Wong Shun Leung & Tan Sau

[Bonesetter]

Gents, I've been reading the thread with interest however didn't find much information regarding WSLs tan sau approach.

I've studied the WSL method for a few years now from a couple of first generation students and am a member of the WSL students association (not that any of this matters).

I think a lot of people have over analysed WSL on his elbow theories.

My understanding from day one has always been that the tan sau disperses force outwards of your centre.

When practicing the tan sau i think about the elbow and push forward from there which helps with springing forward to hit your target should the opponents arm move.

Just like when withdrawing your Wu sau in SLT you pull your elbow back but keep the forward pressure of your Wu (I imagine my wrist pushing forward as I pull the elbow back).

The tan sau should have pressure but be relaxed at the wrist should you need to change the shape of your hand quickly.

There is no secret tan sau.. Just a lot of practice to make it work effectively.

You can use a tan da to defend against a hook to the body but it will fail miserable against a hook to the head..

It's all swings and round abouts... Time for more practice.

Cheers

 

[LFJ]

Gents, I've been reading the thread with interest however didn't find much information regarding WSLs tan sau approach.

Because KPM started this thread out of other ones where it was being discussed.
"Wing Chun vs MMA" thread, "Ho Kam Ming wing chun" thread.

I've studied the WSL method for a few years now from a couple of first generation students and am a member of the WSL students association (not that any of this matters).

Yeah, it really doesn't matter. What matters is who you learned from and their experience, because not all first gen. students have the same understanding of the system.

Little history, WSLSA didn't start off well because many first gen. students weren't on the same page with the whole idea and who was running it. They were also going to be charged fees to join plus renewal fees every few years. Once the founders realized they lacked support from their seniors, they gave honorary lifetime memberships to the other first gens. and now it appears everyone supports them.

Sorry about this, but it sounds like your forms are all application-based. That's common among certain first gens. who have marketed themselves as "gatekeepers" to the system.

 

[Bonesetter]

I don't think the gatekeeper message is true. I have also studied a couple of other lineages and the tan sau idea was always the same. Each to their own.

 

[LFJ]

I have also studied a couple of other lineages and the tan sau idea was always the same.

Yup, we discussed in detail YM's teaching style and lack of attentiveness toward students he felt not worth it (particularly non-fighters) on the "Wing Chun vs MMA" thread.

Show taan-sau to any layman and say "this is called spreading hand, what do you think it's for", and they're gonna tell you the exact same application idea. Easy gap-fill answer.

When practicing the tan sau i think about the elbow and push forward from there which helps with springing forward to hit your target should the opponents arm move.

So, in fighting you think there's gonna be prolonged arm contact, and when it releases your arm is gonna spring forward like that and turn into a punch on its own, huh? Can you honestly say that's ever happened for you outside of chi-sau, in free fighting? (Legit question) If you don't want to answer, at least think about it...

 

[guy b.]

I don't think the gatekeeper message is true. I have also studied a couple of other lineages and the tan sau idea was always the same. Each to their own.

Who do you learn from? Please PM if you don't want to say in public

 

[KPM]

I don't think the gatekeeper message is true. I have also studied a couple of other lineages and the tan sau idea was always the same. Each to their own.

Thanks for speaking up Bonesetter. Glad to hear someone from the WSL line actually making sense. Guy and LFJ have pushed the theme that WSL did not teach Tan Sau as a defensive movement, but only as a way to train the elbow for the punch. They also conclude that since other students of Ip Man actually do use the Tan Sau defensively, that these other Ip Man students did not understand what Ip Man was really teaching and did not learn properly. I believe that is the gist of anything you may have missed on the other threads.

 

[guy b.]

Yes thanks bonesetter. You spoke up and set the record straight about WSL VT at just the right time. Sometimes fiction is stranger than reality, or is that the other way around? I wish you the best of luck in providing more startling insight from inside WSL VT that confirms the suspicions of the majority of right thinking people here on the forum.

 

[Phobius]

You mean to tell me the world is not flat?

