Chi-Sau from lineage to lineage....

[Kung Fu Wang]

This is moving step Chi Shou.

 

[LFJ]

After all we've exchanged, you still see the world with the narrow blinders of a cult-fanatic.

Cant have a discussion without discussing things. You are not discussing but asking to be convinced when your mind is already set.

Saying things like "my system is the only coherent system" is not an open discussion, it is a statement that you will not allow to be questioned. Quite frankly the reason is if you allow yourself to discuss such a statement openly the outcome would be that you had to admit training an inferior system.

A cult-fanatic or someone not open to discussion or afraid to admit training an inferior system would not create a thread asking people to point out deficiencies in their system, as Guy did.

Phobius, if you think WSLVT is not coherent or is an inferior system, you can tell us why on that thread. I'm waiting to hear it too.

Problem is that even you or some other student of your sifu will pass on this system and when they do, some parts of training will have changed. The way the system is interpreted will be changed over time. Memories fade, ideas shift. Understanding differs. Body changes. Your limbs grow weaker or you become more stiff with time. Eventually your system is not what it was because what it was will no longer suite you.

Ideas shift and understanding differs when concepts are vague and open to interpretation.

You can find a bunch of PB students and even grandstudents on Youtube. Even with different strengths and weaknesses, it can clearly be seen that they're training the same system, with the same understanding, and are all quite good at it. When we look at old private footage of WSL, it's all the same stuff. So, I'm quite confident that it's true when WSL said YM taught him all the same stuff too.

And as Guy suggests, a good system allows for a variety of physical conditions and need not be changed for the practitioner to adapt within it. When PB was in a previous organization and lost his hand, he was basically told to give up... But then we know what he went on to accomplish under WSL.

 

[guy b.]

This will help understand the CSL idea of Chi sao better. Yes it is quite different from the WSLVT way. Im not entirely sure how much of Hendriks stuff is in CSL. Hawkins Cheung seems to be Robert Chu's main man though.

Thanks for this, it is a useful insight into the CSL approach.

If this is representative of Hawkins Cheung's approach then I have learned something new. Is HS a practitioner of HC system as well, or something different?

 

[Phobius]

Phobius, if you think WSLVT is not coherent or is an inferior system, you can tell us why on that thread. I'm waiting to hear it too.

Trolling again? If not the please quote where I said such a thing.

Ideas shift and understanding differs when concepts are vague and open to interpretation.

You can find a bunch of PB students and even grandstudents on Youtube. Even with different strengths and weaknesses, it can clearly be seen that they're training the same system, with the same understanding, and are all quite good at it. When we look at old private footage of WSL, it's all the same stuff. So, I'm quite confident that it's true when WSL said YM taught him all the same stuff too.

Why then does it differ between different students of WSL? Besides we do not know this since you already stated there are no videos whatever of you fighting and your teachings are only behind closed doors to not upset others.

On seminars you teach false stuff to not upset after all.

And as Guy suggests, a good system allows for a variety of physical conditions and need not be changed for the practitioner to adapt within it. When PB was in a previous organization and lost his hand, he was basically told to give up... But then we know what he went on to accomplish under WSL.

Yes, WSL was a good teacher adapting VT to work for PB. But how can you expect PB to understand hand movement. It is like learning VT from a book.

 

[KPM]

Thanks for this, it is a useful insight into the CSL approach.

If this is representative of Hawkins Cheung's approach then I have learned something new. Is HS a practitioner of HC system as well, or something different?

Guy, you really don't pay attention, do you?!! And you are the one not long ago that claimed to have visited a CSL group and were speaking as if you knew what Alan Orr was all about!

 

[LFJ]

Trolling again? If not the please quote where I said such a thing.

It was the quote I just responded to!

You said Guy wouldn't openly discuss the statement that WSLVT is the only coherent system (which is not a statement he made) because the result would be admitting training an inferior system.

That means you think WSLVT would be shown inferior if we opened up that discussion. Well, the discussion has been opened and you're welcome to comment on that thread.

Why then does it differ between different students of WSL?

Some have openly made changes to the system for whatever reasons (e.g. GL, WKL). In some cases it's simply do to lack of training time and seriousness. But there are a number of students who learned directly from WSL over time and share the same understanding of the system.

