Are you really interested in exchanging ideas?

[wingchun100]

I would like to see more people talk about what they do instead of trying to invalidate someone else. It's not necessary to believe or make it about what's right or what's wrong.

Guy A does this and Guy B does something else. That's how they do things and both may have some knowledge that is useful. But we won't know if all they are doing is fighting debates and try to present the better argument instead of sharing their experience.

Exactly. The discussions should be about sharing what works for you, then the other person saying, "Hmmm...never thought of it that way."

But instead what happens when you share something that is different from how the other guy does it? "That would never work!!! That isn't real wing chun!!! You're stupid!!!"

 

[wingchun100]

I would like to see more people talk about what they do instead of trying to invalidate someone else. It's not necessary to believe or make it about what's right or what's wrong.

Guy A does this and Guy B does something else. That's how they do things and both may have some knowledge that is useful. But we won't know if all they are doing is fighting debates and try to present the better argument instead of sharing their experience.

The Guy A and Guy B thing...that CANNOT be a coincidence. LOL

 

[wingchun100]

Because, as I've pointed out in a different thread, absolute transmission of information is impossible human-to-human. Each person will add and remove bits, mostly by interpretation. If two people were trained ABSOLUTELY THE SAME, and were both highly dedicated and intelligent, they'd end up with two different variations of the same thing. There's no way to avoid that, no magical training method stops it from happening.

And yet we don't hear about such similar infighting between people of any other style. Well, at least I have never heard of that. If anyone can point to any examples, I would love to see it.

 

[KPM]

^^^^ I know Silat Serak and Bukti Negara has had its fair share of such things!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In VT the strategy which requires understanding by the mind is very sparse, and it is recorded quite explicitly in writing.

As Philipp Bayer says, "Understanding the genius of Ving Tsun should not take longer than an afternoon. By then, everything should be clear"

Understanding of strategy and tactic is indeed passed into the body and mind via physical exercises, not by listening to the teacher speak. Learning the system physically in the correct way is by far the most important thing.



No, it isn't. System understanding is required by the teacher. It isn't required by the student. Knowing the reason for performing a particular drill is of course very useful in terms of understanding, but the system is not learned by listening, pondering, coming up with ideas and new developments. Provided practice is taken seriously and training is done to the best of one's abilities, VT can be learned fully while having only very basic conscious conceptual understanding of the system.

What it does require though is immense trust and perseverence.



YM certainly didn't share the entirety of the physical movement with every student. Many simply copied other students. Many did not complete the system. Many never fought with VT for example, which is a necessary part of the development.

Where YM did show teach the physical movements to particular individuals (of course in the correct order, at the correct time), what he often didn't do was make sure the students knew what they were doing. Many therefore left with parts of the system, not yet functional, which they assumed were for other things than the actual purpose, for example chi sau drills. Many also created their own understanding of why they were doing certain exercises, which quickly led to the degeneration of their wing chun.

By looking at some of the wing chun derived from YM's teaching it is often clearly possible to tell where the originator of the style stopped learning the system from YM.

You're clearly not going to acknowledge that learning depends upon the human mind, and that concepts are NOT contained and transmitted entirely in movements (not the same areas of the brain). I'm just going to drop this line of discussion. Your technical discussions are more fruitful than this - you're denying what we actually know about how the brain works.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And yet we don't hear about such similar infighting between people of any other style. Well, at least I have never heard of that. If anyone can point to any examples, I would love to see it.

Most arts will have some amount of this - it depends upon at least one person perceiving the others as "wrong" and putting that case forward, and the others disputing it. In most arts, there are few people who will vehemently state that others don't understand the art, at all, so most disputes are more technical and nuanced in nature. But it does happen.

 

[Transk53]

Yes, if only we ALL followed that code.

You know what, I am still struggling to understand, how that does not work for others. Think it is dreadful thought of sticking to a singular train of thought, about whatever. Personally I would find that boring. Training would become almost robotic, and I think the persons train of thought too. Any system needs a bit of variation imho, does not mean change, just means trying different methods if you will, then on to other perspectives. It's a good thing not being robotic.

