# New video on Bong Sau by Alan Orr



## geezer (Aug 25, 2016)

This is a long one with a lot of talk, but for me it was really worth watching. I find that over the years I have started viewing bong much the same way. I wish I'd started working this way a lot sooner. Blinded by lineage, I guess. Check it out and post a comment!


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Aug 25, 2016)

Watched this the other day. Thought it was informative.


----------



## Callen (Aug 25, 2016)

Thanks for sharing Geezer.

There's a lot of theory going on in this video... IMO, more than just his take on using the Bong. He's also talking about his interpretation of Wing Chun in general, and how it translates into the way he trains.



geezer said:


> Blinded by lineage, I guess.


Interesting. Out of curiosity, what specifically did you relate to in this video?


----------



## PiedmontChun (Aug 26, 2016)

I find it interesting around 6:40 ish, he says they do not always have forward pressure with Bong Sau, since sometimes the Bong collapses, deflects, and moves around an obstacle. The way I have been taught is to have forward pressure at all times, and in doing so that is how the body knows to give, yield, and move around an obstacle if able as Bong is very adaptable, and is a transitional movement by nature of being trained this way. I never viewed or have heard this described as the Bong 'collapsing' though.

So I'm not sure if his way is in reality very similar to the WT way and its just a different way of defining / explaining it, or if it's a different way altogether with a similar end result. Would love to train with him and feel what he is describing.

Around 7:21, him showing Bong used in extremely close range in order to control / leak in to attack is something pretty commonly used in WT so glad to see it exists in other lineages.


----------



## geezer (Aug 26, 2016)

PiedmontChun said:


> ...So I'm not sure if his way is in reality very similar to the WT way and its just a different way of defining / explaining it, or if it's a different way altogether with a similar end result. Would love to train with him and feel what he is describing.
> 
> Around 7:21, him showing Bong used in extremely close range in order to control / leak in to attack is something pretty commonly used in WT so glad to see it exists in other lineages.



Piedmont -- As a guy who was trained in WT, I'm coming from exactly the same place. Alan makes a lot of statements (here and in other videos) that seem to specifically target and contradict the WT approach. Here you cite two examples. Yet when I carefully watch what he is doing, I don't see the contradiction. At least with the WT I do. I've been going off on my own for a long time but that's a different conversation.

Anyway, I don't see Alan abandoning forward intent. In the first example you cited, he just switches the pressure from the bridge to the elbow. And, as he says, he maintains pressure where it counts, with the body, hips and stance. The loose linking of arms, shoulders, waist and body he demonstrates looks like really _good_ WC to me.

So like you, someday if he comes to the States, I'll have to take a seminar and see what's really going on here in person. Whoops, gotta get back to work now. More later.


----------



## Marnetmar (Aug 26, 2016)

It's nice to see that Alan's ideas are becoming more and more accepted in the 'Chun world. It'll be a long time before we can get rid of the Chainpunch Brigade once and for all, though.


----------



## Jake104 (Aug 30, 2016)

geezer said:


> Anyway, I don't see Alan abandoning forward intent. In the first example you cited, he just switches the pressure from the bridge to the elbow. And, as he says, he maintains pressure where it counts, with the body, hips and stance. The loose linking of arms, shoulders, waist and body he demonstrates looks like really _good_ WC to me.
> 
> So like you, someday if he comes to the States, I'll have to take a seminar and see what's really going on here in person. Whoops, gotta get back to work now. More later.


I don't see Alan's forward intent go away either.. Matter fact it's virtually impossible to tell where his forward intent is or isn't from a video.. I would imagine it's always on, at his level. Forward intent is hard to spot sometimes even in person unless you feel it through touch. Forward intent should be there always like I already mentioned. It's not just moving forward. It can be 'on' even when retreating or when yielding. I think Alan has explained this before.

The delinking is very useful. I think Sifu Sergio has a video on this. IK he was originally from your lineage Steve but we all know he's been researching other mainland lineages now for a while...Anyway there's a two part video from ' the martial man' on YouTube where Sifu Sergio explains WC punching and delinking.. It's a interesting video. He explains how he can get power not only from the ground but he can create power without a base or root. He also shows hooking and uppercut type punching similar to what I learned from my first Sifu. That was also from a mainland lineage. So it kind of makes you think about WC and the different lineages and methods of doing Wing Chun out there.


----------



## wingchun100 (Sep 19, 2016)

I love how many ways there are to interpret wing chun. (Then again I am sure there are just as many ways to interpret ANY martial art, but I don't train in them.) For example this weekend I went to train with a bunch of my seniors at a chi sao get together. One gentleman told me how my main problem was that when my attack was stopped, I would "give up" and try to switch to attacking with the other hand instead of snaking through until I got my hit. Well, I always thought that, when your attack was blocked, that was it...time to go for a new angle of attack. His way of thinking made me feel like I had no idea what chi sao was about...completely short circuited my impression of everything, which is good because it means it has me looking at it all in a new way. Encountering different interpretations is what helps you come up with your OWN version of Wing Chun, which is hopefully effective.


