<- this is my first emote so I hope it works.Yong Chun Bai He Chuen
Moderator: Available
-
martin watts
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:38 pm
- Contact:
-
JimHawkins
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Drills
Hi Martin,
I'll check out the vid link...
The upward thing is the Bong Sao.. Used mainly after contact but sometimes as a redirect with support of the other hand.
But the energy that supports Bong is forward not upward – the wrist drives into the center. The wrist is also the pivot point and the elbow does turn up or rise so that it is just a tad higher than the wrist but the energy is released from the wrist pivot point into the center of gravity of the opponent. So Bong energy is supported by the elbow but released from the wrist. There is also more than one kind of Bong.. The high Go Bong Sao or the low Dai Bong Sao. The Dai Bong does the same thing as the high Bong but lower..
The main action of Bong is considered a transition. So the elbow pops up, you have a Bong and then the elbow drops right away.
An example would be you fire a left punch at the center of the opponent and he slaps it across to your right side.. What happens to the elbow? Well in this case his crossing energy, the slap on the forearm, causes the Bong to pop up <seesaw action> and presses into his slapping arm bridge jamming it into him.. This is the Wing of the Crane going with the crossing energy of the opponent and pressing into and closing off his facing with a forward pressure of the body, a common error is to use the Bong with a crossing energy, the energy should go forward into the CG. This momentarily jams his arm and disrupts his balance.. So the other hand can follow, at which time the elbow drops..
Another common example of Bong is if you grab my hand and pull me toward you.. The Bong elbow will use your energy and follow the wrist pull allowing for a hit with the Bong elbow or a jam and follow with the other hand..
The other hand can Lop or grab done through a forward clearing but it doesn't have to.
All the bridging tools, like Bong, Tan <palm up> , Pak <slap> , most of the parries and clears, escapes, etc all have a forward component either directly in them or the actions are preceded by a forward action..with few exceptions.
I'll check out the vid link...
I would agree and I have no idea what kind of footwork you use.martin watts wrote: Jim - with the lop sau stuff - what I mean to say is that I suspect Wing Chun is a fine tuned system where the arm techniques work best when executed with Wing Chun foot work.
Okay well with Lop Sao you have "Lop Sao" the drill or "Lop Sao" the technique or hand.. In Lop Sao the drill the upward movement isn't really upward...martin watts wrote: In the extreme case of the Lop Sau, we do not really do upward blocks
The upward thing is the Bong Sao.. Used mainly after contact but sometimes as a redirect with support of the other hand.
But the energy that supports Bong is forward not upward – the wrist drives into the center. The wrist is also the pivot point and the elbow does turn up or rise so that it is just a tad higher than the wrist but the energy is released from the wrist pivot point into the center of gravity of the opponent. So Bong energy is supported by the elbow but released from the wrist. There is also more than one kind of Bong.. The high Go Bong Sao or the low Dai Bong Sao. The Dai Bong does the same thing as the high Bong but lower..
The main action of Bong is considered a transition. So the elbow pops up, you have a Bong and then the elbow drops right away.
An example would be you fire a left punch at the center of the opponent and he slaps it across to your right side.. What happens to the elbow? Well in this case his crossing energy, the slap on the forearm, causes the Bong to pop up <seesaw action> and presses into his slapping arm bridge jamming it into him.. This is the Wing of the Crane going with the crossing energy of the opponent and pressing into and closing off his facing with a forward pressure of the body, a common error is to use the Bong with a crossing energy, the energy should go forward into the CG. This momentarily jams his arm and disrupts his balance.. So the other hand can follow, at which time the elbow drops..
Another common example of Bong is if you grab my hand and pull me toward you.. The Bong elbow will use your energy and follow the wrist pull allowing for a hit with the Bong elbow or a jam and follow with the other hand..
The other hand can Lop or grab done through a forward clearing but it doesn't have to.
All the bridging tools, like Bong, Tan <palm up> , Pak <slap> , most of the parries and clears, escapes, etc all have a forward component either directly in them or the actions are preceded by a forward action..with few exceptions.
