Sparring (cont'd from Russbo.com)

[Guest]

This thread is a continuation of a discussion which began on Russbo.com (www.russbo.com/discus/mes...035518157)

The original question was asked by a knowledgable man with 20 years experience in Karate. His question was as follows:

"How long (on average) would it take a gong fu student (not an athletic prodigy) to be able to apply their skills in a controlled, free fighting exercise? I don't mean a full contact, take no prisoners, last man standing kind of thing. I mean I do my stuff, you do yours and we use our knowledge to counter each other....In my dojo, we start that kind of thing as early as possible. I don't get out much, so I don't know if that is the norm in either karate or gong fu."

The discussion became quite interesting before finally getting off track. I look forward to continuing the discussion here.

A<

[Guest]

Greetings.

Sparring is a method for testing your fighting ability.
Therefore, when an individual learns the fighting patterns, with applications, they are free to spar with what they have learnt.

I say this with my own personal experience.
A long time ago, I was taught " The organ seeking kick."
I was a yellow sash at the time in Hoong Ka. I had to face a black belt with what I learnt. On this occasion, I only used the organ seeking kick against my opponent. I defeated him with everything he gave me. I didn't even kick him in the groin. Every time he came in for an attack, I swiftly struck his abdomen. It finally finished with him falling to the floor.
I accomplished this through timing, distancing, and control.
All the flashy moves that he attempted on me, fell him.
This was a very important lesson for both of us.


I once gave one lesson to a friend of mine. ( this was also a long time ago)
I taught her how to escape from grabs. Any grabs. This took only 30 minutes.
1 month later, she was attacked in her house from an insane neighbour. He broke into her place, in broad daylight, while she was watching telelvision.
Before she was able to call the police, they engaged in a fight. He grabbed her, and tried to hold her.
She escaped his hold, kneed him in the groin, and shoved him through her front window. She put him down.
She had no previous martial arts experience to what I taught her in that single lesson.
Later, she thanked me for the lesson that I taught her. It saved her life.

To answer how long it takes to free spar.

One lesson to never.

Happy Halloween.

Anton

[Guest]

Hey Anton.

Interesting post, but I have to disagree with a few points.

"To answer how long it takes to free spar...One lesson to never."

No one can free spar in an effective, controlled manner after one lesson. However, the same person might be able to fight effectively after one lesson, or without any lessons at all. As I'm sure you are well aware, fighting and sparring are two entirely different things. Sparring is an exercise performed in a controlled manner. Fighting is...well...fighting. There are no rules.

Some people are natural born fighters. Some are not. A bad fighter learning the best fighting techniques from the best teacher under the best circumstances may still be a bad fighter, especially if he does not train his mind. A natural fighter may not need any training.

In order to be successful in a violent situation, one must develop a warrior's mindset. Some people are born with it. Others have to train it. In kungfu, we call this aspect "Shen" (mind, spirit). If your mind is not disciplined and you encounter a mean street fighter--someone who will not hesitate to gouge your eyes or rip off your ears or soccer-kick your groin--you may be in serious trouble. If your mind is not calm, if you lose your cool, if you freeze with fear--then all of your techniques are worthless. You have not trained to be a warrior.

Sparring does not demand as much Shen as actual fighting because it is not life-threatening. Nevertheless, your friend had enough Shen to thwart her attacker using the single technique she had learned from you. She didn’t lose her cool. Another person in the same situation might not have succeeded.

I think your success using the Organ Seeking kick was similar, though slightly different. You had enough Shen to assess the proper distance, timing, as well as to execute control. I could be wrong, but I suspect that it was precisely because of your limited repertoire of techniques that you were able to focus on these other aspects.

I had the same experience years ago using a side-kick as an intercepting counter. Using just this one technique (it was all I really knew how to do!), I was able to score on many black-belts. Back then, it was somewhat confusing. Now I understand what was happening.