----------



## guy b (Sep 20, 2016)

geezer said:


> Check it out and post a comment!



He doesn't appear to understand the bong lap drill.


----------



## geezer (Sep 20, 2016)

guy b said:


> He doesn't appear to understand the bong lap drill.



Don't know, ....but he clearly doesn't feel it is very useful in achieving his desired outcome.


----------



## wingchun100 (Sep 21, 2016)

geezer said:


> Don't know, ....but he clearly doesn't feel it is very useful in achieving his desired outcome.


 
I think he feels it is all situational. Things that might work in the street won't work in the ring...meaning if someone confronts you on the street, they don't know that you have any fighting skills. However, when you are in the ring, they know it and are better prepared for it, so there are certain things you can't pull on them that you could to the unsuspecting opponent.


----------



## geezer (Sep 21, 2016)

wingchun100 said:


> I think he feels it is all situational. Things that might work in the street won't work in the ring...meaning if someone confronts you on the street, they don't know that you have any fighting skills. However, when you are in the ring, they know it and are better prepared for it, so there are certain things you can't pull on them that you could to the unsuspecting opponent.



Actually, his problem with alternating drills like the typical "Lap-Bong" cycle is that they do not follow through with the attack. Rather than alternate offense and defense, he seems to be saying that a_ proper_ attack, even if countered, is followed by another and another. It doesn't give up the offense to the opponent.

Personally I see this as a problem in many drills, including some favored in my lineage of VT (which is a branch of the "WT" lineage). Our "lat-sau" curriculum includes many variations, but all start with a similarly_ alternating_ "pak-da" platform (or a punch to punch platform in the EBMAS branch).

I have to explain to my students that for all the positive attributes these drills train, they are fundamentally different from fighting since in fighting, your goal is_ not_ to give your opponent a chance to take over the offense. In order to remedy this, we use a lot of drills with a "feeder and responder". The feeder acts as the coach and the responder stays on the offense, attacking, countering and continuing to attack the feeder.

This is a method of training I picked up from my first Escrima coach, Rene Latosa, and a method preferred (along with sparring) in most competitive MAs that I've seen. Think pad work for example. Unfortunately, some WC/VT schools seem to have gotten away from this in favor of drills that _"take turns"._ Sure, such drills have their place. It's really just a matter of emphasis.


----------



## wingchun100 (Sep 21, 2016)

geezer said:


> Actually, his problem with alternating drills like the typical "Lap-Bong" cycle is that they do not follow through with the attack. Rather than alternate offense and defense, he seems to be saying that a_ proper_ attack, even if countered, is followed by another and another. It doesn't give up the offense to the opponent.
> 
> Personally I see this as a problem in many drills, including some favored in my lineage of VT (which is a branch of the "WT" lineage). Our "lat-sau" curriculum includes many variations, but all start with a similarly_ alternating_ "pak-da" platform (or a punch to punch platform in the EBMAS branch).
> 
> ...


 

I am very sleep-deprived today so I am having a hard time imagining what you mean. I would love to see some footage of that.


----------



## Jake104 (Sep 21, 2016)

I think what Steve means is, the drill will not look like how it's presented to beginners (for training a skill) in a real fight? No way in a million years will you ever use it in that way against anyone other then a WC practitioner who is either just starting off on the first layer or a 'veteran' who is stuck at THAT layer who just ads useless moves to it.. Which in return turns a once useful drill into a choreographed Bruce Li fight scene.


----------



## guy b (Sep 21, 2016)

geezer said:


> Don't know, ....but he clearly doesn't feel it is very useful in achieving his desired outcome.



Here is what he says around 3.40:



> This drill we don't really do because it doesn't really fit into the functionality of how we are going to apply our bong sau, or how we are going to fight



He then goes on a bit of a rant about people who claim that the drill is required and has a specific purpose, and dismisses it as a beginners drill. He claims he has "been there, done that" and moved beyond this beginners drill. 

But the quote shows that he doesn't understand its purpose


----------



## guy b (Sep 21, 2016)

geezer said:


> his problem with alternating drills like the typical "Lap-Bong" cycle is that they do not follow through with the attack.



Which summarises the fundamental misunderstading at the heart of this clip


----------



## guy b (Sep 21, 2016)

Some more core misunderstanding of VT from 11.00


----------



## Jake104 (Sep 21, 2016)

Yawn---—


----------



## KPM (Sep 21, 2016)

guy b said:


> But the quote shows that he doesn't understand its purpose



No.  His quote simply shows that he doesn't use this drill or see it in the same way as WSLVT. Once again Guy, your version and your understanding of Wing Chun is NOT the gold standard!


----------



## guy b (Sep 22, 2016)

KPM said:


> No.  His quote simply shows that he doesn't use this drill or see it in the same way as WSLVT. Once again Guy, your version and your understanding of Wing Chun is NOT the gold standard!





			
				Alan Orr said:
			
		

> This drill we don't really do because it doesn't really fit into the functionality of how we are going to apply our bong sau, or how we are going to fight



Alan thinks the Lap Sau drill is an applications drill. This is a gross misunderstanding if one is practicing YM VT. Where then has Alan got this interpretation from, and how does it fit into his system without breaking it, assuming it derives from the same roots as YM VT?

