What percentage of lesson time do you spend on chi Sao?
- Thread starter SaulGoodman
- Start date
- Status
I agree on this statement, especially since I had to spend some time at one point doing chi-sau just to get rid of a bad habit of opening myself up underneath my arms allowing my partner to hit me in the stomach from time to time. Simple in theory, easy to stretch in SNT but to understand and grasp the need for it? Chi sao is a perfect tool.
Not like it takes ages to train it, but does not change the fact that it is a perfect tool to train elbow placement, tension, movements and what not.
I think you both mean the same thing but just misunderstand one another. KPM calls the partner in a sparring bout an opponent, same he calls the partner in chi sao (no chi sao and sparring is NOT the same thing) but he does not consider them actual fighting opponents I believe but is rather just a term he uses to describe someone standing facing you. You call it differently but think about it as a training partner, both of you. I believe.
Chi sao is not fighting, but there is an intention to hit you/get passed your guard. Which makes the terms used to describe it often so confusing. Some might even call it a game while others get upset by that term because they dont think a game can be for training purposes. It is all the same.
Bridge has nothing to do with grappling. It is the moment you get contact with your opponent and can potentially feel his force. It can be when your feet clash with your opponent, when you quickly deflect a jab, when his punch hits your face or yours hits his. This is bridging. Some methods more preferred than others.
Bridging says nothing about how you utilize that touch or of how long it lasts. It can be for a micro second. Or for an hour (what happends in the bedroom stays in the bedroom however).
So, competitive striking from an unrealistic setup?
No, however what you just did was quite an unrealistic comment.
Maintaining proper structure and technique is what I meant. Force should have a forward intent. Since your comment makes it sound as if you want to do Chi Sao with a passive intent that is probably fine for you but my opinion would be there is little to learn from such a lack of structure.
And bridging has nothing to do with control, touch has nothing to do with control and controlling via contact can be but is not always grappling.
Stop writing as if I said something I did not, it makes discussion a mess if I have to come back and rewrite what I said. This is a friendly request to not add pointless stuff in order to create a non-existent discussion. I never mentioned grappling, if you want to discuss grappling then you should know my belief is that WC sucks in grappling, which is why I touch a bit in GJJ as well.
[EDIT: I have short temper today, damn noise in the office seems to annoy me more than I thought]
OP
OP
SaulGoodman
Green Belt
To me bridging is simply a side effect of trying to land a shot. My intention is to hit while covering the line and if I get some form of bridge contact during the course of that action I will try to use it to my advantage. Otoh, "fishing" for a bridge with the intention of tying up the guys arms THEN hitting him will get you into all sorts of trouble.
It's not just about elbow position, and it's not as easy as you seem to think.
---Good answers LFJ. I find it interesting that guy complains about having a meaningful conversation, yet only gives one-line responses with no elaboration until you decide to chime in. Then guy is all about trying to explain things. Are you two fellows joined at the hip or something? Or when you are around guy feels the need to show that he actually knows a little bit about WSLVT as well?
But anyway.....elbow position is Wing Chun 101. So again, it takes loads and loads of Poon Sau and Lop Sau to train that? What else are you training?
We can be told how to move and understand the theory quite easily, but what happens when things speed up and become more intense or go to free sparring and fighting? Elbows pop out, people freeze, underreact, overreact, etc..
---But if what your are doing in Poon Sau and Lop Sau have nothing to do with fighting and no application to fighting.....how do you know that the attack lines, and responses, and elbow position and such are going to also occur in free sparring and fighting? If they are such two totally different things, how do you know what is learned in one is going to cross over to the other?
We train similarly on the wooden dummy, in reference to our own position and structure. The dummy is not seen as a human offering attacks, as some others prefer. It's abstract and not filled with direct applications.
---I get that part. I've always viewed the dummy like it was a huge human protractor. It makes you get all of your lines and angles correct. It helps you work on correct spacing of your arms and hands, etc. But to say it has no direct applications is to miss out on a lot of things. You could train those lines and angles and such with just a few simple drills on the dummy. You wouldn't need the whole long and elaborate dummy form for that.
