futsaowingchun
Black Belt
This video show's how to break or control the opponents strong bridge or iron bridge. i show how technique is needed not force to overcome a strong bridge.
Breaking The Bridge
- Thread starter futsaowingchun
- Start date
To comment on the second portion of the clip - The tan sau doesn't work here, not because of some iron bridge or anything else form the opponent, but simply because the contact & leverage points aren't correct for tan sau to even be applied in the first place. So, without proper understanding of what drives tan sau or how it is applied, it makes sense that one would have to resort to 'tricks' and grabbing to compensate.
This IMO is the issue that often arises with technique-focused approaches to WC vs looking at concepts/principles of the system.
This IMO is the issue that often arises with technique-focused approaches to WC vs looking at concepts/principles of the system.
First: Good choice of a demo partner for this video. IMO demos always look better when the instructor is matched against a student of equal or larger size and physique.
Second: what's with the sound? When I watched it the sound was out of sync by 2-3 seconds!
Third: Strange. When I was watching this my wife came into the room wearing that same "Gizmo" shirt as your student in a XXL man's size. Hmmm. I hope she isn't keeping something from me!
Now about the clip. I have no problem with the techniques, switching from pak to lap-sau if the energy so dictates. But like JP pointed out, it's not a trick, or even a choice that you make. The energy you receive dictates the response. Yip man famously said that your opponent will tell you how to hit him.
Finally, you omitted what is probably the simplest response when trying to pak-sau an opponent with a very strong and immovable arm. If the pak-sau can't move the arm, then let let the force push your body (shifting your centerline) to the side giving you an opening to strike through.
BTW thanks for posting these clips. It's great having concrete, visual material to discuss.
Agree!
You can force something to happen. You can also borrow your opponent's force, help him a little bit more, and take advantage on it. IMO, it's much easier to go the way that your opponent wants to go.
For example,
when your right arm touches on your opponent's right arm, if you can sense your opponent's pressure, you can use your left hand to "help" his right arm to move toward your left (that's the direction that your opponent's right arm wants to go any way), your right hand then attack.
Instead, if you try to push your right arm and grab on his right arm wrist, that will be "force against force". It won't be the most effective way to execute your technique.
Last edited:
Agreed.
And while I don't necessarily agree with the approaches shown, it's good to have a visual to discuss.
OP
futsaowingchun
Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #6
Applying the Lop Sao is not a trick. it just simply works. I agree the tan sao can not work at that contact point which is why you need to use the lop sao in order to move his bridge. The lop sao energy is different then the tan sao.
Jake104
Black Belt
Lop might work. It's just kinda sorta like a bandaid for bad postioning and not controlling the line properly.
Angle slightly with tan while slightly pivoting and you disrupt his cog then sneak lead punch in. Or again slightly angle slip elbow past his forearm and hook your elbow to lop his stiff forearm. Which is basically a lop motion or idea condensed. Then just disrupt his balance and retake the line to punch with lead. Your way is ok, it's just your giving your opponent a lot to work with. When I get lop'd like in your video. I redirect my energy back into you and disrupt you.
Without over commitment or disruption there is no reason for your opponent to go where you want him to go? Someone really good will read gaps in all the extra movements being made and exploit them. Like already mentioned , I to appreciate the videos. I'm just giving my point of view. I just think the ideas is there. IMO there are to many extra or large exaggerated movements involved when it could be one or two small movements and be done with it. Remember you move that's your turn. Now it's my turn . So make your moves count. Keep the door closed for counters.
Last edited:
Once again I'm confused, as what what you are saying here and what you are doing in a demo don't seem to jive.
You say here lap sao ‘simply works’, yet you start off the video showing how the lap, tan & pak don’t initially work (which I completely agree with, more on that later). As a solution, you have to resort to what are essentially ‘tricks’ (using pak/lap) to make it work, and you even go so far as to say that you ‘do it as a fake'. But, even later in your own video @3:30 you demonstrate again that without the 'fake' that your opponent can resist the lap and that it doesn’t 'simply work'.
You also agree here that the tan doesn't work, which is why you had to use the lap. But then you've also shown several times that the lap also doesn't really work...
Like I said - confusing
So it had me thinking, why do you have to resort to faking (AKA ‘tricks’) to make your WC work?
The reason these things don’t work isn’t because of any strong or iron bridge training of the opponent as you suggest. Lap, pak and tan are easily neutralized here because you are at the wrong contact point (wrist-on-wrist), wrong bridge height (too low) and wrong range (to far) for them to work in the first place. Your opponent has far too much reaction time.
