Does WSLVT exist?

[LFJ]

Learning things out of order will always occur unless you put all your starting students in a specific course where they need to do each step individually before being allowed to pass on to the next. As such not being able to see or hear what other students on next steps are doing.

This was ways of old, not way of the europeans in a modern society. So every time a student miss a few classes which they will for sickness, vacation, working overtime, training something else... you name it. They will miss out on parts of the teaching and continue where everyone else are at the point when they return. Perhaps not a good thing but it is reality, and another thing that is reality as well. In time those students have a chance to become just as good and sometimes even a lot better than other students.

Their path is not doomed from the start.

I disagree with this teaching method and class management.

I was the one saying I cant do what I am supposed to do in that drill properly if the height difference is too big.

What's causing the problem is not height difference, but what you have been told you're supposed to do in the drill.

You are the one saying this drill should just be about the technique of using your elbow properly. No realistic force management, no reaction to force. No reflexes, no sensing nothing. So you are the one describing the drill as purely technique based.

A martial art technique in English usually means something like a kick, punch, block, lock, throw, etc. as it is applied. VT isn't based on this technique vs that technique. That's why we say we are not a technique-based system, but a principle-based one.

Contraction, expansion, and rotation of the elbow are not techniques against other techniques. They are just basic elbow mechanics.

Doing some specific action to control your opponent's arm, like you said you do, is a "this vs that" technique-based exercise.

Chasing hands are what you are doing given that you do the drill in a forced way to focus on elbow without any care for what your partner is moving, the angles, any potential force (Or you claim there is no force ever? Nice going then to have your students so in control they have no force in their move.)

DCS is not a fight. I'm not looking at my partner as an opponent whose arm I must control. I'm not even thinking about hitting someone. We are simply using each other's arms to mutually train our elbow control together in an abstract manner.

You are thinking stick, feel, roll, control, hit, this technique vs that technique. It's a technique-based approach and you have already discovered for yourself that it doesn't work and you need to change it.

Here is a little newsflash for you, you are not me. You have no clue what I do, or how I do it.

You just explained to me what you do and how you do it. And you are not the first WT guy to have done that. I've had this conversation in person.

 

[guy b.]

Learning things out of order will always occur unless you put all your starting students in a specific course where they need to do each step individually before being allowed to pass on to the next. As such not being able to see or hear what other students on next steps are doing.

A beginner can practice with anyone more advanced with them in training the next step of their development. Teaching the beginner will help the more advanced person. Two beginners can also practise together. There is no need to have the whole class doing the same thing. There is no need for the beginner to learn out of order and in fact doing so is very damaging to their development. The order of learning exists for a reason.

Actually you are wrong in more ways than one. I was the one saying I cant do what I am supposed to do in that drill properly if the height difference is too big. You are the one saying this drill should just be about the technique of using your elbow properly. No realistic force management, no reaction to force. No reflexes, no sensing nothing. So you are the one describing the drill as purely technique based.

Learning elbow is not application of technique. It is attribute development, of which there is a large amount in VT. Approaching DCS as a drill whereby you are sensing force and reacting as if a technique based application is a flawed approach when it is just a first stage elbow development drill. If it is something else for you then great- you haven't described what it is though or what you think it is training?

Hey, you are wrong yet again. Chasing hands are what you are doing given that you do the drill in a forced way to focus on elbow without any care for what your partner is moving, the angles, any potential force (Or you claim there is no force ever?

Lol, you do get very emotional. There is no chasing hands when you are focused only on development of your own elbow. The drill as you practice it will lead to hand chasing because arm contact is what you are training to work from.

Here is a little newsflash for you, you are not me. You have no clue what I do, or how I do it. Next time you feel the need to make assumptions out of thin air then stop writing that text altogether

Look, nobody is trying to make a fool of you. If your WT is something different then define what it is and defend why you do things the way you do. When LFJ points out that your drill will train hand chasing from a VT perspective then of course he is correct. You look a bit daft shouting reactively back "no YOU chase hands". Please take the time to explain what you are doing and why. Maybe your entire conceptual base is different to ours? I don't know until you decide to participate in a non adversarial way.

In VT there is no reason that a tall person can't train with a short person in DCS, beyond ridiculous extremes like 5yo child and adult training together. You are very vague on this point, first talking about having to sink your elbow, then failing to respond to further questions. Please just explain exactly where your problem is in physical terms because I can't imagine what you are doing. If it turns out that you exaggerated for effect and that you can in fact train with short adults then please just admit it and we can move on. I will not hold it against you.

 

[guy b.]

Guy b and LFJ which lineage do you guys think resembles WSL the most out of the Ip man students?

I have never seen any that was similar, but then I haven't seen them all.

