Sifu Cliff Au Yeung with students
WSL sparring on the set of enter the dragon
WSL doing the knives with Sifu Clive Potter
Pls feel free to make any comments on these videos you like
I think for them to go at it harder one or both should put on some protective gear. Or have one with protective gear and be the aggressor/attacker, they other with no protective gear and strickly defend and be defensive. When I train like this I rather work on my defense and learn to counter better than just attacking all the time as I think this aspect is a bit easier. At the level they are going at one will still gain fighting skill for sure.
James
Well James,
I beg to differ. Their Taan Sau is not too high, it is doing exactly what Taan Sau is meant to do - it is “spreading/suppressing” the opponent’s force sideways, as opposed to clashing head-on with it in the manner done by most other WC lineages. As for the rolling being too open, …rubbish! How can one test one’s ability to react if one doesn’t “open the door” in the first place. As my dear departed Sifu always taught us, if you want to know what you can do, put yourself under pressure. What is the point of having such a closed structure as to make it next to impossible to test it? Regarding kicking from the close-range; again, you are mistaken in believing that this does not allow for reaction - the opposite is the case - at that range and in that stance, it is far MORE likely that you will detect the kick coming, particularly if there is a decent amount of forward pressure/energy being applied, as the opponent will have to shift the weight to one leg in order to raise the other one. At that point in time, you will feel the weight shift and can shut the kick down by CONTROLLING THE ARMS - you don’t even need to contact the leg! That to me is far more condusive to what should be expected in realistic close-range combat, rather than always expecting kicks to come from a distance and only practising for such conditions. Go back to the ‘Cham Kiu’ form (final section) and you will see the basis for both the theory and the practice. Go back even further (‘Siu Nim Tau’ form, second section, ‘Soh Sau’ action) and you will see the genesis of this concept. There is more to WSLWC than what meets the eye my friend 
DMP
The low or high Tan sau is a lineage thing. Leung Sheung, Wong Shun Leung, Wang Kiu, Lok Yiu the early generation and also many later ones including Leung Ting have the flat or flatter Tan sau. They have arguments for why they think this is superior to the elevated Tan sau. William Cheung and also some later students of Yip Man like the elevated Tan sau and they have arguments for why they think this is superior. Then some have angles in between the completely flat and the elevated level that William Cheung uses.
The Fook sau also has all kinds of variations from the fingers facing sidways , other versions downwards and others use the flat fingers forward Fook sau. Some people contact at the wrist and others contact in the middle of the forearm.
The elevation of the Bong sau also varies. Some never use a high Bong sau and some always do. Also some use the bent wrist Bong sau and other make fun of it and use the straight wrist Bong sau. Besides that there are various ways to apply the Bong sau as well.
Then we all know there are many variations of stance.
All the arguments for each approach sound good on paper. When different people with conflicting theories have met and Chi saud together then they didn’t find they could easily exploit what they saw as perceived weaknesses in the other guys approach. However when in their own club they simulated the other guys approach they could exploit the differences. So the people who use each approach have ways to deal with any weakness in their approach. These are bound to come up if they fight enough.
Some videos from the elavated Tan sau camp show even the master sometimes using the flat Tan sau and some videos from flat land show also the master using the elevated approach.
I think it just shows that the principles of Wing Chun can be implemented in different ways. It’s quite a flexible art. A lot of things can work including delivering a powerful punch with the toes pointing to the outside (e.g. look at Chen Xiaowang Tai Chi).
However within a lineage everything works together like a fine tuned engine. If you have a fine tuned engine then you can’t just put in a piece from another kind of engine and have it work the same efficient way. So within a lineage something may be wrong but outside of that lineage it may be OK because they have a different mechanics and theory.
I can think of 20 reasons why the Tan sau should be flat and another 20 of why it should be elevated.
deleted…
Ray,
I can understand your logic, but like the question I asked on another thread, to which no one has answered yet, there so many ways of doing things and are all of them correct? By correct I mean effective and practical and efficient. I have used something of a low level tan sao only in one application, going from high level tan to low palm strike, for a moment the tan is low level(that is even if you call it tan at that time, I don’t). This technique can be used to trap from a head shot palm strike to and opponent blocks upward, you lower the arm to trap/strike low to mid level ribs.
I don’t mean to sound like a know it all, but I’ve been lucky to have a teacher that has practiced two different Wing Chun systems, WSL and TWC, and from conversations with Sifu and my own investigations this is what conclusions I have come up with.
James
Originally posted by sihing
I think for them to go at it harder one or both should put on some protective gear… At the level they are going at one will still gain fighting skill for sure.
Pretty much my thoughts on the matter…
Originally posted by sihing
Is it okay to analyze these vid’s?
