Good teaching clip

[Juany118]

I may just be using slightly different language to describe the same thing.

I think that the concept of center in Si Lim Tao is very restrictive and (perhaps) to your point, it opens up a bit in Chum Kiu and further still as you continue on through the system.

I think that focus is important though. While WC appears simple on the surface the confluence of structure, centerline, the nature of the various techniques (just three examples: bong, and tan aren't exactly things you just jump into doing then you get into things like bil sau that can be both an attack and a defense make it even more so.). The thing is the techniques rely not just on the structure of the arm itself but proper overall structure and adherence to the centerline. I think as a consequence, as in many disciplines they hammer the core theory, then as you progress things open up bit by bit. In this way you better understand the limits to which you can stretch the "envelope" that surrounds the discipline without tearing it.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[ShortBridge]

It does make sense.

Look at us having a constructive exchange of ideas!

 

[LFJ]

Second in the first video you posted the arm is being basically thrusted at the student in the upright position, basically striking with the forearm head on, where as, WSL makes it clear that you should be "following through" so to speak so the arm, albeit briefly, rides/slides up the opposing bong vs striking it head on. To really see both of these requires playing the videos at the slowest speed available.

It seems that rather than understand the drill through explanation from people who know the system, you're more interested in googling something to counter it for some reason.

If you search Youtube and find something you think looks different, you should ask, rather than present it as counter evidence to say something else you also don't understand is wrong.

Even at the slowest speed you are not being very observant.

In that video you also see both WSL and PB's fists point upward, but elbows drive forward, as in the OP video here. WSL then illustrates clearly how the punch is going forward, from the elbow, not hacking down on the arm like Joy's lineage.

If you are observant, you will see WSL is driving with the elbow, not leading with the fist.

I explained earlier the problem with leading with the fist and actually trying to hit them and force blocks. It is something I've experienced directly when people from other lineages have worked out with me.

They try to punch straight at me, reaching over my bong-sau which extends their arm and lifts their elbow up, losing hip-elbow connection and resulting in their arm getting displaced way out of position by my bong-sau. It just doesn't work as a drill anymore, and is not developing anything that way.

That's why I usually don't do chi-sau or other drills with different lineages, except to reveal their errors to them. With different thinking, it ruins the exercise and renders it useless practice. Better to free-spar to compare.

After that, they then relearn it correctly.

First, yes the wu starts on the other side of the centerline BUT when it engages and laps it is on the centerline. Why? Because the incoming strike should be on the centerline.

This is exactly what is happening in the OP video. Maybe you are not seeing it right due to camera angle, otherwise, what is the problem then?

This goes to the point I made previously about context. We don't know the context and without that we can't even be sure what is being addressed in the first video.

You can't, because you don't know the system. If you know the system, it is very clear what is going on.

If you know the system, you can even tell in any video when errors are intentionally made to check for correct responses from the partner.

We are very familiar with these drills because we train the same system. So, better for you to not make assumptions and scour the internet for counter evidence, but instead to listen... if you are actually interested.

 

[LFJ]

This is felt to be more efficient and reliable than having the wu exactly on center and not knowing which side (palm or back of hand) that the attack will enter on. I'm sure LFJ can clarify.

Not only that, but if the attack comes on the center, for you to intercept it with say paak or taan, or to wedge, or whatever you guys use, you have to first move your wu to one side or the other and come back at center, or step to move yourself to one side or the other.

Both options, as I said, are not as direct or efficient as having a wu in position ready to go, and there will likely be little to no time to decide and respond correctly.

 

[Juany118]

It seems that rather than understand the drill through explanation from people who know the system, you're more interested in googling something to counter it for some reason.

If you search Youtube and find something you think looks different, you should ask, rather than present it as counter evidence to say something else you also don't understand is wrong.

Even at the slowest speed you are not being very observant.

In that video you also see both WSL and PB's fists point upward, but elbows drive forward, as in the OP video here. WSL then illustrates clearly how the punch is going forward, from the elbow, not hacking down on the arm like Joy's lineage.

If you are observant, you will see WSL is driving with the elbow, not leading with the fist.

I explained earlier the problem with leading with the fist and actually trying to hit them and force blocks. It is something I've experienced directly when people from other lineages have worked out with me.

They try to punch straight at me, reaching over my bong-sau which extends their arm and lifts their elbow up, losing hip-elbow connection and resulting in their arm getting displaced way out of position by my bong-sau. It just doesn't work as a drill anymore, and is not developing anything that way.