Yes, WSL was a good teacher adapting VT to work for PB. But how can you expect PB to understand hand movement. It is like learning VT from a book.

Hand movement?

VT is the way of the elbow. PB's condition doesn't require changing the system and he understands it just fine. You know he still has another hand, right?

The previous organization he was in didn't understand VT and so didn't know how to help him.

 

[Phobius]

It was the quote I just responded to!

You said Guy wouldn't openly discuss the statement that WSLVT is the only coherent system (which is not a statement he made) because the result would be admitting training an inferior system.

That means you think WSLVT would be shown inferior if we opened up that discussion. Well, the discussion has been opened and you're welcome to comment on that thread.

I did not say such a thing in that quote, I said that claiming WSLVT is the only coherent VT system is not open discussion, it is making a statement. A statement that only has one possible outcome other than being accepted, and that is claiming it is wrong. Problem with your point of view here is that if it is not the only coherent system then other systems which are not identical to WSLVT may still be true VT as well. This means you might not be training the only true VT, which sounds in your view as blasphemy.

Some have openly made changes to the system for whatever reasons (e.g. GL, WKL). In some cases it's simply do to lack of training time and seriousness. But there are a number of students who learned directly from WSL over time and share the same understanding of the system.

Was not DP one of those close students that has been considered very talented in writing down and passing on WSL teachings without adding his own pieces to it. I know this is clearly not your opinion but still it is what I have heard from several places to be the case.

Hand movement?

VT is the way of the elbow. PB's condition doesn't require changing the system and he understands it just fine. You know he still has another hand, right?

The previous organization he was in didn't understand VT and so didn't know how to help him.

There is hand movement in VT as well, it does serve a point to utilize that hand and both of them in some cases. Saying VT is the way of the elbow is pointless because VT is the way of your feet, your body, your elbow, your joints, your structure. If you punch and dont care about your wrist or hands you will not be a good fighter no matter how well you align your elbows.

PB has what I would call a good weapon because of his position and one I do not admire him. I do however admire what he has done with it.

But unless you are a close friend of PB and have the right to speak for him, lets leave him to comment himself on what he thinks, feels or does. But lacking a hand does make a huge difference, good or bad.

 

[wckf92]

Saying VT is the way of the elbow is pointless because VT is the way of your feet, your body, your elbow, your joints, your structure.

Well stated.

 

[LFJ]

Problem with your point of view here is that if it is not the only coherent system then other systems which are not identical to WSLVT may still be true VT as well. This means you might not be training the only true VT, which sounds in your view as blasphemy.

Neither I nor Guy have claimed it is the only coherent system that exists. We are open to being shown another one. Until then, we're unable to examine any differences it might have with WSLVT.

Was not DP one of those close students that has been considered very talented in writing down and passing on WSL teachings without adding his own pieces to it. I know this is clearly not your opinion but still it is what I have heard from several places to be the case.

The "WSL Blueprint" claim has done a lot, but it's just marketing.

Saying VT is the way of the elbow is pointless because VT is the way of your feet, your body, your elbow, your joints, your structure.

Saying that is pointless. That's every martial art.

The unique elbow concepts are the main thing that sets VT apart.

But lacking a hand does make a huge difference, good or bad.

Sure, but it doesn't change the system at all, his ability to understand it or teach it to others. It's insulting for you to suggest that.

 

[Phobius]

Neither I nor Guy have claimed it is the only coherent system that exists. We are open to being shown another one. Until then, we're unable to examine any differences it might have with WSLVT.

This is not true, every comment made is met with "It is not what we do in WSLVT and as such it is not coherent with the system". You are not seeking knowledge, you are seeking confirmation.

The "WSL Blueprint" claim has done a lot, but it's just marketing.

Bold statement. You care to take that fight with DP instead. I might even think it is damn near offensive statement. Especially coming from a student that may never have met WSL.

Saying that is pointless. That's every martial art.

The unique elbow concepts are the main thing that sets VT apart.

Still it was you who said hand movement has no part in VT, you are now leaving the subject. If you think it has no meaning then you are the one saying there is nothing but elbow in VT.

Sure, but it doesn't change the system at all, his ability to understand it or teach it to others. It's insulting for you to suggest that.

