WSL...guarding the method

Because this was the key part of the quote from Geezer that Hazardi was responding to was...

So I was pointing out this was indeed the truth as it was used by YM's Association first and then noted the one person who, to my knowledge, did actually trademark a different spelling.

I'll leave it at this because as was just pointed out, nothing good can apparently come of this.

No one said WSL trademarked the VT spelling, but that's the spelling he used because YM did.

Those who have changed the system under WSL have used different spellings or renamed their systems.

"Gary Lam Wing Chun" is one example.
"Wan Kam Leung Practical Wing Chun" is another.
 
You need to connect to the pole, to feel it's weight and orientation to, as corny as it sounds, make it an extension of yourself. This requires a hand or prosthetic.

Following that Biomechanics are what they are. More than a few of the movements in the form require wrist movements to achieve certain angles. Now you can adapt your personal method to minimize the need for such movements. So yes wit is indeed used in the adaptation.

The fact that Philipp Bayer uses a prosthetic in order to hold the pole was already discussed here by someone else. I was assuming you had seen this comment. The lack of a hand does not impede Bayer's use of the pole in any way- he uses the standard method very well and is in fact the best I have seen with the long pole. To be clear, the pole method of Philipp Bayer is not altered in any way to account for his lost hand.

In this case it would be looking at the missing hand and simply saying, again while maintaining the core principles of WSLVT "these methods will work perfectly fine, these need a little tweeking and these might not work well at all." It's not changing WSLVT in the least, it's simply adapting the instruction so the student can still excel.

Juany said:
As Callen stated by good teacher will teach a student, within the overall principles of the topic, to their strengths and weaknesses

Again what you are saying appears to be contrary to what Callen is saying:

Callen said:
One of the traits of a good Wing Chun teacher/coach is to find out what drills or training methods work best for which students, and to implement those methods to effectively help them grow

Callen is talking about focus on particular drills within the system in order to address student-specific strengths and weaknesses. This is a standard approach in WSL VT. You are talking about changing methods and teaching in terms of student specific strengths and weaknesses. This is a different approach, not something that is done in the WSL VT that I have experienced. The system is the system- it isn't tailored to be person specific, and it remains fundamentally what it is as it is passed from teacher to student.

Now this of course limits mobility a bit, but with the tight footwork of WC it isn't as bad as it would be with other arts. His kicking is more effected because of the limited hip movement of course but if you were to just watch his upper body move you would think you were watching a dancer, the way he flows in that manner is impressive.. A large reason for this is because when the rest of the class is performing drills that he would not be able to perform, Sifu or one of his assistants will partner with him for other drills. Again the principles of neither art have been changed, Sifu simply sees the limits that the student has and focuses on the drills that are minimally effected (if at all) by the disease or that can help with the disease itself as he has done research into the various types of physical therapy that benefit the condition. All of this so the student in question maximizes his application of the principles of TWC and Kali, the arts themselves have not been altered, the teaching of the art has simply been tailored within the already established boundaries.

If this is supposed to be some kind of relevant comparison with Philipp Bayer, then I can see why people might find your point of view to be offensive

Odd you know so much about what others have posted when you joined but today and only posted for the first time 3 hours ago. That said if you actually look at Callen's posts, we do have some points where we are not precisely on the same page BUT when he responds it has substance

I am just responding to what I read on the thread. Callen appears to be a WSL VT practitioner who has trained under Gary Lam. LFJ appears to be a WSL VT practitioner who has trained with someone else. You seem to want to agree with Callen (although often appearing to misunderstand or twist his meaning), while being antagonistic towards whatever LFJ says. Since the subject is WSL VT, it makes no sense to disregard 50% of the info being provided about that system from people that practice it.

the problem is this the idea that PB is teaching the "pure" version of WSLVT ignores the reality of his physical issue, as illustrated repeatedly, and the differences between himself and other first gen students.

P Bayer teaches mainstream WSL VT. His lack of a hand has been covered and does not change the system he learned from WSL. Your examples are poorly chosen in that David Peterson is not on the same level, and Gary Lam teaches his own system in his own way based upon what he learned from WSL. Philipp Bayer is the only example of mainstream VT that you have mentioned at this point. You are in effect comparing PB to different things and being surprised when there are differences.

As an example more than once WSL stated that one of the purposes of chi sau is to learn sensitivity to the movements of the opponent so that "...You begin to feel a pattern in your opponent’s movements, allowing you to sense the proper angle of attack...", that "...the highest achievement wing chun is to be able to allow your opponent to guide you into the exact method of attacking and defeating him."

WSL VT is not a a system that relies upon sensing and feeling. But you seem to want it to be that way. What more can I say?

the idea that chi sau is about feeling the openings is simply repeated misinformation. Thing is they arent mutually exclusive and in a real fight you want to feel and flow as well because while one of the goals of course is to use tactics that bait and set your opponent up, you can never rely on the fact that your opponent will "take the bait" and so being able to flow and strike where your opponent is vulnerable is an equally vital skill. So logic dictates one of the following.