That's why I usually don't do chi-sau or other drills with different lineages, except to reveal their errors to them. With different thinking, it ruins the exercise and renders it useless practice. Better to free-spar to compare.

After that, they then relearn it correctly.



This is exactly what is happening in the OP video. Maybe you are not seeing it right due to camera angle, otherwise, what is the problem then?



You can't, because you don't know the system. If you know the system, it is very clear what is going on.

If you know the system, you can even tell in any video when errors are intentionally made to check for correct responses from the partner.

We are very familiar with these drills because we train the same system. So, better for you to not make assumptions and scour the internet for counter evidence, but instead to listen... if you are actually interested.

Really they point upwards? I said they point upwards. What I also said is that on slow motion you see that WSL has forward intent beyond the elbow, hence the "sliding" a little upon striking the bong, where as on the other one, also in slow motion, the forward intent ends at the elbow and doesn't follow through, the arm just "stops" without the follow through. WSL even demonstrates that this bit of follow through bit, not just the slamming down bit, is important. Also, if you say it's "because of the angle" that seems to indicate you are assuming it is because of the angle rather than allowing the video to speak for itself. When the video is on slow motion you can actually start using multiple points to see that he is moving more than a couple times on the "wrong side" of the centerline. In those cases I see an issue. Not with the system but the specific encounter. This is where context comes in. Guy made the statement that the student is a novice. Perhaps he is striking off the centerline and thus the wu is off the centerline? Perhaps this is one of the reasons he started doing other things later in the video that were a-typical for the drill? To try and dynamically ram home certain concepts without stopping the drill?

Regardless I think your response here speaks again to the arrogance you have in terms of a supposed superiority to WSLPB-VT with the... " except to reveal their errors to them" comment. As such rather than looking at comments and questions as part of a discussion you automatically assume an attack and go into defense mode, and in a rather confrontational way vs a civil dialogue.

Finally, I am not ignorant of WSLVT, only of what you see as the dogmatically "true" WSLPB-VT. Also it says something when someone makes claims based on "because I say so" and then simply dismiss verifiable videos and quotes of the person who their sub Lineage is named after.

 

[LFJ]

Really they point upwards? I said they point upwards.

You said the following, which is false:

I see the instructor often crossing his own center line when he laps, punching for the ceiling

There is neither crossing the center, nor punching for the ceiling.

What I also said is that on slow motion you see that WSL has forward intent beyond the elbow, hence the "sliding" a little upon striking the bong, where as on the other one, also in slow motion, the forward intent ends at the elbow and doesn't follow through. WSL even demonstrates that this bit of follow through bit, not just the slamming down bit, is important.

There is no slamming down bit except to show what is wrong.

There is also no "sliding" except for when he stops to describe the punch as forward and not chopping down. The drill is performed in the same way as in the OP video here.

Finally I think your response here speaks again to the arrogance you have in terms of a supposed superiority to WSLPB-VT with the... " except to reveal their errors to them" comment.

I described the error and undesirable result. There is nothing arrogant about showing errors and correcting them. That's how teaching/learning is done.

In closing, you seem to be very defensive regarding your lineage, assuming an attack upon it, and a lack of understanding (I did study it for a time though not PB version).

I'm not being defensive. I'm offering clarification to your misunderstanding.

If you are not listening, but trying hard instead to prove something that is false, that is a misguided attack. But I don't mind, I will still offer explanation for anyone reading who might actually be interested.

Also, I don't believe you've ever studied WSLVT, as you seem completely unfamiliar with it and all your info comes from googling things. What line did you learn under and how far did you get?

I am just doing what a court of law does with videos, I allow them to speak for themselves. So I make observations and ask questions about one video. My apologies also that I actually support my contentions with verifiable sources that counter your unsupported claims.

You haven't asked questions. You've made assertions about things you don't understand, and have tried to support those assertions with things found by googling which you also don't understand.

I can see why you are still a beat cop, and haven't made detective. Not very observant.

 

[Lobo66]

LFJ is sharing some very good information here about WSLVT and its training methods. Anyone interested in this system should be thankful.

Too much focus on the fist in punching, over-extending the elbow and loosing connection with the body is an error. It's an error in any form of striking. If punching is to be an efficient movement, it needs to come from a connected and relaxed body. I think we can all agree on that.

As LFJ noted, one of the developmental aspects of this (laap sau) drill is training the connection between hip and elbow. The focus is not on the hand and it is irrelevant that the hand points upward. The direction of force of the elbow is clearly toward the center of the opponent.

