Single and Double Hand Chi Sau

[William E]

Greetings

In our Kwoon lately we have reviewed HFY single hand chi sau along with a basic introduction into the HFY double hand chi sau.

My question to those who have studied other styles of WC such as Moy Yat, what are the differences between single and double hand and do each have their own identity and if so what is it...?

I look forward to your replies and I hope this topic will hopefully bring about lots of discussion.....

William E.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

This is just from my prespective and it has been sometime sense I trained it but,
one handed (daun) chi sau had a few progression, first was stationary Fuk sau covers taun sau> taun sau stikes with a biu sau to eyes> fuk sau recovers with jut sau> jut sau then stikes to chest> taun, now a Da, recovers with bong sau.
This to me was to prepare an person for chi sau one hand at a time with the taun, bong, fuk positions. Also to train reactions after a bridge has been obtained and an opponent desides to strike, this is through the developement of basic structure and energy. Second was this same drill with feet in motion. This was to help one keep structer while moving the horse.
Chi sau was one of the drilles that had many progressions, but the basice understanding was to develope the body as a whole, piece by piece starting with the hands to the feet. As the drills increase in dificulty so do the energies, speed, tecniques/reactions, and sensitivity.
This is just touching the surface of it but a good place to start for this discution. My sihings and sija better have more to say about this. Not to many of us left.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

taun, now a Da, recovers with bong sau. Correction; Taun is now under the jut, (chum) recovers w/bong sau.Second was this same drill with feet in motion. This was to help one keep structer while moving the horse. this is free style(hand) allowed to incorperate heun sau and bow sau (hope my spelling is understandable). Some minor correction/ additions!

[William E]

Thanks James for your insights. Can I ask if there were any differences between the single and double (except the extra hand) training or focus?

William E.

Where is everyone else..........?

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Can I ask if there were any differences between the single and double (except the extra hand) training or focus? The idea behind daun chi sau in a nut shell is, it is a progression of chi sau, of learning basics on hand at a time, a layer of understanding. Most people are pretty stiff even after going through paak sau, hyun sau, laahp sau. Then they get into Daan chi sau, Wuht daan chi sau,> chi sau- puhn sau/ luk sau, Jip sau, Jip sau/ jau sau, Teui mah, Daan Da chi sau, seung da chi sau, and then the gwo sau (freestyle) level. That’s not any clearer is it?

[William E]

Thanks for your reply James. Is there anyone else left on this forum besides you and me.... (and Tony) :p

Now I would like to ask what your experience with HFY single hand chi sau was like and how it was different than the other style.

The one thing that I will add at this point is that the training methodoligies of single hand is totally different than double hand. The training techniques deal with both the verticle and horizontal flowing of energy based on jong sau positioning.

When we move from single to double hand the timframe is different and we are dealing with deu ying and jeu ying. The training methodologies are totally different and the concepts behind them are different.

Thanks for your input.

William E.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Thanks for your reply James. Is there anyone else left on this forum besides you and me.... it feels like it some times but are we?
Now I would like to ask what your experience with HFY single hand chi sau was like and how it was different than the other style. Wow, I'll get back to you tonight after I get out of school. But I have had just a little experience in the three progressions to daan chi sau. Fun stuff! Lots of info.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

From my Fau Kiu mind and body I see the three progressions of Daan Chi Sau as training of five lines, three reference point, gate coverage/clearance, range, sticking energies, as well as control of space/time all with structures.
Any additions.... Anyone... Bueller! Bueller!
Any one fill like putting this into training sequence?

[William E]

Hello James

Nice little discussion we both are having...

Is there anybody out there.....

I wanted to add that single hand HFY chi sau deals with Jong Sau concept and how to engage your opponent. It also deals with covering the space which is a different timeframe then when you are squared off in front of your opponent (deui ying) in a double hand chi sau situation. See the difference?

The point that I was trying to make was that from my understanding, other WC styles train single hand only as a pre-cursor to double hand with no clear distinction for their uses.

HFY has a clear distinction between the two.

William E.

