Drunken Monkey

.....i would say that something that isn't 'taught' is that stance isn't just about your legs. correct stance is part of forming correct structure. if your stances aren't good, then your entire structure is going to be off.

not sure what you mean by cutting angle footwork... but i'm flattered by your comments. i really am not that good. and i am also very much out of touch. it has now been just over a year since i last had a proper wing chun class. recently i've made a deliberate slow going through everything i know from day one stuff. i now have two very nice circles on my lawn where there is no grass...... and talking to two others here about them starting wing chun has kinda given me the drive to do the old pak sau/punch variations. since then i've been going through all of the old drills. i dread going back to hk this christmas.......

usually, when people don't give answers it cos they don't have any. i mean, isn't easier to just keep asking for other people to post things to prove what they say, as opposed to having to actually prove your own statements?

but why shouldn't she? i mean, this is after the event. and as far as i can tell, it's not like the instructor knows before hand he'll get a present. i mean, where do you draw the line? if you can't get a present as a thank you for putting you through the training that lead up to the first real milestone in your training cos it might look bad, then what about the other times? does that mean you can't buy a birthday present? or a christmas present? or a present for their new born baby? just in case it might bring into question that black belt you get a few weeks later? or a few weeks before?

well, i guess that just shows that i have much to learn. you might've picked up that i'm not too confident in it for 'actual use'. it kinda makes me have to think and that kinda puts me off sometimes. and finally, well, when you have his centre, you can 'end' that sticking situation by just attacking. unless of course you're practicing your control of the centre. i think i do things the way i described for a reason. i guess part of it is down to my lack of confidence in it. i'm not a big person. i'm 5'5'' and have short arms and legs. and i only weigh 55/56kgs. if i get it wrong i usually have to work extra hard to recover, even if i keep stance..... or um, guess i just need to do more work!

Your suggestions have merit not my suggestions. just regurgitating what was told to me..... personally, i have no experience and i haven't really thought about it. i'll let you know when i have.

well, i ask cos the majority of the techniques do not rely on their 'flexible' nature. so is it in fact, both? or um, maybe just i'm not that good yet....?

Remember, you can't build a house on a foundation of sand here's where the resident architect comes in and says, um, actually you can.....

What you present to them is what looks like the center but what is really happening is you have theirs and they think they have yours almost. but like i said, i've only ever done this in poon sau. you kinda need both hands in contact to get it 'structurally' right. the odd thing is, you have to make your structure 'bad' for a moment as you move into the new position when structure is correct again (i.e shift hips, step). and the false centre only exists as you are moving to your new position. as you step, the idea is that you partner still only feels forward pressure on him when in fact you are applying pressure from an angle. during the process you tend to have to sort of cross your hands which is why i mentioned bil gee back there.... the fact that you've changed angles means that when you apply 'correct' pressure, you instantly have control of his centre and he has to play catch-up. in simple layman, terms, you are 'faking' what he feels.... please note, this doesn't mean that you have in anyway compromised your defensive structure. you shift into a weaker position but the point is, according to what he feels, nothing has changed. and the weaker position isn't really weak at all. elbows still cover, you are still in correct stance etc etc. if you time your step and hand movement right, you can step side to side and your partner will not know (feel) you have moved. my sifu showed us these bits when explaining the receive what comes and borrow energy and two hands one mind if you feel like he is concerntrating too much on the centre, then give it to him. then snatch it away. y'know, bait, then borrow then confuse. hmm, maybe it really is just a chi sau thing?

so somehow, you disagree with my opinion, but are not saying that i'm wrong?

not too keen on kung fu=skill acquired over time one translation i like is 'excellence through practice' i don't know why this has gone on for so long. in relation to the title of the thread, everything has been said. yes, kung fu isn't a specific style. the next point is that kung fu is/isn't used to refer to chinese martial arts. i keep pointing out that because of the conceptual nature of the term, there isn't a fixed use/meaning of the term. i also mentioned that it is primarily a cantonese term but he keeps throwing mandarin back at me. not sure if he's aware of this but mandarin and cantonese are different enough to make them practically two different languages. fact is, kung fu is an old term (150+years) from the cantonese used to describe the fighting arts of china. it is derived from the term 'kung' which is something you train/practice/art e.g chi kung = thing that you do to practice breathing shun kung = thing that you do to practice mystics noi kung = thing that you do to practice internals when you train, you 'linn mo kung' 'practice the thing that you practice to get good at fighting' (direct translating of characters) or 'practice things that help fighting' (translating into intended meaning) heck. i can throw up examples of how the parts are used and where they come from all day but y'know, can't please everybody.

that's why i said 'give up' (cos what you give is fake) and also why i say that it isn't defense that you obssess over, rather it is control over what is and what is perceived as the centre. during poon sau, there are times when you can present your partner with a false centre, so to speak. y'know, step off side and apply pressure to feed off the wrong arm kinda thing. in most cases, it is just a shift of stance or a half step or even just uncrossing your arms (hello biu gee....) but like i also said, i've ever only really been able to do this during poon sau. when it gets more hectic, i tend to rely on structure to take care of things and just let things 'spring'.

cos not all that is considered a martial art, even those from hundreds or even thousands of years ago has a real martial connection. take the chinese styles. the original long fist was taught to soldiers so yeah, that 'qualifies'. but what about styles like choy li fut, hung gar, mok gar, tai chi, mantis..... they don't actually have much to do with actual warfare. i'm not sure if 'martial art' is as accurate as opposed to simply calling it 'fighting art'.