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
-
martin watts
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:38 pm
- Contact:
Jim,
Thanks for the clarification. I understand what you mean about the bong feeding forwards ( forgive me if I get the names wrong on this ) and not being an upward block. Also as a transitional movement. I had a Wong Shun Leung wing chun man visit here for a few days and they emphasise a lot this forward filling. - you can see him beat me up here:
http://www.fujianbaihe.com/fujianbaihe/ ... drills.mov
I think we have a skill set called Peng ( bounce ) which is about attacking with the hips and shoulders as a follow on to feeding into the other person's space. I have not practiced this. Where I have been suprised in our system is that in the forms I know there is neither a bong like arm position, or a vertical punch, although we have Wing Chun like step drag repetative strikes but they are practised with open hand - vertical hand sword I suppose - and this is not a big thing for us to practice as all ( I have only seen it in conversation with a teacher ). Similarly we do not have in any of the forms I know what most people refer to as an upper crane block. I have only seen and studied a few of our forms so unfortunately on the hunt linking the sytems I cannot really give a full picture.
But for me so far in our system, we are loathe to raise our elbows away from our sides and nearly all block complete to a complete circle with a grab. In that context may be I should not be training people to fall naturally into that position with such a powerful ( in terms of training the muscle memory ) drill. I think you have to be selective about what you train from different systems, and understand how it will either interract beneficially or to the detriment of your own techniques both from an application standpoint, and also from a dilution of style if it is important to you to transmit as best you can the style you have been taught.
By contrast, our double knife set DOES have upward blocks and many elbow techniques as the knives are about 50% of the time folded under the arm. - Dana this is another very good reason for arm conditioning - without it you cannot employ the double knives blocking techniques without injuring yourself. I should say that I try to put these things in the historic context - In fact in some ways the knives form makes more sense without the knives and I am sure I am not the only person who has practiced without the knives, and also I am sure at some point this set or elements from it has been taught empty hand with no explanation as it is so tempting to do.
Jim, what flavour of Wing Chun do you practice? - is it possible for you to direct me to a clip of yourself doing something ?
Best Wishes,
Martin Watts
Thanks for the clarification. I understand what you mean about the bong feeding forwards ( forgive me if I get the names wrong on this ) and not being an upward block. Also as a transitional movement. I had a Wong Shun Leung wing chun man visit here for a few days and they emphasise a lot this forward filling. - you can see him beat me up here:
http://www.fujianbaihe.com/fujianbaihe/ ... drills.mov
I think we have a skill set called Peng ( bounce ) which is about attacking with the hips and shoulders as a follow on to feeding into the other person's space. I have not practiced this. Where I have been suprised in our system is that in the forms I know there is neither a bong like arm position, or a vertical punch, although we have Wing Chun like step drag repetative strikes but they are practised with open hand - vertical hand sword I suppose - and this is not a big thing for us to practice as all ( I have only seen it in conversation with a teacher ). Similarly we do not have in any of the forms I know what most people refer to as an upper crane block. I have only seen and studied a few of our forms so unfortunately on the hunt linking the sytems I cannot really give a full picture.
But for me so far in our system, we are loathe to raise our elbows away from our sides and nearly all block complete to a complete circle with a grab. In that context may be I should not be training people to fall naturally into that position with such a powerful ( in terms of training the muscle memory ) drill. I think you have to be selective about what you train from different systems, and understand how it will either interract beneficially or to the detriment of your own techniques both from an application standpoint, and also from a dilution of style if it is important to you to transmit as best you can the style you have been taught.
By contrast, our double knife set DOES have upward blocks and many elbow techniques as the knives are about 50% of the time folded under the arm. - Dana this is another very good reason for arm conditioning - without it you cannot employ the double knives blocking techniques without injuring yourself. I should say that I try to put these things in the historic context - In fact in some ways the knives form makes more sense without the knives and I am sure I am not the only person who has practiced without the knives, and also I am sure at some point this set or elements from it has been taught empty hand with no explanation as it is so tempting to do.
Jim, what flavour of Wing Chun do you practice? - is it possible for you to direct me to a clip of yourself doing something ?
Best Wishes,
Martin Watts
-
JimHawkins
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
- Location: NYC
Still processing this post Martin but if you're still around:martin watts wrote: But for me so far in our system, we are loathe to raise our elbows away from our sides
How would the system deal with crossing energy say you lead with an attack <what would it be?> and the opponent slaps across like in the example above, how would you use this energy to jam - attack - control - continue?