In chi-sau we function as each other's dynamic training apparatus to aid in each other's own development. Still not fighting an opponent yet.
---Do you do Gor Sau as part of your Chi Sau training? Does your partner give you resistance and make you defend against strikes? If your partner is acting to challenge you in any way....doesn't that make him an opponent in a limited way?
---Good answers LFJ. I find it interesting that guy complains about having a meaningful conversation, yet only gives one-line responses with no elaboration until you decide to chime in. Then guy is all about trying to explain things. Are you two fellows joined at the hip or something? Or when you are around guy feels the need to show that he actually knows a little bit about WSLVT as well?
But anyway.....elbow position is Wing Chun 101. So again, it takes loads and loads of Poon Sau and Lop Sau to train that? What else are you training?
We can be told how to move and understand the theory quite easily, but what happens when things speed up and become more intense or go to free sparring and fighting? Elbows pop out, people freeze, underreact, overreact, etc..
---But if what your are doing in Poon Sau and Lop Sau have nothing to do with fighting and no application to fighting.....how do you know that the attack lines, and responses, and elbow position and such are going to also occur in free sparring and fighting? If they are such two totally different things, how do you know what is learned in one is going to cross over to the other?
We train similarly on the wooden dummy, in reference to our own position and structure. The dummy is not seen as a human offering attacks, as some others prefer. It's abstract and not filled with direct applications.
---I get that part. I've always viewed the dummy like it was a huge human protractor. It makes you get all of your lines and angles correct. It helps you work on correct spacing of your arms and hands, etc. But to say it has no direct applications is to miss out on a lot of things. You could train those lines and angles and such with just a few simple drills on the dummy. You wouldn't need the whole long and elaborate dummy form for that.
In chi-sau we function as each other's dynamic training apparatus to aid in each other's own development. Still not fighting an opponent yet.
---Do you do Gor Sau as part of your Chi Sau training? Does your partner give you resistance and make you defend against strikes? If your partner is acting to challenge you in any way....doesn't that make him an opponent in a limited way?
Chi sau doesn't apply directly to fighting in that going into a fight and trying to do the chi sau drill (which is done with a cooperative opponent to the benefit of both) is likely to result in your getting punched in the face. Chi sau is a drill designed to train habits, skills, movement which apply to fighting. But it is not fighting.
---And no one here, no one.....has said that someone should do any kind of "cooperative Chi Sau rolling drill" in a fight!
The strategy of VT is to hit, not to grapple in some contrived way which is nullified as soon as the opponent doesn't want to do it.
---Do you adhere to the opponent while hitting him? Do you try and maintain any kind of contact with the opponent while hitting him? Do you try and manipulate the opponent in any way to make it easier for you to hit him or harder for him to hit you? Do you try and affect the opponent's balance and structure in any way? Because those are the things I have been talking about. I don't know what you mean by "contrived grappling." Do you do any of these things in WSLVT?
---And no one here, no one.....has said that someone should do any kind of "cooperative Chi Sau rolling drill" in a fight!
The strategy of VT is to hit, not to grapple in some contrived way which is nullified as soon as the opponent doesn't want to do it.
---Do you adhere to the opponent while hitting him? Do you try and maintain any kind of contact with the opponent while hitting him? Do you try and manipulate the opponent in any way to make it easier for you to hit him or harder for him to hit you? Do you try and affect the opponent's balance and structure in any way? Because those are the things I have been talking about. I don't know what you mean by "contrived grappling." Do you do any of these things in WSLVT?
Bridge has nothing to do with grappling. It is the moment you get contact with your opponent and can potentially feel his force. It can be when your feet clash with your opponent, when you quickly deflect a jab, when his punch hits your face or yours hits his. This is bridging. Some methods more preferred than others.
Bridging says nothing about how you utilize that touch or of how long it lasts. It can be for a micro second. Or for an hour (what happends in the bedroom stays in the bedroom however).
---Good answers Phobius. I find it pretty amazing (and telling, actually) that someone that claims to be such an expert on Wing Chun can act totally clueless when other Wing Chun people talk about what a "bridge" is and how it is used!
