Phillip B doing his thing

[t_niehoff]

People demo chi-sao and forms to show their ability at doing chi-sao and forms, not to show their fighting ability, if people choose to view it that way, that is their problem, no?

People can demo whatever they like.

At the same time, I was suggesting that we need to keep in mind the meaningfulness of what is being demo'ed. Doing bike riding motions in the air (forms) doesn't demonstrate anything other than you can do bike riding motions in the air (forms). Riding around with a bike on training wheels (chi sao) doesn't demo anything other that you can ride around on a bike with training wheels on (do chi sao).

[sanjuro_ronin]

People can demo whatever they like.

At the same time, I was suggesting that we need to keep in mind the meaningfulness of what is being demo'ed. Doing bike riding motions in the air (forms) doesn't demonstrate anything other than you can do bike riding motions in the air (forms). Riding around with a bike on training wheels (chi sao) doesn't demo anything other that you can ride around on a bike with training wheels on (do chi sao).

I agree with that.
While clips of people doing specific things can show some of that persons skills doing THOSE specific things, the only way to judge someone fighting ability, short of fightign them, is seeing them fight on a consistent level, perferable with well trained people.

[t_niehoff]

I agree with that.
While clips of people doing specific things can show some of that persons skills doing THOSE specific things, the only way to judge someone fighting ability, short of fightign them, is seeing them fight on a consistent level, perferable with well trained people.

Exactly. A martial art is to develop fighting skills, right? Well, we don't see fighting skills in forms or chi sao -- you only see them in fighting.

If you practice doing bike rinding motions in the air (forms) for years, you'll naturally develop the ability to do that "well." If you practice riding around on your bicycle with the training wheels on (chi sao) foryears, you'll naturally develop the ability todo that "well" too. But this says nothing, absolutely nothing, about having the ability to really ride the bike.

And I find it amusing that people point to things they see in the "air movement" (forms) or the training wheel practice (chi sao) as being useful in really riding the bike. How do they know if they don't ride the bike? It's theory.

[taojkd]

A martial art is to develop fighting skills, right? Well, we don't see fighting skills in forms or chi sao -- you only see them in fighting.

I think what separates one style from another is how you get to be good at fighting (the training methods). Without forms and drills, like chi sao, fighting is just completely chaotic. A good demo of a martial art is going from a form (i.e SNT), to a static application with a partner (i.e. chi sao, counter-punching drills), to live fighting. Theory ->Drill Application ->Live Sparring

A good demo should show that the instructor knows how to apply the theory to real world fighting (irregardless of style/lineage). I don't just want to see fighting in a demo.

[k gledhill]

Look, what Phillip shows in that video is good chi sao. He understands a lot of things, including good technique in both attacking and defending, the body mechanics of good driving power, good delivery of short range vertical fist punching and palm striking, deflecting power, getting advantegeous body angles, etc. He's fast, he's aggressive, he knows how to stick to his opponent in order to control him, unbalance him, push him here, pull him there, and so on.

But it's just chi sao.

It's not fighting. It's a drill (chi sao) that enables a wing chun practitioner to develop certain things crucial to his close quarter striking art - but it has serious limitations in the overall scheme of things as regards what total, all-out fighting is about.

Just go back and look at what Phillip's partner/opponent is doing throughout the entire video.

And then ask yourself the following question: How much of what I saw from that guy is what I'm ever likely to see coming at me in a real fight, or a sparring match, (especially against a non wing chun guy), in a serious tournament, etc ???

Chi sao skills (and related drilling) are essential for developing and maintaining good overall wing chun expertise - but actual sparring/fighting is more essential. Because that's where the rubber hits the road. Until then you've just been tuning up the engine.

That's the bottom line here. After a certain amount of time spent learning the system, (and one has to assume that Phillip has reached that point long ago)...at that point...

for every hour of chi sao (and chi sao related drills) you do - you should be spending at least two hours actually sparring/fighting.

That's how I see it.

I understand your viewpoint from a 'chi-sao' general view ....what philipp is doing is elbow work using forearms and alignmnet ....the game of sticking for the chi-sao is what most assume is the same...The idea being developed is for fighting , this is nothing like the fighting...the repetition of the same actions is to create mistakes from pressure...the guy PB is training with is making mistakes , PB just keeps the pressue up.
Imaging attacking with chum kil aka how to approach the attck facing the correct way...it wont be anything like chi-sao ...