If Alan's system is not related to YM VT then ok fine. But you guys always want to argue that we are all part of some kind of family, and that different interpretations are all equally valid. Difficult to see how you can have it both ways.


----------



## guy b (Sep 22, 2016)

dudewingchun said:
			
		

> Disagree x *1*
> List



What do you disagree about?


----------



## KPM (Sep 22, 2016)

guy b said:


> Alan thinks the Lap Sau drill is an applications drill. This is a gross misunderstanding if one is practicing YM VT. .



I thought we had already established that WSLVT lineage is the only branch of the family that thinks this way.   The WSL/PB guys are the only ones that I have ever seen that are so hung up on this "application" thing.  Again, your understanding of VT is not the gold standard and does not represent everyone's understanding of Ip Man's Wing Chun.


----------



## guy b (Sep 22, 2016)

KPM said:


> I thought we had already established that WSLVT lineage is the only branch of the family that thinks this way.   The WSL/PB guys are the only ones that I have ever seen that are so hung up on this "application" thing.  Again, your understanding of VT is not the gold standard and does not represent everyone's understanding of Ip Man's Wing Chun.



WSLPB VT is YM VT is VT

Please explain how the application based understanding of Lap Sau works in your system and what you have in that system to replace the understanding it represents in VT? Is your system related to YM VT?


----------



## KPM (Sep 22, 2016)

guy b said:


> WSLPB VT is YM VT is VT



We've already had long belabored discussions here that have established that no one believes that other than you and LFJ.  No need to rehash that again!


----------



## guy b (Sep 22, 2016)

KPM said:


> We've already had long belabored discussions here that have established that no one believes that other than you and LFJ.  No need to rehash that again!



Popularity isn't any kind of measure of truth. We discussed that as well. You must have forgotten


----------



## guy b (Sep 22, 2016)

guy b said:


> Please explain how the application based understanding of Lap Sau works in your system and what you have in that system to replace the understanding it represents in VT? Is your system related to YM VT?


----------



## KPM (Sep 22, 2016)

guy b said:


> Popularity isn't any kind of measure of truth. We discussed that as well. You must have forgotten


 
You are a pompous &$$, and no one has forgotten that!


----------



## guy b (Sep 22, 2016)

KPM said:


> You are a pompous &$$, and no one has forgotten that!



When you avoid questions it just looks like you don't know the answer.


----------



## KPM (Sep 22, 2016)

guy b said:


> When you avoid questions it just looks like you don't know the answer.



Not true.  People here know you now Guy.  They know exactly what I'm saying, and not saying, and why!


----------



## guy b (Sep 22, 2016)

Shhhh, it's a SECRET! 

Knowing your delight in arguing I think the conclusion is quite obvious.


----------



## dudewingchun (Sep 23, 2016)

I disagree on all your thoughts about Alan and CSL wing chun.


----------



## KPM (Sep 23, 2016)

guy b said:


> Shhhh, it's a SECRET!
> 
> Knowing your delight in arguing I think the conclusion is quite obvious.



Is that so?  It seems you are the one that has recently posted leading questions on multiple threads trying to entice someone into arguing with you!


----------



## guy b (Sep 24, 2016)

Asking questions is a good way to bring out ideas and underlying assumptions


----------



## guy b (Sep 24, 2016)

dudewingchun said:


> I disagree on all your thoughts about Alan and CSL wing chun.



Do you believe the Lap Sau drill to be a beginners application drill?


----------



## Phobius (Sep 24, 2016)

guy b said:


> Do you believe the Lap Sau drill to be a beginners application drill?



Do you believe SLT is a beginner form? Just because a drill is not mastered does not mean it is not of value. That is the purpose of training, to improve.

Secondly you should define beginner...

Some guys, or a lot of guys, would probably call you a beginner so that begs the question. Are you doing lap sau?


----------



## guy b (Sep 24, 2016)

In  VT everyone should be doing the lap sau drill once they have reached the appropriate stage of development. 

Alan Orr called the Lap Sau drill a beginners drill and characterised it as an application based drill in his system, which appears not to be VT. I am asking his student if he agrees with this in order to learn more about their system.


----------



## geezer (Sep 25, 2016)

guy b said:


> In  VT everyone should be doing the lap sau drill once they have reached the appropriate stage of development.
> 
> Alan Orr called the Lap Sau drill a beginners drill and characterised it as an application based drill in his system, which appears not to be VT. I am asking his student if he agrees with this in order to learn more about their system.



Very astute. You note that Alan Orr is _not_ doing WSL-PB-VT. I'm glad you settled that! 

On the other hand, I find a lot of Alan's CSL WC ideas very relevant to _my VT..._

...although I'm not sure _my current instructor_ would agree. But then, my instructor is not my sifu, just a highly skilled kung fu brother I choose to learn from. Personally, I'm done with sifus. I think I prefer coaches these days.