 

[geezer]

I don't think the gatekeeper message is true. I have also studied a couple of other lineages and the tan sau idea was always the same. Each to their own.

Yes, "each to their own". But it's nice to get another point of view. Welcome to MartialTalk. I hope you continue posting. And, don't let the verbal sparring dissuade you. After all WC/VT is "the science of infighting".

 

[geezer]

... I wish you the best of luck in providing more startling insight from inside WSL VT that confirms the suspicions of the majority of right thinking people here on the forum.

Hey, am I in that majority? Me? "Right thinking" ...I need time to think about that, rightly! And even if I'm wrong, heck, for once I've got company. I tell ya, I'm feeling all warm and fuzzy!

BTW, my thinking on Tan-sau is actually a bit different than just saying, "it's a defense". I actually feel it is all about forearm angle, elbow position, and forward intent. You should be able to accomplish what tan-sau does without "spreading your palm". You can use this forearm and elbow position to deflect, to wedge and control, and to create an opening for a punch. And you can do it all with your hand rolled into a fist inside a glove. I also view the classic demonstration versions lf tan-da as a simplified "example" for demos. You could easily spar using plenty of tan energy and never pose with a classical tan sau.

 

[LFJ]

Video link below, not-to-be-missed...

I know there must be other people reading along, like Bonesetter who just joined in. So, to those people and others who might share similar ideas about how to use taan-sau defensively, try to be deeply honest with yourselves and your free fighting experience, and question why you believe things you are taught. Here's something to think about:

People have suggested ideas of a taan-sau that springs off when contact is loss. Sounds like a neat idea, right? And in chi-sau training where we are in prolonged arm contact, sometimes that effect can happen.

But how about in reality where there will be no prolonged arm contact while fists are flying in your face at high speeds? Has it ever worked for you like that?

In chi-sau drills, reflexively striking at loss of contact, should indicate forward pressure and intent from the whole body, ground up, and should not just be a springing arm trick that can work in free fighting. Again, has it ever?

Some say they will extend a taan-sau and if it meets an obstruction it may bend to bong-sau, depending on the energy it meets, and then spring back off into a strike all of its own. Neat idea. Has it ever worked for you like that in free fighting?

They say if it doesn't meet an obstruction it will continue and be turned into a strike. That means it will have to be extended part way before it's changed to a punch, both in matter and in mind. This will lack speed, power, and accuracy because it didn't have the intent to punch from the beginning.

Do you think there will be time to change hand position and intent midway without a hiccup or thinking involved? Has it ever worked for you like that?

Whatever your idea of taan-sau used defensively is, be honest with yourself and ask, has it ever worked like that in free fighting?

Do you honestly think you will extend a taan-sau to deflect the first punch, then your arm will bend and/or automatically spring off into a strike when contact is lost and before the next one breaks your face?

Has it ever worked for you like that in free fighting?

If not, is it really because you need to train it more (still, after years, with one of the first things you're taught in SNT), or because the idea is unrealistic and made up while playing chi-sau or just a misunderstanding of abstract chi-sau drills?

Take a look at this video and honestly ask yourself:

Tommy Carruthers Lesson - Unrealistic Defence Against Punch—在线播放—优酷网，视频高清在线观看

Precisely for this reason, we don't have such taan-sau ideas in WSLVT. There is simply NO TIME, and no prolonged arm contact in a fight. I think if you're honest with yourself you'll find it hasn't worked because it doesn't work.

So our method of taan is to punch back in a way that uses the elbow to defend our space while the fist goes to the target. Simple, Direct, Effective. This is what works in free fighting. No sticking or springing is going to happen.

Once upon a time, I was taken in by the neat ideas too. But I was not honest with myself about what works and what doesn't, until I was introduced to more realistic ideas and understood what that part of SNT is really all about.

So, I can only suggest you get out and experience other lines of WSLVT if you're still being told your arms are gonna work like glue and springs in real fighting, and in the meantime, remember what Bertrand Russell said:

 

[Bonesetter]

So, in fighting you think there's gonna be prolonged arm contact, and when it releases your arm is gonna spring forward like that and turn into a punch on its own, huh? Can you honestly say that's ever happened for you outside of chi-sau, in free fighting? (Legit question) If you don't want to answer, at least think about it...