 

[guy b.]

Guy B and LFJ have you guys touched hands with a good CST student at all?

Never have. I think they might be lacking from UK, unless you know of any?

 

[Phobius]

A beginner can practice with anyone more advanced with them in training the next step of their development. Teaching the beginner will help the more advanced person. Two beginners can also practise together. There is no need to have the whole class doing the same thing. There is no need for the beginner to learn out of order and in fact doing so is very damaging to their development. The order of learning exists for a reason.

That is your thoughts. I have said previously we don't see DCS as a big drill nor do we do it often anymore.

Learning elbow is not application of technique. It is attribute development, of which there is a large amount in VT. Approaching DCS as a drill whereby you are sensing force and reacting as if a technique based application is a flawed approach when it is just a first stage elbow development drill. If it is something else for you then great- you haven't described what it is though or what you think it is training?

What do you mean with elbow training if you have no techniques in it for your beginners? They can just do what they please as long as their elbow moves a certain way? If they move in a pre defined motion they are doing a technique. So therefore it is technique based drill for you.

Call it whatever you want but that is all it is if it is all you do.

Lol, you do get very emotional. There is no chasing hands when you are focused only on development of your own elbow. The drill as you practice it will lead to hand chasing because arm contact is what you are training to work from.

Because I try to write to you and you respond in telling me what you think I do which as if it is fact. That is not discussing. It is telling me I was wasting my time talking with you.

If you wanted to know what I do you (or LFJ) would ask, not state what you believe to be facts. I just don't like trolling. It makes me think about all the time I lost on the forum that could be better spent.

Look, nobody is trying to make a fool of you. If your WT is something different then define what it is and defend why you do things the way you do. When LFJ points out that your drill will train hand chasing from a VT perspective then of course he is correct. You look a bit daft shouting reactively back "no YOU chase hands". Please take the time to explain what you are doing and why. Maybe your entire conceptual base is different to ours? I don't know until you decide to participate in a non adversarial way.

First of all there is no shouting. Second of all you do a drill where you do something despite angles to an incoming move without force. That if anything should be chasing hands. If there is no force to Palm or Punch then why not just punch forward. You sound as if you chase hands because you force for instance a bong Sau with nothing causing it to roll.

We are simply doing it with forward intent. If an angle is steep it does not trigger the same movement. It would break principles.

In VT there is no reason that a tall person can't train with a short person in DCS, beyond ridiculous extremes like 5yo child and adult training together. You are very vague on this point, first talking about having to sink your elbow, then failing to respond to further questions. Please just explain exactly where your problem is in physical terms because I can't imagine what you are doing. If it turns out that you exaggerated for effect and that you can in fact train with short adults then please just admit it and we can move on. I will not hold it against you.

Well I am trying to say it simple way. It causes me to do other movements that are not part of DCS. Like for instance I can just punch through. It depends on the angles but it sounds as if you force yourself to do a technique in order to train elbow. If you force yourself to do something no matter what of course you can make the drill work because you ignore efficiency and going forward when way is free.

 

[LFJ]

@Phobius

You keep thinking there is an opponent and we must do "this vs that" in DCS.

That is causing a mental block for you to understand what we're talking about when we say we're just using each other's arms to train contraction, expansion, and rotation of the elbow.

There can be no such thing as chasing hands when there is no hand in our minds. There's no opponent and no arm to control. It's not even considered that there's a person in front of us, much less one that is trying to hit us. We are out of range to even hit each other.

We just use each other's arms to train control of our own elbow within the boundaries of our own structures, like on the dummy later.

We lay the foundation in SNT, then learn the effect with a borrowed limb in DCS. Dummy further refines position. But DCS is too early to talk about exchanging force. You don't teach calculus before algebra. You don't teach algebra before addition. And you don't teach addition before counting to 10!

It's an entirely differently mental shift from what you're doing now.

 

[Phobius]

@Phobius

You keep thinking there is an opponent and we must do "this vs that" in DCS.

That is causing a mental block for you to understand what we're talking about when we say we're just using each other's arms to train contraction, expansion, and rotation of the elbow.

So you do DCS on a dummy? If your partner moves towards you then you are not alone. To act as if you are despite having a partner doing a punch or palm strike or reacting to your move then you are not doing a solo drill. Acting as if you are is same as imposing your action on your partner rather than reacting to his/her actions... This is chasing hands given you stick to their hands.

There can be no such thing as chasing hands when there is no hand in our minds. There's no opponent and no arm to control. It's not even considered that there's a person in front of us, much less one that is trying to hit us. We are out of range to even hit each other.