Having only one technique in your repertoire can actually be an advantage in certain situations. If your single technique is a good one and you know how to use it, you can be very effective, especially if your opponent is not well trained. With only one technique, your mind is not cluttered by decisions. There is no question what to use. This allows your mind to relax and focus on aspects of sparring which are actually more important, like timing and distancing.

I don't know about you, but the way I originally learned to spar in Karate was pretty haphazard. Things are much different now that I train with Sifu Wong. Because we train sparring in such a systematic manner, I find that I am able to focus on these other aspects of combat while still using a wide repertoire of techniques.

I think one of the main reasons for this phenomenon is because all of my techniques are taken directly from forms that I practice tirelessly. I don't have to think about them because they are second nature. They just flow effortlessly, allowing me to concentrate on other aspects of sparring.

There's my $0.02.



A<

[Guest]

Please forgive me if this seems slightly off topic, as this knowledge comes from Fencing, rather than Kung Fu. However, it is still about sparring.

A useful function of sparring is to develop a particular technique or reaction. The opponents agree to spar as normal but to keep executing a particular move at random intervals. This is not theory, but practice which I have spent many hours on.

For example, in fencing, a popular move is a lightning fast lunge to the foot. An accomplished swordsman can do this fast enough to be back on guard before their opponent has realised they're going to do it. The usual counter to this is to whip the foot away and attack the shoulder. So our fencers would spar as normal but with frequent attacks to the foot. During this sparring, each fencer will try to keep an expectation in the back of his mind of the reaction to the foot lunge. When the foot lunge comes, they allow their instinct to perform the defence for them. Eventually this expectation/instinct sinks in and becomes completely automatic and lightning fast.

Contrast this with playing for points, which is the nearest most fencers ever get to a swordfight. You have to try and vary your actions. The rule of thumb is that if you make the same move three times, your opponent will take advantage of it.

Chris.

[Guest]

Chris,

Interesting stuff! I’m sure there are many parallels between sparring and fencing. I’ve always loved fencing, but never had a chance to practice it. Personally, I’m very curious. I have a few questions:

Are the techniques used today still applicable to fighting with real swords? How much have they been altered to fit the competition?

What is the usual methodology for training fencers to spar? Do they jump right in, or do they practice on their own for some time first? Do they practice with a dummy?

How large is the repertoire of techniques in competitive fencing? Are we talking about a relatively small number, like in boxing, or a bigger number, like in kungfu?



A<

[Guest]

Anthony,

I'm delighted you take an interest and happy to answer your questions. Please understand that I answer based on the best of my knowledge or on my opinion, which may be open to question.

> Are the techniques used today still applicable to fighting with real swords?

I've never been in a real sword fight. In fencing the safety equipment used is designed so you can attack with the same force and techniques as you would use in a real sword fight. The mask and jacket protect your body, and the swords will bend at the amount of pressure which would penetrate the flesh (known as 'The Nature Of Penetration').

Obviously the psychology of a real fight is not there; in a real fight if you were hit round the head by a sabre cut it would kill you. That makes a big difference to your approach to the fight. However someone trained in fencing would have an enormous advantage in parrying their opponents attacks, for example. Also real fighting weapons tend to be heavier and have a different balance, although with the best quality real swords I've held, this difference is small enough to to be able to use the same principles.

Fencers also train a great deal in distance and timing, which I understand you do in Kung Fu? They also have lightening fast reflexes.

> How much have they been altered to fit the competition?

A great deal. The answer above really applies to fencing in clubs by the more martial set who aren't much interested in competitions. Contrasting the 'real fight' example above to a competition, the electrics used to pick up a hit mean competition sabre fencers would just use the merest glance on their opponents mask to register their touch and get their point. With a razor sharp sword on unprotected flesh you'd still do some damage, of course.

> What is the usual methodology for training fencers to spar?
> Do they jump right in, or do they practice on their own for some time first?
There's probably about as many different ways as you can think of. Different clubs, coaches and fencers all have different approaches as suits their opinion.

