The ever more complicated training of some lineages...

[wckf92]

From a boxing perspective, I see nothing wrong with being "defensive." The sub-text name that Lyte Burly uses for 52 Blocks is "A.O.D" or "Art of Defense." He will tell you that this is where 52 Blocks really shines and what separates it from other methods. Because you cannot do a "tit for tat" kind of defense! When someone can throw fast combinations of strikes from multiple angles you just cannot match them move for move. Eventually one of those blows is going to get in! In FMA a general rule is often used that no combination should be more than 3 counts long. This is because if the combo (whether defense or offensive) hasn't worked within 3 counts you have failed and need to reset/readjust the angle, approach, etc that you are using! One 3 count combo may flow smoothly into the next 3 count combo, but this wouldn't really be considered as a 6 count combo. It all just flows and adapts.

So in 52 Blocks and boxing in general it is acknowledged that doing a "tit for tat" kind of defense where you are trying to match the opponent's attack move for move is simply not a good idea. So emphasis is placed on evasiveness and covering up. Be a hard target to hit and put a wall around that target so that the blows that you know are going to get through can do no damage. Let the opponent get tired battering against your wall or chasing the target so that he gets sloppy and leaves openings, and THEN launch your own attack. The Wing Chun strategy of charging in on the offense and trying to overwhelm the opponent is good, but it is limited. What happens if that opponent has a good defense? The Wing Chun strategy of sticking the opponent to control him and then create openings for your attack can also be good. But what happens when that opponent won't stand still and allow you to stick to him or won't stay in the Chi Sau range? I think this is why we so often see Wing Chun guys not do very well sparring against someone that can box, or we see Wing Chun guys reverting to something that looks a lot like boxing when they spar. Throwing fast combos from multiple directions is what takes people out, and covering up and moving around is the best way to defend against someone throwing said fast combos from multiple directions!

So back to the OP....yes indeed these long and elaborate curricula we often see are really unnecessary. But you have to keep people interested and coming back month to month to pay those fees!

Good post KPM.
Yeah in the past I've used the sword and shield analogy. Sometimes you can just thrust in and skewer the guy; other times you must use your shield to take the incoming blow WHILE your sword is also in use; and often times you just have to weather the storm with just a shield!
I think this is why the Duncan guys/camp get a lot of grief because DL knows that you must weather the long range game and ultimately get passed it to even do the close body stuff...as a result, his WC "covers" a lot; and they primarily use hands in a 'sword and shield' manner and it gets other WC hurling "that's karate WC" slurs at them. Oh well. My opinion is that based on his personal fighting experience he came to realize what you've typed above and as a result his method of WC prefers to cause damage to the nearest enemy limb (in / during the long bridge moments) before closing in further to attack the core of the bad guy.

 

[geezer]

In FMA a general rule is often used that no combination should be more than 3 counts long. This is because if the combo (whether defense or offensive) hasn't worked within 3 counts you have failed and need to reset/readjust the angle, approach, etc that you are using! One 3 count combo may flow smoothly into the next 3 count combo, but this wouldn't really be considered as a 6 count combo. It all just flows and adapts.

I wasn't aware that the 3-shot combo ^^^ was an FMA thing. Come to think of it, I probably first heard it from one of my FMA instructors, but those guys also box, and some even do WC, so I just figured it was generally good advice.

...Throwing fast combos from multiple directions is what takes people out, and covering up and moving around is the best way to defend against someone throwing said fast combos from multiple directions!

So, the way I see it, it's better to maintain the offense ...except when it's smarter to cover up and be defensive. Clear as mud to me. Just like fighting. Guess that makes it true!

BTW, now that you mention it, the methods I use to cover up in WC I really learned outside of WC. Like from those boxing/FMA guys. Don't tell anybody.

Examples:

--Classic extended man-wu sau guard (a la Ip Man movies) folds back like a "peek-a-boo" guard, or even more, like an FMA "brush-back your hair" move to cover the front and sides of the head. If done while closing, the elbows in front of your face can be converted into a fierce close range offense.

--Double Lan sau pulled in tight with forearms crossed in front of the face, best used at a slight angle, leading (for me) with the left elbow. covers the face and head well, and converts directly to an offensive fak-sau or pie-jarn (the hacking elbows in Chum-Kiu form). Negative- leaves the ribs open.

-- Sideward bong-wu or bong-fook sau... kind of a WC version of the "Philly shell". Not my favorate, but I've seen others use it effectively.

.....You know what Keith? As I get older, I find that figuring out these kind of universal conceptual connections across systems is way more interesting than just memorizing new forms and sequences. 'Cause I keep doing it even though some instructors keep telling me to "empty my cup" and just learn what they are teaching. I blame it on ADD and generally a bad attitude.

 

[Punchy]

Knowing the almost nothing I know about WC/VT/WT, I have to wonder if these Chi Sau Sections might be more useful as an alternative to forms. In other words, could they be used to teach basic movement patterns (as forms often are used for), with a bit of application mixed in (which forms aren't generally good for)?