 

[guy b]

You're clearly not going to acknowledge that learning depends upon the human mind, and that concepts are NOT contained and transmitted entirely in movements (not the same areas of the brain). I'm just going to drop this line of discussion. Your technical discussions are more fruitful than this - you're denying what we actually know about how the brain works.

If learning in VT consists of physical exercies which embed movement patterns (which you acknowledge can be learned almost exactly), and if in practice (and learning) VT doesn't require conscious thought about concepts or anything else, then what are you even arguing about?

Again I think an element of hippydom in terms of wanting everyone to be friends, truth to exist in every approach, and all approaches to be relative and to get to the same place by a different road is clouding any clear assessment of the situation. I think also an element of hubris about your position as a brain expert and embarrassment at the potential that you might have to retract a fairly rash early assessment of a system you know nothing about.

My opinion of aikido? I don't have one.

 

[Juany118]

You're clearly not going to acknowledge that learning depends upon the human mind, and that concepts are NOT contained and transmitted entirely in movements (not the same areas of the brain). I'm just going to drop this line of discussion. Your technical discussions are more fruitful than this - you're denying what we actually know about how the brain works.

The problem is this. It is not enough that WSLVT is an effective fighting art. WSL himself must be the only person to have learned the "true" form of VT/WC/WT from YM. Ergo, they have to play games as to the influence of teaching methods (first deny they exist then when confronted with proof change arguments), how the brain absorbs and retains information etc.

Why in the world this is so important as to require the contortions in logic and actual 180 degree changes in arguments is beyond me.

 

[Juany118]

Most arts will have some amount of this - it depends upon at least one person perceiving the others as "wrong" and putting that case forward, and the others disputing it. In most arts, there are few people who will vehemently state that others don't understand the art, at all, so most disputes are more technical and nuanced in nature. But it does happen.

Yep, I remember that from my Aikido days. Thing is though I don't recall anyone saying "only Bob knows the true Aikido as taught by O' Sensei. We would debate whether it should be taught as a fighting art or as an art for spiritual cultivation etc. but placing individual students of O' Sensei in positions akin to being "the one true prophet?" This I have not seen else where. Even in JKD it is about "JKD Concepts" and "Original JKD", not the people but the systems.

 

[Transk53]

If learning in VT consists of physical exercies which embed movement patterns (which you acknowledge can be learned almost exactly), and if in practice (and learning) VT doesn't require conscious thought about concepts or anything else, then what are you even arguing about?

Again I think an element of hippydom in terms of wanting everyone to be friends, truth to exist in every approach, and all approaches to be relative and to get to the same place by a different road is clouding any clear assessment of the situation. I think also an element of hubris about your position as a brain expert and embarrassment at the potential that you might have to retract a fairly rash early assessment of a system you know nothing about.

My opinion of aikido? I don't have one.

There is truth in every approach, and all systems ultimately arrive at the same conclusion.

 

[wtxs]

I hang around to learn and pick up different views and their own interpretation of the art.

I love doing wc but im still new, so cant really provide any advice or contribute to any discussions.

Try to stay out of the political side as it does not help me get better, the human body works in many ways and there is always multiple solutions to any situation.

You are an fast learner

 

[Juany118]

There is truth in every approach, and all systems ultimately arrive at the same conclusion.

What people forget is when it comes to martial arts you are not talking about "small t" truth such as "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God." That is an objective truth. You are talking instead talking about "big T" Truth, the meaning of life "Truth", the personal Truth. Every person is different physically, mentally and emotionally Martial arts are the synergy of these dynamics put into motion. So by definition the Truth will be subjective.

 

[Transk53]

What people forget is when it comes to martial arts you are not talking about "small t" truth such as "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God." That is an objective truth. You are talking instead talking about "big T" Truth, the meaning of life "Truth", the personal Truth. Every person is different physically, mentally and emotionally Martial arts are the synergy of these dynamics put into motion. So by definition the Truth will be subjective.