There are many drills in fencing which are much like 'push hands' in Taichichuan, which are often used to develop and fine hone skills. Most clubs I've been to just fight.

> Do they practice with a dummy?
Not as such, although favourite 'dummy' targets I've trained with include:
Shoes (for hits to the foot)
Someone dropping a glove against a wall in front of you & you have to pin it to the wall before it hits the ground.
A heart shape on a piece of wood for target practice.
Corks suspended on string
Gym ropes
Willing volunteers

> How large is the repertoire of techniques in competitive fencing?
> Are we talking about a relatively small number, like in boxing, or a bigger number, like in kungfu?
From what I understand, the top eschelons of fencing tend to rely on a small number of simple techniques executed with devastating skill. However the full repertoire of such people will be huge. Lower level fencers like me tend to use whatever it takes from what we know to get the points.

I'd like to fire back some of those questions, if I may?

Do you use a dummy in Kung Fu training? If so, what kind of techniques do you work on - hits? Throws?

How do you train to use a large repertoire? Do you have a specific response to certain attacks?
In fencing we tend to use guard-preparation-attack, guard being a defensive starting point, preparation is getting the distance and tactical position of the sword, and attack is hitting the target. You can then fit in techniques as you wish.

Do you do any target practice in Kung Fu swordsmanship?

Regards,
Chris.

[Guest]

“How do you train to use a large repertoire?”

Sifu Wong’s methodology for training sparring is systematic and effective. Many kungfu schools today lack this methodology and therefore cannot apply their techniques in sparring. I’m going to reprint what I wrote on the Russbo forum as it is relevant here. I’m sorry it’s so long, but it may help you (and others) to understand how things are done in kungfu.

We use the following method to train sparring:

1. Learn and practice appropriate kungfu patterns and sets. (Many kungfu students never progress past this level.)
2. Understand and practice the combat application of each pattern individually.
3. Apply specific patterns to counter particular combat situations.
4. Link these individual combat situations into longer, flowing combat sequences.
5. Practice variations of these combat sequences.
6. Practice prearranged sparring sets (longer versions of the combat sequences)
7. Free sparring.

In our school, we are taught a series of combat sequences that cover the 4 categories of attack and defense (Striking, Kicking, Throwing/Grappling, and Chin-Na). I currently know and practice 18 of these sequences, each of which consists of about 3-10 patterns. A single combat sequence practiced alone would look like a short piece of a classical set. Linking 4 or more combat sequences together would look very similar to a classical set.

In practicing these combat sequences, there are important subsections of development:

1. Pre-Choice: both initiator and responder have decided on a pre-arranged sequence to practice.
2. Self-Choice: the initiator chooses a sequence without telling the responder.
3. Surprise Counter: the responder has the choice of responding with a counter outside of the prescribed sequence.
4. Continuation: either initiator or responder can choose to link the end of one sequence directly into another sequence without losing the flow.
5. External Change: allows either partner to branch out to another sequence at any logical point during the initial sequence.
6. Internal Change: allows either partner to make changes within the sequence (almost as if improvising on the prescribed sequence).

The main reason students today fail to apply their kungfu is because they lack the appropriate methods to train sparring. It is easy to see why trying to jump directly from Step 1 (forms) to Step 7 (free sparring) will result in failure every time. Jumping straight into free sparring is a guaranteed way to make your sophisticated kungfu techniques feel useless.

Kungfu is not magic. It is scientific. You cannot expect these sophisticated movements to magically work for you just because you practiced them alone on the top of a mountain for 30 years. If students follow the prescribed methodology and practice sufficiently, they will find free sparring a natural progression. They will be able to apply their techniques spontaneously not because kungfu is magic, but because they have practiced according to a systematic method.

The results are remarkable. For example, while practicing Step 5 (variations on combat sequences) with one of my juniors (who has been practicing kungfu for less than 2 years), we naturally found ourselves improvising further and further outside of the prescribed sequences. By the end, we were closer to (but not at) free sparring. Anyone watching us would have no trouble recognizing our moves from the traditional forms that we practice. What we do looks like "kungfu fighting.” There is no bouncing, no boxing, no padding, no karate, and no taekwondo in any of what we do. It is all traditional kungfu.

