling on the ground to achieve a submission.

That counter, the double-leg and ground fighting, is totally valid and absolutely can work. But it isn't WC. Further, attempts by WC guys to make-up "anti-grappling" are ...to put it kindly, less than satisfying.

So, IMO it is best to practice WC as it was intended, as a close-range, stand-up, striking art, primarily emphasizing straight line attacks and leave the training in other areas to qualified experts in those fields (BJJ, etc.).

On the other hand, I believe WC people need to become more martially "multi-lingual" so to speak and address how to react to a wide variety of attacks. But, to pursue the language metaphor- in an ideal situation, you would learn decent English and decent Spanish first before playing at "Spanglish" ...i.e. learn each separate MA well, and then explore the transitions between them.

 

[drop bear]

Yeah, you absolutely have to deal with it ...but that doesn't make it good Wing Chun.

For example, if your WC partner closes-in and throws a short, straight-line high punch or elbow (a typical WC attack). You might choose to slap it upward and aside (high pak-sau), simultaneously changing levels and shooting a double-leg and then proceed by grappling on the ground to achieve a submission.

That counter, the double-leg and ground fighting, is totally valid and absolutely can work. But it isn't WC. Further, attempts by WC guys to make-up "anti-grappling" are ...to put it kindly, less than satisfying.

So, IMO it is best to practice WC as it was intended, as a close-range, stand-up, striking art, primarily emphasizing straight line attacks and leave the training in other areas to qualified experts in those fields (BJJ, etc.).

On the other hand, I believe WC people need to become more martially "multi-lingual" so to speak and address how to react to a wide variety of attacks. But, to pursue the language metaphor- in an ideal situation, you would learn decent English and decent Spanish first before playing at "Spanglish" ...i.e. learn each separate MA well, and then explore the transitions between them.

There is an element of going completely prison rules. And an element of gaming the game a bit.

I don't think a bit of sneaky head movement or some chasing hands is outside the boundaries of what would be expected in an exchange like that.

If it is flawed. Then it will present as flawed and you won't be able to pull it off.

If you do pull it off and the other guy cried foul for it not being wing chun. I think that is more of a case of salty panties. Rather than a system breaking ethic.

And I disagree with the analogy. If say I spoke English but wanted to use the word chi sau to convey an idea. I should have to learn Chinese to do it.