Siu Lim Tau Comparison

[Nobody Important]

I'm not familiar with YCW WC. Is this your SLT form?

Also, I don't see any similarities to YMVT in the use of this style, at all. It looks unrelated.

No, there are several branches from Yuen Chai Wan. Mine is from his early years, shortly after he stopped teaching Yiu Choi. My material isn't much different than YKS or Yiu Choi WC. Unfortunately during Chai Wan's later years in Vietnam, much changed, both North & South. There are wild deviations because of added Chi Kung, 5 Animal Kung Fu & other material used to fill gaps. I believe my Dai Sigung was a student of Ng Chung So & Yuen Chai Wan, though I would have to double check.

 

[guy b]

No, there are several branches from Yuen Chai Wan. Mine is from his early years, shortly after he stopped teaching Yiu Choi. My material isn't much different than YKS or Yiu Choi WC. Unfortunately during Chai Wan's later years in Vietnam, much changed, both North & South. There are wild deviations because of added Chi Kung, 5 Animal Kung Fu & other material used to fill gaps. I believe my Dai Sigung was a student of Ng Chung So & Yuen Chai Wan, though I would have to double check.

This one?

or this one?

 

[Nobody Important]

This one?

or this one?

Pattern most similar with the YKS video but not as soft, performed more in manner of the Yiu Choi video.

 

[Eric_H]

You mean a jut sau?

Nah, usually just with the wu, our wu sao goes a bit higher than typical YM version, and for what we're talking about we'd use the inside of the bridge to control. I've not seen anyone else do that outside HFY, usually people use the outside of the wu.

If, when trying to smack the face, the attacker chooses a vector just to the side of the face that jams the punch against the bridge, does it become difficult for the recipient to recover center without guiding said punch into his face?
I just ask because that's a problem I run into if my elbow gets opened (driven to the side of center) too much.

So again, trying to make sure I get you, he throws a punch but instead of it going for your face it goes over your shoulder so the act of sweeping it in is what would make it get your face? If that's what you're describing - we also cover this in step 2 of that same beginner's drill I mentioned earlier. This type of attack requires extra vertical leverage (driving the bridge up) and a footwork adjustment using Leung Yi Ma (knee raising to yin line) to counteract. From a flat stance like YGKYM, it's very hard to counter unless you feel the angle in the earliest part of the punch and can get ahead of it.

 

[wtxs]

What is being trained in SNT is the little idea. Nobody has provided equivalent info

I feel your frustration.

 

[guy b]

My material isn't much different than YKS or Yiu Choi WC.

But they look quite different?

Pattern most similar with the YKS video but not as soft, performed more in manner of the Yiu Choi video.

Do you have video? Assuming not, what is the thinking behind the movements, e.g. in the first section of YKS which you say is closer to yours?

 

[Nobody Important]

But they look quite different?



Do you have video? Assuming not, what is the thinking behind the movements, e.g. in the first section of YKS which you say is closer to yours?

The only section that is drastically different between the two is the second section. Everything in the forms is standard fare for mainland WC. Yes I do have video, not real keen on posting it.

 

[guy b]

What you have described is tactical approach/strategy/methodology and contains the same elements as found in the Yuen Family strategy of Position, Bridge, Control, Hit, Return.

What do each of these these elements represent in strategic terms?

You are confusing what we call strategy with what you call the "Little Idea", which to YWC is conceptual and different than strategy.

The strategic description provided is not the little idea of SNT.

I have provided plenty of information concerning YWC concept of "Little Idea".

Ok, well in a similar way the little idea is an idea which is important to the functioning of the system.

I think perhaps what you are looking for is explanation of strategy. If so, that has also been touched on.

No, little idea not a description of strategy, although it has strategic elements and implications. System strategy as already described.

 

[guy b]

The only section that is drastically different between the two is the second section. Everything in the forms is standard fare for mainland WC. Yes I do have video, not real keen on posting it.

Why not? It would make this discussion easier. Plenty of WSL VT video is available.

 

[Transk53]

Why not? It would make this discussion easier. Plenty of WSL VT video is available.

Why not supply one of you're of own? I would really like to see your take on this. From a outsiders point of view of course

 

[Nobody Important]

What do each of these these elements represent in strategic terms?



The strategic description provided is not the little idea of SNT.



Ok, well in a similar way the little idea is an idea which is important to the functioning of the system.