I can give the traditional name for every single move that I use in sparring. For example, a junior recently tried to catch me with an unexpected move (Surprise Counter), but I spontaneously countered his counter with another surprise. He was, in fact, surprised and looked at me in shock as if I had made up some awesome new pattern. I had not. I’m not that clever. I pointed out that I had used a pattern that he already knows: "Sharp Knife Trims Bamboo." All I did was vary the stance from Bow & Arrow to Unicorn, thus varying the application slightly to fit the situation. I was still in a proper stance, and the pattern was still “Sharp Knife Trims Bamboo.”

There are also other reasons why fewer and fewer people can apply sophisticated kungfu patterns in sparring or combat. The most obvious is that they do not know, or have only a cursory understanding of the application. Some teachers even encourage students to figure out the application out on their own, as if solving some puzzle. I can tell you from repeated experience that the application you may imagine or figure out on your own is, at best, only one of many applications. It will likely also be the most unsophisticated one.

Furthermore, even if you personally witness the sophisticated application, you still may not "get" it. I witnessed, understood, and practiced the application to a particular pattern for over a year. I later felt the same pattern applied by Sifu Wong during sparring. What he did might have looked the same to others, but to me it was COMPLETELY different. It might as well have been a different technique. Don't get wrong, I was not practicing the physical form of the move incorrectly. I just lacked the other skills required to make that physical form so effective.

The application of these patterns depends a great deal on these skills. Unfortunately, such skills are not easily seen. Many of these skills, even when felt directly from a master, still take years and years to perfect. Taijiquan Pushing Hands is a good example: it looks simple, and it is...in theory. But the skills, though simple, are invisible to the eye and take years to master.

This leads us to another reason why people fail to apply their techniques: lack of force. Force can be explained and applied in many ways. Internal force is not even necessary. A tiger claw will suffice here as an example of force.

Let's say you know a particular tiger pattern called “Fierce Tiger Descends Mountain.” You have learned the application and the necessary skills directly from the world's best master--Mr. Miyagi. Let's say you practice this move thousands of times. Mr. Miyagi is there every day to correct your mistakes. A year later, you are able to apply this pattern in sparring 80% of the time.

Even if you raise your percentage to 99.9%, you are still missing a critical ingredient. If you have not trained the force for your tiger claw, your technique is worthless. Why? Because this force is necessary to make this particular pattern effective. Though you may land the technique, you will only succeed in tickling your opponent with your tiger claw. This is why force training has always been an essential ingredient in traditional kungfu.

I studied Fu Jow Pai Kungfu (Black Tiger) for about 6 months. I once saw the master jab his left pinky finger into and through a thick, corrugated cardboard box lying on the street. He did it casually, almost jokingly, leaving a perfect hole through several layers of cardboard for us all to see. This guy trained force every day. It wasn't exactly the same as internal force, but trust me: you don't want a guy like this to grab you with any of his fingers.

I remember when I first started sparring in Karate. As a Green Belt, I was thrown into the mix against Black Belts. A soon as my Sensei said, "Hajimei" (Go!), I thought to myself, "Now what?" Needless to say, that Black Belt had his way with me that day. Later, when I was a Black Belt sparring against Green Belts, I remember looking at their faces and thinking, "They have no idea what to do." (Of course, it was much more fun being on the other side.) Though I did eventually learn how to spar, my progress was slow and haphazard.

So there you have it – more than you ever wanted to know about kungfu sparring.

I’ll address some of your other points in another post.

A<

[Guest]

"Do you have a specific response to certain attacks?"

We have many responses to every attack. Shaolin kungfu is known for its extensive repertoire. For example, I could respond to a typical straight thrust punch a dozen different ways. Certain responses are more suitable for certain situations. For example, I would not respond with a kick if I was on an icy, New York City street.