When the forearm meets the bong of the training partner, the striking arm should not try to force its way through by reaching over the bong but should relax further - only then can it have the "flexibility" to effectively work on the timing aspect that is so essentiel to this drill.

 

[Juany118]

You said the following, which is false:



There is neither crossing the center, nor punching for the ceiling.



There is no slamming down bit except to show what is wrong.

There is also no "sliding" except for when he stops to describe the punch as forward and not chopping down. The drill is performed in the same way as in the OP video here.



I described the error and undesirable result. There is nothing arrogant about showing errors and correcting them. That's how teaching/learning is done.



I'm not being defensive. I'm offering clarification to your misunderstanding.

If you are not listening, but trying hard instead to prove something that is false, that is a misguided attack. But I don't mind, I will still offer explanation for anyone reading who might actually be interested.

Also, I don't believe you've ever studied WSLVT, as you seem completely unfamiliar with it and all your info comes from googling things. What line did you learn under and how far did you get?



You haven't asked questions. You've made assertions about things you don't understand, and have tried to support those assertions with things found by googling which you also don't understand.

I can see why you are still a beat cop, and haven't made detective. Not very observant.

A I clarified it later because I realized it came off wrong (the bit about the instructor's wu being what doesn't come back to centerline but cherry picking is your forte'. Same with the slamming down bit, never said he did that, simply said that he wasn't following through with the forward intent of the elbow as WSL illustrated.

I did ask questions and made simple comments actually. If you go back you will see me thank Lobo for his explanation of the fak as he clarified a more than possible (even probable) reason for it. You would see me express uncertainty to Guy in a civil tone stating that until I can watch things in slow motion to clarify what I was seeing before commenting. You would see me specifically stating that I am not making any comments about WSLPB-VT but simply observations of one, single video in isolation. I then went to the trouble of finding another video with WSL to illustrate that I am not questioning your system, just one video. Not getting into a debate of understanding you don't need understanding to say "hey they are talking about WSLPB-VT. There is a guy doing something. there is WSL with PB doing the same thing but with differences you can see at .25 speed. What's up with that?" Instead of acknowleding what amounts to two differences and offering a possibility, such as Guy's comment regarding the impact of a novice student, you simply deny the differences even exist and then say "don't understand." See the importance of video in regards to the later.

Also if you go back through other posts of mine, in response to the ad hominem at the end (blatant ad hominems are quite telling btw), you would see I was a Narcotics Investigator for sometime, I am even still a certified expert is such and Gang Investigations. I CHOSE to return to patrol because I wanted to have a life again outside of the work place. We all have priorities in life and mine on the tail end of my career is work/life balance.

PS, respond with whatever you want from here on out and call it a win. I won't be able to see it anymore because there is no point as the entertainment value of your responses has worn thin.



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[guy b]

Really they point upwards? I said they point upwards. What I also said is that on slow motion you see that WSL has forward intent beyond the elbow, hence the "sliding" a little upon striking the bong, where as on the other one, also in slow motion, the forward intent ends at the elbow and doesn't follow through, the arm just "stops" without the follow through. WSL even demonstrates that this bit of follow through bit, not just the slamming down bit, is important. Also, if you say it's "because of the angle" that seems to indicate you are assuming it is because of the angle rather than allowing the video to speak for itself. When the video is on slow motion you can actually start using multiple points to see that he is moving more than a couple times on the "wrong side" of the centerline. In those cases I see an issue. Not with the system but the specific encounter. This is where context comes in. Guy made the statement that the student is a novice. Perhaps he is striking off the centerline and thus the wu is off the centerline? Perhaps this is one of the reasons he started doing other things later in the video that were a-typical for the drill? To try and dynamically ram home certain concepts without stopping the drill?

Regardless I think your response here speaks again to the arrogance you have in terms of a supposed superiority to WSLPB-VT with the... " except to reveal their errors to them" comment. As such rather than looking at comments and questions as part of a discussion you automatically assume an attack and go into defense mode, and in a rather confrontational way vs a civil dialogue.

Finally, I am not ignorant of WSLVT, only of what you see as the dogmatically "true" WSLPB-VT. Also it says something when someone makes claims based on "because I say so" and then simply dismiss verifiable videos and quotes of the person who their sub Lineage is named after.

Why argue if you aren't interested? Why even post on the thread?

