Siu Lim Tau Comparison

[Nobody Important]

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?

Inside the Dai Bong to Tan Sau is the suggestion of Zhan Jou to Jung Bong (alternative movement).
Standing elbow is using the inside of the elbow (palm up & facing inward) to sweep away a gut punch. This would transition to a horizontal center bong that uses forward pressure (think high barring hand) to intercept second punch to face. It appears to lift due to raising the arm, but it is actually upward & forward (press). This releases stress on the shoulder. Does that help?

 

[guy b]

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.

Defensive tactics are not employed as the means of achieving attack in YM VT, rather attack and defence are linked together. This increases % success in a stressful situation and decreases the chances of being hit. Moving and punching is much more 50:50. The designers of the system obviously preferred to stack the odds in their favour.

 

[guy b]

But by all means, continue to spout your rhetoric about the YMVT superior method.

I haven't said that YM VT is superior to other systems. Maybe it is your inferiority complex making you feel that this is the case? I assure you that it is not.

Chi Sau as a catalyst for punching isn't necessary in Yuen Family Wing Chun. It isn't compatible with our theory as such

Ok?

 

[Cephalopod]

Inside the Dai Bong to Tan Sau is the suggestion of Zhan Jou to Jung Bong (alternative movement).
Standing elbow is using the inside of the elbow (palm up & facing inward) to sweep away a gut punch. This would transition to a horizontal center bong that uses forward pressure (think high barring hand) to intercept second punch to face. It appears to lift due to raising the arm, but it is actually upward & forward (press). This releases stress on the shoulder. Does that help?

I'm pretty sure I understand you. In terms of movement one variant is the reverse of the other: bong to tan; zhan jou (similar to tan shape) to bong. Both involve rolling.
In the video I'm talking about, the movement is from bong to bong (low to high). The elbow doesn't roll, it stays pronated and it just lifts.
Maybe he's just demonstrating 2 working heights for the bong and deems the transition to be moot?

 

[Nobody Important]

Defensive tactics are not employed as the means of achieving attack in YM VT, rather attack and defence are linked together. This increases % success in a stressful situation and decreases the chances of being hit. Moving and punching is much more 50:50. The designers of the system obviously preferred to stack the odds in their favour.

I understand where you are coming from. But IMO the punch itself is easily used to accomplish this on a rudimentary level. No need for Chi Sau in any facet to achieve this effect. When Wing Chun (and this isn't a put down of Wing Chun) can effectively neutralize Western Boxing using the methodology you present, I'll give your branch a serious look. So far I'm unaware of this happening on any consistent basis, which suggests to me; if you are using your Wing Chun as strictly a striking method, your better off with Western Boxing. I don't believe Wing Chun was designed as strictly a striking art, and as such, don't force it to be so. Opinions will vary.

 

[Cephalopod]

I just watched the video again and I noticed that the TWC guy on the right does the same thing (lifting the bong sau) at 4:14.
Are there any TWC people here who could shed some light on that?

 

[Nobody Important]

I haven't said that YM VT is superior to other systems. Maybe it is your inferiority complex making you feel that this is the case? I assure you that it is not.



Ok?

Guy, you imply it with nearly every post. You compare your method with everyone else's and conclude since it isn't compatible with your understanding or with what you were taught that it's broken. You don't have to agree with someone else's view, but you also don't need to be so disdainful. You constantly chide others for not understanding WSLVT, yet tout how it's methods are superior (yes you do this) based on how others methods won't work in your system. They weren't meant to work in your system. There isn't a universal Wing Chun method, simple as that. It would be nice if there was, but then everyone would be the same and the art wouldn't have evolved as it did. Diversity is what makes Wing Chun interesting. I don't accept all views or even recognize all branches, you don't have to either. But I see no need to dismiss them simply because I don't understand them.

 

[guy b]

I'm unaware of this happening on any consistent basis, which suggests to me; if you are using your Wing Chun as strictly a striking method, your better off with Western Boxing.

Sample size completely different, VT takes a long time to become functional, "western boxing" not a coherent method, many different styles exist, western boxing represented by full time athletes, VT not so much. Impossible to arrive at any sensible conclusion regarding side by side effectiveness.

 

[Nobody Important]

I'm pretty sure I understand you. In terms of movement one variant is the reverse of the other: bong to tan; zhan jou (similar to tan shape) to bong. Both involve rolling.
In the video I'm talking about, the movement is from bong to bong (low to high). The elbow doesn't roll, it stays pronated and it just lifts.
Maybe he's just demonstrating 2 working heights for the bong and deems the transition to be moot?

Could be. I thought I seen a transition via a small roll to the high bong, but maybe it was a different section. Hard to tell or justify by superimposing my approach to their movement. Perhaps one of the HFY guys can elaborate for clarification.

