Siu Lim Tau Comparison

[guy b]

My personal perspective might be much the same. But, holy moly! This is no way to begin a productive discussion on an open forum!!! Are you really surprised at the hostile you got?

How about a less confrontational approach? I will try to demonstrate what I mean:

Yes, I too see some things in the Moy Yat VT version of SNT as shown that would be counterproductive ...from the perspective of the VT I practice. For example, the very high position of the double lan-sau or "bar arms" preceeding the double fak-sau movement (left hand frame at 2:30 in the clip) would be problematic in the context of my VT.

Interestingly, when I was first taught this, we also held our sheung lan sau or "double bar-arms" nearly as high as shown here. Later, I learned to let the lan sau settle to a lower position, more in front of the chest. I found this helped me maintain a better structure, with my shoulders relaxed and down, my weight sunken, and my stance better rooted. The slightly lower position also kept my arms and energy closer to centerline and reminded me to focus my energy and intent forward.

Those would be the essential reasons. There are also concerns that could be related to common applications ...such as keeping your arms lower so that you do not get uprooted, but rather can direct the resistance you receive from your opponent downward into your stance. I believe Alan Orr did a nice video on this relating to the way he uses bong-sau to press and move an opponent. We often aply lan-sau similarly. A caveat here would be that applications are specific, situational, and limited. They can be useful to as examples to illustrate how a technique can come into play, but in my VT they are not the reason behind the movements. That is conceptual.

Anyway, that would be my quick, off-the-cuff response ...from the perspective of what I do, expressed honestly, ...but without presuming to know what the Moy Yat practitioner intended, and without being judgemental. Maybe you could try a similar approach?

Sorry, didn't see this before my post.

 

[guy b]

It appears it's you who gets offended when YM VT doesn't work according to other systems

I'm not offended, so no problem

I never said it was flawed, you assumed because it is different to yours. I don't judge a system by one practitioner, just as I don't judge a practitioner by their system. Someday maybe you'll understand that.

I said it is flawed from the point of view of YM VT, because it is

It's about the variety present within Wing Chun, let's try to leave the negativity and politics out of it.

To represent variety properly it needs a correct version from YM VT

 

[guy b]

So....are you saying that you have been "insufferably rude" here so often that people have just come to expect it of you???

People get into the habit of being "offended" as a way of applying social pressure upon individuals not playing by the rules of the group

 

[Transk53]

People get into the habit of being "offended" as a way of applying social pressure upon individuals not playing by the rules of the group

No, individuals are what they are

 

[guy b]

Remember to keep in mind that when watching someone performing a form that they may not be thinking the same as you. Your purpose & understanding for doing a movement may not be the same as theirs.

YM VT not a grab bag of ideas you like. It is designed to work in one way. Without that systemic unerstanding it simply doesn't work. I have no comment on other systems that I don't do.

Where you emphasize push they my emphasize lift. It's all about application, without it, it's impossible to tell intention. All this "It wouldn't work in my system" nonsense is moot. Without having intimate knowledge of how their methodology interplays with the movements it all just speculation.

No, YM VT works like YM VT

What you see as a block maybe a strike or lock to them. Best thing to do instead of speculate & judge is to ask why. Siu Lim Tau is "Little Imagination" not "Little Written in Stone

SNT is little idea. The idea was missing from that video.

In YM VT if you see a lock then someone is making it up as they go along.

 

[Mattattack]

Please don't be. Feel free to state or inquire about any thought you have. As long as you aren't divisive or trolling you'll be alright.

Eh, the discussion needs to veer back to highlighting differences in styles, regardless of how good or bad the people in that video are.

Hey!
I have a very particular question about the vid, especially for anyone familiar with HFY:

At 3:23 the HFY guy (in the center) forms a bong sau and then lifts it straight up into, well, a high bong sau.

A lifting movement with the elbow pronated like this would just annihilate my shoulder if it was against any kind of resistance.

Any idea what is being trained?

This is the stuff I find to be more interesting. Would that be just a high man sau?

 

[Transk53]

YM VT not a grab bag of ideas you like. It is designed to work in one way. Without that systemic unerstanding it simply doesn't work. I have no comment on other systems that I don't do.

A grab bag of ideas you like, oh yes indeed.

 

[Nobody Important]

I said it is flawed from the point of view of YM VT, because it is


To represent variety properly it needs a correct version from YM VT

Who cares, we're not pointing out perceived flaws. I wanted to highlight differences.

No it doesn't. Again there is no accepted standard to which all other branches are to be held to. Who gets to decide what branch of YMVT is correct? This elitism is ridiculous.

 

[Nobody Important]

YM VT not a grab bag of ideas you like. It is designed to work in one way. Without that systemic unerstanding it simply doesn't work. I have no comment on other systems that I don't do.



No, YM VT works like YM VT



SNT is little idea. The idea was missing from that video.

In YM VT if you see a lock then someone is making it up as they go along.

You can keep your technically challenged method to yourself. I'm not interested in elitism, dogma or singularity. If you want to believe that Wing Chun is nothing more than elaborate boxing fine with me. I don't subscribe to your assumptions. You would fare better results by studying Western Boxing if you are going to relegate Wing Chun solely to a punching art IMO. It's counter-productive to practice skill sets that emphasize Chi Sau as a means to punching. Much more efficient to simply move & punch if the strategy is to punch.

 

[Cephalopod]

Eh, the discussion needs to veer back to highlighting differences in styles, regardless of how good or bad the people in that video are.

Three cheers to that!

This is the stuff I find to be more interesting.
Would that be just a high man sau?