[Eric]

Yes, there is somebody out there. He's shady looking though, you might want to go back inside... :D

I know that yes, in my experience we primarily used don chi sao as a lead in to double handed chi sao, however I believe it was also revisited in the teui ma (spelling?) stage with freehanded don chi sao, which includes moving and striking.

Honestly, I never thought of don chi sao as direct combat training, simply a tool to develop good energies, structure, and to begin to let the hands and feet talk to each other on a much simpler basis than double handed chi sao.

This conversation has raised many new questions for me as to don chi sao's purpose in my training. Did you get the same impression sihing james?

[JamesHFYofAZ]

After going through all the progressions of chi sau we then visited them again and used in anouther fassion. Laap sau chi sau and being able to go from two hand back too one so one hand strikes. Also going from same side arm control to cross body control. Not as indepth as HFY but still affective training.This conversation has raised many new questions for me as to don chi sao's purpose in my training. Did you get the same impression sihing james? What questions? Is your question to me about hFY or YM. As far as HFY I always see the hand training as combat, the other was looked at from a control view, like defence, not really combat though, Ya, both combat one just has more understanding then the other- Saam Mo Kiu.
Is there Anyone else... Anyone... Please!:rolleyes:

[Levi]

It has been my experience that, in the Yip Man System, Daan Chi Sau serves several purposes (this list is not all-inclusive):

1. Awareness and intent along the centerline.

2. Constant bridge contact.

3. Sensitivity.

4. Relaxation.

5. Structure.

6. A "pulsing" or whipping energetic.

7. Distance awareness.

Daan Chi Sau taught me, from a stationary, face-to-face position, how to sense movement on the bridge and how to respond accordingly in order to keep my partner's forward energy off of my centerline while keeping my forward energy on theirs. I learned when to relax and when to explode, when to stick and when to charge, using only one line of attack and no footwork.

Wuht Daan Chi Sau, or freehand Daan Chi Sau, added footwork into the mix. However, many students misinterpret the ability to move as the ability, or necessity, to strike, or the ability, or necessity, to push. The footwork is designed, in my experience, to facilitate several things (again, not all-inclusive):

1. The feet learn to listen to the bridge for information on where to step and how much.

2. The feet alter the angles in order to "open" the centerline of your partner, allowing the hands to move less. The idea is that it takes a certain amount of time to move the hand 6 inches (let's say), but if I move the horse three inches at the same time that I move the hand three inches, I accomplish the same thing in half the time.

3. The feet alter the angles in order to "close" your centerline off to your partner, allowing the hands to defend and occupy the centerline.

There are two main obstacles that students shouold try to avoid at this stage, in my opinion: striking and pushing.

Striking at this stage just trains lucky strike timing. If you own the center and you rush forward to occupy it and your hand makes contact with your partner's body, then the "strike" was a secondary, immaterial result of the training tools. If you strike, and you are looking for strikes, then you totally miss the rest of the training. Wuht Laahp Da, Sparring, and and Daan Da Chi Sau are the tools used to train the single hand strikes.

Likewise, one should not equate Wuht Daan Chi Sau with Teui Mah or with pushing. You are not learning how to push or move your partner. If you do, again, that's a secondary, immaterial side effect. You are training to recognize angles. If you concentrate on the training methodologies and the objectives, you will get the others thrown in, but if you are trying to push and hit, then you've completely rewritten the exercise and it's just a one-handed sparring match starting from a bridge.

To me, Yip Man Daan Chi Sau training is primarily defensive in nature. If I concentrate on the defensive aspects (please note that defensive does not mean submissive, it means controlling the center so as to close off attacks), then when I add my other hand into the mix, it SHOULD be free to strike at will.

The greatest lesson I learned in Yip Man Daan Chi Sau was to listen to myself and not to my opponent. Here's what I mean by this:

If I have a bridge and my partner rushes forward, I don not know that because I saw him move forward. I know that because I felt movement along my arm. It was MY sensation on MY arm when I had structure that told me the where when and how of my opponent's intent. Likewise, I do not strike because we are moving around to get strikes in. I strike because my bridge hand told me that the center was empty, and I filled that space.

