Tun tou in wing chun

[KPM]

I think I am one of the most open and productive posters on this forum. Any comments referencing Philipp Bayer's "stupid people" comment were made in the context of a thread where people were trolling for info without contributing anything. By contrast it is possible to share everything in an atmosphere of mutual trust.
.

I believe it was Sean that asked for further information to which you spit out the "stupid people" comment. But... whatever makes you feel good about yourself!

As far as an "atmosphere of mutual trust", I certainly don't trust your motivations, your sincerity, or your intentions based on your past posting record here where you've essentially looked for reasons to criticize other people's Wing Chun on a pretty regular basis. Remember when I pointed out to you that you shouldn't be surprised when people didn't want to discuss their Wing Chun in any depth with you based upon the comments you were making? No, on second thought, I don't expect that even sank in. Whatever......

 

[geezer]

First two Guy B.s What next? Three KPMs? Like an arms race?

@Guy --could you do us all a favor and NOT engage with KPM at all. You know he cannot resist getting into with you. I've asked the same of him. Seems like he can't help himself. So rather than see this thread get sidetracked, how about having you guys interact with the rest of us instead? Please?

That would be a big difference. Would you say then that these ideas are incompatible with your wing chun, or at least that you can't think of a way in which they could be compatible?

...Swallow spit very emphasised in SPM. Can it be used in wing chun?

If swallow means to withdraw energy towards yourself, I would not use it in my Wing Chun. ...Or my Escrima. Forward intent is a core principle in both arts as I practice them. Training to suck in and spit out short circuits our system by making it more complicated. I'm of the belief that simplicity and consistency are more applicable under stress.

Interestingly I used examples of this very idea in class last Wednesday, showing how withdrawing force with techniques like bong, tan, etc. in WC, and likewise with roof-block in Escrima might seem great when done slowly with a compliant partner, but in fact makes your technique slower and left you vulnerable to being run over by an aggressive opponent who maintains forward pressure.

 

[geezer]

I believe it was Sean that asked for further information to which you spit out the "stupid people" comment. But... whatever makes you feel good about yourself!

As far as an "atmosphere of mutual trust", I certainly don't trust your motivations, your sincerity, or your intentions based on your past posting record here where you've essentially looked for reasons to criticize other people's Wing Chun on a pretty regular basis. Remember when I pointed out to you that you shouldn't be surprised when people didn't want to discuss their Wing Chun in any depth with you based upon the comments you were making? No, on second thought, I don't expect that even sank in. Whatever......

Keith, I fully understand your sentiments. But YOU are also making this personal. I fully appreciate the occasional snarky retort. But sidetracking every thread (or allowing yourself to get sidetracked) to continue this personal feud is getting really tiresome. So, whattya say we just talk about the topic instead???

 

[Phobius]

Swallowing does not sound like it would work well in practicality against non compliant opponent. Could be wrong but collapse would be my fear, or as the Geezer said, it just makes everything too complicated.

 

[guy b]

First two Guy B.s What next? Three KPMs? Like an arms race?

@Guy --could you do us all a favor and NOT engage with KPM at all. You know he cannot resist getting into with you. I've asked the same of him. Seems like he can't help himself

Ok I can do that. If KPM is prepared to move on then I am happy to interact with him as well, but the above message would indicate not so for now. I hope that KPM can refrain from posting on threads I start because doing so with no intention of constructive interaction would be "trolling" by most reasonable definitions.

If swallow means to withdraw energy towards yourself, I would not use it in my Wing Chun. ...Or my Escrima. Forward intent is a core principle in both arts as I practice them. Training to suck in and spit out short circuits our system by making it more complicated. I'm of the belief that simplicity and consistency are more applicable under stress.

I would agree. I don't believe there is tun tou in VT and I do think that it contradicts core VT thinking. Some people might point to a thing like jut then punch as an example of swallow spit, but in VT it is only used to clear obstructions, there is no core idea of receiving in with the intention of opening the opponent as you find in systems like SPM. This for me is the core difference between these systems and wing chun. By definition they chase hands while wing chun does not.

Interestingly I used examples of this very idea in class last Wednesday, showing how withdrawing force with techniques like bong, tan, etc. in WC, and likewise with roof-block in Escrima might seem great when done slowly with a compliant partner, but in fact makes your technique slower and left you vulnerable to being run over by an aggressive opponent who maintains forward pressure.

I agree

 

[guy b]

Swallowing does not sound like it would work well in practicality against non compliant opponent. Could be wrong but collapse would be my fear, or as the Geezer said, it just makes everything too complicated.

The strategy in SPM and related systems is to eat space like wing chun but is focused on receiving force and leading or drawing to open the opponent to finish.

