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

[Phobius]

Again this does not differentiate between useful contact and non useful contact. Nor does it make the distiction between finding and making attacking lines (always need to be seeking these), and attachment (don't always need to be seeking this).

What differentiation do you wish for? All contact is useful if being used.

There are only two types of contacts you can get (well more probably but that I care to elaborate on), the first being you hit something. Second being something got in the way of you hitting something. Both are useful, while the second is annoying if you really wanted to hit something.

A term does not need to make distinctions, you want it to perhaps but then it is a wish you need to keep for yourself. Or argue til the world turns over dead on a forum like this one.

There is no 'attachment' without the seeking of it. But the world is not 1 dimensional. You seek one way of 'attachment', it is when your partner seeks something else that more things can happen. The fact that your partner does something should not change the term of what you are doing. That would make you a slave of your partner from a terminology point of view.

EDIT: Also it is just a term, just because you have found a bridge does not mean it is the bridge you seek. Keep searching.

EDIT: To clarify even further if I am unclear. Seeking a bridge is not same thing as seeking ANY bridge. I never said the second. That would be closer to chasing hands.

 

[guy b.]

What differentiation do you wish for? All contact is useful if being used.

Seeking and making attacking opportunities is not the same as punching blindly. All contact is not equal

Attachment is a worse definition than attacking line because seeking attachment leads to sticking, while seeking attacking lines leads to continual attack.

 

[LFJ]

Please explain the WSLVT view on all of this. I think we have just been talking past each other quibbling over terminology rather than getting a real understanding. What does "Kiu" mean to you, and how is it part of "Chum Kiu" and "Kiu Sau"?

I have no kiu-sau term and no attachment. My punch doesn't attach to the target...

If a mess of arms are an obstruction keeping me from reaching the target, like a raging river keeps me from crossing, a bridge is an open path to the other side.

CK is about finding or opening attack lines, the most direct path to the target. Simple as that.

 

[Phobius]

Seeking and making attacking opportunities is not the same as punching blindly. All contact is not equal

Attachment is a worse definition than attacking line because seeking attachment leads to sticking, while seeking attacking lines leads to continual attack.

Punching blindly? Are you a troll? Noone said punching blindly. I dont think there is a single martial art in the world that punches blindly (could be wrong but seriously, you are trolling now)

All contact is not equal. Agreed. We can also agree that air is useful. Not sure what the purpose of this comment was other than to state the obvious. Then again I did the same thing saying all contact is useful if used.

Attachment is not the definition we use, I said 'attachment' as a lose term for making contact in terms of a bridge being attached to the ground. Not attachment as in sticking. Thought this was clear, maybe I need to make myself even clearer. Its like arguing with someone that holds his hands on his ears and screaming right now.

Attacking lines was not your definition, path was. Bridge is equal to path in this discussion. You now want to argue that the term is worse. Then I say you need to spend more time training and less time trolling the forums. Most people should be able to discuss without having to argue that ones use of word is worse than their own. The importance is the message itself.

Attachment is not equal to bridge, never said it was. But you can not create a bridge without attaching it to both sides. You can not create a line without connecting two dots.

Now you may feel free to add more random comments.

 

[Phobius]

I have no kiu-sau term and no attachment. My punch doesn't attach to the target...

If you are talking about what I said, I wrote it as 'attachment' as an intention of saying I did not mean actual attachment but rather to symbolize the two points of a bridge being attached to something. Not as in sticking but rather an instant point of contact in terms of WC.

Next time I need to write even longer posts explaining more about my own text. You guys are eager to jump the gun.

If a mess of arms are an obstruction keeping me from reaching the target, like a raging river keeps me from crossing, a bridge is an open path to the other side.

Now this I thank you for, this is an interesting definition of a bridge. No matter if defining it your way, or my way. The end result is the same. I only dont see it as an existing path until you actually hits the opponent.

Changes nothing in terms of things like CK because it means "Seeking bridge" and not "Finding bridge" to me.

Kiu sao is different, to me these are drills in order to grasp concepts and techniques. Not part of advanced training but rather a way to understand a specific technique in a very limited environment. And I think it means, bridge arm. Something that is trained especially with beginners.

 

[SaulGoodman]

If you are talking about what I said, I wrote it as 'attachment' as an intention of saying I did not mean actual attachment but rather to symbolize the two points of a bridge being attached to something. Not as in sticking but rather an instant point of contact in terms of WC.

Next time I need to write even longer posts explaining more about my own text. You guys are eager to jump the gun.



Now this I thank you for, this is an interesting definition of a bridge. No matter if defining it your way, or my way. The end result is the same. I only dont see it as an existing path until you actually hits the opponent.