Yes good answer. You don't really know with a lot of things. I just best summarise it as "**** happens" You can never do anything to mitigate that, but at least can be worked around.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yep, I remember that from my Aikido days. Thing is though I don't recall anyone saying "only Bob knows the true Aikido as taught by O' Sensei. We would debate whether it should be taught as a fighting art or as an art for spiritual cultivation etc. but placing individual students of O' Sensei in positions akin to being "the one true prophet?" This I have not seen else where. Even in JKD it is about "JKD Concepts" and "Original JKD", not the people but the systems.

Agreed. The closest I've seen is in regards to Saito Sensei, who appears to be the closest to teaching as Ueshiba Morihei originally did (as acknowledged by Stan Pranin). However, I don't hear much of anyone claiming that's the only right way, just that it's the way closest to the way the founder taught.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm pretty sure if the founders were still alive and still in their prime, they would have made changes to how they fight, just for the simple fact that fighting systems come in contact with each other more frequently. The fighting strategies aren't as local as they were in the past.

 

[Transk53]

I'm pretty sure if the founders were still alive and still in their prime, they would have made changes to how they fight, just for the simple fact that fighting systems come in contact with each other more frequently. The fighting strategies aren't as local as they were in the past.

So I guess that is because more and more, treat the Martial Arts as a normal thing to do. In a modern age context.

 

[JowGaWolf]

So I guess that is because more and more, treat the Martial Arts as a normal thing to do. In a modern age context.

I think you are actually correct about Martial Arts as being a normal thing to do, which means more people are training it now than ever before. Each person has an understanding that fits them and will make an imprint on the system especially if they become teachers. If I trained TKD and became an instructor, then I would be one of the TKD schools that didn't do the fancy kicks. My teaching of TKD would be based on how I was able to get TKD to work for me. Because I have a self-defense mindset, I would take out all of the things that were fancy. I would change the height of certain kicks with the goal of attacking without exposing the groin as much. I would still be teaching but the approach to TKD would not be same as what we see other schools do. Kicking with the hands down would be against the law in my TKD school.

 

[Transk53]

I think you are actually correct about Martial Arts as being a normal thing to do, which means more people are training it now than ever before. Each person has an understanding that fits them and will make an imprint on the system especially if they become teachers. If I trained TKD and became an instructor, then I would be one of the TKD schools that didn't do the fancy kicks. My teaching of TKD would be based on how I was able to get TKD to work for me. Because I have a self-defense mindset, I would take out all of the things that were fancy. I would change the height of certain kicks with the goal of attacking without exposing the groin as much. I would still be teaching but the approach to TKD would not be same as what we see other schools do. Kicking with the hands down would be against the law in my TKD school.

Very interesting, thanks for sharing. I don't know why, but the TKD surprises me, but yes, I can see what you are saying to certain degree of course. So more lower kicks, but in higher frequency?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Very interesting, thanks for sharing. I don't know why, but the TKD surprises me, but yes, I can see what you are saying to certain degree of course. So more lower kicks, but in higher frequency?

My statement about TKD is based on my knowledge of what Jow Ga does. We train to deal with high kicks and we know how to exploit the weaknesses and opportunities that come with kicking high. If I could kick like TKD then I would do kick at a height where the kick lands slightly out of range of where my opponent thinks he can grab it. I would try to make him over extend and reach for my kicks. By not kicking high, I don't expose my knee or my groin as much. It also makes it difficult to have my standing leg swept from under me.

Keep in mind that I train for self-defense so when I see a standing leg, I'm instantly thinking about breaking it. Also keep in mind that sporting environments have rules that protect the fighter and makes it possible to do things that one shouldn't attempt or should attempt with caution in a self-defense situation.

I think some people don't think about the context in which some techniques are done and as a result tend to think that the technique can be done anywhere in any situation. Most of what is trained in Martial arts is trained in the context of someone who is the same height and size as you are. This guy tries high kicks against a much taller opponent. In my book this is a high risk thing to do . Being that he was so much taller lower kicks would have been better. Every time he kicked I thought the guy was going to kick him in his standing leg or in the groin.