.....when we're not secretly plotting each other's downfall.....

sure, but the original term was "fist art" but that term wasn't really applied to war applications (i.e fist arts were not war arts) i've said before, i think a closer term for them as a whole isn't 'martial art' but 'fighting art'. as you pointed out above, the original term was fist art i.e the art of using your fists. .....now i'm a little confused as to what i'm trying to say..... as for actual martial aspects. i mentioned that mainly as a base for my assertion that 'martial art' in not a good term to use as it is inaccurate. you used the word 'combat'. which at the level of the individual is 'fighting'. again, this is why i prefere to use 'fighting art'.

hmmm, does the three section staff count as a flexible weapon? i never quite figured that one out.

i was under the impression that it wasn't just emin who sent the challenges back.

tomorrow.... i promise..... i've made the big step of buying the padded envelope and writing on your address. but the big problem is that my local post office is also the local main post office. last week, the queues went outside the building and it took me nearly an hour to get to the counters. but then that was also road tax week.... it is always super busy. anyway... I'm finding that even after only a few weeks of training I'm looking at my Shotokan techniques and re-evaluating them in the light of what I've learned so far in WC wing chun has a way of doing that. i think some of it is cos of it's inherent 'simpleness'. some of it might be because it is quite different compared to most things out there and it acts as a very useful counterpoint.

Sometimes, stating that you are a trained martial artist can be found to be antagonizing, or even threatening well, like i kinda said, the above was told to me if it looks like there's nothing else i can do to de-escalate the situation. the initial shouting is to attempt to bring attention to the situation as well as bring the aggressor back into reality, as it were, making him that little bit more aware of people, things around him. you might be better off to launch a pre-emptive strike with no warning well this is where it gets a bit sneaky. i was also told that i can still make the pre-emptive attack, just as long as i've 'protected' myself somewhat by the shouting. i should point out that this was told to me by someone who works london doors. he in turn was told by a met police officer who has a special interest in that aspect of martial arts and the law. not claiming that it is the thing to do. just throwing up some more useless junk to eat up server space...

books can show you how things might look and they can kinda tell you why things are done but they can't show you how things are done or make you understand the whys. and they tend to make things much harder to grasp because they have to attempt to describe+explain a lot things all at once, when in reality it takes only a minute to show. and to fully understand, you have to feel it being done.

just a few questions.... and mainly for the guys who train in or have trained in a 'grappling' style. what was the teaching of strikes like in that training. i mean, what/how did you deal with that aspect? also, did the training emphasise the grappling aspect (joint lock, control, breaks throws) above everything else? or did it have strikes that would lead to grappling. not sure if this is making sense..... so. let's take a basic scenario. you are being attacked. the aggressor if going to throw a basic straight punch. how would you teach the beginner to deal with it? receive/block/parry? then go straight to a throw, lock, control etc etc? or did you also teach/show strikes where they possible, or was purely about grappling? i.e in the above scenario, it would be: receive, punch, grab arm, throw/control/whatever...? i ask this cos during my training, i was always shown things that i could do, as opposed to things that i would do. during chi sau, if the opportunity came for me to apply a lock of some sort, i could go for it and then the game changes. i mean, i wasn't ever taught strictly striking or strictly grappling. of course there were times when specific techniques were shown so that i could understand how they work. really sorry for the appalling grammar/english. i just ate one too many fish fingers and my stomach is telling me all about it.....

Remember that in Wing Chun the defense of the central line is an "obsession" i'm gonna pick at this and say that it is closer to being that in wing chun, you obsess over controlling the centre. not sure if you do this but there are times that you 'give up' the centre in order to be able to regain control in a stronger position. but then again, this is something that i've only realistically done during poon sau. can't really imagine me doing it in any other situation.....

um..... good point? sorry, couldn't resist......

i've got some dummy plans laying around somewhere.... or ask at your local carpenters. my local can and has built them using tongued sections around a hexagonal core. the wood is slightly cheaper cos they're smaller pieces but it is possibly even more hardy cos it's less prone to splitting (unless you're really unlucky). on another note. a friend of mine has the 'resin' one from 'immortal'. i think they have a website but not sure on the details. he tells me it feels just like the wooden one but i think some of the dimensions are 'off'. you can kinda make your own one but unless the body is properly dried, it will split. it all depends on how easy it is to get that sized 'logs'/trunks. and about the stance. its something that takes ten seconds to show you and it will instantly banish all doubt about it working..... and well, it's something that a lot of people don't believe could work. hmm, then again, i only show people (during training) when the point of stances comes up. been too long since i've been in a proper wing chun class.

$1000? for? and i'm surprised that they didn't give the opportunity to push someone's stance. really surprised.