You certainly offer a warm welcome LFJ. I've been in plenty of fights unfortunately due to my profession and as Wing Chun is the only art I know I can say my training and how it's been taught to me works.

I train my Wing Chun as I believe it was intended at close range.. By practising with pressure and intent at this range you can develop elbow force and relaxed hands which can change shape quickly.

Most fights I've been in have ended up either in a clinch type situation or on the ground. Wing Chun gives you ideas and ways to deal with both scenarios.

Wether or not my hand has sprung forward when the pressure was no more is debatable as there is lots going on in a fight. I still think it's better to practice this way then not to focus on elbow pressure/power.

A lot of people practice Wing Chun as if it's a combat sport. Darting in and out in straight lines, Chin sticking out, guard hands not protecting anything above the shoulders..

 

[Bonesetter]

The idea we discussed about springing forward when contact is lost with the tan sau works for many strikes in Wing Chun.. As the old saying goes.. "Rush upon loss of contact" It's not just about WSLVT and tan sau

 

[LFJ]

I train my Wing Chun as I believe it was intended at close range..

I see many people do this at the expense of not knowing how to handle other ranges. We've seen videos of certain lines in WSLVT walking straight into round punches that are thrown from out of range. Is this what you've been taught too?

They do this because they lack mobility, tactical footwork for dealing with outside ranges and closing the gap intelligently, with the right timing and angles. They just believe in moving forward and "occupying center". Walking straight up the middle on a boxer is a losing strategy.

I still think it's better to practice this way then not to focus on elbow pressure/power.

It's not so much about elbow pressure/power as it is overall fighting strategy. Taan and jam elbows contain information about the VT strategy and tactics, missing in lots of VT, including other lines of WSLVT.

For example, what have you been taught the final three actions in SNT are about? How about the final three actions in CK?

I know some lines in WSLVT are almost entirely application-based. They are totally missing the abstract information about VT fighting strategy in the forms.

A lot of people practice Wing Chun as if it's a combat sport. Darting in and out in straight lines, Chin sticking out, guard hands not protecting anything above the shoulders..

Yet, that's exactly what they do when they go walking into round punches. In fact, WSLVT is highly mobile with more tactical footwork than charging in or half steps back on an angle, yet that's all many teach.

 

[Phobius]

I see many people do this at the expense of not knowing how to handle other ranges. We've seen videos of certain lines in WSLVT walking straight into round punches that are thrown from out of range. Is this what you've been taught too?

Being taught a close quarter martial art does not mean you have to be stupid. A closed quarter art needs high mobility to move in and out of range. Just see grapplers, just because they do grappling does not mean they are easily taken down by a boxer while going into proper range.

In fact, WSLVT is highly mobile with more tactical footwork than charging in or half steps back on an angle, yet that's all many teach.

Being highly mobile is true for all WC. Sadly mobility is not part of first forms and as such I think many teachers simply come to conclusion incorrectly that WC should be fairly static.

That or aged teachers being so good now that mobility is not necessary for them. Something however they still need to teach their students.

 

[KPM]

Video link below, not-to-be-missed...

---I can't ever seem to get these youku.tube videos to play here in the US. Am I missing a click somewhere?


Whatever your idea of taan-sau used defensively is, be honest with yourself and ask, has it ever worked like that in free fighting?

---We see numerous videos of Phillip Bayer demonstrating continuous Bong/Lop cycles, trapping, and pushing his opponent. Below is just the first example of many that popped up when I searched for him on youtube. But I don't believe I've ever seen a video of him doing that in free-fighting. Do you have a video of PB, or anyone, doing what he shows in this video in free-fighting and it working well?

 

[LFJ]

Being taught a close quarter martial art does not mean you have to be stupid. A closed quarter art needs high mobility to move in and out of range. Just see grapplers, just because they do grappling does not mean they are easily taken down by a boxer while going into proper range.

