What if Wing Chun remained a concept...

[Nobody Important]

FWIW I use Bong in the exact same manner though usually in conjunction with Lop to get a hold. I'm lost at what started this whole Bong Sau controversy. Seems pretty basic to me.

 

[guy b.]

I'm lost at what started this whole Bong Sau controversy. Seems pretty basic to me.

Somebody asked how we use bong

 

[guy b.]

The only clips the WSLVT guys show to back up their superior fighting method are demos.

Do you provide clips of your free sparring? I don't remember seeing such a thing from anyone really.

 

[LFJ]

FWIW I use Bong in the exact same manner though usually in conjunction with Lop to get a hold.

Bong should open a clear path to directly punch through at the same time. So, our bong is in conjunction with a punch.

Laap is only used if bong fails to displace the obstruction on its own. Laap after bong otherwise is to be avoided because bong is already a remedial action to regain an attack line. Two remedial actions in a row when unnecessary is not direct or efficient.

Plus, laap at an arm that is no longer there and you grasp at air while running off line and exposing yourself. So, the idea is always a direct punch. There's an old saying that "a strike is worth a thousand grabs". Grabs are difficult and rarely used in reality, whereas striking is always more reliable at speed.

 

[Nobody Important]

Bong should open a clear path to directly punch through at the same time. So, our bong is in conjunction with a punch.

Laap is only used if bong fails to displace the obstruction on its own. Laap after bong otherwise is to be avoided because bong is already a remedial action to regain an attack line. Two remedial actions in a row when unnecessary is not direct or efficient.

Plus, laap at an arm that is no longer there and you grasp at air while running off line and exposing yourself. So, the idea is always a direct punch. There's an old saying that "a strike is worth a thousand grabs". Grabs are difficult and rarely used in reality, whereas striking is always more reliable at speed.

I don't do Bong & Lop with same hand. Bong doesn't always need to be forceful. I don't always use Lop afterwards, only when situation arises. I like to maintain control of one side of opponent if I can when hitting them. Good structure in conjunction with a bridge need not be forceful, it simply needs to be able to withstand the force applied to it. Grabbing should come naturally and not be forced. It's not hard to grab/wrap, you see it all the time in boxing, wrestling & MMA. The old adage "Wrestle a boxer, box a wrestler". Easy enough to do if using forward intent or initiating a clinch, and it doesn't have to be a prolonged grip , but can be if one so chooses.

 

[Nobody Important]

Here is bong:

Ving Tsun Kung Fu Philipp Bayer ASD

At 17 secs. A left Bong followed by a brief right grab. Exactly as I was saying.

 

[LFJ]

I don't do Bong & Lop with same hand.

Of course not. Not sure how that would work anyway.

Bong doesn't always need to be forceful.

If it is to accomplish its task it needs to be. But I understand other lineages give it multiple tasks. Bong-sau to me is a remedial action. So, not one that should be overused. In my most recent free fighting I haven't even needed to use it.

I like to maintain control of one side of opponent if I can when hitting them. Good structure in conjunction with a bridge need not be forceful, it simply needs to be able to withstand the force applied to it.

Did you say you do TWC? Or was that just Juan? You're both new members, so I'm not sure.

Anyway, that's a very different fighting strategy to WSLVT. Our bong-sau doesn't receive force applied to it. It's paak energy from the elbow.

Grabbing should come naturally and not be forced. It's not hard to grab/wrap, you see it all the time in boxing, wrestling & MMA. The old adage "Wrestle a boxer, box a wrestler". Easy enough to do if using forward intent or initiating a clinch, and it doesn't have to be a prolonged grip , but can be if one so chooses.

Laap-sau can certainly be used, but at the right time as a remedial action, otherwise you risk grasping at air. That was all I wanted to say. In a high speed fist fight, I'd prefer to focus on striking without trying to grab anything unnecessarily.

 

[geezer]

Here is bong:

Ving Tsun Kung Fu Philipp Bayer ASD

Hey, this is the best clip I've seen to address John Wang's "Rhino" guard. The guy with his hands clasped is essentially in the "Rhino" guard position that John advocates. It is a very strong, wedging position, but because the hands are locked, both hands can be jolted aside as shown creating a huge opening!

BTW, the forward pressing "soft bong" such as often used in WT can work against this too, except rather than displace the opponent's locked arms, it presses against and flows around the arms, putting the WT/VT guy in a similarly advantageous position. The difference has to do with whether you move your opponent, or if (because of his level of power) whether you use his energy to move your body (like when working with the dummy). Either way you end up with an advantageous angle allowing you to strike your opponent.

