Siu Lim Tau Comparison

[guy b]

if his intent is upward/rising....then you follow...even if "ballistically"...and are not meeting force with force. You are simply augmenting his upward intent and taking it past its target. I don't see how this could be considered "hand chasing" any more than a Pak Sau the deflects a punch off the target is considered "hand chasing."

I think the main problem with this picture is viewing bong as some kind of cover or interception movement when someone is already in the process of punching you in the face. I would say a bit late for bong at this point. Very unlikely that you succeed in catching the punch with your bong like a movie hero and redirect it over your head. More likely you do a spazzy bong movement as you are smacked in the face with zero benefit as more punches rain down on you.

The time for bong is the instant when hands over yours. It must be done immediately, displacing to the side like pak, and with simultaneous punch. It is to recover position, not to protect your face when someone is in the process of beating you up.

neither LFJ or Guy has offered a solution for this scenario from WSLVT even though they are criticizing other people's explanations.

Sorry for not being on the internet 24/7

How would WSLVT deal with a situation where an opponent is above your bridge (both your arms are lower than his) at relatively close range and he is throwing a rising punch towards your face?

Move?

 

[KPM]

I think the main problem with this picture is viewing bong as some kind of cover or interception movement when someone is already in the process of punching you in the face.

---How is displacing upward any different than displacing to the side as you describe below?

More likely you do a spazzy bong movement as you are smacked in the face with zero benefit as more punches rain down on you.

---Speak for your spazzy self. You have no idea without having seen it done.

The time for bong is the instant when hands over yours. It must be done immediately, displacing to the side like pak, and with simultaneous punch.

---How how is "displacing to the side" not "hand chasing" and "displacing upward" is?



Sorry for not being on the internet 24/7

---Sorry, but you could have lead off by describing how WSLVT would do it differently rather than just criticizing what other's noted.



Move?

---Genius!!!

 

[LFJ]

Your reply is more about what you think is wrong with that movement. I'm asking for a definition of arm-chasing, so I can understand the principles.

My reply defines arm-chasing within the current example for illustration. It is being overly concerned with defending and controlling the opponent's arms, rather than attacking center and supporting the attack.

The example under discussion is a flinch-like response to cover and follow a detected incoming punch. As guy b. already mentioned, by that time it'd probably be too late for a reactive cover and you'd just be lifting the punch into your face, maybe brow instead of chin. More punches would quickly follow and your bent arm would be up in the air, in no position to attack or defend again, if it is not used against you.

With directness as a guiding principle of VT, there is no reason we'd ever fling our arm over our head like that to "follow" or "ride" a punch upward. It's a clearest example of chasing the arm.

 

[LFJ]

If the punch is delivered with power and intent, if the opponent has bigger arms than you, if there is a speed/tension/direction change in the course of the punch, then your shoulder muscles will get loaded, lock up and the opponent can yank on your stiff arm and send you flying.

---Ah! But if his intent is upward/rising....then you follow...even if "ballistically"...and are not meeting force with force. You are simply augmenting his upward intent and taking it past its target. I don't see how this could be considered "hand chasing" any more than a Pak Sau the deflects a punch off the target is considered "hand chasing."

You can't calculate for speed/tension/direction change in the course of the punch. You've already reactively flung your arm up over your head when you saw the punch coming, and they may change to attack your now open body, or face from under your raised arm.

You may try to change and defend again, but you've already been put on defense and in the "past". It's very difficult to recover by then already.

Paak-sau is directed to the center, not up or sideways, and it is helping the punch take center as well.

---In Pin Sun we would do this rising Bong with a pivot so that it is deflecting a bit to the side as it lifts and the pivot is then driving in the rising punch with the other hand. How is it "chasing" if the opponent is getting hit at the same time?

Your defending arm is chasing, or "following" as you say.

On further thought, if the opponent tries to dis-engage from the mutual tension to punch again with the same hand but to the face...
That's much easier to deal with because my bong hand will extend to fill center...a new man-sau

---Yes! Our "Hok Bong" is somewhat like a Man Sau, but with the elbow more bent.

Your "Hok Bong" appears to be going over your own head as you pivot out. It can't just extend to center, from what you've shown and described.

---How is displacing upward any different than displacing to the side as you describe below?

---How how is "displacing to the side" not "hand chasing" and "displacing upward" is?

You are chasing, or "following" upward. VT bong-sau is directed straight into the opponent's center. It is the rotation of the elbow that displaces laterally, not following their arm like you do.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

My reply defines arm-chasing within the current example for illustration. It is being overly concerned with defending and controlling the opponent's arms, rather than attacking center and supporting the attack.

The example under discussion is a flinch-like response to cover and follow a detected incoming punch. As guy b. already mentioned, by that time it'd probably be too late for a reactive cover and you'd just be lifting the punch into your face, maybe brow instead of chin. More punches would quickly follow and your bent arm would be up in the air, in no position to attack or defend again, if it is not used against you.

With directness as a guiding principle of VT, there is no reason we'd ever fling our arm over our head like that to "follow" or "ride" a punch upward. It's a clearest example of chasing the arm.