 

[guy b]

Guy, you imply it with nearly every post. You compare your method with everyone else's and conclude since it isn't compatible with your understanding or with what you were taught that it's broken.

I explicitly didn't do this here. I looked at the TWC form from a YM VT perspective (in which case non functional), but TWC claims other input so not a criticism. HFY I didn't comment on because means nothing to me. Moy Yat I commented on because performed badly (fact), and is YM VT

you also don't need to be so disdainful. You constantly chide others for not understanding WSLVT, yet tout how it's methods are superior (yes you do this) based on how others methods won't work in your system.

I think people read offence into my replies that is not intended. I don't feel disdainful towards systems I don't understand, just have no opinion

There isn't a universal Wing Chun method, simple as that. It would be nice if there was

I am only interested in technical discussion on YM VT, because that is the system I know.

 

[JowGaWolf]

@JowGaWolf

I'll be labeled as a heretic for this, but, Jow Ga has a fair amount of Hung Gar influence. I'm of the belief that Hung Gar, especially Lam family, has a good deal of Wing Chun in it, though expressed differently to the mainstream stuff. My question is , does Jow Ga have a set similar to Lam family Tiger & Crane's that contains the short bridge opening? If so what is your impression as to it's purpose?

My question is , does Jow Ga have a set similar to Lam family Tiger & Crane's that contains the short bridge opening? If so what is your impression as to it's purpose?

Good question. I'll have to take a look since it is made of 3 different systems. Technically I could learn some things out of Hung Ga, Choy Ga, and Northern Shaolin and still be in line with Jow Ga principles. For me that's freaking awesome. The reason this would be acceptable is because the Founder was proficient and all 3 systems which allowed him to put them together in a way that works.

This is Jow Ga

This is Hung Ga Tiger Crane form that you speak of? If so we have some of this. But it's scattered among multiple forms in Jow Ga.

In some of the forms that I know of, it seems like there is a flicker of Wing Chun type movement, but I currently don't know enough forms to know for sure just how much those Wing Chun type techniques play a part in Jow Ga. My guess is that there was an original technique that took 2 different paths (probably more but just for simplicity we'll just say 2). One path led to Wing Chun and the other led to Hung Ga. Some of the techniques that look like Wing Chun may or may not be in some of the advanced forms that I don't know yet. There is a Jow Ga form called small Eagle Claw which takes a narrow stance similar to Wing Chun and it has more bridges, but I haven't been taught that form yet. I've only seen parts of it

I would need to ask someone from one of the 3 systems that make up Jow Ga about the Wing Chun type techniques. I don't know if Wing Chun influenced Hung Gar or if it's like the "2 path" scenario where the techniques are older than Wing Chun and Hung Ga

 

[Nobody Important]

Sample size completely different, VT takes a long time to become functional, "western boxing" not a coherent method, many different styles exist, western boxing represented by full time athletes, VT not so much. Impossible to arrive at any sensible conclusion regarding side by side effectiveness.

Sorry you believe that. I find boxing to be very coherent. I will agree that Wing Chun takes longer to learn, but then again, I'm approaching it differently by placing emphasis on aspects other than simply punching and the means to utilize a punch.

I would assume that a branch of Wing Chun dedicated to punching and supporting elements to facilitate punching would be relatively easy to learn. But you don't find Western Boxing coherent, so I guess that dampens my assumptions.

 

[Nobody Important]

I explicitly didn't do this here. I looked at the TWC form from a YM VT perspective (in which case non functional), but TWC claims other input so not a criticism. HFY I didn't comment on because means nothing to me. Moy Yat I commented on because performed badly (fact), and is YM VT

------- You just did it with your reply. Do you seriously not see that? It may be a branch coming from Yip Man, but it isn't your branch. Their approach may be different than yours. You need to accept the fact that you cannot quality control others based on your belief alone. You don't have to accept or recognize them, but I see no need to criticize simply for the sake of doing so. Have some Mo Duk.


I think people read offence into my replies that is not intended. I don't feel disdainful towards systems I don't understand, just have no opinion

------- You're constantly interjecting your opinions concerning arts other than YMVT. This very thread for example. Try using a little tact when approaching questions to difference.


I am only interested in technical discussion on YM VT, because that is the system I know.

------- That's fine, but let others discuss non YMVT without you interjecting your opinion of their incapatibilty with YMVT. No one wants to constantly hear how our methods are incompatible with yours, we don't care. We are looking for commonalities and different views. Not differences we don't agree upon, this is a given. We know we have differences, no need to constantly point them out.