In my experience of these systems they have MUCH better shapes and ideas than VT to this end. But this is because VT has different goals and works differently in practice. They also incorporate a lot of seizing and grappling because of course they have to with this strategy. Unlike VT they emphasise power generation with minimal momentum (either rotational or linear) and again they are much better than VT at doing this because it is central to their fighting strategy.

I think that trying to use VT in this way is a fundamental misunderstanding of the system and what it is for. We can see from systems optimised to work in this way how much more advanced they are than VT used in this way.

My personal feeling is that there has been some desire to add such things in to some wing chun in order to fill gaps perhaps where understanding is lacking.

 

[Phobius]

The strategy in SPM and related systems is to eat space like wing chun but is focused on receiving force and leading or drawing to open the opponent to finish.

In my experience of these systems they have MUCH better shapes and ideas than VT to this end. But this is because VT has different goals and works differently in practice. They also incorporate a lot of seizing and grappling because of course they have to with this strategy. Unlike VT they emphasise power generation with minimal momentum (either rotational or linear) and again they are much better than VT at doing this because it is central to their fighting strategy.

I think that trying to use VT in this way is a fundamental misunderstanding of the system and what it is for. We can see from systems optimised to work in this way how much more advanced they are than VT used in this way.

My personal feeling is that there has been some desire to add such things in to some wing chun in order to fill gaps perhaps where understanding is lacking.

Also to add so there is no missunderstanding or hard feeliongs from other groups. I did not mean that it wont work for others in practicality, was simply speaking for myself and based on my knowledge of WT.

 

[guy b]

Also to add so there is no missunderstanding or hard feeliongs from other groups. I did not mean that it wont work for others in practicality, was simply speaking for myself and based on my knowledge of WT.

I would say that SPM can certainly work, but then the whole strategy is optimised in this direction. I prefer VT

 

[KPM]

I'll say this.....some people could not be more wrong about what they think of Wing Chun in general. WSLVT is not the standard by which all Wing Chun is judged.

 

[wckf92]

I'm with KPM on this one. But, to guy's credit...he at least confined his post #26 opinions to his "VT".
If his VT doesn't have these methods then that is too bad because I can't even imagine a WC without emphasis on power generation thru internalizing and using these methods.
To me, you can't have one without the other (yin vs yang or vice versa). We have 2 arms, two legs...
The key to understanding the essence of WC is found in that symbol.

 

[Danny T]

What are you considering chasing hands?
I'm believing what I know as chasing hands may be somewhat different than others.
We don't consider controlling the opponents limbs when in the center chasing.

 

[guy b]

mphasis on power generation thru internalizing and using these methods.

How do you utilise swallow spit in power generation in your wing chun? I know how it is done in SPM but can't imagine similar in WC so hearing how you do would be interesting.

to guy's credit...he at least confined his post #26 opinions to his "VT"

I don't wish to offend anyone.

 

[geezer]

How do you utilise swallow spit in power generation in your wing chun? I know how it is done in SPM but can't imagine similar in WC so hearing how you do would be interesting.

I think there may be some lineages of WC/VT ...perhaps some of the old mainland branches, that incorporate this kind of energy, and perhaps they do it effectively. I don't know about that.

And, as Guy suggested, there may be other WC groups today that try to integrate "swallow-spit" from outside sources because they think that "more is better". Like Guy, I do not embrace that kind of "kempo" thinking, i.e. the belief that the more different stuff you do the more effective you are. Personally, I left a complex kempo-like system for WC back in 1979 precisely because of WC's essential "KISS" approach. As I get older and dumber, I find my lineage's emphasis on simplicity ever more appealing. Others may find the opposite true.

Now if there is an example of "swallow-spit" in my WC that I could verbally describe, it might be in Dan Chi Sau where we use jum-sau to deflect the incoming palm strike downward. While we do not "swallow" or withdraw force, if your partner overcommits his palm or leans forward, the movement can cause him to topple forward and feel as though he is being "sucked in". This same effect can happen in a lot of other situations as well (example: "WT's" initial attack in Chi-Sau Section 1 sequence, etc.). But it never actually involves "pulling energy back". Forward pressure is always exerted or you are doing it wrong (in my VT/WC).

 

[dudewingchun]

Quite often when I spar with my muay thai training partner, when he throws a hook ill use my CSL tan and spread/swallow, shift to the side slightly following his footwork and then with the same hand shoot out another punch while his hand is coming back and while his other punch may be coming around the other side or down the middle I cover with the other hand with a CSL wu cover or just biu sao or Tan. Works quite good for me. All about timing.

It is the Chu Sau Lei application of Tan/tun which is slightly different to a normal Ipman wc Tan. But when im doing it I will sink into my stance and link my body to give me structural power then once thats done and his hand is on its way back, I rise slightly/springy and shoot my front punch.

Just some experience I have had not in training but in sparring against an non compliant partner.