The problem lies in everyone assuming the same things are being 'worked'

I used to do wristing chi-sao like most, with the game being to strike and block/trap etc...as a thing on its own...no fighting correlation to attacking someone tactically ...and only using chi-sao as a basis to make my actions natural, instinctive to motion and lines of force as I blast in using strikes with alternating hands like most guys doing charging attacks .

What we cant 'see' is the idea being developed/nurtured....why we have so many variations. What one sees is what one assumes is the same or , try to copy it add to it make a few additions ...without the basic idea in the first place.

I trained a long time without the same idea I have now...and feel like I wasted a lot of time...I could punch kick use tan sao liek everyone , do a bong etc...pak trapping...but there was something missing that I was trying to find myself after a while..PB had the answers...its not secrets , I can tell you , show you , anyone...and you will see its actually quite similar to twc. in tactical delivery. only the focus of the system is more on making the arm capable of beghaving in an a way that allows each arm to act as 2 per action . Utilizing the forearms and angles of the strike lines coincide with angles at tangents to the side the opponent throws at you...only by attacking in a way that makes the basic idea work ...if you create an 'intersection' of contact ' like 2 roads meeting ..you have the drills that make the responses flow as you maintain the attack...

but use strikes in common rotation that allow us to have an edge over the other guy with a simple skill....we can still strike with 2 hands in fast rotation . but adopting a hidden technique that makes the inner or outer forearms behave like the other hand , trapping by aligned strike positioning as we strike, not by leaving the line to parry, block. Either arm has the ability to be the opposite force while still travelling on striking lines to the opponents varying angles as we move with them.


So the chi-sao becomes a different idea than the sticking wrsiting trapping that I used to follow...now its aligning the strikes at random , coupled with angling to the specific side your being attacked form , twc same ideas..flanking blind side...

[k gledhill]

So?

The video shows Philipp coaching his student by constantly checking elbow positions (what you see as a push), Wu Sao, etc. under pressure and in a continuously changing situation, hence instilling several habits so they hold up when his student is put under real pressure.

He's not sparring with a student, he's coaching.

Nuff said.

thats my point , what 'you' see is what 'you' associate chi-sao too.....my input is to try to make the 'developmental' stages using chi-sao as an end to FIGHTING ...what we need are the movies I have of PB doing a bit of gor sao, but he has asked me not to post them... its not chi-sao

We do fighting entry training as well, have a guy attack randomly etc.. and fight randomly...but what you get is an attacker ...trying to deliver a constant overwhelming assault...so the coaching is to make the pair of 'fighters' see the clash as critical to delivering the attack/ counters...to try to 'turn the opponent' or make the run.

Pressurizing an opponent with relentless attacking can do this but you need attributes , beyond form and drill....heart, a goal , fitness levels running etc..] to maintain the idea...heavy bag work, focus pads, I do all this with the students so they know they are learning to ko a guy , not feel a sticky hit with LOP n CHOP been there so i know

I use chi-sao now to prove actions and develop the fighting mistakes...iow we fight first and coach showing the idea we are tring to use to be able to simply 'attack me' if I take 2 steps 'away' from you......

WSL and PB met because PB wanted to have a VT teacher, when they met PB was a TKD champion of his weight class, so he was asking guys if they could block his jumping spinning kick ... WSL asked him to do whatever he wanted and they faced off....seeing pb had a hand disability WSL asked if he should use one arm too , class act there...PB said no ....PB did the kick WSL stepped back and stood there....WSL asked " how long have you developed that attack ? " PB " x years [ not sure the years ]...WSl says I beat you attempts to attack me by simply stepping back ..

Point being if the guy steps away from you, can you sustain the attack? ...VT makes it a science.

I do the same thing now...I ask guys to do their chi-sao thing then step away a few steps and watch them look at me...? then I explain..and do it again chi-sao ...step away

not normal is it ? but then you start to see the attack and defender roles...I help you to be a good attacker by coaching ..not trying 'out wristy stick you'...

Then allow my arm to impede the attempted strikes to check for arm chasing as they step towards me, like a guy would just stick his arm out to block a punch......introduce the strike/parry of either arm using tan/jum training ...isolating it in dan chi- alignmet strike drills broken down into a 2 beat " align 1 beat- strike 2 nd beat " becoming redundant when a single strike from either arm is doing the 2 beats of dan chi previously done...

then introducing the closer proximity drilling oc chi-sao...in strike distances and 1beat counters and strikes...with angling to movement in and away of facing the now moved target...attacking 'facing' angling ' strikes with 1 beat 2 function ability in rotation...

introduce the idea that your blocked ...how to keep the attack going....po-pai shoves to regain strike distances in a flowing attack , low stright kisks to allow further enrty even if you step away....