----------



## geezer (Sep 25, 2016)

OK ...in the interest of full disclosure, my students call me "sifu". That may seem a bit hypocritical in light of my remarks above. It's just the tradition in our association. But I'm a "coachy" sort of sifu. Not a know-everything "guru" type of guy.


----------



## Phobius (Sep 25, 2016)

geezer said:


> OK ...in the interest of full disclosure, my students call me "sifu". That may seem a bit hypocritical in light of my remarks above. It's just the tradition in our association. But I'm a "coachy" sort of sifu. Not a know-everything "guru" type of guy.



I don't necessarily see sifu in that sense. It is my teacher/coach that has on a personal level taken an interest in my life and shared pieces of his. His interest lies in my development not only as a student of WT but as a person. Of course this also comes with the fact that he rather see me finding things out on my own than taking his word for anything.

According to him we are not real martial artists or masters of anything until we stop believing what we hear and start experiencing and exploring things ourselves. Leaving those that simply copy him to pay the rent and train to their own delight in the meantime.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 25, 2016)

I love Alan Orr


----------



## wingchun100 (Oct 4, 2016)

Phobius said:


> I don't necessarily see sifu in that sense. It is my teacher/coach that has on a personal level taken an interest in my life and shared pieces of his. His interest lies in my development not only as a student of WT but as a person. Of course this also comes with the fact that he rather see me finding things out on my own than taking his word for anything.
> 
> According to him we are not real martial artists or masters of anything until we stop believing what we hear and start experiencing and exploring things ourselves. Leaving those that simply copy him to pay the rent and train to their own delight in the meantime.


 

I don't see Sifus in that way either. They can be viewed in many ways, although it depends on your level of involvement. If you are someone who takes a martial art because you want a hobby, then they are just the person you pay money to. BUT if you want to really learn the whole system in and out, then the Sifu is your guide on that road to self-discovery.

Provided they are good enough to do that, of course.


----------



## guy b (Oct 4, 2016)

geezer said:


> Very astute. You note that Alan Orr is _not_ doing WSL-PB-VT. I'm glad you settled that!
> 
> On the other hand, I find a lot of Alan's CSL WC ideas very relevant to _my VT.._



There is only VT. Personal interpretation is only misunderstanding of VT


----------



## drop bear (Oct 4, 2016)




----------



## geezer (Oct 4, 2016)

guy b said:


> There is only VT. Personal interpretation is only misunderstanding of VT



That's your interpretation!


----------



## Phobius (Oct 5, 2016)

geezer said:


> That's your interpretation!



Does that not mean you are doing VT and he is misunderstanding your VT?

Not sure why I had to quote this. It just deserved to be quoted again.


----------



## guy b (Oct 5, 2016)

geezer said:


> That's your interpretation!



Interpretation is not involved


----------



## Callen (Oct 6, 2016)

guy b said:


> There is only VT. Personal interpretation is only misunderstanding of VT


Out of curiosity, who do you train with?


----------



## guy b (Oct 6, 2016)

Callen said:


> Out of curiosity, who do you train with?



With friends in the UK


----------



## geezer (Oct 6, 2016)

guy b said:


> Interpretation is not involved



I simply _Kant _ think of a response to such a statement. Oh well...


----------



## Danny T (Oct 6, 2016)

geezer said:


> I simply _Kant _ think of a response to such a statement. Oh well...


Kant is an excellent response.


----------



## Danny T (Oct 6, 2016)

guy b said:


> There is only VT. Personal interpretation is only misunderstanding of VT


Actually interpretation is a teaching technique that combines factual with stimulating explanatory information.
Therefore, the passing on of information within the WC system is going to be through interpretation.


----------



## guy b (Oct 6, 2016)

Danny T said:


> Actually interpretation is a teaching technique that combines factual with stimulating explanatory information.
> Therefore, the passing on of information within the WC system is going to be through interpretation.



VT isn't data that needs explained. It is a massively detailed, step by step, learning and error correcting method produced a while back by some people who are not us. 

There isn't anything to change; it already works. There isn't anything that needs to be explained; it is already laid out in great detail and written down for the avoidance of doubt. 

Of course everyone has different physical and mental capacity, different perception speed and quality, different preferences, different biases. But this is not interpretation of the kind so often discussed here. VT is still just VT


----------



## KPM (Oct 6, 2016)

^^^^ Where can I find this document where your VT method is written down in great detail?


----------



## Phobius (Oct 7, 2016)

KPM said:


> ^^^^ Where can I find this document where your VT method is written down in great detail?



MartialTalk?


----------



## guy b (Oct 7, 2016)

KPM said:


> ^^^^ Where can I find this document where your VT method is written down in great detail?



I believe you do a different system with a different conceptual base? VT would probably not be relevant to you


----------



## KPM (Oct 7, 2016)

guy b said:


> I believe you do a different system with a different conceptual base? VT would probably not be relevant to you



Yes, I do a different system.  But I am here to learn about what others do as  well.  I like all versions of Wing Chun.  I enjoy learning about how others may do things differently than I do.  And I don't assume that because they do it differently that it is necessarily wrong and "substandard."  I know WSLVT is a great system and would like to learn more about its conceptual base.  If you know of a document that explains all of that in a detailed way all in one place I would love to see it!


