What percentage of lesson time do you spend on chi Sao?

[yak sao]

System to me is a way to teach martial art, a martial art exist in the practitioner or master himself and is very individual. Perhaps this idea comes from my sifu, I do not know, since he is very much in approval of studying or learning other systems as well.

I share this view as well. When we start out, our WC is going to be a carbon copy of our teacher's, for the most part.
But as we develop and learn more of the system, what we do should be our WC.
The over arching ideas , principles or concepts or whatever you want to call them will still be there , but it will have each individual's distinct flavor .
At least it should. We shouldn't look like little WC robots running around mimicking movements, trying desperately to fit WC techniques into our arsenal. WC is not a style of kung fu, it is a system.
And as such once it's understood, the principles of the system do not restrict you they free you up. WC doesn't teach us what moves to do, it teaches us how to move.

 

[SaulGoodman]

I share this view as well. When we start out, our WC is going to be a carbon copy of our teacher's, for the most part.
But as we develop and learn more of the system, what we do should be our WC.
The over arching ideas , principles or concepts or whatever you want to call them will still be there , but it will have each individual's distinct flavor .
At least it should. We shouldn't look like little WC robots running around mimicking movements, trying desperately to fit WC techniques into our arsenal. WC is not a style of kung fu, it is a system.
And as such once it's understood, the principles of the system do not restrict you they free you up. WC doesn't teach us what moves to do, it teaches us how to move.

What a brilliant post!
I consider Wc a training method to encourage efficient use our bodies. How this is manifested depends on many things. It's refreshing to hear from another practitioner who isn't trapped in the dogma that if it doesn't "look" like wing chun (in that persons opinion), it ain't wing chun. It's the side effects of the training you take to the battle, not the fixed shapes and pak Sao drills...

 

[JPinAZ]

I'm not sure "what is your definition of a bridge" has to do with "what percentage of time do you spend practicing chi Sao"? This thread has been derailed and destroyed. Pity, as when we were on topic it was quite interesting.

I agree with the thread being derailed. Unfortunately it's becoming a common theme on this forum more and more.

On the other hand, in my lineage Kiu Sau plays a major role in our over-all Chi Sau 'umbrella', being a big part or engagement and dealing with bridges out-side, or at the edge of the box. So, I can see why the definition of Kiu would have relevance on a thread regarding Chi Sau, even if it's almost futile to try to discuss these things here as of late..

 

[KPM]

I don't understand what you find insulting about that statement. He is talking about VT, not your mainland wing chun system.

.

Again, LFJ said: but other Southern CMAs are arm-chasing styles by design and their terminology reflects it. Since WSLVT is totally different that the rest of Wing Chun, I can only assume when he says "other Southern CMAs" he is including Wing Chun. So yes, I do find it insulting for him to say all Wing Chun other than WSLVT are "arm-chasing styles by design" because that is certainly the implication in what he said.

 

[KPM]

I said that in response to you stating that other Southern CMA terminology differs from mine as if that should invalidate mine or something. I really don't know why else you'd mention that or see how it's at all relevant. What was your point?

My point....... was that your understanding of "Kiu" may be perfectly valid for WSLVT, but it is not the widely accepted and "typical" understanding of the term by any means. That doesn't invalidate your understanding. It was meant to point out that other ways of viewing it are also perfectly valid....which is something that you were not admitting, but rather considered everyone else to be "wrong."

 

[KPM]

On the other hand, in my lineage Kiu Sau plays a major role in our over-all Chi Sau 'umbrella', being a big part or engagement and dealing with bridges out-side, or at the edge of the box. So, I can see why the definition of Kiu would have relevance on a thread regarding Chi Sau, even if it's almost futile to try to discuss these things here as of late..

Jonathan, I would be interested in how your system defines and uses "Kiu Sau", if you are willing to share (and willing to ignore the naysayers).

 

[LFJ]

It appears that for you a bridge is contact with an obstruction, yes? If so then how would you rationalise the term bridge as defined above in terms of the second form, assuming you have one similar to the one I know? Is your second form called "remove/clear bridge" or "seek bridge"? What does it contain?

