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

[Phobius]

Bridge is built when you connect with your opponent in that way or other ways. It is not you physically walking across a bridge, it is a sense that traverses the bridge. This sounds like a bunch of made up sheit but it is really easy for those that train WC. We can call it a sense or feeling that allows you to gather information about your opponent. You may not know it but have you ever thought why in chi-sao you seem to sense what your opponent is doing before your mind even can grasp it? This means it is not your eyes collecting information and reacting to it, the information is passed over the bridge. The more you train the faster you can move across that bridge and understanding your opponent.

Why would you have the term book since the bible is a book, why then not just use word bible? Well answer is simple, a bible is not the only book. (sorry if I offend someone very religious here)

A bridge is not illogical, it just exists. It is your choice whether you use it or not.

Nor is it magical or even special, grapplers have it, boxers (at least to some degree), lovers (as in a very happy old couple), doctors, arm wrestlers.... you name it. Many have it. It is just a WC term 'bridge' that is made up. You want to argue that it should have another name that is fine, but to argue that it is not important or not existing would make me wonder if your style of WSL VT is not interesting anymore to me.

To narrow your field of view will only make you so much closer to blind.

 

[LFJ]

You can follow that link to see what else I think about the term "bridge" as you define it, why it is illogical, and what it means in my lineage. Don't really feel like repeating it every time it comes up.

So what information do you get from someone when you punch them in the head? Can you read their mind, see their memories, hack in and download their skills?

The Bible is the title of the book, by the way. It doesn't mean "book".

 

[guy b.]

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?"

Agree. For me it is superfluous and confusing terminology. It is either meaningless (i.e. any contact is a bridge), or it misleads towards ideas of bridge sensitivity, control, and so on.

If it means punch into defensive gaps when there is an opportunity then great but hardly profound.

 

[PiedmontChun]

With the hands, a bridge is formed anytime you strike and you meet an obstacle in the way, so it is a thing that happens anyway. I'm sure it can be thought of as a more esoteric concept, and it seems like that's what Guy B and LFJ are looking for to pick apart, but I don't see a need to define in too much detail. The question is what do you do with that bridge, or what are your training methods developing you to do once there is a bridge?
I don't think anyone on this thread is advocating chasing hands, but rather saying there is value in controlling (to some degree) while striking an opponent, and that chi-sau develops responsiveness for those brief moments when a bridge is formed.
How this looks to me, in just one example, is if I pak my opponent's arm to clear the way for a punch from my opposite hand, my pak is making contact with their forearm / elbow but my pressure and force are being driven toward their center of mass. I am also not going to retract or release that pak until I absolutely have to replace my prior punch, so there is a controlling aspect to this and not just clearing the line to attack. To me that is a nuanced but important distinction between some of the patty cake looking pak sau drills I see on Youtube.

 

[Phobius]

You can follow that link to see what else I think about the term "bridge" as you define it, why it is illogical, and what it means in my lineage. Don't really feel like repeating it every time it comes up.

You think a lot of stuff but as long as you dont understand a meaning what you have ever written about it holds no value. Therefore you have to rethink and rewrite, or not. Choice is yours on the net.

So what information do you get from someone when you punch them in the head? Can you read their mind, see their memories, hack in and download their skills.

You are just being silly now for sake of childish arguments. When you hit someone with your first you feel if the punch hit or not, if it was deflected or they move with the punch to minimize damage. You feel if they lost balance and maybe also if they are counterpunching.

Well you can feel that, from your comment I assume you never do.

The Bible is the title of the book, by the way. It doesn't mean "book".

A punch is one possible bridge by the way. It doesn't mean bridge.

Same as grappling being a possible bridge. But it does not mean bridge.

We can go on all day. But without bridge concept why train using chi Sao. If you share nothing when touching you are way better of training using other methods.

 

[KPM]

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:

---I'll state again that is seems pretty amazing to me that someone that claims to know so much about Wing Chun is clueless about what it means to use a bridge and how Chi Sau trains that.



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.

---How do you remove an obstruction without contact? How do you turn or move the opponent without contact? How do you clear the way to hit without contact? If you've closed with the opponent, then do you let him get away? Or do you stay on him until he is finished? Maintaining contact is not chasing hands. Maintaining contact can be pressing on the upper arm while you are punching the opponent and forcing him backwards into a wall.

 

[KPM]

I've never claimed to be an expert.

Any attempt to control another body via contact is a form of grappling. Focus on the control rather than the hitting is called hand chasing in VT.

So Gum Sau is grappling? Lop Sau is grappling? Lan Sau is grappling?

 

[KPM]

I never said they have nothing to do with fighting.

---That's certainly what Guy seemed to be suggesting. He has even said on one of the other threads that you wouldn't use Bong, Lop, etc in the fight! Just punch!


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.

---Why is that never part of any of Phillip Bayer's many videos?



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.

---Well then, I would say you don't have a very efficient system. Your dummy form is twice as long as it needs to be for what you are getting out of it!! It sounds like you don't have a very good way to transition Chi Sau skills to fighting if you never challenge each other as an "opponent" in Chi Sau/Gor Sau. You have a whole lot of unneeded things in the SNT, CK, and BG forms if all you are worried about is cycling punches and not learning any kind of application. You make your WSLVT sound like a boxing system, yet you aren't training like boxers train.