----------



## guy b (Oct 7, 2016)

KPM said:


> Yes, I do a different system.  But I am here to learn about what others do as  well.  I like all versions of Wing Chun.  I enjoy learning about how others may do things differently than I do.  And I don't assume that because they do it differently that it is necessarily wrong and "substandard."  I know WSLVT is a great system and would like to learn more about its conceptual base.  If you know of a document that explains all of that in a detailed way all in one place I would love to see it!



It is in the writings of the system, and also in the oral tradition and the teaching order/method. I am sure your system also has writings


----------



## KPM (Oct 7, 2016)

guy b said:


> It is in the writings of the system, and also in the oral tradition and the teaching order/method. I am sure your system also has writings



This comment above:  
*There isn't anything that needs to be explained; it is already laid out in great detail and written down for the avoidance of doubt. *

This lead me to believe that it was written up as a book or single document.  So you are saying that isn't actually true?


----------



## guy b (Oct 7, 2016)

KPM said:


> This comment above:
> *There isn't anything that needs to be explained; it is already laid out in great detail and written down for the avoidance of doubt. *
> 
> This lead me to believe that it was written up as a book or single document.  So you are saying that isn't actually true?



Documents exist but it isn't something I can post on the forum KPM. I suggest you start training the system if you are interested


----------



## KPM (Oct 7, 2016)

So let me see if I have this straight.....WSLVT is the "true" version of Ip Man's Wing Chun and almost everyone else in the Ip Man lineage learned incompletely or incorrectly.   Within WSLVT are documents that explain how everything should be done in great detail.  But the WSLVT lineage is unwilling to share this with those that didn't learn properly in order to benefit all Ip Man Wing Chun people? Or am I misrepresenting what you have been writing here for awhile?


----------



## guy b (Oct 7, 2016)

KPM said:


> So let me see if I have this straight.....WSLVT is the "true" version of Ip Man's Wing Chun and almost everyone else in the Ip Man lineage learned incompletely or incorrectly.   Within WSLVT are documents that explain how everything should be done in great detail.  But the WSLVT lineage is unwilling to share this with those that didn't learn properly in order to benefit all Ip Man Wing Chun people? Or am I misrepresenting what you have been writing here for awhile?



Writings and tradition exist in VT which don't get shared with random people on the internet, correct. I think this is the case for every system. Don't worry, quite a lot is being shared already.

Information is available to anyone who trains VT honestly and with commitment so there is nothing to stop anyone accessing this if they want it.


----------



## Wing Chun Auckland (Oct 7, 2016)

I see this argument is still going on after all this time. 
Guy B has a view that is unwavering and this has been proven many times. He could be right or wrong. But it seems the only way to know would be to go train PB VT. So until that time we may as well all move on.


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 7, 2016)

guy b said:


> I suggest you start training the system if you are interested



If I understand the PB WSL VT landscape correctly...this would mean or imply Europe(?).
If I'm not mistaken, the PB WSL folks do not have a decent rep in the USA?


----------



## guy b (Oct 7, 2016)

There are some WSL people in the US. Gary Lam would be the most obvious choice. He has added things but you could do worse. Some of his students take a more back to basics approach, good choice would be Ernie Barrios


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 7, 2016)

guy b said:


> There are some WSL people in the US. Gary Lam would be the most obvious choice. He has added things but you could do worse. Some of his students take a more back to basics approach, good choice would be Ernie Barrios


Thanks. 
I think those guys are west coast. 
What about the dude in NYC? Gledhill(?)
Is he/does he represent the PB methods well enough or...?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## guy b (Oct 7, 2016)

Yes Kev Gledhill understands the system and would be a good teacher


----------



## Callen (Oct 8, 2016)

guy b said:


> There are some WSL people in the US. Gary Lam would be the most obvious choice. He has added things but you could do worse. Some of his students take a more back to basics approach



There are many of us in the US. Not a lot under Phillip Bayer, but there are 1st and 2nd generation WSLVT practitioners here.

Gary Lam has added things just like Wan Kam Leung, Wang Zhi Peng and Phillip Bayer and have added things... No one but the man himself can teach WSLVT exactly the way he did, so mentioning that people have added to the system isn't really an accurate gauge.

I'm interested in your comment about the "back to basics" approach of Gary Lam's students. What exactly has given you this impression?


----------



## Wing Chun Auckland (Oct 8, 2016)

Callen said:


> There are many of us in the US. Not a lot under Phillip Bayer, but there are 1st and 2nd generation WSLVT practitioners here.
> 
> Gary Lam has added things just like Wan Kam Leung, Wang Zhi Peng and Phillip Bayer and have added things... No one but the man himself can teach WSLVT exactly the way he did, so mentioning that people have added to the system isn't really an accurate gauge.
> 
> I'm interested in your comment about the "back to basics" approach of Gary Lam's students. What exactly has given you this impression?