Changes nothing in terms of things like CK because it means "Seeking bridge" and not "Finding bridge" to me.

Kiu sao is different, to me these are drills in order to grasp concepts and techniques. Not part of advanced training but rather a way to understand a specific technique in a very limited environment. And I think it means, bridge arm. Something that is trained especially with beginners.

Phobias , I'm paraphrasing here but "never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"..,

 

[guy b.]

Noone said punching blindly.

When talking about differentiation between useful contact and non-useful contact in terms of attachment, you said "What differentiation do you wish for? All contact is useful if being used."

Punching without concern for finding or opening attacking lines to the target would be a reasonable definition of punchiing blindly. Why not punch anywhere if all contact is equally useful? Why seek or make open paths to the target when punching the arms is just as good?

Attachment is not the definition we use

What is the definition you use?

in terms of a bridge being attached to the ground

This was not clear at all, over the last few pages. I don't think you mentioned attachment to the ground. Why would it be important to mention being attached to the ground..is it to warn against Superman punches?

Attacking lines was not your definition, path was.

The most direct path to the target is the attacking line. I don't know if I did refer to it as a path, I think that was LFJ. You could call it the most direct path, the attacking line.

Attachment is not equal to bridge, never said it was. But you can not create a bridge without attaching it to both sides. You can not create a line without connecting two dots.

Seems like a trivial point to make, doesn't help understanding. So what is your definition of a bridge? Before it sounded like you meant any attachment between yourself and the opponent. I will find quotes if you like.

 

[Phobius]

When talking about differentiation between useful contact and non-useful contact in terms of attachment, you said "What differentiation do you wish for? All contact is useful if being used."

Punching without concern for finding or opening attacking lines to the target would be a reasonable definition of punchiing blindly. Why not punch anywhere is all contact is equally useful? Why seek or make open paths to the target when punching the arms is just as good?

Huh? You honestly think we don't always try to find a clear path before punching? Seriously this is a martial arts forum. I took you for being serious.

What is the definition you use?

Bridge. You know the point you have been arguing now.

This was not clear at all, over the last few pages. I don't think you mentioned attachment to the ground.

Now I am sure, you are trolling. I just said attachment when discussing above post making correlation with an actual real bridge.

The most direct path to the target is the attacking line. I don't know if I did refer to it as a path, I think that was LFJ. You could call it the most direct path, the attacking line.

Sure, you can call it attacking line. LFJ might have been the one calling it path. Was it anything you wanted to say about it? But if this is all you train, it sounds as if you use chi sau to learn to see with your eyes. How else do you find a clear path if contact is not to be used and a punch is not to meet resistance?

So chi sau is eye coordination? Interesting.

Seems like a trivial point to make, doesn't help understanding. So what is your definition of a bridge? Before it sounded like you meant any attachment between yourself and the opponent. I will find quotes if you like.

I said they are not equal. Same time I say you can't have a bridge without having contact. This means I don't consider all contacts to be a bridge.

Now you do know this changes nothing, Bridge is just a term. So no matter how I define it, the term itself does not define how I train. It is just a vague description.

 

[LFJ]

If you are talking about what I said, I wrote it as 'attachment' as an intention of saying I did not mean actual attachment but rather to symbolize the two points of a bridge being attached to something. Not as in sticking but rather an instant point of contact in terms of WC.

Well, I find that entirely useless and unnecessary terminology.

Now this I thank you for, this is an interesting definition of a bridge. No matter if defining it your way, or my way. The end result is the same. I only dont see it as an existing path until you actually hits the opponent.

A path is a line in space whether I take it or not. CK is about finding, taking advantage of, or creating these open attack lines.

A line in space not being a line until I take it and hit the target? Sounds strange and again inaccurate.

People have been saying physical connection (arm to arm, fist on face) is a bridge, now you say it is a path?

I think kiu-sau comes from a flawed definition of kiu and leads to strategies based on arm-chasing from a VT perspective.

We don't have this term in our system.

 

[Phobius]

Well, I find that entirely useless and unnecessary terminology.

It was not a terminology, it was a symbolism.

A path is a line in space whether I take it or not. CK is about finding, taking advantage of, or creating these open attack lines.

A line in space not being a line until I take it and hit the target? Sounds strange and again inaccurate.

You can think that way, to me it is a matter of being a grumpy untrusting guy. I dont think a hit is a hit unless it actually hits. So I dont train possibilities, I train to figure out facts.

People have been saying physical connection (arm to arm, fist on face) is a bridge, now you say it is a path?

You guys are really funny. Like hilariously. You called it path, so in order to discuss your term with you I used the name for it.