More later..
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
-
martin watts
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:38 pm
- Contact:
I do not know. I have not trained so much in these terms. - this seemingly simple thing is something I have discussed with quite a few people over the last 6 months or so as a good person will be able to take you quite high on the arm and catch your centre quite effectively and if they have a good level of skill the initiative is very difficult to regain.
This may be one of those things that are system bound - i.e. the attack itself is flawed and should not be done - or at least the reaction to the opponent should be before they get into this position.
I struggle at the moment to find a solution which does not compromise our stance, and simultaneously works against a larger attacker ( by larger I mean at least 20% body mass so me at 12 stone vs a 14 stone man ).
This is one nut I have quite high on my list of things to work out and played with karate, trad kung fu and wing chun people on and not been satisfied with.
If you can film what you consider to be a good solution in Euchi for this problem then I would be very intersted to see.
Particularly annoying as this is basically what most people start off with as a puch with a block and enter in the first lesson! -
Martin
This may be one of those things that are system bound - i.e. the attack itself is flawed and should not be done - or at least the reaction to the opponent should be before they get into this position.
I struggle at the moment to find a solution which does not compromise our stance, and simultaneously works against a larger attacker ( by larger I mean at least 20% body mass so me at 12 stone vs a 14 stone man ).
This is one nut I have quite high on my list of things to work out and played with karate, trad kung fu and wing chun people on and not been satisfied with.
If you can film what you consider to be a good solution in Euchi for this problem then I would be very intersted to see.
Particularly annoying as this is basically what most people start off with as a puch with a block and enter in the first lesson! -
Martin
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Martin in the original three forms that come from China, Uechi Ryu has absolutely no closed-fisted thrust. And a few modern RBSD experts consider this a big plus.Martin wrote: Where I have been suprised in our system is that in the forms I know there is neither ..., or a vertical punch, although we have Wing Chun like step drag repetative strikes but they are practised with open hand - vertical hand sword I suppose
There's nothing wrong with punching if you condition the hand for it and hit in the right place. But an absence of punching techniques - particularly to the head - is hardly a minus. It's just a path that works, and minimizes your risk of hand injury.
By the way, I'm not against punching so long as folks do/train it correctly and understand the risks involved.
Very thoughtful, Martin. Integrating without diluting or corrupting is tricky business.Martin wrote: But for me so far in our system, we are loathe to raise our elbows away from our sides and nearly all block complete to a complete circle with a grab. In that context may be I should not be training people to fall naturally into that position with such a powerful ( in terms of training the muscle memory ) drill. I think you have to be selective about what you train from different systems, and understand how it will either interract beneficially or to the detriment of your own techniques both from an application standpoint, and also from a dilution of style if it is important to you to transmit as best you can the style you have been taught.
Excellent stuff, Martin. Our own Raffi Derderian is an instructor in Uechi, in FMA, and in JKD. He has many, many drills (single and with partner) that are done empty-handed, then with knife, and then with stick. When you consider decision-making vs. reaction time (Hick's law) it makes sense to do more with less. I'm very high on parsimony, and it's a reason why I choose weapon forms that use postures and movement similar to (sometimes identical to) our empty-hand forms. Plus... At the end of the day, it's just easier to teach stuff that integrates well. It shows people the underlying simple principles expressed multiple ways, and that's a path to them taking the material and running with it.Martin wrote: By contrast, our double knife set DOES have upward blocks and many elbow techniques as the knives are about 50% of the time folded under the arm. - Dana this is another very good reason for arm conditioning - without it you cannot employ the double knives blocking techniques without injuring yourself. I should say that I try to put these things in the historic context - In fact in some ways the knives form makes more sense without the knives and I am sure I am not the only person who has practiced without the knives, and also I am sure at some point this set or elements from it has been taught empty hand with no explanation as it is so tempting to do.
- Bill
-
JimHawkins
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
- Location: NYC
Thanks for that clip Martin!martin watts wrote: I had a Wong Shun Leung wing chun man visit here for a few days and they emphasise a lot this forward filling. - you can see him beat me up here:
http://www.fujianbaihe.com/fujianbaihe/ ... drills.mov
I would have thought he was of the Leung Ting line..