No, little idea not a description of strategy, although it has strategic elements and implications. System strategy as already described.

No offense but this a quick trip down the rabbit hole, previous statements now being retracted and all.

 

[guy b]

No offense but this a quick trip down the rabbit hole, previous statements now being retracted and all.

No idea what you mean. No statements being retracted. I don't mind if you don't want to answer, up to you

 

[KPM]

No idea what you mean. No statements being retracted. I don't mind if you don't want to answer, up to you

You have been asking plenty of questions without sharing yourself. So why should he?? You just made post #392 on this thread and STILL haven't shared about your own understanding of SNT and what the "little idea" actually is!!!

 

[Nobody Important]

No idea what you mean. No statements being retracted. I don't mind if you don't want to answer, up to you

Both you and LFJ have stated that the "Little idea" of your system is the general strategy.

The general strategy was then elaborated, and I mentioned that it was similar to YCW WC strategy, ours is just structured different, but still not our "Little Idea"

You now have stated that the " Little Idea" is not a description of the strategy after I stated that you we're confusing my description of concept for strategy. I said they are two very separate yet linked things.

So is your "Little Idea" the general strategy or not?

Again the "Little Idea" of YCW WC is the concept of adaptation as based on "Listening" & "Understanding". Reread my previous posts for elaboration.

What is your "Little Idea" if not the general strategy? No more games, just a descriptive answer with some "meat" otherwise I'm done trying to converse with you. I've been more than tolerant & forthcoming.

 

[Juany118]

Both you and LFJ have stated that the "Little idea" of your system is the general strategy.

The general strategy was then elaborated, and I mentioned that it was similar to YCW WC strategy, ours is just structured different, but still not our "Little Idea"

You now have stated that the " Little Idea" is not a description of the strategy after I stated that you we're confusing my description of concept for strategy. I said they are two very separate yet linked things.

So is your "Little Idea" the general strategy or not?

Again the "Little Idea" of YCW WC is the concept of adaptation as based on "Listening" & "Understanding". Reread my previous posts for elaboration.

What is your "Little Idea" if not the general strategy? No more games, just a descriptive answer with some "meat" otherwise I'm done trying to converse with you. I've been more than tolerant & forthcoming.

And this is largely my frustration. Typically they are so vague that you can't pin down a thing BUT on the odd occassion they get into specifics and there is a response, the goal post gets moved because the idea they hold to so tightly, that there is a difference so fundamental that their WC/VT is different, falls apart.

I only knew WSLVT for a brief time (relative to other arts I have studied) so my main frame of reference is TWC. That said since joint this forum I have come to the following conclusion. WC/VT/WT is like the English language.

There are differences in how it is spoken across the United States. Add in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. Heck the youth of the Arab Emirates actually speak English better than Arabic. In all these places accent and slang create differences yet they can all communicate with each other because fundamentally the language is still "English".

The same imo applies to Wing Chun and to argue otherwise is really akin to arguing the difference between color and colour or the pronunciation of laboratory.

 

[Nobody Important]

And this is largely my frustration. Typically they are so vague that you can't pin down a thing BUT on the odd occassion they get into specifics and there is a response, the goal post gets moved because the idea they hold to so tightly, that there is a difference so fundamental that their WC/VT is different, falls apart.

I only knew WSLVT for a brief time (relative to other arts I have studied) so my main frame of reference is TWC. That said since joint this forum I have come to the following conclusion. WC/VT/WT is like the English language.

There are differences in how it is spoken across the United States. Add in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. Heck the youth of the Arab Emirates actually speak English better than Arabic. In all these places accent and slang create differences yet they can all communicate with each other because fundamentally the language is still "English".

The same imo applies to Wing Chun and to argue otherwise is really akin to arguing the difference between color and colour or the pronunciation of laboratory.

There is no argument. I'm right & you're wrong, it is correctly pronounced laboratory! LMAO

 

[anerlich]

There are differences in how it is spoken across the United States. Add in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. Heck the youth of the Arab Emirates actually speak English better than Arabic. In all these places accent and slang create differences yet they can all communicate with each other because fundamentally the language is still "English".

Australia, mofo. Your GM Cheung's place of residence. He and I laugh condescendingly at your casual hemispherism.

 

[guy b]

Are the various branches of Wing Chun so drastically different from one another as to be considered unrelated systems, or is it simply varying degrees understanding?