It is at least the way I used to train it that the partners move causes us to move in order to deflect their palm or punch by sensing how it causes the arm to roll. It is not to impose a deflecting move but to sense how it forces your arm to roll or move.

We just use each other's arms to train control of our own elbow within the boundaries of our own structures, like on the dummy later.

We do too, it's a drill. You are using a partner in a drill. But our structure is not done despite our partner but because of what our partner does. I guess this is the big difference in how we see the drill. You seem to impose yourself and do stuff no matter what your partner does. We act due to the movement of the partner.

We lay the foundation in SNT, then learn the effect with a borrowed limb in DCS. Dummy further refines position. But DCS is too early to talk about exchanging force. You don't teach calculus before algebra. You don't teach algebra before addition. And you don't teach addition before counting to 10!

It's an entirely differently mental shift from what you're doing now.

Actually in my view you are doing a drill different to how I do it. So it means different things because to you it is static and just teaching how to do a "technique" correctly. We focus on the transition mostly. We don't do because we are told but because we feel it. We have other drills to do our moves against someone without initial contact.

 

[LFJ]

So you do DCS on a dummy? If your partner moves towards you then you are not alone. To act as if you are despite having a partner doing a punch or palm strike or reacting to your move then you are not doing a solo drill. Acting as if you are is same as imposing your action on your partner rather than reacting to his/her actions... This is chasing hands given you stick to their hands.

You're still thinking "on the partner". You don't get it... There is no sticking and following either.

It is at least the way I used to train it that the partners move causes us to move in order to deflect their palm or punch by sensing how it causes the arm to roll. It is not to impose a deflecting move but to sense how it forces your arm to roll or move.


We do too, it's a drill. You are using a partner in a drill. But our structure is not done despite our partner but because of what our partner does. I guess this is the big difference in how we see the drill. You seem to impose yourself and do stuff no matter what your partner does. We act due to the movement of the partner.

Yes. I know. You are sticking, feeling, yielding, rolling, etc.. That's why you're making problems for yourself. What does all this do for you? You think you are going to stick, feel, yield, and roll with arms that are flying at you in a fight?

Actually in my view you are doing a drill different to how I do it. So it means different things because to you it is static and just teaching how to do a "technique" correctly.

If I move my arm it's not static. Elbow contraction, for example, is not a technique. How do you think I'm going to contract my elbow on you?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Using whole body power is good! But that clip is very exaggerated. Unnecessarily so! This is where Andreas Hoffman learned to do his forms so "exaggerated." Cheng Kwong is his primary teacher.

IMO, during the beginner level training, the "exaggeration" will be needed. Many CMA systems use "exaggeration" to train certain "body method".

 

[wtxs]

I recalled awhile back someone said there is no back fist strike used in WC. Watching this video, there it is ... since Lun Kai learn WC from directly fromYM, it must be legit?

Now we will have to decide who has the real YM WC/VT that had been debated?

 

[Phobius]

You're still thinking "on the partner". You don't get it... There is no sticking and following either.

So you do not have contact with your partner during DCS drill? You do not keep contact either?

Yes. I know. You are sticking, feeling, yielding, rolling, etc.. That's why you're making problems for yourself. What does all this do for you? You think you are going to stick, feel, yield, and roll with arms that are flying at you in a fight?

Sticking is a thing that may exist for a moment or more in chi sao and some drills. Not fighting. Feeling exist in fights whenever there is contact for a microsecond. You need to train to grasp that moment of contact which it seems to me your WSLVT care little about.

Yes it is there even on a quick jab. No it is not chasing hands. Chasing hands means seeking the contact, this is about understanding contact.

If I move my arm it's not static. Elbow contraction, for example, is not a technique. How do you think I'm going to contract my elbow on you?

If you move your arm you are not static. But if you drill does not change appearance it is static drill.

I consider it to be a technique if done as a pre defined move and not as a natural response.

When you contract you elbow you have no forward intent? We do it as part of feeling an incoming force.

When a palm to me gets pointed to my stomach it comes in at a 0 degree angle or slight upward angle. Jut sao would not do anything to an actual attack at this point unless you can get your elbow lower. Unless collapsed towards the body the elbow will only slightly touch the arm of your partner.

I mean I barely recall it, just that the drill became so wrong at such height difference. I am trying to recreate the event I barely remember.

IF you are a very tall person against a very short person.

We are talking about a 4'11'' partner to a 6'5'' guy. Or something of that sort. A lot of text about a non normal encounter.

And to clarify more. Force means not brute force such as forcing your way in but rather an intent for palm/punch to reach its target in front of me. DCS is not about fighting or hitting.

 

[KPM]

I recalled awhile back someone said there is no back fist strike used in WC. Watching this video, there it is ... since Lun Kai learn WC from directly fromYM, it must be legit?