I'm from the Moy~Yat family. Some differences in how we do those drills: The first one dan chi sao, single hand chi sao, we normally 'jut' when the other guy palms, that's the jerking hand, done with a wrist snap down and in toward us, this draws them in, uproots them and makes an opening for the immediate same hand punch.. Together these two actions are jut-da or 'jerk hand/hit.'
The Lop Sao drill there is very similar to how we do it but we normally start off facing. You can use more forward <spring> energy from the wrist in those Bongs. When he lops your fist his elbow is not in the center where it needs to be. So as soon as you feel him go to lop your fist let it immediately *pop* forward into Bong like a spring. Like opening and old watch, when you take the cover off the spring might just pop out and go flying. If you do it right the Bong will shoot right through his center opening. As soon as it does let the elbow drop and you can hit to the line with a rising side palm, regular palm or fist.. This is a common ‘test’ of the other person’s structure in the drill.
The rolling there looked Leung Ting-ish to me because of the speed. It’s similar to what we do but we don’t normally roll that fast. I’d have to drink several double espressos before my luk sao would go that fast.
When I get back to training I’ll try to post some clips hopefully from the school.
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
-
JimHawkins
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
- Location: NYC
martin watts wrote: I struggle at the moment to find a solution which does not compromise our stance, and simultaneously works against a larger attacker ( by larger I mean at least 20% body mass so me at 12 stone vs a 14 stone man ).
This is one nut I have quite high on my list of things to work out and played with karate, trad kung fu and wing chun people on and not been satisfied with.
Well some of those circles may help. Is there any forward energy component in the circles? Most of the circles in WCK are used with a forward energy component so the circle becomes a spiral. What are the major attacking weapons, you mentioned a sword palm? So like a vertical palm lead with the blade?
Some of the circles may be used to convert when they apply lateral energy and perhaps used to close off their facing, crane is big on that as far as I know. Wing hand conversions, depending on the kinds of strikes and elbow placement may afford the opportunity to recover from lateral energy while pressing into and jamming/clawing them and making them loose facing or just allow you to come back to the line.
I would think that you guys would do a lot of flanking closing off moves as opposed to doing forward entries. We do both depending on what they do.. Whatever it is, I would think it would use their energy to close off their facing and jam, grab, etc while allowing you to press the attack while maintaining bridge contact and some kind of energy component.
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
-
Dana Sheets
- Posts: 2715
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am
Hi Martin,
Lots of yummy stuff in what you wrote. (and in what Jim wrote too) And it has me thinking. I don't have time to ask all my questions (getting on a 6:00 am flight heading West and need to finish packing) but I will ask this one -
Do you think Yong Chun is a mostly straight up the middle system, mostly just to the outside, or a little of both? Seems like lots of trapping drills want you to be just to the outside but lots of striking drills want you to be in the center. I often wonder where the twain shall meet.
cheers,
Dana
Lots of yummy stuff in what you wrote. (and in what Jim wrote too) And it has me thinking. I don't have time to ask all my questions (getting on a 6:00 am flight heading West and need to finish packing) but I will ask this one -
Do you think Yong Chun is a mostly straight up the middle system, mostly just to the outside, or a little of both? Seems like lots of trapping drills want you to be just to the outside but lots of striking drills want you to be in the center. I often wonder where the twain shall meet.
cheers,
Dana
-
JimHawkins
- Posts: 2101
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
- Location: NYC
Just for clarification:
The "center" in WCK is wherever you are.. When we angle off we say that we are moving the centerline. So in WCK a centerline entry does not mean just a frontal entry; Rather it means entering through controlling the center space that connects your center <CG> to his<CG>, though it goes deeper than that.
In WCK the Crane elements seem to like Closing Off facing meaning using their energy to point them facing away from you, or flanking, could be a little or a lot. This means for the moment they only have one hand while if you are facing them you can use two hands against their one. Conversely, the Snake elements in WCK seem to prefer a more frontal attack.
The "center" in WCK is wherever you are.. When we angle off we say that we are moving the centerline. So in WCK a centerline entry does not mean just a frontal entry; Rather it means entering through controlling the center space that connects your center <CG> to his<CG>, though it goes deeper than that.