"I've never been in a real sword fight."

No? I thought that kind of thing happened all the time in the UK?

"The mask and jacket protect your body, and the swords will bend at the amount of pressure which would penetrate the flesh (known as 'The Nature Of Penetration')."

Fascinating! Even the terminology is cool!

"Obviously the psychology of a real fight is not there; in a real fight if you were hit round the head by a sabre cut it would kill you. That makes a big difference to your approach to the fight. "

You've raised a crucial point -- the main difference between martial sports and martial arts. Training for sport competition demands many things that can be applied in real combat. Nevertheless, one thing it does not demand is the mindset necessary to survive a violent, life/death struggle. This mindset is the single most important factor in real combat.

As I've said, without the proper mindset, all of your training is worthless. I suspect that modern fencers are in the same boat as modern sport martial artists. Nevertheless, I suspect that fencers don't worry much about their combat ability (or lack thereof).

"However someone trained in fencing would have an enormous advantage in parrying their opponents attacks, for example."

If they can keep calm and cool, I would imagine that they would have a significant advantage. The same goes for sport martial artists. However, facing a razor sharp sword requires even more mental discipline than facing an empty-handed opponent.

"Also real fighting weapons tend to be heavier and have a different balance, although with the best quality real swords I've held, this difference is small enough to to be able to use the same principles."

Interesting. I would not have guessed this. I would have guessed that competition swords had become lighter and lighter with newer technologies until they barely resembled their combat-oriented ancestors.

"Fencers also train a great deal in distance and timing, which I understand you do in Kung Fu? "

Good fighters do. Again, you have targeted crucial aspects of combat and sparring. Distancing and timing are essential aspects that are often neglected in favor of techniques. As I mentioned in my previous post, practicing a single technique while focusing on timing, speed, and distancing can be incredibly effective.

"They also have lightening fast reflexes."

The reflexes are what originally fascinated me. I loved watching the competitions at Columbia University, which has a fantastic fencing team. These fencers were tremendous. They were so fast, I could barely see what was happening. Not only were they fast with their attacks, but the good fencers could actually respond to these attacks! It was amazing to watch.

"From what I understand, the top eschelons of fencing tend to rely on a small number of simple techniques executed with devastating skill. However the full repertoire of such people will be huge. Lower level fencers like me tend to use whatever it takes from what we know to get the points."

This sounds familiar. At the higher levels, techniques are secondary. Skills are more important. A master may only need a handful of techniques because his skills are so...well...skillful!

In kungfu, we must also include force in the equation. A master is usually measured by his level of force, not his knowledge of techniques. There are many kinds of force, but a quick story will illustrate the point.

Wang Shu Jin was a legendary master of the internal art Pa Kua Chang (Baguazhang). He was a huge guy weighing well over 200 pounds. Many Karate fighters traveled to China to test themselves against him. Wang Shu Jin didn't even need to spar with these people. He just stood there.

He invited these fighters to hit him anywhere except the throat or face. He would take their best, full-power punches and kicks to his body, arms, and legs. Then he would laugh at his opponents, who often hurt themselves in the process. This guy had incredibly internal force. He was virtually invulnerable to strikes that were not also loaded with internal force (and thus able to penetrate his).

Make no mistake. Wang Shu Jin could also fight. He was incredibly fast and skillful with his techniques. But even without his techniques, he could still beat most people. He was just that powerful.



A<

[Guest]

I myself do not fence, but I know some people who do.
One story they told me is particularity fitting for this thread too.

This fencing class was fairly open, mainly people training in their own way and sparring with whomever was free or willing to spar. For one of these sessions, my friend saw someone new standing by the wall watching everyone. Since he himself had no current partner, he walked over and asked the person if he knew how to fence, and if he would like to fence with my friend. The man agreed and whe getting ready, he was very surprised to see that his opponent had a black suit, not white. He then found out that this was the equivalent of a Master of a very high grade as the newcomer defeated everyone in the class with the same pattern/sequence - parry riposte.