Nope, PB VT is exactly the same as Yip Man's. VT is VT..... according to Guy......


----------



## Danny T (Oct 8, 2016)

_QUOTE by guy b
 "There is only VT. Personal interpretation is only misunderstanding of VT


QUOTE by guy b
 "There isn't anything to change; it already works. There isn't anything that needs to be explained; it is already laid out in great detail and written down for the avoidance of doubt."  "VT is still just VT"
_
When stating who to train WC with or who is the best of the next generation.
_ 
QUOTE by guy b
"There are some WSL people in the US. Gary Lam would be the most obvious choice. He has added things but you could do worse.”


QUOTE by guy b 
"Sean Wood his student is also very good and taking an interesting direction with MMA focused training


QUOTE by guy b
"I like Wang Zhi Peng, although he has added some other elements_

If Wing Chun is Wing Chun and personal interpretation is only misunderstanding of it and there isn’t anything to change then why would you recommend anyone who has used their interpretation, added, or changed anything within to be someone to train with or consider them to be the best of the next generation?


----------



## Callen (Oct 8, 2016)

Wing Chun Auckland said:


> Nope, PB VT is exactly the same as Yip Man's. VT is VT..... according to Guy......



Phillip Bayer is doing his best to preserve his Sifu's system, just like many other 1st generation WSL students. In my quote above, I'm not necessarily saying VT is or isn't VT. I feel like that's a separate point.


----------



## Wing Chun Auckland (Oct 8, 2016)

Callen said:


> Phillip Bayer is doing his best to preserve his Sifu's system, just like many other 1st generation WSL students. In my quote above, I'm not necessarily saying VT is or isn't VT. I feel like that's a separate point.



Sure. But I think you would agree that WSL's interpretation of YM's teaching is his own. And then PB's interpretation of WSL style would be is his own. To think that PB's wing Chun would be equivalent to Yip Mans is very hard to believe. Also I would think the likes of PB, Gary Lam etc can do what they like to their wing Chun.


----------



## Callen (Oct 8, 2016)

Wing Chun Auckland said:


> Sure. But I think you would agree that WSL's interpretation of YM's teaching is his own. And then PB's interpretation of WSL style would be is his own.



I do agree with these statements.


----------



## Wing Chun Auckland (Oct 8, 2016)

Then


Callen said:


> I do agree with these statements.



Then that would make you one of the more reasonable and balanced WSL people on this site. 

You are obviously new here. This thread is supposed to be about Alan Orr's lap sau ideas. But it got hijacked again and turned into a WSL debate. This always happens.


----------



## Callen (Oct 8, 2016)

Wing Chun Auckland said:


> Then that would make you one of the more reasonable and balanced WSL people on this site.
> 
> You are obviously new here. This thread is supposed to be about Alan Orr's lap sau ideas. But it got hijacked again and turned into a WSL debate. This always happens.



I do my best to be a reasonable and balanced person in general, the fact that I'm a WSL practitioner shouldn't have much bearing.

I joined Martial Talk in 2014. I try and only chime in on threads when I have something to contribute. I hope that I didn't add to the derailing of Geezer's post


----------



## KPM (Oct 8, 2016)

Callen said:


> I do my best to be a reasonable and balanced person in general, the fact that I'm a WSL practitioner shouldn't have much bearing.



Having a WSL person around that doesn't revel in insulting other lineages and post as if they have experienced a religious conversion is certainly a welcome thing!


----------



## Wing Chun Auckland (Oct 8, 2016)

Callen said:


> I do my best to be a reasonable and balanced person in general, the fact that I'm a WSL practitioner shouldn't have much bearing.
> 
> I joined Martial Talk in 2014. I try and only chime in on threads when I have something to contribute. I hope that I didn't add to the derailing of Geezer's post



Don't get me wrong, I like WSL style. My cousin is one and I used to cross train with some. I find their approach refreshing.


----------



## Juany118 (Oct 8, 2016)

Wing Chun Auckland said:


> Sure. But I think you would agree that WSL's interpretation of YM's teaching is his own. And then PB's interpretation of WSL style would be is his own. To think that PB's wing Chun would be equivalent to Yip Mans is very hard to believe. Also I would think the likes of PB, Gary Lam etc can do what they like to their wing Chun.




And lets not even get into the fact that when it came to teaching YM's  YC says that when his father personally taught students he taught the student to their own particular strengths and weaknesses.  It's a murky mess in terms of what is "right", hence why I have decided to take the attitude "okay did you ever get into a fight with WC/VT?"  If the answer is "yes" the next question is "did it work?"  If the answer is "yes", move on your teacher knew of what they spoke.  If the answer is "no" it gets more complicated because now you have to ask a butt ton of questions to figure out if it was the fault of the teacher, the student or if the opponent was simply more skilled.