 

[guy b.]

That's certainly what Guy seemed to be suggesting. He has even said on one of the other threads that you wouldn't use Bong, Lop, etc in the fight! Just punch!

Can you point me to this comment please? I think you must have misread.

Why is that never part of any of Phillip Bayer's many videos?

Maybe you should ask Philipp Bayer about the content of his videos?

Well then, I would say you don't have a very efficient system. Your dummy form is twice as long as it needs to be for what you are getting out of it!! It sounds like you don't have a very good way to transition Chi Sau skills to fighting if you never challenge each other as an "opponent" in Chi Sau/Gor Sau. You have a whole lot of unneeded things in the SNT, CK, and BG forms if all you are worried about is cycling punches and not learning any kind of application.

It's a different understanding of the system KPM. What you see in one way, we see in a different way. There is nothing superfluous in WSLVT.

 

[guy b.]

So Gum Sau is grappling? Lop Sau is grappling? Lan Sau is grappling?

It depends why and how they are used.

 

[JowGaWolf]

What's the most popular martial art in England these days?

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.

for me bridging is the contact on the arm or hands that occurs when trying to punch or defend against a strike. In Jow Ga this connection is almost always through my arms contacting my opponent's body (legs, arms, torso, neck. Etc.)
I think of it like how a real bridge connects the flow of traffic. My arms serve as a bridge that connects the flow of energy that I'm using with the energy that my opponent is using. With this definition I can also create a bridge with my legs.

 

[KPM]

for me bridging is the contact on the arm or hands that occurs when trying to punch or defend against a strike. In Jow Ga this connection is almost always through my arms contacting my opponent's body (legs, arms, torso, neck. Etc.)
I think of it like how a real bridge connects the flow of traffic. My arms serve as a bridge that connects the flow of energy that I'm using with the energy that my opponent is using. With this definition I can also create a bridge with my legs.

I think this is a very common understanding in Chinese Martial Arts....at least southern CMAs. Not sure why the WSLVT guys have so many problems grasping this. "Kiu Sau" or "bridge hands" is a commonly used term, even outside of Wing Chun.

 

[KPM]

It depends why and how they are used.

For a noted conversationalist, that isn't really an answer.

 

[dudewingchun]

Guy you seem like you actually enjoy making threads difficult and argumentative.

 

[guy b.]

that isn't really an answer

I don't think there is much point in repeating the same point over and over again to generalised disagreement. I am happy to answer specific questions to the best of my ability.

 

[KPM]

I don't think there is much point in repeating the same point over and over again to generalised disagreement. I am happy to answer specific questions to the best of my ability.

I asked you a direct question, which I don't believe has specifically been asked before, and you chose not to really answer it. I think Sean is "spot on" in his conclusion above. You are happy to argue at every opportunity. But sharing real information in a friendly way.....not so much.

 

[guy b.]

I asked you a direct question, which I don't believe has specifically been asked before, and you chose not to really answer it. I think Sean is "spot on" in his conclusion above. You are happy to argue at every opportunity. But sharing real information in a friendly way.....not so much.

Which question? Post again and I will try to answer. Sorry for not giving you enough attention; I am currently at work, not scanning the forum 24/7

There are some questions from me on this thread which have not been aswered if you fancy a discussion

 

[Transk53]

Maybe the Wing Chun forum could do with some sub forums dedicated to which branch/lineage a particular member practices. Perhaps then there would not be so many de-constructive comments. Which I will venture to say can catch anybody out who may just be feeling a little punchy. Up to post 9, this thread was an enjoyable read, and some after. May well seem a little contradictory coming from myself, but banter is banter. Trolling and deliberately banging on about the same linage stuff etc, to derail threads is pointless. Just my penny's worth.

 

[KPM]

Which question? Post again and I will try to answer. Sorry for not giving you enough attention; I am currently at work, not scanning the forum 24/7

There are some questions from me on this thread which have not been aswered if you fancy a discussion

You really are dense aren't you?? Post #67, on this very page...to which you responded without really answering....to which I pointed out that you didn't really answer...to which you said you are "happy to answer direct questions"....even though you didn't....which was my point. Clear enough?? If you are truly the conversationalist that you claim to be, one would think you would pay better attention to the actual discussion!!

 

[guy b.]

You really are dense aren't you?? Post #67, on this very page...to which you responded without really answering....to which I pointed out that you didn't really answer...to which you said you are "happy to answer direct questions"....even though you didn't....which was my point. Clear enough?? If you are truly the conversationalist that you claim to be, one would think you would pay better attention to the actual discussion!!

I think I answered that question adequately. What are you still unsure about?

To spell it out again, it really depends on the intended result. If your goal is control, tying up, offbalancing or otherwise affecting the body of the opponent then hand chasing it is. If your goal is hitting then hand chasing it is not. VT is a system which imposes control not by grabbing hold and controlling (i.e. grappling), but by the use of attacking angles, stepping, pressure, eating space, closing options, automatic covering while hitting, intelligent recycling of strikes. It requires the correct thinking to work. It utilises a particular strategy, which is entrained and internalised by the individual using abstract drills. It is not application based and drills do not relate directly to fighting. There is no searching for arm contact in VT.

I don't know how your system works, but it sounds a bit different.

Maybe you would answer some of the questions I asked earlier? Thanks