My only experience with HFY Daan Chi Sau has been the first several progressions, and a tiny bit of cross-hand training. I have not been exposed to any Chi Sau training using two hands yet. However, I can say that by having the formula (precise heighth, width, and depth measurements), HFY Daan Chi Sau trains a more three dimensional field, one not limited so exclusively to the centerline. The Jong Sau connection to HFY Daan Chi Sau makes perfect sense to me. Thanks for verbalizing it.

That's been my experience. Others may differ.

-Levi

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Good say Levi,
I new there was somebody else, there is always somebody else! :cool:

[dragon lady]

I would agree with Sihing Levi. This really isn't too shocking since we train and teach this together!

I think that daan chi sau is a vital training tool. In the YM system, without repeating all that Sihing said, it also reinforces the natures of the techniques we use... is taan doing what taan is supposed to do? It is slightly different to examine these motions when the bridge is already built than from a saan sau drill. It definitely develops and draws on sensitivity.

Wuht Daan Chi Sau is the equivilant of going from SNT to CK. You put wheels on it. Can you move your horse and keep your struture proper relative to yourself while maintaining awareness of the bridge and your training partner? Can you feel when your partner doesn't? As there are no set sequences in this exercise, you have to feel the input on the bridge.

I also have had very, very little cross-hand experience and the same Daan Chi Sau drilling as Sihing (imagine that). I find that the drills do accentuate the same point I made about the YM Daan Chi Sau in that the natures of the techniques are explored. The HFY method with the inclusion of skill challenges clearly illustrates when a hand is not proper.

[Savi]

Sihing Levi, that was an excellent post! I like it a lot!
Originally posted by William E
I wanted to add that single hand HFY chi sau deals with Jong Sau concept and how to engage your opponent. It also deals with covering the space which is a different timeframe then when you are squared off in front of your opponent (deui ying) in a double hand chi sau situation. See the difference?

The point that I was trying to make was that from my understanding, other WC styles train single hand only as a pre-cursor to double hand with no clear distinction for their uses.

HFY has a clear distinction between the two.

William E. I have also noticed that Jong Sau is truly foundational, regardless of the syllable/technique we are drilling or applying. I do not see any other way someone can learn HFY without training Jong Sau first.

I like what everyone has shared here so far. I have a similar perspective.

From what I have learned and observed in YMVTK, there is no definitive usage of the Tan Jung, Yan Jung and Dan Tien within Dan Chi Sau or Syeung Chi Sau. The reference point that seems to be most often used is the Yan Jung (middle reference point). We did spend extensive time understanding the nature of each technique we used in relation to energy and purpose.

example:
Bong Sau has an upward and (lifting and sinking) off-center intention/ Yat Ji Chung Choi has a forward and sinking (from the elbow) intention.

And the same treatment is done to all the other techniques involved in DCS. YM Cross Hand DCS to me is very difficult to figure out what exactly is correct for this system. There did not seem to be any specific strategy or tactic or idioms guiding crosshand application. It was more of the Wuht Dan Chi Sau as Levi mentioned (freestyle). The spacial measurements of our structure was not as precise and clear as with HFY science. It seemed to be based more on heuristics.

I noticed within HFY DCS, all the reference points and lines are used throughout the progressions. There is no question of proper structure because the Sup Ming Dim had already been defined and addresses heighth (3 ref), width (5 line) and depth (2 gates) whether we are in Chiu Meen, Chiu Meen Deui Ying, or Chiu Meen Jeui Ying; cross hand or same side as well. HFY DCS is undoubtedly more comprehensive because of the method of going through body mechanics, technical knowledge, skill challenges. The progressions also have a distinction/specific focus which apparently addresses all 3 dimensional space, and energy exchanges. To me this seems more tangible.

After learning some of HFY DCS, and applying it against the YM DCS, I could see where things were not compatible - yet at the same time seems more logical and sound.

From my POV, it also seems that the combative application of YM DCS is not as stressed as it is in HFY. It does seem to gravitate more towards drilling than actual fighting. BUT, that's just my opinion.