LFJ has been making some excellent posts analysing what is going on in these clips to an extent that I have not seen anyone else on the forum do. Instead of just saying thanks, you scour the internet looking for "evidence" which you can use to argue against something you didn't understand in the first place. There isn't anything to argue against because your points are based on misunderstanding

In life as in VT it isn't possible to learn if you can't put aside ego. There is no reason for hubris here anyway- you practice a different system with a different way of doing things. What possible reason could you have for arguing detals of a drill in a system you don't practice or understand? You act like LFJ has offended you in some way and you bear a grudge, but you have only been on the forum for a few months? I just don't understand

 

[Juany118]

LFJ is sharing some very good information here about WSLVT and its training methods. Anyone interested in this system should be thankful.

Too much focus on the fist in punching, over-extending the elbow and loosing connection with the body is an error. It's an error in any form of striking. If punching is to be an efficient movement, it needs to come from a connected and relaxed body. I think we can all agree on that.

As LFJ noted, one of the developmental aspects of this (laap sau) drill is training the connection between hip and elbow. The focus is not on the hand and it is irrelevant that the hand points upward. The direction of force of the elbow is clearly toward the center of the opponent.

When the forearm meets the bong of the training partner, the striking arm should not try to force its way through by reaching over the bong but should relax further - only then can it have the "flexibility" to effectively work on the timing aspect that is so essentiel to this drill.

I get that. I am not disputing that at all either. All I am doing is looking at one particular video. I saw three things that made me scratch my head. I noted them over the course of this discussion and one of them, the fak sau issue, you explained in a manner I found more than likely. I still had the other two issues, the wu into pak and the movement of the strike. So I waited until I could get to a PC and slow it down. I then (due to my recollection of my WSL training, which was admittedly more than a few years ago so I wanted confirmation) went in search of a WSL video to compare. So what did I see?

On video 1, it appears the wu remains on the opposite side when it encounters the punch and paks a few times, not everytime but a few. Additionally the striking arm has forward intent at the elbow but there is no follow through upon striking the bong, it stops dead.

On the WSL video the wu moves to the centerline for the encounter everytime and, while it is basically missed unless slowed down, the forward intent involved in the punch "follows through" and thus you see the arm continue toward, sliding on PB's bong ever so slightly.

I don't see how the above contradicts the methodology LFJ posted because I was basically just saying "WSL is doing it right, why is it different over there?"

It could be, as has been clearly stated and inferred elsewhere, that the student was having an impact due to being a novice. If, the student's punch is not along the centerline, then naturally your pak will not be either. Maybe that and the instructor's punch are different because he is move concerned with observing the student's bong and wu at that point. This would be consistent with him feeding faks to the hand later actually.

Rather than talk about the possibilities of what was viewed however in a civil manner it was an immediate defensive and, at times, aggressive reaction. It really boggles my mind since time and again I specifically stated I wasn't criticizing or making comments about the system itself, only one specific video. Then even further by noting first only 3 and then after your explaining a probability for one of the three only 2.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[LFJ]

I saw three things that made me scratch my head. I noted them over the course of this discussion and one of them, the fak sau issue, you explained in a manner I found more than likely.

But you continued mentioning it with other things you find problematic, for some reason, but you are not telling us what you think is wrong with it.

I still had the other two issues, the wu into pak and the movement of the strike.

It was wu into laap before. Now you have changed? What wu into paak are you talking about now?

On video 1, it appears the wu remains on the opposite side when it encounters the punch and paks a few times, not everytime but a few. Additionally the striking arm has forward intent at the elbow but there is no follow through upon striking the bong, it stops dead.

On the WSL video the wu moves to the centerline for the encounter everytime and, while it is basically missed unless slowed down, the forward intent involved in the punch "follows through" and thus you see the arm continue toward, sliding on PB's bong ever so slightly.

Don't know what you're talking about with the wu and paak on video 1 now. Can you point to a timestamp and be clear, please?

On the WSL video there is no follow through because it is an uncompleted punch, except for when he stops and shows the intent. There is no sliding on the bong otherwise. It's the same as in video 1. You should not be trying to follow through and punch over the bong, for reasons previously explained.

Rather than talk about the possibilities of what was viewed however in a civil manner it was an immediate defensive and, at times, aggressive reaction.

Are you saying I didn't actually provide detailed explanations to you? Thanks.

The failed detective joke in the last post was just teasing because you aren't being very observant in this thread, despite my attempts to help you. I have not been aggressive with you at all. I guess by this point you would have told me to stop resisting and shot me already.