 

[Juany118]

When was the video taken? Only asking because the TWC has some differences from that which GM William Cheung himself can be see doing in both old and new videos. I will be at a seminar in a couple weeks hosted by his closed door student/head of the US Branch. I think I'll show him the video and ask what's up.

Here's the old video I mentioned. Some of the differences are pretty obvious, even if you have never seen SLT before.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Juany118]

I explicitly didn't do this here. I looked at the TWC form from a YM VT perspective (in which case non functional), but TWC claims other input so not a criticism. HFY I didn't comment on because means nothing to me. Moy Yat I commented on because performed badly (fact), and is YM VT

------- You just did it with your reply. Do you seriously not see that? It may be a branch coming from Yip Man, but it isn't your branch. Their approach may be different than yours. You need to accept the fact that you cannot quality control others based on your belief alone. You don't have to accept or recognize them, but I see no need to criticize simply for the sake of doing so. Have some Mo Duk.


I think people read offence into my replies that is not intended. I don't feel disdainful towards systems I don't understand, just have no opinion

------- You're constantly interjecting your opinions concerning arts other than YMVT. This very thread for example. Try using a little tact when approaching questions to difference.


I am only interested in technical discussion on YM VT, because that is the system I know.

------- That's fine, but let others discuss non YMVT without you interjecting your opinion of their incapatibilty with YMVT. No one wants to constantly hear how our methods are incompatible with yours, we don't care. We are looking for commonalities and different views. Not differences we don't agree upon, this is a given. We know we have differences, no need to constantly point them out.

The other issue is to claim corruption is to say it is damaged and or weakened. Problem is Guy has also said he doesn't accept the premise that if it works it's all good. Ergo he doesn't need practical proof to prove corruption (failure in real life practice). His arguments are formed also identical to those you would see in theological debates between different sects, not people logically discussing verifiable facts.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[KPM]

Sample size completely different, VT takes a long time to become functional, "western boxing" not a coherent method, many different styles exist, western boxing represented by full time athletes, VT not so much. Impossible to arrive at any sensible conclusion regarding side by side effectiveness.

How about at least one instance of a good WSLVT guy easily handling a good western boxer??

 

[KPM]

When was the video taken? Only asking because the TWC has some differences from that which GM William Cheung himself can be see doing in both old and new videos. I will be at a seminar in a couple weeks hosted by his closed door student/head of the US Branch. I think I'll show him the video and ask what's up.

Here's the old video I mentioned. Some of the differences are pretty obvious, even if you have never seen SLT before.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Yeah, that version of the TWC form was certainly a bit different than what I learned when I was studying TWC.

 

[KPM]

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

In Pin Sun we have a similar motion called a "Hok Bong" or "Crane Wing." This is essentially a rising Bong Sau that comes upward from below the attacker's limb and lifts it off-line. Rather like a Fak Sau with the elbow bent. This is often done simultaneously with a upward punch with the other hand...much like the "bouncing punch" that many Ip Man lineages have in their Chum Kiu form. So imagine someone throwing a straight punch towards your face when you have both hands down, and you react by doing a rising Bong to deflect the punch upward with a "uppercut" to his chin coming along a split second behind.

 

[JowGaWolf]

My question is , does Jow Ga have a set similar to Lam family Tiger & Crane's that contains the short bridge opening? If so what is your impression as to it's purpose?

Not sure which part of the form that you are referring to. Do you mean the techniques in the opening bow?

 

[Vajramusti]

Good question. I'll have to take a look since it is made of 3 different systems. Technically I could learn some things out of Hung Ga, Choy Ga, and Northern Shaolin and still be in line with Jow Ga principles. For me that's freaking awesome. The reason this would be acceptable is because the Founder was proficient and all 3 systems which allowed him to put them together in a way that works.

This is Jow Ga

This is Hung Ga Tiger Crane form that you speak of? If so we have some of this. But it's scattered among multiple forms in Jow Ga.

In some of the forms that I know of, it seems like there is a flicker of Wing Chun type movement, but I currently don't know enough forms to know for sure just how much those Wing Chun type techniques play a part in Jow Ga. My guess is that there was an original technique that took 2 different paths (probably more but just for simplicity we'll just say 2). One path led to Wing Chun and the other led to Hung Ga. Some of the techniques that look like Wing Chun may or may not be in some of the advanced forms that I don't know yet. There is a Jow Ga form called small Eagle Claw which takes a narrow stance similar to Wing Chun and it has more bridges, but I haven't been taught that form yet. I've only seen parts of it

I would need to ask someone from one of the 3 systems that make up Jow Ga about the Wing Chun type techniques. I don't know if Wing Chun influenced Hung Gar or if it's like the "2 path" scenario where the techniques are older than Wing Chun and Hung Ga