I do not doubt his skills or his talents. Nor his ability as a teacher, but to say his view is not different is just being ignorant to the truth. A system being unchanged by the people teaching it is a romantic view and one I do not share. You can not teach without correcting students, and you can not correct students without basing it on your own experience. As such a system is changed pending on who teaches it.

 

[LFJ]

every comment made is met with "It is not what we do in WSLVT and as such it is not coherent with the system".

Not even once. I've never called something incoherent simply because it's different. I actually detail what makes it incoherent. Then people get upset and make straw man attacks against me like this.

Bold statement. You care to take that fight with DP instead.

Fight? lol

Still it was you who said hand movement has no part in VT, you are now leaving the subject. If you think it has no meaning then you are the one saying there is nothing but elbow in VT.

I never said that.

You can not teach without correcting students, and you can not correct students without basing it on your own experience. As such a system is changed pending on who teaches it.

It is clear you have not studied a coherent system and seen it stay intact through generations. I've seen it happen through 5 generations. Of course if your ideas are vague and open to interpretation it can change dramatically in 1 generation.

 

[Phobius]

Not even once. I've never called something incoherent simply because it's different. I actually detail what makes it incoherent. Then people get upset and make straw man attacks against me like this.

You state systems are incoherent based on how you read a sentence. That is to state a system is incoherent. And if you read your posts most just say, "it is not coherent because we train true VT stated by WSL and we do not do like you". That is not a discussion nor is anything I am saying straw man attacks.

Fight? lol

Not physical but fight about you stating he is lying or got it all wrong.

It is clear you have not studied a coherent system and seen it stay intact through generations. I've seen it happen through 5 generations. Of course if your ideas are vague and open to interpretation it can change dramatically in 1 generation.

5 generations. Given that you lived to see and train with YM, WSL and PB you also have a sifu trained by PB which in turned trained another student which in turn trained a student that became a sifu in his own right.

If you are that old then that is great for you but how come you follow WSLVT and PB and not just state you train VT pure and simple? You should know more than them by now.

 

[LFJ]

And if you read your posts most just say, "it is not coherent because we train true VT stated by WSL and we do not do like you". That is not a discussion nor is anything I am saying straw man attacks.

Quotes or it's a straw man.

In this thread I explained why stepping in DCS is a system defect, putting the cart before the horse. I didn't say it's wrong just because I don't do it.

Not physical but fight about you stating he is lying or got it all wrong.

I don't think he is lying. It's just that he had occasional guidance, not year-round instruction. Others who were more close knit over time share the same understanding of the system and DP differs.

5 generations. Given that you lived to see and train with YM, WSL and PB you also have a sifu trained by PB which in turned trained another student which in turn trained a student that became a sifu in his own right.

If you are that old then that is great for you but how come you follow WSLVT and PB and not just state you train VT pure and simple? You should know more than them by now.

Five generations counting WSL. The other four are all still living and training and the VT concepts and principles have not changed, including laterally within each generation.

That makes it very hard to believe it didn't come from YM or that YM taught dozens of drastically different versions of the same system all with different concepts and principles, many of which are not functional. That's just the "interpretation" gimmick.

VT is very abstract and clearly not everyone understood it, due partly to lack of exposure to the teacher and practical experience, and partly to YM's well-documented temperament and teaching style. He was more interested in having one good student than ten lousy ones. Not that only one turned out good, but most did not.

Believe what you want though.

 

[guy b.]

I said that claiming WSLVT is the only coherent VT system is not open discussion, it is making a statement. A statement that only has one possible outcome other than being accepted, and that is claiming it is wrong.

Nobody claimed this. You seem to be getting angry over nothing.

 

[guy b.]

if you read your posts most just say, "it is not coherent because we train true VT stated by WSL and we do not do like you". That is not a discussion nor is anything I am saying straw man attacks.

This itself is a straw man.

 

[guy b.]

every comment made is met with "It is not what we do in WSLVT and as such it is not coherent with the system". You are not seeking knowledge, you are seeking confirmation.

Generally inconsistencies are pointed out specifically. The above is not anything like the way discussions tend to go.

 

[guy b.]

Phobius, how about addressing my specifi replies to you in post 78?

Thanks

 

[geezer]

...When PB was in a previous organization and lost his hand, he was basically told to give up... But then we know what he went on to accomplish under WSL.

This is something I admire tremendously about Philip Bayer, and it discredits that other organization.