----------



## Wing Chun Auckland (Oct 9, 2016)

Juany118 said:


> And lets not even get into the fact that when it came to teaching YM's  YC says that when his father personally taught students he taught the student to their own particular strengths and weaknesses.  It's a murky mess in terms of what is "right", hence why I have decided to take the attitude "okay did you ever get into a fight with WC/VT?"  If the answer is "yes" the next question is "did it work?"  If the answer is "yes", move on your teacher knew of what they spoke.  If the answer is "no" it gets more complicated because now you have to ask a butt ton of questions to figure out if it was the fault of the teacher, the student or if the opponent was simply more skilled.



Agreed! I mean, how many times have we heard this about YM.


----------



## guy b (Oct 10, 2016)

Callen said:


> There are many of us in the US. Not a lot under Phillip Bayer, but there are 1st and 2nd generation WSLVT practitioners here.
> 
> Gary Lam has added things just like Wan Kam Leung, Wang Zhi Peng and Phillip Bayer and have added things... No one but the man himself can teach WSLVT exactly the way he did, so mentioning that people have added to the system isn't really an accurate gauge.



Gary Lam has added an entire structured teaching curriculum and has added to the system quite a lot, especially in terms of how it is taught. The reason I say that you could do worse than Gary Lam is that he has produced some good people and as far as I know he has not changes the core VT under what he has added.

Philipp Bayer hasn't added anything



> I'm interested in your comment about the "back to basics" approach of Gary Lam's students. What exactly has given you this impression?



Things that some of them have said


----------



## guy b (Oct 10, 2016)

Danny T said:


> If Wing Chun is Wing Chun and personal interpretation is only misunderstanding of it and there isn’t anything to change then why would you recommend anyone who has used their interpretation, added, or changed anything within to be someone to train with or consider them to be the best of the next generation?



Some teachers have added things on top of the VT method while leaving the core essentially intact. It can be difficult to separate what is added and what is core in such cases but it is possible. 

Gary Lam and WZP are examples of this. I quite like WZP's SC influenced throws. It isn't VT but quite easy to see where the VT begins and ends with him. With Gary Lam it is more difficult to separate the core VT but still possible.


----------



## LFJ (Oct 10, 2016)

Wing Chun Auckland said:


> Sure. But I think you would agree that WSL's interpretation of YM's teaching is his own. And then PB's interpretation of WSL style would be is his own. To think that PB's wing Chun would be equivalent to Yip Mans is very hard to believe.



Very hard to form an opinion when you have 0 experience with any of their VT.

Instead of believing the opposite to be true, it would be a more rational position to withhold belief one way or the other until you go and examine the evidence. Don't you think?


----------



## guy b (Oct 10, 2016)

LFJ said:


> Very hard to form an opinion when you have 0 experience with any of their VT.
> 
> Instead of believing the opposite to be true, it would be a more rational position to withhold belief one way or the other until you go and examine the evidence. Don't you think?



That would be the approach of someone who decided things based on evidence and didn't have any particular bias


----------



## guy b (Oct 10, 2016)

Wing Chun Auckland said:


> Then that would make you one of the more reasonable and balanced WSL people on this site.
> 
> You are obviously new here. This thread is supposed to be about Alan Orr's lap sau ideas. But it got hijacked again and turned into a WSL debate. This always happens.



Why would it be reasonable to believe people who say they have added to the system, but not to believe those who say they have not added to the system, particularly when the system taught by those who admit to adding things appears to contain the core taught by those who say they have not added?


----------



## Callen (Oct 10, 2016)

guy b said:


> Gary Lam has added an entire structured teaching curriculum and has added to the system quite a lot, especially in terms of how it is taught. The reason I say that you could do worse than Gary Lam is that he has produced some good people and as far as I know he has not changes the core VT under what he has added.


The core VT has not been changed by what Gary Lam as added to his teaching curriculum.



guy b said:


> Philipp Bayer hasn't added anything


Except what is uniquely his own. In this context, I wasn't talking about what any of them have or have not added to their curriculum. I was referring to the personal attributes which influences the outcome of their VT.



guy b said:


> Things that some of them have said


Who have you trained with from Gary Lam's school and how do you define "back to the basics"?


----------



## Wing Chun Auckland (Oct 10, 2016)

We've been over this fellas. Another hijacked thread on why WSL is superior to all other lineages. Yip Man = WSL = PB. We get it. Thanks for your input.


----------



## guy b (Oct 10, 2016)

Callen said:


> The core VT has not been changed by what Gary Lam as added to his teaching curriculum



Yes, that was what I said.



> In this context, I wasn't talking about what any of them have or have not added to their curriculum. I was referring to the personal attributes which influences the outcome of their VT



If you mean personal physical and mental attributes then these are different for everyone. These do not affect the system as taught and learned.



> Who have you trained with from Gary Lam's school and how do you define "back to the basics"?



By back to basics I mean discarding the Gary Lam teaching curriculum.


----------



## guy b (Oct 10, 2016)

Wing Chun Auckland said:


> We've been over this fellas. Another hijacked thread on why WSL is superior to all other lineages. Yip Man = WSL = PB. We get it. Thanks for your input.



Let's discuss bong and/or the bong lap drill, that would be great. I did try to discuss earlier but nobody wanted to.


----------



## Callen (Oct 10, 2016)

guy b said:


> These do not affect the system as taught and learned.