Agreed. Grapplers are good at this because they train it.

Unfortunately, many Wing Chun people spend all their time already in contact in chi-sau, and don't train moving through ranges realistically if at all. Here, I'm thinking specifically about certain lines within WSLVT, but also others.

Being highly mobile is true for all WC.

Lack of mobility is often the number one ingredient I see missing a lot.

 

[LFJ]

---I can't ever seem to get these youku.tube videos to play here in the US. Am I missing a click somewhere?

Shouldn't take more than clicking on the link. Are you getting any sort error message? Not available in your area?

But I don't believe I've ever seen a video of him doing that in free-fighting. Do you have a video of PB, or anyone, doing what he shows in this video in free-fighting and it working well?

PB shows the free fighting aspect to his students and fights with them so they see how things are supposed to work. But not everything is put online. Those who have gone to visit have not been disappointed though.

This video shows a bit of light sparring:

 

[geezer]

@LFJ: You raised some important questions. I'll attempt to clarify a few misunderstandings for the sake of anybody who might be interested.

People have suggested ideas of a taan-sau that springs off when contact is loss. Sounds like a neat idea, right? And in chi-sau training where we are in prolonged arm contact, sometimes that effect can happen.

But how about in reality where there will be no prolonged arm contact while fists are flying in your face at high speeds? Has it ever worked for you like that?

Fighting at the boxing range is very different from the clinch range. But as we close, often arms clash and being able to slip and spring through is definitely useful, and being relaxed and "springy" assists in this.

In chi-sau drills, reflexively striking at loss of contact, should indicate forward pressure and intent from the whole body, ground up, and should not just be a springing arm trick that can work in free fighting. Again, has it ever?

Agreed. We seek to apply springy forward pressure with the whole body from the ground up. The arms are just the last links in this chain. I hope I did not suggest otherwise.

Some say they will extend a taan-sau and if it meets an obstruction it may bend to bong-sau, depending on the energy it meets, and then spring back off into a strike all of its own. Neat idea. Has it ever worked for you like that in free fighting?

Why would you extend a tan sau? You extend a strike. If you encounter an obstacle, you use angling and elbow to slip around or wedge through to hit. Only if your arm is jammed back does it function as a tan. Note I said function. The hand may stay in a fist the whole time if the arm, elbow, and structure are functioning correctly. And yes, this works in sparring. I don't know about fights since frankly I don't get into fights and haven't since my school days.

 

[geezer]

@LFJ: You raised some important questions. I'll attempt to clarify a few misunderstandings for the sake of anybody who might be interested.

People have suggested ideas of a taan-sau that springs off when contact is loss. Sounds like a neat idea, right? And in chi-sau training where we are in prolonged arm contact, sometimes that effect can happen.

But how about in reality where there will be no prolonged arm contact while fists are flying in your face at high speeds? Has it ever worked for you like that?

Fighting at the boxing range is very different from the clinch range. But as we close, often arms clash and being able to slip and spring through is definitely useful, and being relaxed and "springy" assists in this.

In chi-sau drills, reflexively striking at loss of contact, should indicate forward pressure and intent from the whole body, ground up, and should not just be a springing arm trick that can work in free fighting. Again, has it ever?

Agreed. We seek to apply springy forward pressure with the whole body from the ground up. The arms are just the last links in this chain. I hope I did not suggest otherwise.

Some say they will extend a taan-sau and if it meets an obstruction it may bend to bong-sau, depending on the energy it meets, and then spring back off into a strike all of its own. Neat idea. Has it ever worked for you like that in free fighting?

Why would you extend a tan sau? You extend a strike. If you encounter an obstacle, you use angling and elbow to slip around or wedge through to hit. Only if your arm is jammed back does it function as a tan. Note I said function. The hand may stay in a fist the whole time if the arm, elbow, and structure are functioning correctly. And yes, this works in sparring. I don't know about fights since frankly I don't get into fights and haven't since my school days.