Ah! Your first paragraph includes a great definition: "being overly concerned with defending and controlling the opponent's arms, rather than attacking center and supporting the attack"

As for Guy's response, he made it to "ignore" so I can't read his posts. You have been more reasoned in your responses, even to those you disagree with, and provide more content.

I see your points about using a rising bong sau here (though I barely understand the principles involved in bong sau, I at least understand the objections you put forth). I would point out that nobody has said anything about flinging an arm over the head - it sounds like they are talking about a controlled redirection, simply in a different direction than what you've suggested WSL VT would use.

I'm looking forward to hearing how other lineages make use of the opportunities this move presents, while avoiding the problems presented by having the arms that high.

 

[KPM]

You can't calculate for speed/tension/direction change in the course of the punch.

---Who said anything about the opponent changing the direction or course of the punch? If he is aiming upward and your arm is beneath his and rising, this is going to be hard for him to do!


You've already reactively flung your arm up over your head when you saw the punch coming,

---Big assumption and totally wrong.

and they may change to attack your now open body, or face from under your raised arm.

---Did you miss the part about the upward punch to the chin following a split second behind the Hok Bong? That certainly makes responses like that somewhat difficult. And we still have the saying "Bong Sau does not remain"....so here the Hok Bong rises and immediately switches to something else with very little if any pause.


You may try to change and defend again, but you've already been put on defense and in the "past". It's very difficult to recover by then already.

---Totally wrong. What can I say. You are doing the exact same thing you accuse others of doing when you actually try to explain your WSLVT.


Paak-sau is directed to the center, not up or sideways, and it is helping the punch take center as well.

---Guy said "displacing to the side like pak, and with simultaneous punch", and I won't even go into the problems with the idea of doing a Bong while trying to punch over the top of it. Isn't that something you laugh at the LTWT guys for doing?




Your defending arm is chasing, or "following" as you say.

---Only in your world.



Your "Hok Bong" appears to be going over your own head as you pivot out. It can't just extend to center, from what you've shown and described.

---The punch is what is extending to center. The Hok Bong is seldom done without the accompanying punch.

 

[KPM]

Your reply is more about what you think is wrong with that movement. I'm asking for a definition of arm-chasing, so I can understand the principles.

You seldom get a direct answer from the dynamic duo Gary. Here is the way I see it.

If you do a system that is focused on only punching the opponent, then "arm chasing" becomes anything that isn't directed into the opponent's center for the purpose of making the way for the punch which ideally should be happening at the same time. Its like driving a wedge into the opponent's center. Anything that deviates off of the line of drive of that wedge is considered wasted motion and therefore "arm chasing."

But if you do a system that is not no narrowly defined, "arm chasing" is also not so narrowly defined. If you do a system that allows for controlling the opponent, for responding without necessarily always punching them out, for Kum Na type applications, and for the possibility of defending against a weapon, then "arm chasing" is not defined the same way. But we still need to be as direct as possible. We still need to have our ultimate goal as controlling the opponent's center...whether by a strike or a body manipulation, etc. So I define "arm chasing" as anything that distracts from that goal. I think if you do more than three counts in a particular technique or defense without affecting the opponent's center and his balance in some way....then you are "arm chasing" because you have lost your focus. For example.....if an opponent throws a relatively long range extended punch that allows me to come under it with a double grab (what we call a "Lung Na") and then pivot to guide him past me and yank him off his feet, I have definitely avoided an attack and dissolved the threat. But this would be "arm chasing" by the other definition.

 

[LFJ]

You can't calculate for speed/tension/direction change in the course of the punch.

---Who said anything about the opponent changing the direction or course of the punch? If he is aiming upward and your arm is beneath his and rising, this is going to be hard for him to do!

The "speed/tension/direction change" was said by Cephalopod, who you were quoting.

And you hope it'll be hard for him to do.

and they may change to attack your now open body, or face from under your raised arm.

---Did you miss the part about the upward punch to the chin following a split second behind the Hok Bong?

Did you miss the part about the opponent also having two arms?

You may try to change and defend again, but you've already been put on defense and in the "past". It's very difficult to recover by then already.

---Totally wrong. What can I say.

You could explain how.

---Guy said "displacing to the side like pak, and with simultaneous punch", and I won't even go into the problems with the idea of doing a Bong while trying to punch over the top of it. Isn't that something you laugh at the LTWT guys for doing?

The paak-sau causes lateral displacement by virtue of our attacking angle in relation to the opponent's facing, not by slapping arms left or right.

Who said anything about punching over the top of a bong-sau?

Your defending arm is chasing, or "following" as you say.

---Only in your world.

I see no distinction between "follow" and "chase" in this context. Apparently, Pin Sun doesn't hold directness as a guiding principle, as in YMVT.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I see no distinction between "follow" and "chase" in this context. Apparently, Pin Sun doesn't hold directness as a guiding principle, as in YMVT.

Or doesn't define it the same way.

 

[LFJ]

Or doesn't define it the same way.