While the original term for these drill are chi sau sections, the European guys have taken to referring to them as two man forms.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

While the original term for these drill are chi sau sections, the European guys have taken to referring to them as two man forms.

So, do you think they could be used in place of the traditional forms? Do they cover enough of the same function?

 

[Punchy]

So, do you think they could be used in place of the traditional forms? Do they cover enough of the same function?

I think you need both. The 2 man sets/ sections, pick up where the solo forms leave off and the solo forms reinforce the structures used in the 2 man sets.

 

[KPM]

I think you need both. The 2 man sets/ sections, pick up where the solo forms leave off and the solo forms reinforce the structures used in the 2 man sets.

I think it likely that this is how many of the old systems were done. Ku Lo Wing Chun was taught this way by Leung Jan when he retired to Ku Lo Village. Some said he was returning to an older way of doing the system. It was taught is short sets that had a 2 man drill that went with each to teach how to apply it. Tang Yik Weng Chun's fundamental form has 11 sections, each of which has a 2 man drill that teaches how to apply it. I'm told "ancestral" White Crane was organized the same way.

 

[Bino TWT]

Geezer, I do feel that the EWTO side made things overly complicated and mechanical and spends way to much time with choreographed drills. The actual sections themselves are very short. They are there to teach you a core idea and train reflexive impulses, focused around specific techniques. Things are much more simplified and streamlined on the Hong Kong side of WT, and a lot more emphasis is put into functional flow and application, as opposed to a fluffed up curriculum.

For instance, in the EWTO curriculum, Chum Kiu Chi Sao Section 1 -the shortest section of the seven- is stretched out across 3 student grades (6, 7, & 8). In the HK system, student grade 8 is already on Section 5.

On top of the Chi Sao sections, the EWTO also has the Lat Sao program, so double double your enjoyment.

BTW, I've never heard of the Chi Sao sections being called "2 man forms"; maybe there's just a mistranslation into English from German/Swedish/Dutch/whatever? And to answer some of the questions up there, no they do not replace the forms, nor do they serve the same function.

 

[jlq]

Bino,

the term "two-man form" was not an original term used in Germany. It was introduced a couple of years ago, when Keith Kernspecht changed his system. Before that, they were called "sections" (or "Sektionen" to be precise ). There is an editorial on the EWTO site where Keith Kernspecht is explaining his rationale for changing the term, if one cares to spend some time finding it. These chi sao sections are not some "original" part of Leung Ting's system. They were first created after he started coming to Europe regularly to teach. An old friend of mine, a HK Chinese student at the IWTA Headquarters (he was the training partner of Tam Yu Min) told me that when he started training, they didn't have any sections, but then he had to travel for work, and when he came back after a no. of years and took up training again, suddenly they had. But since he was already an advanced practicioner of that school, he would always practice free-flow chi sao and thus never learnt any sections of any kind. When I was learning from Leung Ting in Seundak, China, he was very explicit about the sections just being some crutches to learn the basics and that one should abandon training them very soon, and even when training the sections, one shouldn't blindly follow the choreography but use the proper bin fa to counter the opponent. Keith Kernspecht and the way he structured his grading system is to be blamed for the sections becoming well-nigh useless, as the overall goal was forgotten, and the sections became a goal in themselves. As far as what the students were learning at Leung Ting's IWTA HQ in HK at the time I was their, they would have finished the first section CS for their 8th student grade and had to demonstrate free-flow chi sao fighting. The other sections were taught later. So, at least in Leung Ting's school it was not as you describe, but maybe some of his students and grandstudents who run their own organisations have their own curriculum. Anyhow, you are correct, the HK sections are very simple and rather short and can be learnt in a short time, however in Germany, some teachers teach longer and more elaborate versions.

 

[Bino TWT]

Jlq, Thanks for the response. To my understanding, the sections were always a part of the LTWT system, although I haven't had the chance to speak with many people that trained with LT in HK pre-1980. I have been known to be wrong lol.

My first Sifu was a student of KK at the castle and a classmate of Emin, who after coming to America in the early 80's, began touring the states with LT and opened an IWTA school. LT taught him the sections. He later left the IWTA and went under an organization that was an offshoot of the EWTO (since there is no EWTO presence in America) with Simon Mayer (an instructor from KK's castle), and Martin Hofmann (left the EWTO after 5th Practitioner) so I learned the EWTO system from them.

My current Sifu started in the EWTO under KK in the 80's as well but left, and has been under CCF and Chris Collins, before finally settling in under Tam Yiu Ming, who we are under now. I originally learned KK's version of the sections, but have since learned the sections (and the system) as they are (currently) taught in HK by LT, CCF and Tam Yiu Ming.

As far as the difference between KK & LT's views on the sections, you are spot on brother. The Germans drastically over-complicated things and drug even the simplest things out over many many years. Under Tam, we use the sections as a core idea to highlight techniques and explore situations and possibilities that arise.They are more of a guide than etched in stone, and one is encouraged to constantly be able to switch up responses from various sections instead of following the choreography, and "lose" the sections once one has absorbed the skill it has to offer.

