Improbability of the "Refinement" Theory
- Thread starter LFJ
- Start date
Why would the thread be locked? KPM makes accusation. Accusation is denied. KPM repeats accusation because he doesn't like to hear what we actually believe about WSL VT. There isn't a lot more to do in this case than ask KPM to stop repeating his lie.
For the final time ever I hope, it is possible that YM taught other people besides WSL his system. I have not found any of these people so far. But since I have not seen every YM derived line of wing chun in existence, I cannot say that WSL was the only person to receive the system from YM. I cannot speak about what I have never experienced. This is what I believe regarding the VT of YM.
I'm trying to figure out which part of post #249 looks like a copy from some Wiki. All the comments appear to be LFJ's responses to another's comments.
Yeah, I was just been a little general, not meaning to littearally quote a Wiki.
I suppose. That's a pretty general description though, and could be interpreted in different ways, and tactics may differ largely within someone else's interpretation of that.
I think Guy, Lobo, and I have given pretty clear descriptions of our strategy not long ago in this thread.
Yeah, VT is just an aggressive striking skill.
Disrupting balance is to make it harder to defend against our strikes, not to open up lock or throw opportunities.
Why are you shouting? Are you angry?
Is there anyone else here other than Guy and LFJ that has NOT gotten the distinct impression that they both think that WSLVT is the only "real" version of VT???
Actually, in communication it does matter whether the receiver is able to understand your point. There are at least two possibilities when miscommunication occurs: either the speaker mis-communicated, or the listener mis-understood. Since we can only control our own side of the communication, it is incumbent upon us as the speaker to be as clear as possible.
To whom, or are just insinuating that only you have that capacity?
It doesn't matter in terms of the correctness of the point, which is all I am concerned about. KPM likes to do this thing where he conducts a straw poll of what people think, because he wrongly believes correctness to be determined by popularity.
I think I have been pretty clear, repeating the same point many many times. KPM is either trolling or mentally deficient in terms of his capacity to understand at this point.
Is this clear enough for you:
guy b said:
What are you even talking about?
"It doesn't matter what other people think I think KMP <KPM>, what matters is what I actually think.
Yes exactly, what you think all the time, with no regard to anything else possibly being correct, and mainly no thought applied to what information could look like to another person. I'm dyslexic and prone to missing out words. Even so, not hard to work out picking up on KPM's post. Basically I am asking do you view yourself as the only athourity on WSL VT? That certainly comes across other lineages as well as WSL VT being the definitive version of Wing Chun.
So now Guy has returned to his true form! He has called me a liar, a troll, and mentally deficient. Just because I asked for him actually create one thread that outlined all the technical differences he sees in one place so it would be easier for everyone to follow his argument.
So now Guy has returned to his true form! He has called me a liar, a troll, and mentally deficient. Just because I asked for him actually create one thread that outlined all the technical differences he sees in one place so it would be easier for everyone to follow his argument.
Hope he says that to me. I can legitimately say, " takes one to one"
Juany118
Senior Master
Then you don't know the history of YMVT as well as you thought because the answer is far more nuanced than "no he didn't." YM overtime modified/refined the WC he had been originally taught.
As for your previous post, perhaps English is your second language. To impose is to force, control. You claim a misinterpretation BUT this is clear language...
" When fighting, your opponent will be free to move how he likes, he will not think as you do. Hence your movements will be determined by his actions..."
There is no misinterpreting this and it is still consistent with Lobo's description.
You can flow and be aggressive. No one would say this is passive
To misinterpret statements the languages needs to be open to interpretation. WSLs words are rather explicit here. It seems to me this is a case similar to your denial that WSL changed the teaching method of VT as compared to YMs. You have your current preconceptions which are contradicted by WSL's own words and rather than having your preconceptions informed by new documented and verfiable facts you try to twist the words to conform to your preconceptions.
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Lobo66
Yellow Belt
Hey guys,
In a violent assault the perpetrator will try to stack the cards in his favor any way he can, seeking out an unaware victim and attacking at a moment of surprise and weakness. He tries to impose his will/plan 100%.
In combat sports you try to impose your game plan on your opponent as much as possible. This becomes tricky because your opponent is also skilled and has a gameplan of his own, which includes (most likely) counter strategies to yours. But both you and your opponent are trying to impose your own game plans.
Rembemer Rousey vs Holm? Classic example. Rousey tried to impose her strategy of bull-rushing and taking Holm down, but Holm, using superior footwork and distance control, imposed her own carefuly crafted game plan, thus leading Rousey into over-extending herself. Rousey "showed" Holm the way to victory. Holm flowed with Rousey's movements, contracting and expanding in defense and attack - but she still imposed her strategy.
In WSLVT we also try to impose our strategy, which guy b has already described in this thread. But imposing our strategy doesn't mean that we can't also "flow" with the movements of our opponent. It doesn't mean that we are somehow "stiff" or "obstinate" in our actions. Quite the contrary, we try to remain in a state of relaxed and centered focus. Ready to change. Ready to let our opponent "show us" the way to beat him. This is how we impose our game plan.
Hope that helps Juany118.
In a violent assault the perpetrator will try to stack the cards in his favor any way he can, seeking out an unaware victim and attacking at a moment of surprise and weakness. He tries to impose his will/plan 100%.
In combat sports you try to impose your game plan on your opponent as much as possible. This becomes tricky because your opponent is also skilled and has a gameplan of his own, which includes (most likely) counter strategies to yours. But both you and your opponent are trying to impose your own game plans.
Rembemer Rousey vs Holm? Classic example. Rousey tried to impose her strategy of bull-rushing and taking Holm down, but Holm, using superior footwork and distance control, imposed her own carefuly crafted game plan, thus leading Rousey into over-extending herself. Rousey "showed" Holm the way to victory. Holm flowed with Rousey's movements, contracting and expanding in defense and attack - but she still imposed her strategy.
In WSLVT we also try to impose our strategy, which guy b has already described in this thread. But imposing our strategy doesn't mean that we can't also "flow" with the movements of our opponent. It doesn't mean that we are somehow "stiff" or "obstinate" in our actions. Quite the contrary, we try to remain in a state of relaxed and centered focus. Ready to change. Ready to let our opponent "show us" the way to beat him. This is how we impose our game plan.
Hope that helps Juany118.
Juany118
Senior Master
@Lobo66
It clarifies your view but when I studied WSLVT my instructor used the rapids analogy, I didn't come up with that on my own lol. The more I think about the more I think this may be an argument of semantics. Let me explain...
I see strategy and tactics, as I said before, as different things. Strategy is the overall methodology behind the MA, similar to the overall methodology of a particular Military campaign. The Strategy in both WSLVT, again as I was taught, and TWC is embodied by WSL's quote.
Next we have tactics, this is what happens in the individual fight/battle. You have specific goals that you wish to impose on the other that can change from encounter to encounter but when I am speaking of flowing I mean the HOW only, basically your Rousey vs Holm argument. Holm said "I am top dog, you will lose" and flowed to that end. In another encounter maybe I don't want to beat the other person into unconsciousness, maybe my goal is simply to defend myself and if they stop their assault I still imposed my will, he stopped. However again I did so by flowing. With this in mind do I understand you correctly? If I do the misunderstanding to this point is largely my fault, I compartmentalize a lot so I was looking narrowly at the HOW.
I get the idea from how Guy and LFJ responded that they see the HOW as being/requiring an imposition as well.
Last edited:
Lobo66-- I just want to complement you on posting in a way that is engaging and informative without being at all insulting. You have no trouble explaining your system's strengths without implying that other groups are deficient. I hope you continue to stay active on this forum and help explain more about WSL-VT.