Bridging says nothing about how you utilize that touch or of how long it lasts. It can be for a micro second. Or for an hour (what happends in the bedroom stays in the bedroom however).
---Good answers Phobius. I find it pretty amazing (and telling, actually) that someone that claims to be such an expert on Wing Chun can act totally clueless when other Wing Chun people talk about what a "bridge" is and how it is used!
OP
OP
SaulGoodman
Green Belt
I don't understand why "grappling" is such a swear word with the "vt" guys. They seem to think just keeping the elbow down and tight and throwing lots of punches forsaking any type of control of the opponent is the panacea to winning fights. Don't want to spoil the party here but if your striking doesn't quickly resolve the fight you will be grappling whether stand up or on the ground. Watch any MMA match, you think they're not trying to finish the fight fast with strikes? How much time do the matches end up in standing grappling? Of course on the street it's different right? Wc works very well in the stand up grappling/clinch range of a fight. If yours doesn't well...
You were saying that chi sau is directly applicable to fighting here, and that aiming to remain attached to arms was the bread and butter of wing chun:
No
There is no trying to maintain contact. If contact is made then the obstruction is removed. This may or may not involve turning or moving the opponent. It depends on the nature of the obstruction. The focus is on clearing the way to hit, not on maintaining contact. Maintaining contact intentionally is hand chasing which is avoided.
There are many other methods of control other than making contact at the wrists and hoping the opponent stays there to be controlled. The strategy of VT is all about controlling the odds in a physical encounter. Closing options, forcing choices, and pressuring imposes control.
I am opposed to grappling type approaches to VT because VT is a terrible grappling method. Far better to learn a real grappling method and focus on what VT is good at.
Basic doesn't mean easy to do or comes naturally. It takes a lot of programming, yes.
Coordination, alignment, balance, distancing, timing, reflexes, etc..
I never said they have nothing to do with fighting. They are an essential part of VT fight training.
How do we know? We spar and/or fight. Drilling is then used to iron out errors revealed under pressure. Then we return to free fighting and see if we've improved and find more errors which we go back to training to fix.
Many primarily go in the opposite direction only; train techniques in chi-sau then try to apply them in fighting. Our method is more about auto-correction than learning new applications.
That's a fine opinion, but the method I train relies on simplicity and non-application thinking. It's complete and coherent in itself. Extra application ideas would be superfluous at best, detrimental at worst.
An opponent is a competitor. We aren't competing at that stage in training.
As a partner, we may also allow them to hit us to ensure proper alignments and pressures. We may execute correctly or incorrectly to train responses or to draw out errors in our partner that are known or unknown, for correction.
Even when pressure is increased, we are still helping each other as partners by the mere fact of it being a VT exercise and not free sparring. We aren't competing, so we aren't opponents.
That is nice and all, but bridge is not grappling once again. Nor is control necessarily grappling. You yourself control your opponent by watching him, if he touches you the sense that he is moving to attack you or even talking with him. All of it is measures of controlling your opponent.
Heck even clapping your hands in front of your opponent is an attempt at controlling him. None of those can be called grappling.
WSL VT also does controlling, to secure that you align your centerline. You do not allow your opponent to move in behind your back. As a simple example.
Bridge is also the moment your fist connects with his face, as you stated before to like. That you would not call grappling but it gives you a sense of his lack of structure, and whether or not he loses balance or is ready to punch back. It is all there with the bridge, and you learn this whether you know it or not when training WC, VT or WT.
We've discussed illogical "bridges" before in this thread:
"If there's a bridge, cross it. If there's no bridge, build one"
Me from that post:
"Interpreting a bridge as any sort of contact, including fist-to-face as you do, also makes little sense. A punch is a punch. Why do you need to invent special terminology for it? "If there's no bridge, build one" = "If you haven't punched someone, punch them"? Why do you need an maxim to tell you that? Plus, if your fist on someone's face is the bridge, what is crossing the bridge? Putting your fist through their skull?"
- Status