I understand that the curriculum and the grading system has changed many times over the years in both the HK and EWTO sides of WT (not to mention the offshoot organizations, like you said). LT comes to Texas a few times a year, and the way he teaches it now and the material for the student grades in his IWTA kwoons is as I described earlier. Like all things though, change comes with time.

I'm a little jealous that you got to train at HQ lol... I'm hoping to make it over there one day; it's on my bucket list.

I'd really love to pick your brain sometime bro.

 

[geezer]

On top of the Chi Sao sections, the EWTO also has the Lat Sao program, so double double your enjoyment.

When I learned under LT, he had a handful of supplemental drills that he called "lat-sau". As you point out, the extensive EWTO Lat-sau program was developed separately. I had relatively little exposure to those EWTO drills since I left WT in the early nineties. When I returned to the art and affiliated with my current WT offshoot organization, I had to learn their version of the Lat-Sau program which is somewhat simpler than the EWTO program.

Although at first I didn't care for Lat Sau, I now find it a lot of fun, and believe it is a very practical way to introduce students to technical applications, as well as timing, distance, and flow ....making their transition down the road to sparring and chi-sau much easier.

BTW, one reason I might like the Lat-Sau better these days is that I will shamelessly experiment and change the sequences as I see fit!

I can't really get away with that so much with the Chi-Sau sections ...and stay in my current Assn.

BTW, I've never heard of the Chi Sao sections being called "2 man forms"; maybe there's just a mistranslation into English from German/Swedish/Dutch/whatever? And to answer some of the questions up there, no they do not replace the forms, nor do they serve the same function.

I haven't heard the Chi Sau sections called two man forms either, but IMO that is ....pretty much... what they are.

 

[geezer]

Bino ...do you guys do Lat Sau? ...And if so, do you ever mess with it? Like go from the Lat Sau base platform (repeating pak-da) to ....whatever? Like maybe pak-pak-clinch and throw (kinda in our Lat Sau 5 anyway) or pak upward, change levels and shoot under the incoming punch, ...or duck under and take the back, ...or arm drag, ....or ...or ....or?

Well, I do. All the time ...since my instructor is over a thousand miles away and can't yell at me.

 

[Bino TWT]

Lol Geezer, I learned the entire Lat Sao program up to 1st Tech before my exodus (now I'm 1st tech in HKWT too, which is much further in the system). The curriculum I teach now is the Hong Kong system, but I have retained some of the Lat Sao elements into what I teach and shuffled it into the HK curriculum where it parallels. Mostly in the first few student grades. For instance, I teach Lat Sao 1 to learn proper punching & Pak'ing and occupation of the center, and the program 1 trap sequence, and the key elements of each of the first 5 Lat Sao levels (5 is pretty awesome, yes), along with a lot of the Chi Sao drills from 6. I teach Lat Sao 3 in it's entirety (Lat Sao 3 is an amazing program!) but by student grade 3, we are using "real" Lat Sao (free hand, no contact) instead of the Pak Da platform. I pretty much discarded everything from the EWTO program after SG-6. In the HK system, our main training platform in the early stage is Jut Chuen, but I have my students test their techniques under pressure from every range, every platform. When they learn something, they have to be able to make it work from Pak Da, Poon Sao, Jut Chuen, and of course no contact range. We flow in and out of the platforms as well, so they learn to react to the changes. We go from Poon Sao to Pak Da to Jut Chuen, break contact then reengage, all while flowing in and out of all of the sections randomly, so you are making intelligent strategic impulse responses to real pressure in real time without knowing what's coming.

Especially in the beginning levels, the Lat Sao program is excellent for fine tuning the mechanics and technical aspects, and getting the students familar with certain techniques, responses, and situations, although I feel that as a platform it reaches a point of diminishing return, and I feel that there are quite a bit of "flaws" in the choreography, especially in the upper levels. It (Lat Sao platform) does make it easier to train between high and low level students, like if one is Biu Tze level and one is pre-Chi Sao level though.

My sifu is currently overseas training with Tam Yiu Ming at th moment, but he will be back to kick my *** in the next month or so lol.

 

[PiedmontChun]

I trained under an instructor in an organization that formed as rebel outcasts of sorts from LT / EWTO, and they took the EWTO's sections and updated them somewhat. I was frustrated by them. What you were able to learn depended on your student grade, and your student grade relied upon remembering and executing chi-sau sections and drills flawlessly (enough) for testing. My memory sucks, and having to stand mostly stationary for most of the sections and drills was torture for me sometimes personally.

I will give my instructor credit for the fact that once a main section was learned to the point that students could execute it without having to pause and think of the next movement, he would encourage unscripted lat-sau / gor-sau and say "use attacks from section X". This made you then apply it - actively think and look for opportunities to use specific ways to trap / attack. That sort of felt like a rubber meeting the road kind of moment and what kept me interested, made me feel like I was progressing.

Forms are obviously important to WC, and drills are important in about every martial art for good reason, but the combo of forms + chi-sau sections + more drills, it gets very esoteric and tedious without a good amount of sparring to balance it out.