So IMO, you are trying to use fakes (what I would call tricks) as a band-aid for a much bigger issue – you are trying to use tools in the wrong timeframe. Fix the above mentioned things and you'll have a lot better success without having to fake your opponent - even if they have iron bridge training
(** I see Jake already offered one good possible solution to what I'm referring to, so I took that part out of my reply **)
Last edited:
OP
futsaowingchun
Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #9
Sorry about the sound. Not sure what happened. I used Youtube to edit it and messed up the audio. Anyway, the video is not so much about technique but the energy like you said,but you still have to use a techniques. Your idea about letting the force push your body and shiffting to regain the center is good but the video is not about that. It's about manipulating his structure or breaking it down. I don't see many videos on this so I thought I'd talk about it a little. From personal experience, when I was learning I remember my sifu bridge. I could not move it no matter how hard I tried and I was bigger then him. So, now I know its not about who has the stringer bridge but how can you break it at its weak point.
OP
futsaowingchun
Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #10
Once again I'm confused, as what what you are saying here and what you are doing in a demo don't seem to jive.
You say here lap sao ‘simply works’, yet you start off the video showing how the lap, tan & pak don’t initially work (which I completely agree with, more on that later). As a solution, you have to resort to what are essentially ‘tricks’ (using pak/lap) to make it work, and you even go so far as to say that you ‘do it as a fake'. But, even later in your own video @3:30 you demonstrate again that without the 'fake' that your opponent can resist the lap and that it doesn’t 'simply work'.
You also agree here that the tan doesn't work, which is why you had to use the lap. But then you've also shown several times that the lap also doesn't really work...
Like I said - confusing
So it had me thinking, why do you have to resort to faking (AKA ‘tricks’) to make your WC work?
The reason these things don’t work isn’t because of any strong or iron bridge training of the opponent as you suggest. Lap, pak and tan are easily neutralized here because you are at the wrong contact point (wrist-on-wrist), wrong bridge height (too low) and wrong range (to far) for them to work in the first place. Your opponent has far too much reaction time.
So IMO, you are trying to use fakes (what I would call tricks) as a band-aid for a much bigger issue – you are trying to use tools in the wrong timeframe. Fix the above mentioned things and you'll have a lot better success without having to fake your opponent - even if they have iron bridge training
(** I see Jake already offered one good possible solution to what I'm referring to, so I took that part out of my reply **)
I guess we have differences of opinions. Mine comes from experience which i have been testing for over 30 years. It has nothing to do with wrong contact point or height.
Danny T
Senior Master
1. The fundamentals should be taught, practiced, corrected, practiced and ingrained.
2. Know your positions, structures, and how to maintain them in movement.
3. How to move from position to position with movement and against pressure.
4. How to correct the positions and structures when they are off.
5. How to correct the positions and structures when they are off within movement and against pressure.
Wrong positioning happens within the dynamics of movement. Knowing how to correct or adjust must be trained but not until the correct fundamentals have been ingrained. Good Wing Chun takes time to ingrain. Problems arise when practitioners 'jump' ahead to learn new things before having the fundamentals correct first.
2. Know your positions, structures, and how to maintain them in movement.
3. How to move from position to position with movement and against pressure.
4. How to correct the positions and structures when they are off.
5. How to correct the positions and structures when they are off within movement and against pressure.
Wrong positioning happens within the dynamics of movement. Knowing how to correct or adjust must be trained but not until the correct fundamentals have been ingrained. Good Wing Chun takes time to ingrain. Problems arise when practitioners 'jump' ahead to learn new things before having the fundamentals correct first.
And mine comes from understanding of WC principle & theory, along with common physics, which I always try and point back to in my replies to help clarify my positions (and am always solidifying in my training). In my lineage, some of these things are line, box & gate theories, time/space/energy awareness as it relates to our heaven/human/earth concepts, as well as out saam mo kiu phylosophy to name a few of the major ideas.
Look, I am only going by what you share here and on your clips, which often-times I find a bit contradictory & confusing. Maybe it's just a miscommunication issue. So instead of giving me your resume, you could simply explain why in your opinion the tan didn't work, if as you put it, it has nothing to do wrong contact point or height (or lack of leverage for that matter)? I'd also ask the same of the pak & lap at various times throughout your clip and yet here you say lan simply works, but I'm getting the impression you're not really hear to talk WC, only to share your clips..
FWIW, '30 years' in a system/art doesn't automatically equal knowledgable or 'correct'. I have often found when people are quick to spouting their years of experience vs. actually backing up their theories and/or differing view points with sound concepts/principles or logic, they typically do the former because they lack the confidence and/or the ability to do the latter. And, I've seen people spend many years in an art only to discover after all that time they didn't really know what they thought and had to 'start over' once they realized this.
Now, I'm not saying this is necessarily the case with you, but it is interesting when I back up my POV with WC principles & theory and you only reply with your resume - as if somehow your 30 years gives you more 'correctness' over others
. One would think with all those years experience you would have more to say on the matter.
Last edited:
OP
futsaowingchun
Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #16
And mine comes from understanding of WC principle & theory, along with common physics, which I always try and point back to in my replies to help clarify my positions (and am always solidifying in my training). In my lineage, some of these things are line, box & gate theories, time/space/energy awareness as it relates to our heaven/human/earth concepts, as well as out saam mo kiu phylosophy to name a few of the major ideas.