In WCK the Crane elements seem to like Closing Off facing meaning using their energy to point them facing away from you, or flanking, could be a little or a lot. This means for the moment they only have one hand while if you are facing them you can use two hands against their one. Conversely, the Snake elements in WCK seem to prefer a more frontal attack.
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit
-
martin watts
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:38 pm
- Contact:
Firstly - my issue with forums is they can be so damn interesting that you spend more time in them than training! Secondly sorry this post is a bit multi threaded but I am tying to say hello to so many people at once in this forum.
Also If any of you have posts of clips on the web can you email to me the links so I can see who I am talking with: martin@allmydates.com
Bill, I really have very very little experience with the knife stuff. We have a double knife form - the knives are like thinner longer butterfly knives - but all I have done is learnt it and not explored the uses so much. Whereas I am happy to muddle with the first 2 or 3 forms I know with people I work with I really have so little experience of the knife work that I am still in solitude with it. So when I say knife I am really talking double swords. Certainly I / we are very very naive when it comes to any sort of combat application. I am afraid there is more than a little element of us doing blind repitition of forms with no meaning / understanding. I feel if you get that right and then apply a degree of proper curiosity, perspective and an honest mind you can get a long way. In fact I feel that is how Euchi started and why the system is so well done in terms of being cross supported in its own frame of reference - something which defines a body of work as a system as oppose to a bunch of self defence techniques.
With regards to real fighting I have some different concepts of this - for example. If 2 people fight ( peter and paul ) let us suppose Paul wins the fight in 5 seconds. If Peter then trains a lot with me and they fight again he will win in 1/2 second. If Paul trains a lot with me and they fight again Peter will still win but it will take 50 seconds. So what is the point? - well if you apply this to a whole village or gang of people it will make the difference between the survival or not of the village. This is the kind of historical context of the art which people are not so interested in ( I think there are many many more ) as it is difficult to sell personal study now on the basis that in a crowd you would do better. I think I have no other thoughts on fighting that are different from anyone who has trained for a few years and knows the contradictions.
Jim,
The emphasis difference I felt between Leung and Wong students ( and they were classmates ) was Leung being more weight back / reactive and Wong being more forwards / contact ( see how Jan leans into lots of moves ). Jan was looking much more like us as well.
I worked with Yoko my student yesterday and in push hands we have 5 new things to get to grips with in response to working with other people over the summer ( and having no answer to their problems ). So I do have a craney solution to the trapped cross arm, but will have to train it up to test if it is effective with some bigger people. I will start a page on my site and post my solution with other peoples when I am a little more happy with it. We certainly have flanking steps in our forms. Unfortunaltely my main test bed for this is a 5ft Japanese women. Whilst this will prepare me if I ever go to Japan and have to fight one, I am tentative about results when the techniques are applied to large hairy men with black belts on!
If you mean by closing off what I think then yes that is very much us. Where we differ a little from other stuff I have seen is that , given a re-direction of their energy, we are liable to re-engage the force in order to proceed ( instead of for example an Ai Ki Do style following of their momentum ). Potentially then, the re-engagement might be to use their energy against them internally ( for example a joint lock forced against their momentum ). This is a little the difference between riding their Dan Tien and driving their Dan Tien - Dan Tien being what we call the centre of motion but you have it too in karate.
Dana, I am not sure what you mean by straight up the middle vs flanking. Certainly what we are most concerned with above all else is rooting. so whether we enter , pull back , or step to the side and forwards etc we are trying to re-establish our root and posture before re-engaging. I feel that we are not too shy about losing contact whilst we do that, and being quite large and catch all about the re-engagement. So we might step sidewards and forwards, letting go of the partner in the mean time, root, and then double grab the partner. From there, re-direction may well just be from the waist ( hips maintaining rooted position ). We like our waist training.
I suspect also that many though not all of our techniqes are catch all techniques, i.e. we train the position not specific applications - so for example in the case of the large lower to upper blocks in the Ba Fen forms ( after the first turn ) these are either blocks to strikes, entering bumps to shoulders, or Chi Na locks onto the partners arms ( for example if they have done a roundhouse ). So I think talking about middle vs flanking styles is only as accurate as talking about soft vs hard styles which makes little sense for us because we are talking about selectively countering with opposites in most if not all of these areas.