Yes by all means. Contrary to appearences some of us can discuss technical differences without getting emotional.
Originally posted by sihing
Personally I think there are a lot of holes in their rolling
I wouldnt say there were holes. I would say that their rolling is wide enough to allow for some mutual testing of structure, reflexes and positioning without being so wide as to leave them completely exposed.
When my teacher (Clive Potter) first went to learn from WSL in HK (after about 12 years of WC in the UK with Joseph Cheng and Nino Bernado) they told him off for rolling too narrowly. I think the expression was words to the effect of ‘how can we practice if you do it like that’.
As we all know Chi sau/lok sau is a drill and as such requires an element of cooperation.
Originally posted by sihing
their tan-sao’s are way to low
There are two main reasons why we do the tan sau this way.
- One of the ideas in WSL VT is that the direction in which your foream is pointed determines the direction in which your force will subsequently go (like a gun it has to be pointed at the target if the bullet/force is to hit them)
If the tan sau is at an incline, the ‘line of force’ will be towards the ceiling and hence any forwarad pressure exerted will miss the target and go into open air. Conversley with the tan sau level, all the forward force is going into the opponent and hence can be used to break through their structure/defences. This works best of course when combined with the proper footwork.
- Having the tan sau pointed up makes it structually weaker than when level. Have someone do a hook or backfist and then when you have stopped it with tan make them push forward (not upwards). The high tan will collapse quite easily whereas the level tan should mean that their force just slides off it.
Originally posted by sihing
and the roll circle is way too big
See above
Originally posted by sihing
of course this is all just a opinion, and I do not mean to put anything or anyone down, just making observations.
Understood. If we all agreed there wouldn’t be much discussion here would there?
Who the heck am I to critique two people who have practised martial arts for far longer than I… but… I will anyways! 
Didn’t really like it:
Lots of clashing of arms when I thought it didn’t need to happen - seemed to me there was very poor footwork. It didn’t really seem to exist, both looking unstable and wobbling at times. Not much turning going on. Often striking when clearly out of range (due in part, I guess, from one guy being far shorter than the other, but still, that’s what footwork is for, no?).
For WSL lineage Chi Sau I far prefered Ernie’s clips on his website. More unity going on and better range.
Anyways, that was my impression… which is warped a wee bit as my XingYi makes me turn more and not stick to front-facing the way I did in my Wing Chun. But hey, videos tell about half the real story - I’d like to work out with either of the two guys if the chance came up.
Hey Nick, are these clips a good representation of WSL Wing Chun?
Hi,
Nothing wrong with that tan sau in my opinion, pretty similar to the way we do things in ip ching wing chun at the lok sau stage
Stu
Originally posted by saulauchung
Hey Nick, are these clips a good representation of WSL Wing Chun?
I wouldnt say they were a bad representation.
Some things to keep in mind
-
Cliff au yeung (the bald guy) is very short even for a chinese guy. IMO its a good example of how a small guy can get in close and neutralise a reach advantage.
-
Appearences can be deceiving. You never really know what its like until you feel it for yourself. If you’re in London come up to st albans some time or go and see Micheal Louison in south London. Also Desmond Spencer is, I think, under phillip Bayer now but im not sure where his class is located.
-
Ill post some more clips as a point of comparison. Also check out ‘The science of infighting’ for some footage of WSL.
Originally posted by black and blue
Who the heck am I to critique two people who have practised martial arts for far longer than I… but… I will anyways!
That’s pretty much my feeling. I knew that if I commented, it would offend someone. It’s easy to be an arm chair martial artist.
I think James made some good comments, based on his particular flavour of WC. Personally, I think the Tan Sao looks great, but hey that’s me. Also, as David said, there is more to things than may meet the eye. I have my own comments, but will leave them to myself, because I suspected that this would turn into a lineage debate, and who really needs that? While I am not WSL, I have a lot of respect for it. David’s book remains one of my favorite books on WC.
I probably should stay out of this =)
But you know how much I like to stick my foot in my mouth [ hey this could be a skill for a pink sash 3 stripe instructor test j/k]
But what my eye sees
A lot of tense shapes bouncing , why ? Too much speed and not enough feeling , it’s that bumper car thing
It’s what happens when you don’t relate [ mold] to you opponent but just come in with fixed shapes
I have heard good things about Cliff so there is probably more then meets the eye
The WSL elements are there just not as smooth as I like to see [ but this is do to Gary instilling the important of naturalness control and feeling setting up position before power ] again it’s just chi sau =)
As for the whole tan shape thing , I don’t really get into technique discussing they are just fixed moments in time , it’s better to understand the concept and it’s purpose then to sit there and measure out things in inches that’s a little silly
Elbow down , forward intent , you can cut , glide , guide , spread , and so on as long as you can use it and it’s direct and cultivates your alignment in your body and to the desired target .