I think kiu-sau comes from a flawed definition of kiu and leads to strategies based on arm-chasing from a VT perspective.

We don't have this term in our system.

Then you think wrong, feels funny does it not? And to clarify so you understand. Hand/arm chasing is not used in most styles of WC. In fact most are actually clearly against it.

 

[Phobius]

Phobias , I'm paraphrasing here but "never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"..,

Yea I know, but the more upset they get. The more details they write about. So there is value to making them upset as well.

EDIT: Rewrote, did not mean to sound like a d***.

 

[SaulGoodman]

There's nothing of value coming from these guys apart from troll like activity designed to anger people,

 

[KPM]

I have no kiu-sau term and no attachment. My punch doesn't attach to the target...

If a mess of arms are an obstruction keeping me from reaching the target, like a raging river keeps me from crossing, a bridge is an open path to the other side.

CK is about finding or opening attack lines, the most direct path to the target. Simple as that.

So you are saying in WSLVT "Kiu" or "bridge" simply refers to an opening?....open space through which you can strike? Ok. That could even fit with "Chum Kiu" in the sense of "seeking an opening." I can see that. But I will also point out that this is not the typical understanding in southern CMAs. And it doesn't fit with the idea of "Kiu Sau." But that's alright. We've already noted that WSLVT is a completely different system.

 

[LFJ]

It was not a terminology, it was a symbolism.

Useless and unnecessary, I think. Sorry.

You called it path, so in order to discuss your term with you I used the name for it.

It doesn't help to start saying path if you're still talking about physical connections.

And to clarify so you understand. Hand/arm chasing is not used in most styles of WC. In fact most are actually clearly against it.

In theory maybe, but I see so many talk about not chasing arms and then go about establishing arm contact to work from, which they call "attached striking".

That is arm-chasing to me.

 

[LFJ]

So you are saying in WSLVT "Kiu" or "bridge" simply refers to an opening?....open space through which you can strike? Ok. That could even fit with "Chum Kiu" in the sense of "seeking an opening." I can see that. But I will also point out that this is not the typical understanding in southern CMAs. And it doesn't fit with the idea of "Kiu Sau." But that's alright. We've already noted that WSLVT is a completely different system.

Correct. We don't have a kiu-sau term and don't care what other Southern CMAs say or do. Irrelevant.

 

[Phobius]

Useless and unnecessary, I think. Sorry.

Your problem, not mine. Sorry. (EDIT: Really nothing I care or can do anything about. You just have to skip those parts of the text then.)

It doesn't help to start saying path if you're still talking about physical connections.

Reread my sentence, I was referring to a path as in not connected just the way you want it. And added I do not consider it the purpose unless it is connected (In which we already stated I consider the term Bridge better suited)

I still think path is a term that exist and may be used. It just means something else. Which is the hilarious part of all this and what makes it into such a joke. If you want to call something else, for something else. You can. Path means the same to you as it does to me. You are the ones that want a path to mean Bridge.

In theory maybe, but I see so many talk about not chasing arms and then go about establishing arm contact to work from, which they call "attached striking".

That is arm-chasing to me.

Yes it is, and it is not acceptable in most arts. Either you are A. looking at people that need more training. Or B. People that have been ill-trained. Or C. People who do not agree with their system or trains a system that does not agree with any of the WC lineages I have seen.

It should not take a genius to think of this.

 

[Phobius]

Correct. We don't have a kiu-sau term and don't care what other Southern CMAs say or do. Irrelevant.

Great, so you are only interested in discussing things with people training WSL VT?

 

[SaulGoodman]

The WSLVT system (especially Philipp Bayer) seems to have a very different approach to WC. That's cool, and if it works for them, that's cool too. I know a guy who made the effort to go to Germany who trained privately with Philipp and was VERY impressed with what he learnt. The thing is, he told me Bayer is a super nice guy who isn't divisive at all. His attitude is "we do what we do, they do what they do". It's a pity other VT guys on this forum can't be like that.

 

[LFJ]

You are the ones that want a path to mean Bridge.

You're needlessly complicating things. Bridge is the VT term for the path to the target. That's it.

Yes it is, and it is not acceptable in most arts. Either you are A. looking at people that need more training. Or B. People that have been ill-trained. Or C. People who do not agree with their system or trains a system that does not agree with any of the WC lineages I have seen.

It's actually many lineage heads, but I won't name names for PC purposes.

 

[LFJ]

Great, so you are only interested in discussing things with people training WSL VT?

No, I just mean other styles' terminologies are irrelevant to our terminology and fighting strategy. So it means nothing to me what other Southern CMAs say kiu means.