[k gledhill]

If it was obvious to you, then you wouldn't marvel at videos of people riding around with the training wheels on.



People who talk about "understanding" are the theory/fantasy guys.

It's not about "understanding" -- it's about skill (being able to do it). And skill doesn't come from "understanding" (if anything, understanding comes from skill). You don't "understand" how to ride a bike: you learn the skill and then get better by doing it. With a skill you talk about "knowing how to" as opposed to "understanding" (for example, you "know how to" wrestle or box as opposed to "understanding" wrestling or boxing), and you can only demonstrate that (skill) by doing it.

Videos of people doing bike riding motions in the air (forms) or riding around with the training wheels on (chi sao) doesn't show they can ride the bike or "know how to" ride the bike.

Your so busy trying to 'backpeddle' I dont watse time wwith you still waiting for your inch punch rational...that thread...

You dont understand the system 'I' am doing ...you can understand what you like I dont care, Im trying to convey an alternative to yours , my old idea....a fighters way of using the system to be a better VT fighter...why would you argue if it might improve you ? you seem like the 3 monkeys while going blah blah cant hear you !!

going to repeat mantra forever blah blah...

wsl was fantasy to you ?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Your so busy trying to 'backpeddle' I dont watse time wwith you still waiting for your inch punch rational...that thread...

You dont understand the system 'I' am doing ...you can understand what you like I dont care, Im trying to convey an alternative to yours , my old idea....a fighters way of using the system to be a better VT fighter...why would you argue if it might improve you ? you seem like the 3 monkeys while going blah blah cant hear you !!

going to repeat mantra forever blah blah...

wsl was fantasy to you ?

An honest question here, who did WSL fight?

[Knifefighter]

An honest question here, who did WSL fight?

And why are there so many WC demo clips, but so few actual "going full on against resisting opponent" clips?

[sanjuro_ronin]

And why are there so many WC demo clips, but so few actual "going full on against resisting opponent" clips?

Actually, I gave up asking that a while ago, no one ever answered...there used to be a clip on youtube of that, it was some teenagers from a eastern european school I think.
It looks like hard contact kick boxing, but there was some obvious "chain punching", if I recall...

[Knifefighter]

Actually, I gave up asking that a while ago, no one ever answered...there used to be a clip on youtube of that, it was some teenagers from a eastern european school I think.
It looks like hard contact kick boxing, but there was some obvious "chain punching", if I recall...

Its funny how many people don't "need" to post any evidence of them actually performing their methods against resisting opponents, yet most of these same people
have the "need" to post about how great their system is and how effective their methods are.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Its funny how many people don't "need" to post any evidence of them actually performing their methods against resisting opponents, yet most of these same people
have the "need" to post about how great their system is and how effective their methods are.

Ah well...yes, this is true.
And some people tend to justify the effectiveness of their chosen system by what others have done.
Not a good way since what others do or have done has ZERO to do with that we can do.
Heck some people are good fighters REGARDLESS of what they do, not because of it.

[k gledhill]

they didnt have videos and you tube back then ...

You cant see whats being developed in videos ergo we get T with the threads of " its a form in the air wow, its chi-sao , gee wilickers..." I cant blame him and the video doesnt explain anything ...so its going to be pigeonholed as another chi-sao video wow ...

Im trying to explain the underlying ideas... sadly those need more videos...maybe Ill try to post some soon. easier than words, my student say this, THEY understand what Im saying , but relalize that most wont, becasue they are trying , like I used to , that a tan is a the same tan and a bong is bong ...the ideas and developmental directions are completely different. And yet when you see / hear them you can still use your existing 'framework' but with a new set of instructions ...and embark on a new road of endless training Im almost 50 !! I started when I was 24

[m1k3]

I have seen a couple of clips on youtube that were supposed to be of rooftop fights. They were black and white, grainy and the skills were not very impressive. I was going to make some additional comments but I didn't want to open the "street vs. sport" can of worms.

[Knifefighter]

Im trying to explain the underlying ideas... sadly those need more videos...maybe Ill try to post some soon.

Your ideas posted to video would have much more validity if they also included actually going hard against resisting opponents.