Look, I am only going by what you share here and on your clips, which often-times I find a bit contradictory & confusing. Maybe it's just a miscommunication issue. So instead of giving me your resume, you could simply explain why in your opinion the tan didn't work, if as you put it, it has nothing to do wrong contact point or height (or lack of leverage for that matter)? I'd also ask the same of the pak & lap at various times throughout your clip and yet here you say lan simply works, but I'm getting the impression you're not really hear to talk WC, only to share your clips..
FWIW, '30 years' in a system/art doesn't automatically equal knowledgable or 'correct'. I have often found when people are quick to spouting their years of experience vs. actually backing up their theories and/or differing view points with sound concepts/principles or logic, they typically do the former because they lack the confidence and/or the ability to do the latter. And, I've seen people spend many years in an art only to discover after all that time they didn't really know what they thought and had to 'start over' once they realized this.
Now, I'm not saying this is necessarily the case with you, but it is interesting when I back up my POV with WC principles & theory and you only reply with your resume - as if somehow your 30 years gives you more 'correctness' over others
Watch the video..its very easy to understand. The guy in the video who is a beginner understands so why can't you.
Short, snappy responses like this to genuine points raised are getting to be troll-like behavior.
If you're not willing to discuss your content, it seems your only motive in posting your videos here is to increase your view rates. I'm no moderator, but I wouldn't allow it much longer.
It's MartialTalk, not MartialClickOnMyVideos and "buzz off with your beginner questions. I have 30 years of experience".
Well I am not really that old in the world of Wing Chun with little to no experience to boot. (way less than 30 years).
My question however is this, why go force against force here? If he is strong but has no forward intent, can you not just move to his side? Seems like he is already pushing you in that direction anyway.
If he however shows forward intent why not let his force pass and not be in its way?
If using muscles give an advantage as it seems you are stating here, why would you ever condone a soft way? For me the reason for softness (not skin soft but not brutal force either) has been to sense direction of force so that when your opponent redirects yours you know it. Why not use the weakness that seems to be the case when people use brutal force?
Sorry a lot of questions but for this video alone it feels like this was a technique or set of techniques rather than a concept and based on a lot of "What if...". What if he uses the strength you put up to match his to take a step to his left and attack?
My question however is this, why go force against force here? If he is strong but has no forward intent, can you not just move to his side? Seems like he is already pushing you in that direction anyway.
If he however shows forward intent why not let his force pass and not be in its way?
If using muscles give an advantage as it seems you are stating here, why would you ever condone a soft way? For me the reason for softness (not skin soft but not brutal force either) has been to sense direction of force so that when your opponent redirects yours you know it. Why not use the weakness that seems to be the case when people use brutal force?
Sorry a lot of questions but for this video alone it feels like this was a technique or set of techniques rather than a concept and based on a lot of "What if...". What if he uses the strength you put up to match his to take a step to his left and attack?
The problem I see with this kind of thing is too much "chi-sau" type thinking. Many people think they can take their chi-sau ideas straight into fighting, and so give themselves unnecessary riddles like this to solve using "sensitivity" and other things that require thinking, prolonged arm contact, and that just don't work when fists are actually flying at speed.
The riddle here is how to move an immovable object. I ask why you feel the need to do so anyway. Quit trying to wrestle with their arms and focus on hitting them, because no doubt in free fighting they aren't just going to be standing there holding their position like that. They will also be moving and trying to hit you. Focus on the face, not on the arm.
So instead of trying to solve the riddle of moving an immovable object, or penetrating an impenetrable wall, simply just recover position to wu-sau and replace to check forward with the other hand to keep from being followed back, and reset to find another tactical entry on the opponent. This way there is no fighting against his force, or wrestling with his arm thinking which way to go/ what technique to use... only setting up to intercept and strike him from a better position.
This tactic is shown in the following clip. (Notice not a dead/static demo/theory). Recover to wu-sau and check forward, intercept and attack. As he says at the end of the clip; "Ganz einfach..." (quite simple).
The riddle here is how to move an immovable object. I ask why you feel the need to do so anyway. Quit trying to wrestle with their arms and focus on hitting them, because no doubt in free fighting they aren't just going to be standing there holding their position like that. They will also be moving and trying to hit you. Focus on the face, not on the arm.
So instead of trying to solve the riddle of moving an immovable object, or penetrating an impenetrable wall, simply just recover position to wu-sau and replace to check forward with the other hand to keep from being followed back, and reset to find another tactical entry on the opponent. This way there is no fighting against his force, or wrestling with his arm thinking which way to go/ what technique to use... only setting up to intercept and strike him from a better position.
This tactic is shown in the following clip. (Notice not a dead/static demo/theory). Recover to wu-sau and check forward, intercept and attack. As he says at the end of the clip; "Ganz einfach..." (quite simple).
OP
