Tan Sao against jab

[Graham H]

If your martial art has techniques that are designed to be used against this martial art or that martial art then you better develop your psychic ability or hope that your opponent will always be obliging enough to wear a nice T shirt telling you what style they do.
The Wing Chun I study deals with attacks and threats, lines of force and movement, not specific techniques. You choose your response based upon the line and height of the attack, and the range to the opponent - no other information is relevant until after contact is made. In a real situation (and by real I mean no gloves, no ref and no mat where anything goes) you don't have time to find out what techique the opponent is throwing or what style he might or might not have studied. The Wing Chun shapes are designed to work against any angle or direction of strike, the only limitation is the practitioner's ability to select the correct tool for the job and to use them.

Can only speak from personal experience but I'm a WC person and its worked for me everytime so far.

Another good post Ian but I hope that you say "make contact" you mean engage an opponent and not about trying to make arms contact then stick to them like most WC fools!

GH

[Graham H]

I like David Petersons analogy that in chi sau we are trying to break contact not make contact. We are learning what do if obsticles are met so we can always find a clear and free line for the punching and NOT to go looking for the arms in order to make contact, stick to them and manipulate them.

GH

[k gledhill]

I like David Petersons analogy that in chi sau we are trying to break contact not make contact. We are learning what do if obsticles are met so we can always find a clear and free line for the punching and NOT to go looking for the arms in order to make contact, stick to them and manipulate them.

GH

Ironic the common MIS-interpretation of chi-sao leads so many astray...

[wingchunIan]

Another good post Ian but I hope that you say "make contact" you mean engage an opponent and not about trying to make arms contact then stick to them like most WC fools!

GH

Can't work out how to multi quote so I picked your first post to respond to Graham. By contact I mean either fist to face etc or if something gets in the way then its an arm or leg to whatever. Having made the response to the original attack, once contact is made it presents information that is then used to determine the next reaction (and I do mean reaction and not thought through product of analysis) at this point I go back to my previous post in that if contact is made IME there isn't time to work out what technique it was / might be, you simply have to respond to the forces you feel on your arm / leg etc and either remove the blockage or flow round it.

Wrt to chi sau the above is where I see the benefits of the exercise. I don't strictly agree with the comment of seeking to break contact but I do strongly agree that chasing arms is a futile endeavour.

[Graham H]

Can't work out how to multi quote so I picked your first post to respond to Graham. By contact I mean either fist to face etc or if something gets in the way then its an arm or leg to whatever. Having made the response to the original attack, once contact is made it presents information that is then used to determine the next reaction (and I do mean reaction and not thought through product of analysis) at this point I go back to my previous post in that if contact is made IME there isn't time to work out what technique it was / might be, you simply have to respond to the forces you feel on your arm / leg etc and either remove the blockage or flow round it.

Wrt to chi sau the above is where I see the benefits of the exercise. I don't strictly agree with the comment of seeking to break contact but I do strongly agree that chasing arms is a futile endeavour.

Ok I agree with 95% of what you say apart from the "feeling the forces on your arm" bit. There is no time in fighting for this. I used to have this idea as well but in the WSL lineage I was shown the error in that thinking...................literally!

In my lineage one of the skills developed through chi sau and into sparring is to not allow contact. We learn to use the opponents punching line against them. Easily shown but hard to explain through text. There are occasions where a redirecting of an oppoents force is required such as when you are pinned against a wall or you opponent tries to take control of your limbs but mainly the only contact that is made with the opponents arm is a short, sharp shocking force in order to displace a limb and open the way for your own punch.

The "sticky" idea of chi sau has led to many many errors in approaches to training and why Wing Chun does not work very well against attacks that are not wing chunesque. In our our lineage (specifically what my teacher was taught by wong shun leung) the idea is very different than most lines!

GH

[Graham H]

Ironic the common MIS-interpretation of chi-sao leads so many astray...

astray into a different galaxy as far as I'm concerned

G

[wingchunIan]

the only contact that is made with the opponents arm is a short, sharp shocking force in order to displace a limb and open the way for your own punch.
GH

ref the above post, if your strike is blocked how in your lineage do you determine the correct next move. As a very simple illustration only, if you throw a left punch and the opponent blocks it by moving his right arm in towards the centre connecting at the forearm surely your reaction / choice of next move would be different to if he blocked by moving his right arm from the centre to his shoulder (the difference between wax on and wax off )? How do you judge what to do? angle to take etc?

[JPinAZ]

Ok I agree with 95% of what you say apart from the "feeling the forces on your arm" bit. There is no time in fighting for this. I used to have this idea as well but in the WSL lineage I was shown the error in that thinking...................literally!