Directness is objective and unambiguous.

 

[wckf92]

On a different note, speaking of comparing the form - is there any meaning or significance to the various spellings of it? I've always thought it was Sil Lum Tao. The OP spelled it Siu Lim Tau... I think there is a Siu "Nim" Tao/u, etc etc...? Can it all be chalked up to Mandarin vs Cantonese?

 

[LFJ]

Standard Cantonese pronunciation of "Little Idea" (simp: 小念头 trad: 小念頭) is Siu-Nim-Tau.

In colloquial speech, the 'N' initial is often pronounced lazily as an 'L', hence; Siu-Lim-Tau. Low what I mean?

Siu-Nim-Tau in Mandarin is Xiao Niantou.

Some lineages use "Little Practice" (simp: 小练头 trad: 小練頭), which is Siu-Lin-Tau. This 'L' initial is originally an 'L', and the final is an 'N' here, not an 'M'.

"Sil Lum" is a nonstandard romanization of Siu-Lam, which is the pronunciation of "Shaolin" in Cantonese, where the single 'A' is pronounced like the 'U' as in "dumb", hence the common spelling. And the 'L' initial is originally an 'L'. This spelling has led to some confusion by non-Cantonese speakers. No lineage I'm aware of actually uses the characters for Shaolin to name this form.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Directness is objective and unambiguous.

Not entirely. Directness is a concept, and the principle behind that concept can be expressed more than one way.

 

[KPM]

Directness is objective and unambiguous.

---Not as unambiguous as you think! I already gave an example of using Lung Na to deflect, control, and neutralize an attacker....but you would call this "chasing hands" by your definition. But to me, its a pretty direct response!


Who said anything about punching over the top of a bong-sau?

---Sorry, I guess I misunderstood what Guy was saying. So how do you deflect inward with a Bong Sau and punch simultaneously?

 

[geezer]

Directness is objective and unambiguous.

Hey ...I agree. And directness is a core principle in the VT I train as well as in DTE or Direct Torres Escrima. Which goes to show that very different arts can value directness. But getting to your point, if you break down an exchange, you can objectively evaluate how direct it is.

On the other hand, sometimes there are valid reasons for taking a less direct course of action. An example might be off-lining in DTE escrima ....steping diagonally forward and to the side to "get an angle" rather than charging up the middle. Some WC/VT stresses this too. Yau pin, yap ching. From the side through the center. It's not the absolute shortest path, but it may be the most effective way to close in a given situation.

 

[LFJ]

Not as unambiguous as you think! I already gave an example of using Lung Na to deflect, control, and neutralize an attacker....but you would call this "chasing hands" by your definition. But to me, its a pretty direct response!

I would call it dreaming if you think you can catch a punch out of the air and throw the guy right along as you describe. I think you watch too many movies.

Hey ...I agree. And directness is a core principle in the VT I train as well as in DTE or Direct Torres Escrima. Which goes to show that very different arts can value directness. But getting to your point, if you break down an exchange, you can objectively evaluate how direct it is.

On the other hand, sometimes there are valid reasons for taking a less direct course of action. An example might be off-lining in DTE escrima ....steping diagonally forward and to the side to "get an angle" rather than charging up the middle. Some WC/VT stresses this too. Yau pin, yap ching. From the side through the center. It's not the absolute shortest path, but it may be the most effective way to close in a given situation.

Right. We try to be as direct as possible given the circumstance. I can't think of a circumstance where I'd lift and follow a punch up and over my head though. That's not direct in the least.

 

[LFJ]

So how do you deflect inward with a Bong Sau and punch simultaneously?

Man/wu launch simultaneously from different ranges to different points.

 

[KPM]

I would call it dreaming if you think you can catch a punch out of the air and throw the guy right along as you describe. I think you watch too many movies.

---There you go again! You routinely comment on people saying things in regard to WSLVT when they don't know the system. But you are doing the exact same thing! Double standard much? Did I say anything about "catching a punch out of the air"? That is not how we use Lung Na. But since you don't know what Lung Na is or how we use it, how can you pass such judgments?



Right. We try to be as direct as possible given the circumstance. I can't think of a circumstance where I'd lift and follow a punch up and over my head though. That's not direct in the least.

---If an opponent's punch is already traveling on an upward trajectory it seems pretty direct to me to let it continue on that trajectory while taking it off the target and while punching him at the exact same time. It's one count. He punches, you deflect as you return a punch. How someone can say that isn't "direct" is beyond me.


Man/wu launch simultaneously from different ranges to different points.

---Not a very good answer. I'm sure Gary has no idea what you are talking about. It isn't clear to me either, and I actually know what a "Man" and a "Wu" are!

 

[guy b]

But since you don't know what Lung Na is or how we use it, how can you pass such judgments?

Then please provide info

 

[wtxs]

WSL VT is not "simply punching"

Well lets seeee ...if your WSLVT don't have absorb, redirect, no chi na method, does it also applies to open hand or finger strikes? What does that leaves you? All we ever heard is the PUNCH.