 

[LFJ]

LFJ has been making some excellent posts analysing what is going on in these clips to an extent that I have not seen anyone else on the forum do.

Thanks. Ironic, the way I still get accused of not engaging in technical discussions by those who are regular posters yet contribute very little to the forum in the way of technical information.

My contributions to the forum go unappreciated by some who would rather have threads locked and me banned for expressing heretical views!

 

[KPM]

^^^^ You have been very selective about when and what you share in the past. This particular thread is the exception, not the rule. I commend you for your openness here. Maybe it will last, maybe not. But you still have to ask yourself why you got the reaction you did from Juany, when all he was doing was trying to participate in your technical thread. Comments about being a beat cop or about whether or not he was going to shoot you for resisting were not at all necessary and another example of lack of tact or "Mo Duk" if you will. On the other hand, Lobo66 manages to make points and share info without coming across as you and Guy do. This is supposed to be a "friendly" forum, but with you and Guy it never seems to end up that way. You have to ask yourself "why is that?"

 

[guy b]

Comments about being a beat cop or about whether or not he was going to shoot you for resisting were not at all necessary and another example of lack of tact

That was a good humoured jibe. Juany was being more than a bit of a dope here and since he often refers to his police experience and using evidence to track down the truth as if it it is being hidden, then I would say a fair enough comment. People are extremely sensitive, for example Juany's inability to put ego aside and accept a description of what is being done in a different system that he doesn't understand; Joy's refusal to communicate with anyone (even Lobo who has barely if ever tried to speak to him) and request to close down the thread . All seems a very extreme reaction to someone disagreeing with you about wing chun or (in Joys case) just hoping for a little interaction.

 

[guy b]

Thanks. Ironic, the way I still get accused of not engaging in technical discussions by those who are regular posters yet contribute very little to the forum in the way of technical information.

My contributions to the forum go unappreciated by some who would rather have threads locked and me banned for expressing heretical views!

Your technical descriptions and break downs are generally very good, and for anyone interested in finding out about WSL VT very useful. I think mostly what people like KPM are looking for is for you to assume they know it already and immediately give any detail you might have with no back and forward exchange of views which might expose lack of detailed knowledge on their part, or cause awkward disagreement. Basically I would say ego stops them participating openly in discussion- too scared of being wrong..a shame. The thing is though that everyone is wrong every single day of their lives, and the only way to get better is to accept you aren't perfect and get on with improving.

 

[KPM]

^^^^ That displays such a total lack of personal insight and what has gone on in this forum that I'm not even sure what to say anymore!

 

[guy b]

^^^^ That displays such a total lack of personal insight and what has gone on in this forum that I'm not even sure what to say anymore!

Have a look in the mirror KPM

 

[LFJ]

You have been very selective about when and what you share in the past. This particular thread is the exception, not the rule.

I try to avoid feeding the obvious parasites.

Comments about being a beat cop or about whether or not he was going to shoot you for resisting were not at all necessary and another example of lack of tact or "Mo Duk" if you will.

Lmao, jeezlouise!

 

[wtxs]

I can see why you are still a beat cop, and haven't made detective. Not very observant.

Really man? Or had you now reduced yourself to and behave like a boy? Shame on you!

 

[geezer]

That was a good humoured jibe. Juany was being more than a bit of a dope here and since he often refers to his police experience and using evidence to track down the truth as if it it is being hidden, then I would say a fair enough comment. People are extremely sensitive, for example Juany's inability to put ego aside and accept a description of what is being done in a different system that he doesn't understand; Joy's refusal to communicate with anyone (even Lobo who has barely if ever tried to speak to him) and request to close down the thread . All seems a very extreme reaction to someone disagreeing with you about wing chun or (in Joys case) just hoping for a little interaction.

@ Guy B and LFJ:

Honestly, Guy, LFJ's comment to Juany about still being a beat cop did not come across as a good humoured jibe. It struck me as a rude and angry response that was insulting to both Juany, and to friends of mine who are cops. Beat cops.

Sure, maybe it wasn't meant that way, but KPM has a point. You and LFJ seem to make a lot of comments that most others find offensive. Now that may be, as you keep insisting, simply because everybody else here has a problem (people are so sensitive), or it may be because both you guys need to work on how you go about disagreeing with others. As to which is the problem here (your posts, or everybody else's sensitivities) I suggest you consider, as you so often do, which of the two is more probable.