In my lineage one of the skills developed through chi sau and into sparring is to not allow contact. We learn to use the opponents punching line against them. Easily shown but hard to explain through text. There are occasions where a redirecting of an oppoents force is required such as when you are pinned against a wall or you opponent tries to take control of your limbs but mainly the only contact that is made with the opponents arm is a short, sharp shocking force in order to displace a limb and open the way for your own punch.

The "sticky" idea of chi sau has led to many many errors in approaches to training and why Wing Chun does not work very well against attacks that are not wing chunesque. In our our lineage (specifically what my teacher was taught by wong shun leung) the idea is very different than most lines!

GH

IMO, Chi Sau strategy should be simple - "If no chi, hit" (basically, stick only if you have to, otherwise hit, where hitting is the main goal).

[Graham H]

ref the above post, if your strike is blocked how in your lineage do you determine the correct next move. As a very simple illustration only, if you throw a left punch and the opponent blocks it by moving his right arm in towards the centre connecting at the forearm surely your reaction / choice of next move would be different to if he blocked by moving his right arm from the centre to his shoulder (the difference between wax on and wax off )? How do you judge what to do? angle to take etc?

This is my whole point. Unless you are just beginning Ving Tsun or engaging in certain drills for skill development, its not possible to use the "what if" approach!

The beauty of Ving Tsun is that it teaches us how to react in real time based on conceptual ideas. This results in being able to adapt to what your opponent is doing in all situations. We can adapt without having to trawl through 1000's of techniques in which case we can be a lot quicker in responding and correcting our structure/ attacking line should it deviate or be taken from the center. This error can be caused by your own movement or the opponents. As soon as you ask the question "what would you do if I do this" Ving Tsun starts to lose its effectivness.

In SLT we start to develop the abilty to move in certain ways start to install basic shapes and lines of thinking as a precursor to CK. In CK we learn how we should move by taking the most direct route to a stationary or moving target. In Chi Sau we learn to apply these ideas in an unrehearsed environment and through hours upon hours of repeated practice we learn how to deal with an opponent based on his attack be it linear or whatever.
How one reacts in a real fight has so many permiatations that one cannot tell until the fight happens.
Chi Sau also teaches us to press the opponent, take advantage of chances and keep his attacking lines away from our own center. Facing an opponent square on is incorrect but many apply the ideas of SLT to actual fighting when in fact SLT is very abstract. Its an exercise not a fighting form. It lays the foundations and that is it.

One fundamental idea in VT is that we learn to displace an opponents limbs and strike in one action with one arm. As we have two arms and certain x'ing lines that are taught in CK it allows us to continually press the opponent and take advantage of his mistakes using the simplest methods. This concept was highlighted when Ip Man said your opponent will show you how to hit them.

Ving Tsun is not based on set techniques.

I used to get involved in discussions that used to last for days about what would be best against a hook, an uppercut, a roundhouse kick etc etr ect. I have spent years previously trying to apply single techniques to different kinds of attacks but my whole idea on VT was turned upside down in 2 hours and all the previous 10 years did was show me how not to do Wing Chun.

So I won;t get involved in tit foir tat discussions because my idea of Wing Chun is not based on that anymore.

Sorry for going off on a tangent but I cannot give you an answer. It's not my thinking.

Wax on wax off ideas are for Danielsan for fighting against the Kubli Kan or whatever it was....." put him in a body bag yeeeeeaaaaaah!

GH

[Graham H]

IMO, Chi Sau strategy should be simple - "If no chi, hit" (basically, stick only if you have to, otherwise hit, where hitting is the main goal).

There is no "stickyness" in the WSLPB line! The term "chi sau" is a paradox to quote somebody I know!

G

[wingchunIan]

The beauty of Ving Tsun is that it teaches us how to react in real time

GH

i didn't make myself clear. I wasn't saying what would you do, I was trying to give a very simplistic illustration. To re position my post, you talk about reacting and reacting in the right way etc etc but what is your trigger? what triggers your reactions? what makes you choose (at an unconcious level) reaction A versus reaction B? The human body only has 5 ways of gaining information, 1)sight 2)taste 3) hearing 4) smell and 5) touch. So realistically in a fight you have a choice of 1, 5 or 1&5 together (I'm assuming that you aren't licking / kissing your opponent) so which do you train to rely use in your lineage?

[Wayfaring]

So would you mind sharing what tools you use?
And if I ask what tools you would possibly use IN CASE the opponent throw a jab/hook/elbow, etc., would that be a valid question to you?

All right I'll share tools / techniques. One of the variables here is going to be range.

Jab - for this discussion, we'll assume range is such that I am facing a good boxer who jabs to get distance, has dialed it in, and now has the range, shoulder rotation, and upper body lean to strike me quickly and solidly in the face (for MMA fans kind of like Nate Diaz was doing to Donald Cerrone about a hundred times).