Right, I'm confused by this as well.

First, bridge was defined as contact with or a sensed obstruction. Then it was said seeking the bridge is finding options to remove the obstruction and get the hit or move around it to find another path.

The bridge metaphor pretty much falls apart at that point. It really makes no sense at all, since you should be able to cross a bridge, not have to tear it down or find another detour.

I would fear a unclear terminology would reflect a messy strategy. But I would perhaps have to see the style in action to say for sure.

 

[guy b.]

Again, LFJ said: but other Southern CMAs are arm-chasing styles by design and their terminology reflects it. Since WSLVT is totally different that the rest of Wing Chun, I can only assume when he says "other Southern CMAs" he is including Wing Chun. So yes, I do find it insulting for him to say all Wing Chun other than WSLVT are "arm-chasing styles by design" because that is certainly the implication in what he said.

Hang on, weren't you arguing that your wing chun was similar to SPM and White Crane in terms of conceptual base and strategy on a recent thread?

SPM is an arm chasing style that actively seeks arm to arm contact as part of it's trap/draw and finish approach to fighting.

I don't understand what you would be complaining about if your art was conceptually similar to these other styles- they don't work in the same way as VT and their practitioners would not care if you told them they were chasing hands or seeking hand contact because such criticism means nothing to them.They are not VT.

I don't see how you can have it both ways, claiming similarity to these systems but denying hand chasing?

 

[guy b.]

I would fear a unclear terminology would reflect a messy strategy. But I would perhaps have to see the style in action to say for sure.

It doesn't inspire confidence, but like you say would need to see it.

 

[guy b.]

Well seeking bridge does not mean seeking ANY bridge. It means seeking bridge and I interpret it as seeking or finding more options. If there is no obstruction all you need to do is punch, a simple idea.

But this isn't what you said above. You didn't define bridge as "options", you defined it as contact with an obstruction. So seek bridge would be "seek contact with an obstruction" in these terms?

Can you expand further to clarify please?

 

[KPM]

You are so full of sh!t, KPM.

I said nothing of the sort, although the WC world is indeed full of arm chasers.

But it was YOU who first said "other southern CMAs" and you were clearly not referring to other lineages of WC or you would have said so. So don't put words in my mouth and offend yourself!

Now hold on....Guy said you were speaking ONLY about WSLVT when you wrote "VT." In your comment I took you as grouping everything else as separate from your WSLVT as "other Southern CMAs". And several of us had also been making the point that the "Kiu" terminology in our Wing Chun was also common to other southern CMAs. So are you now saying you were including all Wing Chun when your wrote "VT"? Because that's very confusing and inconsistent!

 

[KPM]

I don't see how you can have it both ways, claiming similarity to these systems but denying hand chasing?

Again, you seem to suffer from an attention deficit disorder or reading comprehension problem or something.......I stated more than once that you and I do not agree on what "hand chasing" consists of. You see those videos of Alan Orr that were posted where he is manipulating the balance and destroying the structure of his partner as "hand chasing." You seem to have a very broad definition of "hand chasing."

 

[KPM]

First, bridge was defined as contact with or a sensed obstruction. Then it was said seeking the bridge is finding options to remove the obstruction and get the hit or move around it to find another path.

----What's wrong with that? If a bridge is a connection...an established contact....then once contact is made it is used to determine how to remove or get around the obstruction that produced the connection.


The bridge metaphor pretty much falls apart at that point. It really makes no sense at all, since you should be able to cross a bridge, not have to tear it down or find another detour.

---No it doesn't. You are simply trying to take it too literally. You and Guy seem to be the only ones having that problem. A bridge is a connection. You don't necessary literally "cross" a connection, but you can certainly remove it or go around it!


I would fear a unclear terminology would reflect a messy strategy. But I would perhaps have to see the style in action to say for sure.