A perfect example of perfect skill? All opponents unknown, all defeated wth the same technique/strategy, time after time - even knowing what was going to happen was pretty useless by the look of it, yet the man was not short of willing partners.

Grasping The Sparrows Tail?

[Guest]

Super stories and info

For a while, I was lucky enough to study with Professor Pearson (i.e. a Professor of Fencing). He wore black. I don't think its allowed in competitions, though, as it would be a very unfair advantage being more difficult to see.

The members of that club were very wise to fence him: its well known in fencing that fighting someone superior to you is an excellent way to learn. He was doing them a favour. I'm sure this translates directly to Kung Fu - you would learn more sparring with Sifu than with your juniors.

In fact, is it possible to spar with such a disparity in level? Surely the superior could only ever do one of two things - give their junior a lesson or flatten them. Personally, I don't think tearing your opponent apart teaches them anything, although defeating them while still leaving them their dignity is a useful lesson.

Regards,
Chris.

[Guest]

Hey Chris,

"The members of that club were very wise to fence him: its well known in fencing that fighting someone superior to you is an excellent way to learn. He was doing them a favour. I'm sure this translates directly to Kung Fu - you would learn more sparring with Sifu than with your juniors."

One learns different lessons when sparring with colleagues as opposed to sparring with a master. Sparring with seniors is obviously a good learning experience, but sparring with juniors also gives many opportunities to learn. For example, while sparring with a junior, a senior can practice how to control his or her techniques, how to think several steps ahead, and how to implement tactics and strategies.

When sparring with juniors, seniors must be careful not to overwhelm them. Instead, you must try to help him or her learn. Sparring is not a competition. It's an exercise. You are partners, not opponents. Similarly, the junior should be aware that the senior is taking it easy on purpose. In this way, both partners are able to learn more effectively.

"In fact, is it possible to spar with such a disparity in level? Surely the superior could only ever do one of two things - give their junior a lesson or flatten them. Personally, I don't think tearing your opponent apart teaches them anything, although defeating them while still leaving them their dignity is a useful lesson."

It is definitely possible to “spar” despite a big disparity in the levels of the partners. However, the bigger the disparity, the more it becomes a lesson and the less it becomes an exchange. If the disparity is large enough, sparring is usually a lesson.

A master sparring with a student is similar -- but not identical -- to a senior sparring with a junior. The main difference is that the master is mainly teaching. Though a master may indeed learn something from a student, it is usually not the same as an exchange. On the other hand, when seniors spar with juniors, both partners are actively exchanging.

Depending on the nature of the sparring, a master would typically spar only a few levels above the student's level. If the master sparred at his or her own level, the student would be completely overwhelmed. He or she would never get past the first technique.

If he or she wanted, a high-level master could pull off the same feat as the master fencer and defeat numerous opponents using the same technique. Knowing the counter to a technique is not enough when facing a master. Even if you know how to counter his or her technique, you may not have the skills (timing, distancing, speed) to do so effectively. Furthermore, even if you do have the necessary skills, you may not have enough force.

Example. One of my seniors was lucky enough to personally feel the force of Sigong Ho Fat Nam’s One-Finger technique. He had just witnessed Sigong perform the technique on his sister (who also practices kungfu). Furthermore, the technique -- a simple finger thrust to the neck -- was straightforward and should have been relatively easy to counter in numerous ways. Nevertheless, my senior still could not block or evade the technique despite his best efforts. He said that he tried, but Sigong went straight through all of his defenses like a hot knife through butter.

Of course, this was not an exchange. It was a lesson. Sigong was giving him (and his sister) a taste of One Finger Zen, which is actually a huge honor. At the time, it may not have felt like much of an honor though. My senior said that as soon as Sigong’s finger gently touched his neck near the collarbone, he felt a surge of energy and pain rush into him making his knees buckle. He said that he could hardly breath until Sigong removed his finger.

How do you spar with someone like that!

A<

[Guest]

Wow! Scary stuff!