 

[Nobody Important]

Of course not. Not sure how that would work anyway.



If it is to accomplish its task it needs to be. But I understand other lineages give it multiple tasks. Bong-sau to me is a remedial action. So, not one that should be overused. In my most recent free fighting I haven't even needed to use it.



Did you say you do TWC? Or was that just Juan? You're both new members, so I'm not sure.

Anyway, that's a very different fighting strategy to WSLVT. Our bong-sau doesn't receive force applied to it. It's paak energy from the elbow.



Laap-sau can certainly be used, but at the right time as a remedial action, otherwise you risk grasping at air. That was all I wanted to say. In a high speed fist fight, I'd prefer to focus on striking without trying to grab anything unnecessarily.

I understand, can see why you use it that way, simple & effective. We do have some other ways of using Bong , but most often used as you describe. High percentage probability is best.

I do Yuan Kay San.

Agree. But I am comfortable grappling & once inside will revert to that if feeling overwhelmed boxing. Actually I'll use whatever necessary to end the confrontation quickly, whether that be WC, hand full of dirt in the eye fu or run like hell, lol.

 

[LFJ]

Hey, this is the best clip I've seen to address John Wang's "Rhino" guard. The guy with his hands clasped is essentially in the "Rhino" guard position that John advocates. It is a very strong, wedging position, but because the hands are locked, both hands can be jolted aside as shown creating a huge opening!

Ha, yeah! That's funny. We have some drills using this where the guy will try to wedge into us with this strong structure and we learn to cut the flanks as they are given, either by displacing actions to turn the guy, or by allowing them to turn themselves by overshooting while we remain facing our attack line.

Another "abstract" drill. It would be far from the best idea to try and fight with this "rhino guard".

BTW, the forward pressing "soft bong" such as often used in WT can work against this too, except rather than displace the opponent's locked arms, it presses against and flows around the arms, putting the WT/VT guy in a similarly advantageous position. The difference has to do with whether you move your opponent, or if (because of his level of power) whether you use his energy to move your body (like when working with the dummy). Either way you end up with an advantageous angle allowing you to strike your opponent.

While we wouldn't go force against force, we'd also not want to allow ourselves to be turned by the opponent's energy. The stronger they are with it, the more their own arms work as a lever to turn them on their axis as we remain facing and cut into the flank. So we need not worry about shifting or adjusting too many things unnecessarily. We'd prefer to face our line of attack and go forward.

 

[LFJ]

High percentage probability is best.

That's the philosophy of WSLVT, and why we focus so much on "the punch" and simple actions to aid in its successful delivery.

 

[LFJ]

The difference has to do with whether you move your opponent, or if (because of his level of power) whether you use his energy to move your body (like when working with the dummy).

Oh, by the way, when moving around the dummy, for us, it isn't an idea of moving around an opponent's energy. The first bong-sau is not sticking to a point and moving around it to ward off with taan and strike with a low palm as a sort of application idea that many do.

Moving around the stationary dummy is teaching footwork and ideas of chasing a moving target. So we will actually disengage after the first bong-sau and cut back in from the flank, turning not around an opponent, but just to face our attack line on an evading target. Two arms and a leg make contact to ensure simultaneity and whole body force behind a punch. Could be either arm punching. Don't know yet. Both make contact to ensure facing. It's not a literal application connected to the preceding bong-sau.

Entirely abstract ideas. Dummy arms don't represent human arms. They are just tools to refine position, alignment, and angles like a protractor. View the dummy as an attacker and you train actions that become evasions where you are the one trying to move around them, rather than being the aggressor, putting them on the run, cutting them off, and imposing your fight. The dummy is a training wheel though, not the opponent and the form is not a simulated fight or choreographed applications.

 

[SaulGoodman]

Oh, by the way, when moving around the dummy, for us, it isn't an idea of moving around an opponent's energy. The first bong-sau is not sticking to a point and moving around it to ward off with taan and strike with a low palm as a sort of application idea that many do.

Moving around the stationary dummy is teaching footwork and ideas of chasing a moving target. So we will actually disengage after the first bong-sau and cut back in from the flank, turning not around an opponent, but just to face our attack line on an evading target. Two arms and a leg make contact to ensure simultaneity and whole body force behind a punch. Could be either arm punching. Don't know yet. Both make contact to ensure facing. It's not a literal application connected to the preceding bong-sau.