If you wish to punch a guy that’s 12 feet tall then aim up . if you wish to universally hit across the shortest distance the aim forward , your choice
Black & Blue [For WSL lineage Chi Sau I far preferred Ernie’s clips on his website. More unity going on and better range.]
Thank you , nice stuff to hear , you did bring up something else I noticed a lack of range , a lot of long triangle stuff , but not much in the way of staying in medium/short triangle and square positions , once your in if your feeling is good you can stay in the pocket and take the guys position , if your tossing your shapes at a guy and you hit a wall it will cause the whole bounce thing and you keep having to restart
Preferences I guess
But I am young in the WSL family , David is eons ahead of me so I might be wrong , wont be the first time and defiantly not the last =)
Well argued Nick. Interesting vid of Wong on the Enter the Dragon set.
Just to respond to the tan sao debate, we practice a technique utilizing the high tan sao against a round punch. If the punch was a right hook to the face or upper gate, then the practitioner would utilize the left tan sao and step straight left with left foot, meeting the punch half way, punching with the right to simultaneously defend and attack. Now when I teach this technique I specifically show them what would happen if the level of the tan sao was less than 45deg. The punching arm would slide underneath the tan and would contact the ribs. In Double arm chi-sao, the tan sao palm would be face height, the forearm down the centerline with the elbow, the distance of the thumb and pinky finger expanded, away from the body. When no force is place on the tan, from your fok sao, the forward intention would automatically extend forward and strike towards the face, not upper wards above the head. Plus when your fok turns into a strike(with no twisting of the body strike), my high tan will deflect it automatically without me moving it(economy of motion), when tan is low you would have to move it, raise it, to deflect the strike. When we do SLT, in the 1st section, we have the students concentrate on forward intention, and I like to tell them their tan sao is holding up a wall, eventually as you practice more the wall gets heavier and heavier, thereby increasing your forward intention. What this eventually does, besides teaching the body to always want to move forward once in contact, but it also makes it dam hard to apply any type of trap or lop sao to a person with strong forward intention. One of my seniors has great forward intention, and when we chi-sao and connect at the wrists, it feels at times that he is pushing me off balance, even though I am bigger and heavier than him. I really have to make sure that my own forward intention is there too. When Sifu does it you can hardly move his arms to trap or lop as his structure is so steady. Soon we will have some clips coming out of Sifu practicing blindfold chi-sao and combat techniques, you will see that his elbow is immoveable and how the forward intention thing works from that.
I like these types of debates on technique, we have different experiences and do things different and forces us to explain ourselves and what/why we do it this way, it benefits all of us.
James
YongChun wrote:
The low or high Tan sau is a lineage thing. Leung Sheung, Wong Shun Leung, Wang Kiu, Lok Yiu the early generation and also many later ones including Leung Ting have the flat or flatter Tan sau. They have arguments for why they think this is superior to the elevated Tan sau. William Cheung and also some later students of Yip Man like the elevated Tan sau and they have arguments for why they think this is superior.
**“Arguments” on how to do something – in other words, starting from a theory and analyzing it logically. Yeah, that will work. 
All the arguments for each approach sound good on paper. When different people with conflicting theories have met and Chi saud together then they didn’t find they could easily exploit what they saw as perceived weaknesses in the other guys approach. However when in their own club they simulated the other guys approach they could exploit the differences. So the people who use each approach have ways to deal with any weakness in their approach.
**And then testing via a drill, chi sao. I guess the idea is if you can make it work in chi sao that must mean something significant.
I think it just shows that the principles of Wing Chun can be implemented in different ways. It’s quite a flexible art. A lot of things can work including delivering a powerful punch with the toes pointing to the outside (e.g. look at Chen Xiaowang Tai Chi).
**I think it shows that folks can come up with lots of theories on how to do something, and can find ways to do drills to support their view, but that no one has tested it where it really matters. Sure, a lot of things can work – in a drill or against unskilled folks.
Lots of things can seem to make sense.
sihing wrote in response:
I can understand your logic, but like the question I asked on another thread, to which no one has answered yet, there so many ways of doing things and are all of them correct? By correct I mean effective and practical and efficient.
**LOL! Yeah, according to Ray just try them in a drill and if it works there, that proves it.
And then:
Well argued Nick.
**If only arguments counted.
Nick Forrer (thanks for using your real name) wrote:
If we all agreed there wouldn’t be much discussion here would there?
**How many different ways are there to throw a jab in boxing? Lots. Which is right? The guy that can do it while hitting the focus mitts or the guy who can make it work in the ring? Does logic tell you whether he can make it work in the ring?