Thank you for your answer, I think you've clarified that point very well.

Regards,
Chris.

[Guest]

Anthony,

Actually, your story about One Finger Zen made me think of another question.

When you strike at someone in Kung Fu, is your movement always fast?

Fast movements aren't always the best, as a sparring partner of mine once demonstrated ( on me ). In our bout he slowly extended his sword toward me (this was epee so you can only hit with the point), instead of extending as fast as he could. Furiously, I attempted to parry several times, taking out a couple of flies and looking like I was doing The Complete Works of Shakespeare in semaphore. All of which fell desparately short because his sword just wasn't there yet. He just kept going, flicking his sword round mine in a couple of doubles and calmly placing the point of his sword on my chest. He outsmarted me because I expected him to move fast and he didn't oblige.

I wonder if Sigong took a similar approach in the account you told us of? This would explain why his opponents couldn't stop him; if they were expecting speed and it wasn't provided.

Chris.

[Guest]

One of the most frustrating (and rewarding) people I ever sparred with used a 'broken rythem' style of movement, instead of a constant, he would be stopping and starting, jerking instead of flowing.

It was actually extremely difficult to avoid or counter him, as you would find yourself 'sweeping' past a strike that hadn't arrived yet, or abandoning your strike because of his new position.

He also used 'slow' strikes, and I agree that they are confusing, although maybe either limited to points sparring or people with exellent body movements or internal force, since the accelleration at the end would need to be considerable to achieve a lasting effect.

I still like 'snap' turns, where your feet just come back under you and you are in a perfect place with excellent balance, usually in one of your opponents blind spots. As to being able to do that in plain sight yet not get picked up? No idea

So no, not all strikes in Kung Fu are fast, I myself do not work for speed, instead concentrating on form and force, allowing speed to come as it comes.

I have seen beginners in all systems basically throwing themselves at their opponent as fast as they can in an attempt to get hit as often as they can, or am I missing the point? The flip side of this is that two 'counter punchers' make for a poor start, both waiting for an opportunity. This is why I like the idea of creating your opportunities, not waiting for them.

[Guest]

Chris,

--"When you strike at someone in Kung Fu, is your movement always fast?"

The answer is no. Not all kungfu patterns or skills rely on speed. For example, the Golden Bell technique (an art which covers the body in a protective layer of energy) does not require any speed. Nevertheless, speed is usually a crucial factor in combat.

There is a saying in Chinese that goes something like this : "100 techniques might as well be 1 speed." This saying suggests that if you are going to practice 100 techniques, you might as well just practice one technique and focus on speed because it will be much more effective. It also suggests that an opponent who knows numerous techniques can still be defeated with a single, fast technique.

--"I wonder if Sigong took a similar approach in the account you told us of? This would explain why his opponents couldn't stop him; if they were expecting speed and it wasn't provided."

I don't think so. I provided this story as an example of someone being defeated by superior force. Sigong's force was so powerful that my senior could not block. Sigong went straight through his defenses not because of speed, but because of force. I'm sorry, but I can't resist a modern analogy here. It's like trying to block a light-saber slash with a regular sword. It won't work because the light-saber is just too powerful.

The example you gave is, in my opinion, an example of a skillful use of tactics. From what I've seen of fencing, speed is crucial. It would seem reasonable to assume that many fencers become accustomed to this speed -- a habit that can be exploited by tactics. Varying the speed in a way that tricks your opponent is an example of a tactic.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think this is variation of the kungfu tactic: "Signal to the East, Strike the West." This tactic can be employed on many levels. For example, it can be used when attacking a castle or fortress. By sending a small army (the signal) to the "East" side, you tempt the defenders to move their attention to that side, thereby leaving the "West" side vulnerable to the real attacking army.

Your sparring partner did not even need to "signal" because you were already expecting speed. You were already defending the "East" side of the fortress. All he did was attack the weaker "West" side. Basically, this is a glorified way of saying that he tricked you.



A<