I do not admire the way some PB followers (you, Guy, Kevin G., et al.) are convinced beyond all reason that they have the one and only true VT. That you and Guy are unable to see this is why further discussion is moot.

 

[Phobius]

Phobius, how about addressing my specifi replies to you in post 78?

Thanks

You mean below points?

guy b.: There are many "true systems" in martial arts. Examples include BJJ, SPM, Hsing Yi/Yiquan, Ving Tsun. I am not arguing about who is the best fighter; I am interested in the system of VT- how it works.

My answer: There are more than a single "lineage" of BJJ. Same goes for Ving Tsun. Hsing Yi/Yiquan I do not know much about in terms of lineages and history so will not express any knowledge there. So saying any of them is "true" means either you accept all parts and lineages of them to be true... or it is an incomplete sentence.

guy b.: Some things are objectively better for the purpose to which they were designed than others. Not all MA systems are equivalent. I can't understand why discrimination in such things causes offence.

My answer: It does not cause offence except when you say WSLVT is the perfect system in terms of fighting according to YM's concepts and any change would make it worse. This is identical to saying your system is the only true system.

And finally I think the important point, you stated: I don't think I have said that VT is the only coherent system. I don't mind if someone points out a glaring problem with VT, I would just shift my training in another direction. This has happened to me more than once in my life training MA.

My answer:

VT is an internally coherent and consistent fighting system. Changing parts of the system does not result in equally valid expressions of that system. It just results in breaks and disconnects.

VT is what was taught by YM. I don't have much interest in other mainland systems

A coherent error correcting system like VT shouldn't change because of individual stylistic differences. Changing it for this kind of reason is a misunderstanding of what it is for. Someone's own interpretation of concepts is a change to the system, not a stylistic difference.

With a more coherent system having answers that render these workarounds unnecessary, and that isn't in direct conflict with fundamental principles of the system, I can honestly say what I train stands up to questioning and testing. Others not so much, but I'm supposed to accept their ideas because there are more people who hold them? That's an Appeal to the Majority.

That's not a fair judgement. It's not just a claim of superiority coming from nothing more than a biased attitude. It's an observation made by literally thousands who have switched lineages and noticed the same thing. Each step and element of WSLVT simply fit together and function better as a coherent development system. That's objective fact in all fairness.

I don't think certain other WC are a product of overhauling WC, more a matter of never getting WC. The main marker of this fact in the present is that they are contradictory and they do not work as fighting systems.

Nobody is claiming that WSL VT is the only wing chun that works, but it is one. Personally I have not seen another, but one may exist

The entire system is centered upon unique punching methods. He would've had to rework the entire system from step-1 if it were not, but his system is too coherent, when compared to the disjointed collection of ideas of many others, for that to be the likely case. This is the first observation people make when they come to WSLVT from other lineages. Every piece fits together in logical progression further developing the same idea to a simple end-goal.

I will take the version that is coherent, non-contradictory, and that works. Popularity is irrelevant. Source is irrelevant. I have not encountered other methods beside WSL VT that do this. I do not rule out the possibility that they could exist or that you and others could have experienced them. I can only work on my own experience.

From my perspective some other interpretations of wing chun do or believe things that I do not agree with. I think this is normal in wing chun due to the diversity of opinion. I don't think that WSL VT is a different interpretation; I think it is more like a complete and coherent understanding of the system vs less complete or more incoherent understandings. If WSL did this himself then perhaps he went above and beyond what YM taught; who knows and is it really relevant? What WSL thinking does though is to make things work that do not otherwise work, im my experience. But then I have not experienced all wing chun and so cannot speak about the individual experience of others. I am sure that there is other workable wing chun in the world and it is quite possible that everyone here has a workable system that I have not experienced.

Taking WSL VT as an example, YM showed WSL a lot of different things, some of which were more coherent than others. WSL then made a knife form based on his own ideas and those of YM. The WSL form is more dynamic and more attacking than the YM form. Of course neither tested their ideas with the knives in real knife fights with death as a possibility. And this is one of the few people that YM showed the knives to in their entirety.

You want more quotes? I have not even made any quote from this thread or the DCS discussion or anything of that sort.... basically because you can already just look back at those.

 

[geezer]

@Phobius: Dude, you just made my day. Thanks! ....Now I can sign off and go do something more worthwhile than bicker on this forum.