Any of these areas are complex and I am more then a little out of my depth trying to enunciate them but that is where I am up to. In fact just talking about it all makes we want to take up static Qi Gong so I don't have to try to explain what I am doing in the 'application arena of death'.
Martin
Also If any of you have posts of clips on the web can you email to me the links so I can see who I am talking with: martin@allmydates.com
Bill, I really have very very little experience with the knife stuff. We have a double knife form - the knives are like thinner longer butterfly knives - but all I have done is learnt it and not explored the uses so much. Whereas I am happy to muddle with the first 2 or 3 forms I know with people I work with I really have so little experience of the knife work that I am still in solitude with it. So when I say knife I am really talking double swords. Certainly I / we are very very naive when it comes to any sort of combat application. I am afraid there is more than a little element of us doing blind repitition of forms with no meaning / understanding. I feel if you get that right and then apply a degree of proper curiosity, perspective and an honest mind you can get a long way. In fact I feel that is how Euchi started and why the system is so well done in terms of being cross supported in its own frame of reference - something which defines a body of work as a system as oppose to a bunch of self defence techniques.
With regards to real fighting I have some different concepts of this - for example. If 2 people fight ( peter and paul ) let us suppose Paul wins the fight in 5 seconds. If Peter then trains a lot with me and they fight again he will win in 1/2 second. If Paul trains a lot with me and they fight again Peter will still win but it will take 50 seconds. So what is the point? - well if you apply this to a whole village or gang of people it will make the difference between the survival or not of the village. This is the kind of historical context of the art which people are not so interested in ( I think there are many many more ) as it is difficult to sell personal study now on the basis that in a crowd you would do better. I think I have no other thoughts on fighting that are different from anyone who has trained for a few years and knows the contradictions.
Jim,
The emphasis difference I felt between Leung and Wong students ( and they were classmates ) was Leung being more weight back / reactive and Wong being more forwards / contact ( see how Jan leans into lots of moves ). Jan was looking much more like us as well.
I worked with Yoko my student yesterday and in push hands we have 5 new things to get to grips with in response to working with other people over the summer ( and having no answer to their problems ). So I do have a craney solution to the trapped cross arm, but will have to train it up to test if it is effective with some bigger people. I will start a page on my site and post my solution with other peoples when I am a little more happy with it. We certainly have flanking steps in our forms. Unfortunaltely my main test bed for this is a 5ft Japanese women. Whilst this will prepare me if I ever go to Japan and have to fight one, I am tentative about results when the techniques are applied to large hairy men with black belts on!
If you mean by closing off what I think then yes that is very much us. Where we differ a little from other stuff I have seen is that , given a re-direction of their energy, we are liable to re-engage the force in order to proceed ( instead of for example an Ai Ki Do style following of their momentum ). Potentially then, the re-engagement might be to use their energy against them internally ( for example a joint lock forced against their momentum ). This is a little the difference between riding their Dan Tien and driving their Dan Tien - Dan Tien being what we call the centre of motion but you have it too in karate.
Dana, I am not sure what you mean by straight up the middle vs flanking. Certainly what we are most concerned with above all else is rooting. so whether we enter , pull back , or step to the side and forwards etc we are trying to re-establish our root and posture before re-engaging. I feel that we are not too shy about losing contact whilst we do that, and being quite large and catch all about the re-engagement. So we might step sidewards and forwards, letting go of the partner in the mean time, root, and then double grab the partner. From there, re-direction may well just be from the waist ( hips maintaining rooted position ). We like our waist training.
I suspect also that many though not all of our techniqes are catch all techniques, i.e. we train the position not specific applications - so for example in the case of the large lower to upper blocks in the Ba Fen forms ( after the first turn ) these are either blocks to strikes, entering bumps to shoulders, or Chi Na locks onto the partners arms ( for example if they have done a roundhouse ). So I think talking about middle vs flanking styles is only as accurate as talking about soft vs hard styles which makes little sense for us because we are talking about selectively countering with opposites in most if not all of these areas.
Any of these areas are complex and I am more then a little out of my depth trying to enunciate them but that is where I am up to. In fact just talking about it all makes we want to take up static Qi Gong so I don't have to try to explain what I am doing in the 'application arena of death'.
Martin