Entirely abstract ideas. Dummy arms don't represent human arms. They are just tools to refine position, alignment, and angles like a protractor. View the dummy as an attacker and you train actions that become evasions where you are the one trying to move around them, rather than being the aggressor, putting them on the run, cutting them off, and imposing your fight. The dummy is a training wheel though, not the opponent and the form is not a simulated fight or choreographed applications.

Do you deliberately court controversy by constantly making such sweeping statements? Rather than saying "the dummy arms don't represent human arms" simply saying "in my system dummy arms don't represent human arms" immediately puts a much friendlier spin on your views. These kind of statements just cause conflict and you and your fanboy constantly derail discussions with this approach. And btw LOTS of us here have been practicing the dummy for a long time and are intelligent enough and experienced enough to know that there are many, many ways to use it.

 

[LFJ]

I said "for us" right at the beginning of the post before getting into how it is used and viewed in my lineage.

Quit trying to find something to whine about.

 

[guy b.]

Do you deliberately court controversy by constantly making such sweeping statements? Rather than saying "the dummy arms don't represent human arms" simply saying "in my system dummy arms don't represent human arms" immediately puts a much friendlier spin on your views. These kind of statements just cause conflict and you and your fanboy constantly derail discussions with this approach. And btw LOTS of us here have been practicing the dummy for a long time and are intelligent enough and experienced enough to know that there are many, many ways to use it.

This constant focus on language is so trivial. Obviously everyone speaks from their own experience. Please just block posters whose opinions you consistently don't like. In fact I thought you had done so already?

LFJ is correct, you seem just to like to look for problems

 

[Phobius]

While we wouldn't go force against force, we'd also not want to allow ourselves to be turned by the opponent's energy. The stronger they are with it, the more their own arms work as a lever to turn them on their axis as we remain facing and cut into the flank. So we need not worry about shifting or adjusting too many things unnecessarily. We'd prefer to face our line of attack and go forward.

How would you do a bong sau if you notice it becomes force against force? Would you just surrender the move and leave the path you are on? This is one point where I would assume you allow your feet to move you rather than to attempt to move your opponent. Forcing your opponent sideways is first of all not easy in terms of punching, then again this was not a punching scenario. Secondly there is also a risk that the opponent just lets you pass and continues the assault because your bong sau seems to be used as a sideways punching at someones arms.

Think a difference being that my style would more allow the attack to, in worst case scenario, move forward and I would by shifting of position get a clearer path to my opponent while at the same time not have to worry in case I missread his attack since I am no longer in its path. This is of course just an example that is emphasizing, it is not an actual depiction of a realistic fighting scenario.

 

[LFJ]

How would you do a bong sau if you notice it becomes force against force?

I don't stick a bong-sau out to receive force, and it is coupled with a punch that continues to clear the line made by the bong.

Secondly there is also a risk that the opponent just lets you pass and continues the assault because your bong sau seems to be used as a sideways punching at someones arms.

It's not. It's forward. The rotation of the elbow is what causes the lateral displacement of the opponent's arm. There is no "sideways punching at someone's arm".

Think a difference being that my style would more allow the attack to, in worst case scenario, move forward and I would by shifting of position get a clearer path to my opponent while at the same time not have to worry in case I missread his attack since I am no longer in its path. This is of course just an example that is emphasizing, it is not an actual depiction of a realistic fighting scenario.

I wouldn't prefer this approach because it only addresses your position. It really does nothing to stop the opponent from refacing and continuing attack. It doesn't break their structure, disrupt their balance or anything. It just moves you out of their line of attack, but they can still adjust too. You just have to hope you are faster than them, but you are already being passive to their attacking momentum.

 

[Phobius]

I don't stick a bong-sau out to receive force, and it is coupled with a punch that continues to clear the line made by the bong.

It's not. It's forward. The rotation of the elbow is what causes the lateral displacement of the opponent's arm. There is no "sideways punching at someone's arm".

I see, was worried you actually made an attack with a ready bong sau. Did not want to say anything but it would sound like a sure ticket to damaging your shoulder.

Now however you did say you have no sensing of contact or force. So in that case if your bong sau is triggering force on force, in that case the punch which I assume is your other hand might not find a clear path. Now you have two hands locked by a single arm of your opponent because the punch will face resistance as well on the same arm as the bong sau tries to shift. What part of your description am I missing here?

I wouldn't prefer this approach because it only addresses your position. It really does nothing to stop the opponent from refacing and continuing attack. It doesn't break their structure, disrupt their balance or anything. It just moves you out of their line of attack, but they can still adjust too. You just have to hope you are faster than them, but you are already being passive to their attacking momentum.