--There is nothing wrong with the terminology. Only with people that refuse to try and see things from someone else's viewpoint. But tell us LFJ....you are a translator, are you not?.....just how does "Kiu" translate into English? Does it not translate as the architectural structure known in English as a "bridge"? And using this as a metaphor in Wing Chun without over-using it by trying to be too literal fits just fine. But how do you get "bridge" as an open space....a lack of anything....a potential area...a nothingness....from the translation of "Kiu"? Note, I am NOT saying that your view of "Kiu" as an opening is invalid for what you do! I'm just pointing that "Kiu" as connection fits the metaphor better than "Kiu" as "opening."

 

[LFJ]

A bridge is a path to the other side where crossing would otherwise be impossible (over a raging river, say).

A bridge is not something you ever have to remove or detour around, so it makes no sense to call connection to an obstruction a bridge.

Not sure what's hard to understand here.

A physical bridge made by connection to the opponent is what I would call taking things too literally!

I'm looking at the function, you're looking at the structure. And you think I'm the one taking it too literally?

Plus, "seeking the bridge" by your definition would mean looking to connect to an onstruction.

How is that not arm-chasing?

 

[guy b.]

you and I do not agree on what "hand chasing" consists of.

What does hand chasing consist of?

 

[guy b.]

What's wrong with that? If a bridge is a connection...an established contact....then once contact is made it is used to determine how to remove or get around the obstruction that produced the connection.

Phobius defined it as contact with an obstruction, not as any connection. Why would you seek to make contact with an obstruction?

 

[KPM]

A bridge is a path to the other side where crossing would otherwise be impossible (over a raging river, say).

---A bridge is a connection between the bank on one side of the raging river and the bank on the other side of the raging river. It is not an "opening" unless you are assuming you are going to leap across the river!!


A bridge is not something you ever have to remove or detour around, so it makes no sense to call connection to an obstruction a bridge.

---What if in the process of crossing over the physical bridge over the raging river you met with a barrier across your path. Would you not then have to either remove the barrier or go around it? Is not the barrier in some sense part of the bridge?


Not sure what's hard to understand here.

---I agree! But it seems to be you that is having the hard time understanding! Any metaphor when looked at too closely starts to break down. That's why it is considered a metaphor! The value of a metaphor is simply in the understanding that it provides by providing an analogy. The analogy does not have to be precisely exact in every sense. It seems everyone here but you and Guy understands the metaphor of "Kiu" being a "bridge" just fine.



I'm looking at the function, you're looking at the structure. And you think I'm the one taking it too literally?

---The way you are using the term "Kiu" doesn't match the translation of the word at all. An open space is not a "bridge." If you wish to change the word from "Kiu" to a word meaning "opening" when using the Kuen Kuit, that's fine. But I don't think that is what the creator of the Kuen Kuit intended.


Plus, "seeking the bridge" by your definition would mean looking to connect to an onstruction.

--- "Seeking a bridge" simply means looking to contact the opponent. That may be contacting with a fist to his face! If you meet an obstruction and form an actual "bridge" or "connection", then you deal with that. It does NOT mean you are throwing your arms out there looking for contact rather than trying to hit the opponent. No one on this long thread has ever suggested that!

 

[KPM]

What does hand chasing consist of?

You first. You and LFJ are the people here that seem to have your own unique terminology. You and LFJ are the ones that are saying everyone else is wrong. So you tell us what "hand chasing" means from a WSLVT perspective.

 

[KPM]

Phobius defined it as contact with an obstruction, not as any connection. Why would you seek to make contact with an obstruction?

Geez! Really? An obstruction is something in the way...when you contact something in the way....don't you connect with it? If I am throwing a punch and someone puts up a block to obstruct my punch....are we not now connected by the contact? And can I not now use that connection to sense what the opponent may be about to do and flow into my next move in response?

 

[Phobius]

Phobius defined it as contact with an obstruction, not as any connection. Why would you seek to make contact with an obstruction?

Why build a bridge on an open road if not to cross something blocking the path?

You don't seek contact with an obstruction. It happens however. If it does not you punch and hit, fight over. Basics in all martial arts. I still have doubts there is a whole form named seeking bridge that is only about punching on a clear path where there will be no obstructions.

Or from what I understand of your style you think there exists a punch that none can only obstruct. A path in your view. Having serious doubt on that personally. Way too optimistic and unrealistic.