Apparently they are so drastically different as to be unrelated in practical terms

 

[guy b]

Both you and LFJ have stated that the "Little idea" of your system is the general strategy

I don't believe I have stated this. LFJ mentioned that the little idea is about the strategy. This is true; but it is not "the strategy". Strategy has been discussed in detail already. Little idea is also about (has a bearing on) other things. It is a simple idea with quite profound consequences and requirements for the system.

So we have given detailed strategic information, and you have not (no idea what you mean by position, bridge, control and so on). We have not revealed the thinking behind SNT and the system, but then neither have you, since you have not talked about the ideas which make your "shapes" work. It may well be that this represents a different part of your system, but this is the bit that we need to talk about if you want detail of what the little idea is in YM VT. And I don't mean vague conceptual waffle like sink, rise swallow spit, leak, intercept, etc, etc. I mean specifics.

Looking at the YKS and the YC SNT, I can see large problems from the point of view of YM's little idea. Obviously they have arisen from the same historical source and drifted apart. Hard to imagine what you would replace the little idea with in terms of what these sets are showing. The system would need to be turned on its head, completely eviscerated, and then re-stuffed with different guts for this to be functional; and then it wouldn't function in the same way as YM VT. Not saying they don't work, but hard to see how you can claim they would function on the same strategic basis as YM VT?

The general strategy was then elaborated, and I mentioned that it was similar to YCW WC strategy, ours is just structured different, but still not our "Little Idea"

No detail provided, you just said it was the same as YM VT strategy

You now have stated that the " Little Idea" is not a description of the strategy after I stated that you we're confusing my description of concept for strategy

The strategy is described seperately and has been elaborated upon. The little idea influences and has consequences for strategy but is not the strategy

So is your "Little Idea" the general strategy or not?

No, the strategy is freely available

Again the "Little Idea" of YCW WC is the concept of adaptation as based on "Listening" & "Understanding". Reread my previous posts for elaboration

This could mean almost anything. It isn't specific enough to be useful in describing your system.

What is your "Little Idea" if not the general strategy? No more games, just a descriptive answer with some "meat" otherwise I'm done trying to converse with you. I've been more than tolerant & forthcoming.

In life as in VT you get what you put in. Happy to provide as much meat as you do.

 

[Nobody Important]

I don't believe I have stated this. LFJ mentioned that the little idea is about the strategy. This is true; but it is not "the strategy". Strategy has been discussed in detail already. Little idea is also about (has a bearing on) other things. It is a simple idea with quite profound consequences and requirements for the system.

So we have given detailed strategic information, and you have not (no idea what you mean by position, bridge, control and so on). We have not revealed the thinking behind SNT and the system, but then neither have you, since you have not talked about the ideas which make your "shapes" work. It may well be that this represents a different part of your system, but this is the bit that we need to talk about if you want detail of what the little idea is in YM VT. And I don't mean vague conceptual waffle like sink, rise swallow spit, leak, intercept, etc, etc. I mean specifics.

Looking at the YKS and the YC SNT, I can see large problems from the point of view of YM's little idea. Obviously they have arisen from the same historical source and drifted apart. Hard to imagine what you would replace the little idea with in terms of what these sets are showing. The system would need to be turned on its head, completely eviscerated, and then re-stuffed with different guts for this to be functional; and then it wouldn't function in the same way as YM VT. Not saying they don't work, but hard to see how you can claim they would function on the same strategic basis as YM VT?



No detail provided, you just said it was the same as YM VT strategy



The strategy is described seperately and has been elaborated upon. The little idea influences and has consequences for strategy but is not the strategy



No, the strategy is freely available



This could mean almost anything. It isn't specific enough to be useful in describing your system.



In life as in VT you get what you put in. Happy to provide as much meat as you do.

You are full of bs. I have provided in detail what the "Little Idea" of YCW WC is, you aren't able to comprehend and are now whining.

You are now retracting your statements. Why is that? Because you don't actually know what it is. You thought you could bs me with your strategy bit until I called you out on it.

You sir are a troll who doesn't know a damn thing about WC other than what you can Google. You can take your weak attempts at a gotcha moment and shove them.

You have lost all credibility with me.

What little you do know of WC has been at the expense of internet trolling. The fact that you constantly argue points based on visual difference and application is a dead give away. You have absolutely no comprehension of WC concept or theory.

The least someone like you could do is extend the courtesy to others here by calling them Sifu, they after all are responsible for what little information you do possess.