I don't think so.
A man sau would have a supinated elbow (elbow in) so that you're not presenting an 'asking hand' in a highly weakened position.
Assuming that you are training transitions from one position to another in your Sil lim tau, it's the lifting movement that gets me. Ouch.

But maybe there's an idea behind it that I haven't thought of.
Anyone?

 

[Nobody Important]

Eh, the discussion needs to veer back to highlighting differences in styles, regardless of how good or bad the people in that video are.

This is the stuff I find to be more interesting. Would that be just a high man sau?

I agree completely. I'm not interested in perceptions of correct or incorrect performances. Just the differences each branch highlights and why. There is no need for imposing belief as to why it's "incorrect" or "inconsistent" with your personal view. We all approach things differently, we cannot learn when forced to accept something as "truth" simply because some individuals believe we should all be held to their belief without question

 

[Mattattack]

It looks like the circles in the HFY are a lot bigger

 

[guy b]

I wanted to highlight differences.

Then you need a functional variant, or you are looking at pretend differences.

Who gets to decide what branch of YMVT is correct?

It is one system recently split. Quite easy to tell

 

[guy b]

It's counter-productive to practice skill sets that emphasize Chi Sau as a means to punching.

Obviously you don't understand YM VT

Much more efficient to simply move & punch if the strategy is to punch

The strategy is not to punch, it is llhs, lsjc. The punch is the main weapon

 

[guy b]

A man sau would have a supinated elbow (elbow in) so that you're not presenting an 'asking hand' in a highly weakened position.

Careful you don't say anything that might "offend" anyone

 

[guy b]

You can keep your technically challenged method to yourself. I'm not interested in elitism, dogma or singularity. If you want to believe that Wing Chun is nothing more than elaborate boxing fine with me. I don't subscribe to your assumptions. You would fare better results by studying Western Boxing if you are going to relegate Wing Chun solely to a punching art IMO. It's counter-productive to practice skill sets that emphasize Chi Sau as a means to punching. Much more efficient to simply move & punch if the strategy is to punch.

It sounds like you don't believe that VT is a system at all, what with varying strategies, making the movements mean whatever you like, it being in the mind of the practitioner, etc? When correct can no longer be differentiated from incorrect for fear of causing offence, meaning disappears entirely.

 

[Nobody Important]

Three cheers to that!


I don't think so.
A man sau would have a supinated elbow (elbow in) so that you're not presenting an 'asking hand' in a highly weakened position.
Assuming that you are training transitions from one position to another in your Sil lim tau, it's the lifting movement that gets me. Ouch.

But maybe there's an idea behind it that I haven't thought of.
Anyone?

As for the bong sau in question at 3:23 being performed by the HFY guy. I can't speak for HFY, but we have a similar movement in Yuen family WC. What's being performed is what we'd call Dai Bong (Big Wing). It's a sweeping movement to the inside followed by a transition to Tan Sau. This sweep is for protecting the abdomen from a gut punch, flipping it over to Tan Sau allows you to now be atop the opponents bridge from a second strike to head. In that transition process is Jan Jou (Standing Elbow) & Jung Bong (Center Wing) respectively. This would be an alternative use, defending a gut punch with standing elbow to face punch with center wing. There are more applications that involve one punch instead of two, as well as, locking techniques based on those movements. How HFY perceives them IDK.

 

[Nobody Important]

It sounds like you don't believe that VT is a system at all, what with varying strategies, making the movements mean whatever you like, it being in the mind of the practitioner, etc? When correct can no longer be differentiated from incorrect for fear of causing offence, meaning disappears entirely.

Whereas you believe all other branches of Wing Chun are broken, inconsistent or flawed because of their various interpretations to use, I believe your method to be limited in it's use. Difference of opinion is all. Seems the only person I offend is you because I don't subscribe to your belief in Wing Chun as having a singular & limited purpose or that YMVT is the only correct version.

Can we move on? Or are you going to continue to insist that your interpretation is right & anything contrary to your understanding is false?

 

[Nobody Important]

Obviously you don't understand YM VT



The strategy is not to punch, it is llhs, lsjc. The punch is the main weapon

Why bother when it could all be bypassed by simply moving & punching? Or are you into making defending yourself overly complex? I don't need fancy theory or complex strategy to punch someone. Those things are needed for defending, but that's a defensive mindset. If you promote an aggressive mindset it's counter-intuitive to employ tactics that are primarily defense as the means to achieving them.

But by all means, continue to spout your rhetoric about the YMVT superior method. Chi Sau as a catalyst for punching isn't necessary in Yuen Family Wing Chun. It isn't compatible with our theory as such.

 

[Cephalopod]

As for the bong sau in question at 3:23 being performed by the HFY guy. I can't speak for HFY, but we have a similar movement in Yuen family WC. What's being performed is what we'd call Dai Bong (Big Wing). It's a sweeping movement to the inside followed by a transition to Tan Sau. This sweep is for protecting the abdomen from a gut punch, flipping it over to Tan Sau allows you to now be atop the opponents bridge from a second strike to head. In that transition process is Jan Jou (Standing Elbow) & Jung Bong (Center Wing) respectively. This would be an alternative use, defending a gut punch with standing elbow to face punch with center wing. There are more applications that involve one punch instead of two, as well as, locking techniques based on those movements. How HFY perceives them IDK.

Thanks Nobody.
I get the dai bong, and the transition to tan sao would be the natural follow up. For me this would involve forward pressure and an inward roll of the elbow.
It's that lifting movement I don't get.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with the ideas of standing elbow and jung bong (at least I don't think I am...my knowledge of Chinese terminology is very lacking).
You say these fit between the dai bong and the roll into tan sau? Elaborate?