I agree on some points here, except the having to be faster. You see, I never said I must in all cases let them pass. Just that in cases where force gets reflected back into my body that force will shift my position to the side slightly. My intention is of course often to avoid being where the punch will be. Might not be pure WC, I do not make such claims as I said many times before, we are not purists, nor do I know given all the different interpretations of WC.

Also there is nothing passive, it is a forward intent. I do not simply step to the side and wait for them to pass. As soon as my punch can continue it will. A new angle causes a bong sau to disrupt their balance. It also allows ability to control their body from rotating to face me without breaking their own structure or retreating by a single step. (Of course they can always shift stance, everyone always can no matter what you do)

It does not just move us out of their line of attack, it is an attack by us at the same time. We have two arms, and we just allowed both their arms to be facing away from us. So once more this is not a passive movement. It is not a prolonged contact / chi sau game. It is simply using returning force to trigger a change of position. If the opponent does not resist the bong sau movement the effect may very well be same as what you do, if I have the correct interpretation of what you do.

 

[LFJ]

Now however you did say you have no sensing of contact or force. So in that case if your bong sau is triggering force on force,

Triggering force on force?

in that case the punch which I assume is your other hand might not find a clear path. Now you have two hands locked by a single arm of your opponent because the punch will face resistance as well on the same arm as the bong sau tries to shift. What part of your description am I missing here?

The punch itself is also designed to clear the path. Failing that is when a remedial action such as laap-sau can be used. If the opponent is very tense it just serves as a lever to move their body.

Also there is nothing passive, it is a forward intent. I do not simply step to the side and wait for them to pass. As soon as my punch can continue it will. A new angle causes a bong sau to disrupt their balance. It also allows ability to control their body from rotating to face me without breaking their own structure or retreating by a single step. (Of course they can always shift stance, everyone always can no matter what you do)

It is passive in the sense of being reactive to the opponent's force and allowing it to dictate a shift of your entire structure. That's something I would avoid, and would view as a gift if my opponent did.

The bong-sau, as I do it, must be abrupt. It is the sudden shock force that causes the break of structure and disruption of balance and facing. With that, it is difficult for the opponent to recover or counter as a punch is coming at the same moment as a unit with the bong.

Without causing a shocking disruption of their structure, balance, and facing, and immediately eating up space, they are still capable of recovering with a direct and center-chasing jat-da as soon as your bong begins to fold and you start shifting. So, from my perspective, it is a passive and undesirable reaction.

 

[Phobius]

Triggering force on force?

Not sure how to describe it, you make a move with force that is met by force.

The punch itself is also designed to clear the path. Failing that is when a remedial action such as laap-sau can be used. If the opponent is very tense it just serves as a lever to move their body.

Not all force needs to be tense, but yes if it is tense you need to move their force. That force might be against your attempt to move it. If you resist it too hard that intent of theirs may just change to a shorter attack on same path. An elbow can sting and in such case not only have you not shifted them, instead their attack may force your bong sau arm and punch to the side instead. Force against force.

It is passive in the sense of being reactive to the opponent's force and allowing it to dictate a shift of your entire structure. That's something I would avoid, and would view as a gift if my opponent did.

Not being where the opponent thinks you should be is not passive. Not attacking is passive. It does not matter what you name it, it does not make it so. Have to in the deepest disagree, an assault can not be called passive because it is reactive. It is an illogical conclusion. Also a structure is not shifted because a position is changed. Structure and position are two individual things, unless you consider movement a weakness.

The bong-sau, as I do it, must be abrupt. It is the sudden shock force that causes the break of structure and disruption of balance and facing. With that, it is difficult for the opponent to recover or counter as a punch is coming at the same moment as a unit with the bong.

I call this chasing arms, you chase his arm with your bong sau. Given that you have no contact and plan ahead to use bong sau to attack his arm in order to push him to the side. Only trigger being your visual senses. Again there might be something I am missing... or perhaps you never use bong-sau in actual punching? Such case could perhaps force me to retract this statement.

Without causing a shocking disruption of their structure, balance, and facing, and immediately eating up space, they are still capable of recovering with a direct and center-chasing jat-da as soon as your bong begins to fold and you start shifting. So, from my perspective, it is a passive and undesirable reaction.

In my view passive means you are continuing a fight keeping a neutral ground. He advances and you step back. He attacks and you move away / dodge. Passive is not what I was talking about.

And you would use jat sau on a bong sau? Is that not like asking to get hit by a backfist or elbow for you guys? I mean we are talking about the opponent punching hand doing a jat sau? Doing such a move would just trigger something else. Are we talking about the same jat sau that I am thinkning about, shocking hand or whatever else one might call it?