There is a "Gwai Choi" in Ku Lo Pin Sun Wing Chun as well as Tang Yik Weng Chun. I believe Koo Sang also taught a backfist strike.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

I recalled awhile back someone said there is no back fist strike used in WC. Watching this video, there it is ... since Lun Kai learn WC from directly fromYM, it must be legit?

Now we will have to decide who has the real YM WC/VT that had been debated?

No, we don't have to decide that. We just have to practice a version of wing chun/martial arts that agrees with us the most.
These are the actual facts, there rest is just hearsay and guessing:
1. YM changed his wing chun serveral times.
2. YM taught people differently
3. Only people who trained with YM know exactly what he taught

 

[KPM]

^^^^^^ Common sense!

 

[Nobody Important]

No, we don't have to decide that. We just have to practice a version of wing chun/martial arts that agrees with us the most.
These are the actual facts, there rest is just hearsay and guessing:
1. YM changed his wing chun serveral times.
2. YM taught people differently
3. Only people who trained with YM know exactly what he taught

The real question is what makes what Yip Man taught the standard that all Wing Chun branches must follow? Popularity? Seems to me that most of the dissent comes from the descendents of Yip Man, the rest comes from the weird ramblings of those that would seek to knock Yip Man from his throne of popularity.

 

[guy b.]

I consider it to be a technique if done as a pre defined move and not as a natural response.

It's a drill FFS. You are training elbow positions and movement between. You are entraining attributes, not training techniques you will use in fighting.

When a palm to me gets pointed to my stomach it comes in at a 0 degree angle or slight upward angle.

Then get them to point it at your elbow so that you can do something with it. It isn't training a response to an attack on your nether regions from a mdget, it is just giving your elbow something to move around.

Jut sao would not do anything to an actual attack at this point unless you can get your elbow lower. Unless collapsed towards the body the elbow will only slightly touch the arm of your partner.

Jut sao? I don't understand. Why would you be jutting the palm when elbow not extended? What are you intending to train with this?

 

[guy b.]

1. YM changed his wing chun serveral times

Nope. VT is VT

2. YM taught people differently

Different people certainly arrived at different results

3. Only people who trained with YM know exactly what he taught

That is why we remember what they told us

 

[guy b.]

I have said previously we don't see DCS as a big drill nor do we do it often anymore.

It is a big drill for beginners. Do you not have any in your classes?

If they move in a pre defined motion they are doing a technique. So therefore it is technique based drill for you.

A technique in MA is a complex physical movement which can be applied to an opponent as is, like a triangle choke, a footsweep, an uppercut. Technique based MA teach techniques and work on stringing them together. Principle based MA teach ideas and build from them to fighting. Technique based approach is faster but relies on massive personal effort to achieve coherence. Principle based starts coherent (or should do) but is difficult to maintain that coherence in the face of adversity. VT is a concept and principle based system.

Basic abstract elbow movements are not techniques because they have no direct application- they are just a fundamental piece of the jigsaw. A technique based approach to DCS imagines that it is something like 1 handed fighting, where you are learning reflexive reactions which can be applied directly to fighting. What you are doing in other words.

If you wanted to know what I do you (or LFJ) would ask, not state what you believe to be facts. I

We are debating. Come back with your own points when challenged, or reformulate your argument if discussion exposes a flaw in it. Don't get emotional about it, it is a waste of your and my time.

That if anything should be chasing hands. If there is no force to Palm or Punch then why not just punch forward. You sound as if you chase hands because you force for instance a bong Sau with nothing causing it to roll.

Bong is not a reactive technique in VT. <akes no sense to "force" a bong in this way.

It depends on the angles but it sounds as if you force yourself to do a technique in order to train elbow.

You are training your elbow in DCS, not fighting an opponent!

You don't "just punch forward" because you are doing a drill to develop basic elbow usage, not lat sau jik chung.

 

[wtxs]

No, we don't have to decide that. We just have to practice a version of wing chun/martial arts that agrees with us the most.
These are the actual facts, there rest is just hearsay and guessing:
1. YM changed his wing chun serveral times.
2. YM taught people differently
3. Only people who trained with YM know exactly what he taught

We all know that ... except for a few. Lun Kai must have "fill in the gap", because their YM VT don't have that nor they do that. Can't resist baiting, got plenty of popcorn and tons of cold beer.

 

[guy b.]

We all know that ... except for a few. Lun Kai must have "fill in the gap", because their YM VT don't have that nor they do that. Can't resist baiting, got plenty of popcorn and tons of cold beer.

I wouldn't call it "baiting" to be proudly and ignorantly wrong. Baiting requires the possibility of discussion where none is intended.