Originally posted by t_niehoff
[B]YongChun wrote:
**LOL! Yeah, according to Ray just try them in a drill and if it works there, that proves it.
[/B]
Hi Terrence, I guess anything I wrote never sunk in. We have people who know how to fight and fought as much as anyone probably including you. Some of them have never stepped into a Boxing ring or a BJJ studio and that’s my only point. But some of our other students have been cross training for years.
Anyone who has met professional fighters or met the likes of Emin Boztepe, Kenneth Chung, Jesse Glover or have seen Gary Lam and people like that is no fool. They know their place in the scale of things. You don’t have to be a genius to know that if you enter the ring with Mike Tyson that it’s going to hurt. If you want to fight people like that then you have to train like they do. You don’t need to be a genius to understand that! Everyone is aware of how typical Wing Chun training did against the Thai boxers in the 1970’s.
I have never said anything like what you said above. I don’t agree a drill or form makes one an effective fighter. These are just building blocks to get there. You seem to discard those in a hurry and are telling people to quit wasting their time with these. Impatience! What’s the hurry? They are a step along the way. You assume a lot about what people know, think and do around the country.
If it works in chi sau it proves it works in chi sau. If it works in a drill, it proves it works in a drill. If it works in a fight it proves it worked in that particular fight.
The angle of Tan sau is just a small point in the whole spectrum of fighting. Anything in this art is worth discussing in my opinion. And even the people who don’t compete regularly in MMA events have a right to an opinion.
You think everyone is an idiot except you or what?
Terrence don’t get carried away broad brushing everyone. I doubt if anyone is saying after drills and chi sau that you can handle the Ultimate/Pride/K1 fighters or be a realistic fighter. Some people can never be turned into fighters.
In fact I deleted my Tan sau post because I have seen these discussions years ago and they never get anywhere except into heated debates about nothing.
Most people here aren’t stupid and weren’t born yesterday in my opinion.
To become a fighter you have to fight. I learned that in the 1960’s. That’s obvious. Do you have anything else to say beyond that?
Regarding the elevation of the Tan sau, it has been a topic of discussion by various masters of this art. Are they all idiots too?
Ray
Terrence,
If a Martial arts instructor of any style, or a boxing coach, makes a claim of superior fighting skill for themselves (sorta what William Cheung did over a decade ago) then one should expect to be called out for it. If I claim that I am going to teach you a Martial Art or techniques for self defense and that’s what you are going to pay for then, where is the problem. I as a instructor of a MA I cannot guarantee that you as the student will be able to 100% of the time defend yourself, I can’t even guarantee that you will defend yourself 50%, or any % for that matter, because in the end it is up to the individual to execute the technique properly or even execute it at all. All I can guarantee is, IF you apply the principals learned from class, with proper timing and perception of the opponent’s movement, you will have a better chance of defending yourself against an unsolicited attack. In my mind, WC is the perfect MA, if applied perfectly. That’s why debates like the tan sao thing are important in a way, because according to my understanding of the uses of tan sao, two ways of doing it (high or low level) are not correct, only one way is correct, IMO. Using the application example from my last post on this thread against a round punch, using a low level tan would get you hit, the high tan works perfect, but the structure of the tan has to be close to perfect to have it work correctly. Maybe if someone could give me an example of the use of the low level tan sao I would understand more about it.
When I practice I strive for perfect movement of the technique I am practicing so that when it is really needed in a fight then it will come out as close to perfect or perfect. If you never practice something to perfection then you can’t expect it to come out that way or close to it. This is why SLT is so important in WC application. Chi-sao is not fighting yes, it is just a drill, but it is related to fighting and develops attributes that lead to success in a fight. Mok Jong training is not fighting either but training it leads to attribute development also and makes fighting easier. All of these things are needed to complete the puzzle. Eventually one has to take all of these structured things and perfect movements and put them in a random environment so that your eyes get used to seeing what the opponent is going to do, and you get used to controlling your fear and adrenaline and are able to use the things learned in class. Now, if your goal is to be fighter #1 in the world then yes you better train everyday and fight everyday, but if you do this expect a short life span and not much of an enjoyable life. Once again, IMO if the skill has been achieved and reinforced it will stay with you with less effort than was required to obtain it, that’s the true beauty of the Wing Chun system, at least the one I study and the way I understand it and have learned it.
James
Nick, thanks for posting the links.
Regards,
- kj
Originally posted by t_niehoff
**If only arguments counted.
Terence, you’ve got to admit, this is pretty funny coming from you. 
It’s good to laugh a little … it’s an overall tension reliever, brings things back into balance, and is great for the health.
Regards,
- kj