One learning point for WCK students is to look at what other boxers do to deal with this scenario. The boxing ready stance has hands up close to the face guarding the face. Boxers will cup block a jab and punch back quickly. Or slip a jab. They will even time a jab to hit at the same time. Also, they will move their feet to an angle.

In WCK the difference in covering your face is that your hands aren't as close to your face allowing the punch to develop quite as much speed. You will intercept the jab a little ****her away from your face, and since it is a straight punch, you will do it by occupying the centerline with a jong sau arm structure. That is your WCK man sau wu sau with your hands such that you can cover your head being punched. The punch may slide off to the inside or the outside depending on the angle of the attack and the contact on the bridge or your forearm. Depending on the commitment level of the jab you may or may not be able to follow it back in to pursue. You also may have the cross coming right behind the jab, so the same bridge structure will deal with that although if that punch has a lot more mustard on it you may have to throw energy into it so your bridge isn't collapsed.

Things you can do similar to a boxer - cover your face, don't leave it open. Follow the punch in and strike immediately if there is an opening. Take advantage of the contact on the bridge to adjust your feet so you have a better angle.

Hooks - I've seen a lot of dialogue and video on hooks and WCK. IMO most of them miss one of the key fundamental elements to understanding a boxing hook. In boxing, the cross, 2, or straight punch shifts the weight forward onto the front foot. This will mean the boxer is crashing into you with weight behind that punch, and will end up a lot closer in range than you might expect. The hook is a reaction directly off of the 2, where the weight is shifted from the front foot to the back foot. In other words, the boxer is moving a little bit away from you. At the same time, the heel, hips and body rotate to get a lot of velocity on the punch. Hooks are harder to see - you are still reacting to getting crashed into and punched hard with a cross (RH for traditional stance), then a turn and movement away and you get hit by a LH hook.

For a WCK tool to deal with this, first of all you need to develop the eyes and skill to know when one is coming. Don't be a sitting duck. Next, your movement will be key. You either need to be too far away by moving back (remember the hook has the boxer shifting weight AWAY), or you need to move into it and jam it with a biu strike, or a biu da intercept / punch if you can time it. Range is the key to dealing with a hook. Be inside of it, or outside of it. No man's land will give you a sore face. If you are of a WCK family that it's blasphemy to take a step back, then pursue in off of the straight cross and continue to occupy the opponent's space.

Those are the concepts. They are easier stated than done, and require practice against the basic motions first, and make sure the bad guy opponent motions have the right form and energy. That's one of my pet peeves - people doing unrealistic retarded bad guy / uke motions and practicing against it, pretending they are developing skill. Also, start to move in free motion drills like the straight blast gym guys describe.

Last, one of the real reasons I see WCK people not able to deal with boxers jabs and hooks is that they never practice with contact. Every boxer pretty much has been hit, and a lot, so they don't flinch with contact, but continue to enact their game plan. However, if you have never been hit in the face in practice, then it is highly likely that when you get hit in the face for real you will stiffen up and revert to primal reactions rather than disciplined ones. Look at Brock Lesnar's last few fights where Shane Carwin, then Cain Velasquez took advantage of Brock's lack of punching training where he was getting hit and chased him all over the cage. That is a real phenomena, and what you train, you are prepared for. What you don't train, you are not prepared for. If you are going to fight a boxer, prepare to get hit in the face. It's OK to get hit in the face, you can actually do that and still win a fight. As a side note, rounds where you are getting hit a lot are about 10x more tiring than rounds you are not getting hit a lot. There is a natural adrenalin reaction involved.

Now I'm sure is where I'll get a lot of flack where people say they never get hit, their sifu would never be hit by a boxing punch, our strikes are more for life and death, etc. I'll ignore those comments and just encourage you to play around with those different tools for dealing with the jab and hook.

[Phil Redmond]

I like David Petersons analogy that in chi sau we are trying to break contact not make contact. We are learning what do if obsticles are met so we can always find a clear and free line for the punching and NOT to go looking for the arms in order to make contact, stick to them and manipulate them.

GH

Wow, something in common. Go figure . .

[Phil Redmond]

. . .Phil was going to show how he would use a Tan Sau in an uncontrolled enviroment so I want to see it as I don't think it works. . . .GH

Miscommunication here. I was going to show you how to get an idea of what punch, kick, shoot, etc., and opponent was going to use. I never said I was going to make a clip of a Tan. But I could.

[Yoshiyahu]

IMO, Chi Sau strategy should be simple - "If no chi, hit" (basically, stick only if you have to, otherwise hit, where hitting is the main goal).

Okay thats pretty cool!