Long and short range Tan Sao

[guy b.]

You use "double Tan" (like 2 spears) to separate your opponent's arms from his head. After your arms are both inside of your opponent's arms, you can do many thing:

- both palms strike on his ears.
- forearm hit on the back of his head.
- willow palm strike on his neck.
- both thumbs on his eye sockets.
- both thumbs into his nose.
- both hands choke on his throat.
- pull his head into your knee strike.
- head lock.
- ...

The "double Tan" can help you to get there. How you may want to play with his exposed head will be all up to you.

Attachment 9613

Attachment 9611

Attachment 9612

Attachment 9614

Sounds like something different to wing chun

[boxerbilly]

Sounds like something different to wing chun

Not to me. I know, I don't do wing chun. But do you not have any idea, technique or form that has double handed attacks? Some sort of double palm/ 2 hand hit strike?
If so, he is applying that concept to perhaps another technique. Or more likely combining the concepts. After which he may be applying the same double hit concept to techniques or vehicles if you will. He may change the tools. Using ideas in ways not normally considered yet, those ideas are there perhaps taught in another context.
If you can double hit. Why not double tan sao? Why not double pak sao? Why not, just keep adding I guess until you have exhausted your understanding then ask for help. "What am I missing ?" " What else is there?"

[JPinAZ]

Sounds like something different to wing chun

Agreed.

To clarify why I feel this way, at this point John (YouKnowWho) is taking a very loose definition to the WC concept of taan sau and applying it outside the context of WC principle by calling what he is doing as 'spreading'. This IMO is the issue when trying to take something that is very system-specific and apply it to a 'general MA's' thinking or approach, while ignoring the source-system's basic/core principles & concepts.

While I feel it's always good to explore ideas and challenge what we are taught, IMO none of the pictorial examples he's giving really fit within WC principle-based application of what taan sau is. I say this as because none of them takes into consideration for what drives the taan sau action from a WC gate theory, facing, energy or WC structural POV. To simply say 'see, this is a spreading action, so it's taan sau' isn't enough.

Bottom line, we can call anything we want a by any name we want (taan sau in this case), but if you aren't following basic supporting WC principles that drive the action, it's only a taan sau by name alone.

[boxerbilly]

Agreed.

To clarify why I feel this way, at this point John (YouKnowWho) is taking a very loose definition to the WC concept of taan sau and applying it outside the context of WC principle by calling what he is doing as 'spreading'. This IMO is the issue when trying to take something that is very system-specific and apply it to a 'general MA's' thinking or approach, while ignoring the source-system's basic/core principles & concepts.

While I feel it's always good to explore ideas and challenge what we are taught, IMO none of the pictorial examples he's giving really fit within WC principle-based application of what taan sau is. I say this as because none of them takes into consideration for what drives the taan sau action from a WC gate theory, facing, energy or WC structural POV. To simply say 'see, this is a spreading action, so it's taan sau' isn't enough.

Bottom line, we can call anything we want a by any name we want (taan sau in this case), but if you aren't following basic supporting WC principles that drive the action, it's only a taan sau by name alone.

This is a great post. I agree with everything you wrote. Stick to your principles. But what if you can't? Are there other lesser principles that may become major principles in certain situation?

YKH, was clearly giving self defense applications. Perhaps in a way that as far as you are concerned is wrong and you are violating to many. But lets say, how ever it happened, you get bear hugged and lifted up. Okay if you are 6'3 and 250lbs that may not even be in the realm of possible for you. But a little guy. You are only going to be there for a second most likely before the next bad thing happens. This may be the "best" position to do anything from. The next may be your last. Would doing anything as YKW, provided you had at least one arm free, now be something found in WC ?

I am not trying to be difficult. Or to prove anyone wrong. Everything everyone has wrote thus far is probably 100% correct. But not always ! Not for all things. I would not believe for a second, WC has no answer to the posed problem or others that may be just as potentially tricky but to get one to think. What do you do ? Where is the answer ? Ed is hopefully going to help solve those questions. I can't believe for a second that anything YKW wrote can not be found inside of WC.

[boxerbilly]

I just found a WC front bear hug video. Closest I could to my scenario. But both his arms are restrained and he is not picked up. It matters little because I I liked was HOLY SMOKES. Wing Chun may have bear hugs as attacks !!! Not only that but front chocks as well as attacks. Found in the forms/ How many of you Wing Chun guys practiced bear hugs this week? Or chocking the crap out of someone ? I personally would be grabbing the adams apple but whatever. Same difference to me.

Now, that is their belief. It may or may not be yours. I am using "yours" as a generalization. My replies are not always meant to only respond to the guy asking the question or whatever. Anyway, they were taught this or found this. Right or wrong ? I have not a freaking clue. But that is what was seen and ended up in their laps.

And this is their idea to escape. Others may have found another way that is equally valid. Some may work better for certain body types you may have or the body type of the attacker. Probably more than one option. A juijitsu guy may come along and say, that's crap. From his point of view he is probably right. Trying it against him will probably fail. But it may work as shown against someone who does not know much bear hugging you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIsQIoqhtRs

[JPinAZ]

This is a great post. I agree with everything you wrote. Stick to your principles. But what if you can't? Are there other lesser principles that may become major principles in certain situation?

YKH, was clearly giving self defense applications.....

......What do you do ? Where is the answer ? Ed is hopefully going to help solve those questions. I can't believe for a second that anything YKW wrote can not be found inside of WC.

We can discuss what-ifs and the extreme hypotheticals all day long, but don't see any point in veering off the subject any further. fair enough?

The subject is the action of Taan Sao. There are specific usages for tan sao action based on specific WC ideas & theories taking into consideration facing, range, leverage and contact point, strategy and tactics. Nothing personal against John, but looking at his examples and what he's said here, we're clearly talking about 2 very different ideas of what WC is. In which case it's hard to find common ground to continue discussion, so we can just agree to disagree.

As for Ed, I think he's trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist (for most people in the WC community anyway). But then, he's not part of this discussion, so I see no point to go into that here

[boxerbilly]

We can discuss what-ifs and the extreme hypotheticals all day long, but don't see any point in veering off the subject any further. fair enough?

The subject is the action of Taan Sao. There are specific usages for tan sao action based on specific WC ideas & theories taking into consideration facing, range, leverage and contact point, strategy and tactics. Nothing personal against John, but looking at his examples and what he's said here, we're clearly talking about 2 very different ideas of what WC is. In which case it's hard to find common ground to continue discussion, so we can just agree to disagree.

As for Ed, I think he's trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist (for most people in the WC community anyway). But then, he's not part of this discussion, so I see no point to go into that here

Fair enough.

[stonecrusher69]

[QUOTE=boxerbilly;1287113]Not to me. I know, I don't do wing chun. But do you not have any idea, technique or form that has double handed attacks? Some sort of double palm/ 2 hand hit strike?
If so, he is applying that concept to perhaps another technique. Or more likely combining the concepts. After which he may be applying the same double hit concept to techniques or vehicles if you will. He may change the tools. Using ideas in ways not normally considered yet, those ideas are there perhaps taught in another context.
If you can double hit. Why not double tan sao? Why not double pak sao? Why not, just keep adding I guess until you have exhausted your understanding then ask for help. "What am I missing ?" " What else is there?"[/QUOTE/

we have the double palms poi pai in wing chun