Interesting perspective. Are you saying that physical and mental attributes do not influence the outcome of someone's Wing Chun?



guy b said:


> By back to basics I mean discarding the Gary Lam teaching curriculum.


Not being confrontational here, but I'm not sure I understand your stance. Are you saying that you have heard some of Gary Lam's students say things that have led you to believe they have discarded or moved away from his teaching curriculum?


----------



## guy b (Oct 10, 2016)

Callen said:


> Interesting perspective. Are you saying that physical and mental attributes do not influence the outcome of someone's Wing Chun?



The method is not its outcome. As long as the method is not broken then that is the main thing. 



> Not being confrontational here, but I'm not sure I understand your stance. Are you saying that you have heard some of Gary Lam's students say things that have led you to believe they have discarded or moved away from his teaching curriculum?



Yes that is correct.


----------



## wingchun100 (Oct 11, 2016)

I guess everyone missed the part where Ip Man taught things a little differently to each student, hence why there has been so many versions of WC.

I don't get why this doesn't happen to other styles. No one ever seems to debate what version of Shotokan Karate is.


----------



## KPM (Oct 11, 2016)

Callen said:


> Not being confrontational here, but I'm not sure I understand your stance. Are you saying that you have heard some of Gary Lam's students say things that have led you to believe they have discarded or moved away from his teaching curriculum?



I think Ernie Barrios certainly has.  What I have seen him doing now looks more like Phillip Bayer's vids.


----------



## Callen (Oct 11, 2016)

KPM said:


> I think Ernie Barrios certainly has. What I have seen him doing now looks more like Phillip Bayer's vids.


Yeah, from a distance I can understand where you're coming from. However, there are many WSLVT practitioners who like to think of WSLVT as the system, not what they were taught by a specific teacher. Ernie Barrios is blending. He didn't necessarily discard Gary Lam's curriculum, it's still in there. He's merely utilizing what works for him within the WSLVT constructs and principals.

I have 2nd generation WSLVT friends that have had the fortune of training with several different 1st generation practitioners. While none of them abandon their Sifu(s) or forget the source from which they drink, they feel like their understanding of WSLVT as a system increases the more they learn.


----------



## LFJ (Oct 12, 2016)

Callen said:


> Ernie Barrios is blending. He didn't necessarily discard Gary Lam's curriculum, it's still in there.



He has said they haven't done GL's system anymore for many years, and I don't see much GL left. He has definitely been in contact with more fighting focused VT groups, and I like it.


----------



## KPM (Oct 12, 2016)

^^^^^ Yes, I tend to agree.  I have known Ernie from some of the forums for many years.  I have seen his personal WCK style change over the years, and to my eye, become much more like PB's version.  To me, "curriculum" means how you are organizing and teaching the material, not the specific content.  I think Ernie has clearly changed the  way he teaches Wing Chun compared to how Gary Lam is teaching it.


----------



## guy b (Oct 12, 2016)

Gary Lam's teaching curriculum is available on line if anyone wants to have a look. It is different to the WSL VT method


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 12, 2016)

guy b said:


> Gary Lam's teaching curriculum is available on line if anyone wants to have a look. It is different to the WSL VT method



Cool. Will look it up. Out of curiosity is the WSL VT teaching curriculum available online?


----------



## guy b (Oct 12, 2016)

wckf92 said:


> Cool. Will look it up. Out of curiosity is the WSL VT teaching curriculum available online?



Not that I know of, but you can get a basic idea by looking around


----------



## guy b (Oct 12, 2016)




----------



## wingchun100 (Oct 12, 2016)

guy b said:


> Let's discuss bong and/or the bong lap drill, that would be great. I did try to discuss earlier but nobody wanted to.


 
Topic drift is not a new thing. LOL


----------



## geezer (Oct 12, 2016)

@ _Guy B--_ So Gary Lam has made changes in his teaching method. Do the other well known proponents of WSL VT (David Peterson, Philip Bayer, Wang Zhi Peng, etc.) all adhere to a similar basic curriculum or are there many approaches?

BTW, with regard to your previous post, trying to surmise someone's curriculum by looking at videos of some of their students doesn't sound like an accurate or very realistic method.


----------



## geezer (Oct 12, 2016)

BTW to get back on topic, here's a video of the "WT" lap sau drill as shown by Alex Richter out of NYC. It's more linear and uses a front punch rather than a back-fist. It also avoids laying two hands on one as per the kuit "Yat fook yee mo yee fook yat". Since it uses a fook or jut rather than a committed lap, some schools prefer calling this repeating sequence "jut-chuen-da" rather than "lap-sau".






​


----------



## KPM (Oct 12, 2016)

^^^^ How about taking this over to the new thread I started so it is not lost in this long thread that many have probably stopped paying attention to?


----------



## geezer (Oct 12, 2016)

KPM said:


> ^^^^ How about taking this over to the new thread I started so it is not lost in this long thread that many have probably stopped paying attention to?



Right. Guess I forgot where I was!


----------



## wingchun100 (Oct 13, 2016)

How about them Bears?


----------