I think you have some misconceptions about how WSL VT works in reality. There is no feeling for openings and flowing in WSL VT because fighting does not resemble the chi sau drill.

When WSL said a quote I posted in an older thread (and summarized above) about you never being able to completely control your opponents actions you need to be able to flow and let them show you where to strike he was speaking a truth anyone who has been in a real fight, especially against other styles, knows.

Can you please provide the quote? It is hard to respond when I don't know what you are talking about. I think though that you are a bit confused.

a. if 1 is true then those who say the above is misinformation are wrong. This then leads to another question. Is this a misunderstanding of PB teaching on their part or has PB changed something as others changed things?

2. It was misinformation BUT then this also raises a few questions.
a. how could someone with as much reported real fighting experience not realize you can never truly control the actions of every opponent regardless of the amount of "baiting" and "setting up" and that's where being sensitive and capable of flowing through the small gaps you feel with that sensitivity comes in?

Simple, PB hasn't changed anything, he teaches what WSL taught and what YM taught. VT is not anything to do with sensing gaps and flowing through- this doesn't work in reality. It is simply a fighting method with a particular aproach, apparently quite different to the wing chun you have seen before. That it isn't completely foolproof is not really a criticism; no fighting method works 100% of the time. What is needed is a method which increases the odds, something WSL VT does very well.
 
Can you please provide the quote? It is hard to respond when I don't know what you are talking about. I think though that you are a bit confused.

It was a quote on strategy, and he had it explained to him by at least three different WSLVT practitioners, but still wants to argue with us and tell us what WSL meant when he hasn't the faintest clue what WSL actually taught. That's about the height of arrogance, wouldn't you say?
 
We belong to different CLUBS which are part of different organisations. I've been in MA situations before Wing Chun that abused the concept of "family". I have two brothers. No one on here is a relative. When I see "Kung fu family", I think "Manson Family".

I ain't calling anyone "Sifu" that I don't know personally. I know some very highly ranked Kung Fu instructors and call them all by their first name.



Sorry to disappoint. I've completed my instructor's grading system and helped bring a number of students up to instructor level. I'm older than some of the guys you suggest I treat like father figures.

I would be within my rights to request to be called "Sifu", "Sigung" or "Professor" in some circles. By your standards, I could demand it of you on here. But I'd give myself a savage uppercut if I ever caught myself doing that.

It's nearly 2017. Not 1850. Come on.

That's very fair. Congratulations on your teaching accomplishments.
 
Given that I have never met WSL or studied WSLVT, I have no opinion as to whether WSL engaged in the practice of "guarding" the method by deliberately presenting incorrect information on video or at seminars or in interviews. I've encountered enough stories of this happening in both Chinese and Japanese martial arts circles, that I assume it must happen at least occasionally. I have no idea whether WSL was the sort of person who would do such a thing.

I will say that in my opinion any instructor who engages in such a practice in this day and age is being unethical.

Personally I'm a big fan of the open source approach to martial arts. I believe it's the best way for martial arts to grow and progress. Anything I've learned is freely available to those who are interested. That said, I will offer no negative judgment towards those who choose to hold back some of what they know, for whatever reason. I will judge those who deliberately offer misinformation. I believe it violates the spirit of being a teacher. I also believe it causes the state of a martial art to deteriorate. Those who engage in such a practice have only themselves to blame if the art they practice and teach becomes worse in their time.
 
We belong to different CLUBS which are part of different organisations. I've been in MA situations before Wing Chun that abused the concept of "family". I have two brothers. No one on here is a relative. When I see "Kung fu family", I think "Manson Family".

I ain't calling anyone "Sifu" that I don't know personally. I know some very highly ranked Kung Fu instructors and call them all by their first name.



Sorry to disappoint. I've completed my instructor's grading system and helped bring a number of students up to instructor level. I'm older than some of the guys you suggest I treat like father figures.

I would be within my rights to request to be called "Sifu", "Sigung" or "Professor" in some circles. By your standards, I could demand it of you on here. But I'd give myself a savage uppercut if I ever caught myself doing that.

It's nearly 2017. Not 1850. Come on.
I understand your stance on this, anerlich, but your tone is a bit more aggressive than is necessary.
 
Those who engage in such a practice have only themselves to blame if the art they practice and teach becomes worse in their time.

lol Because of people learning off videos? Even if everything were accurate, people learning off videos would still screw it up.

No worries. VT is alive and well in the hands of those who know it and teach it freely to all who show up and put in the time and effort. It is only growing.
 
The fact that Philipp Bayer uses a prosthetic in order to hold the pole was already discussed here by someone else. I was assuming you had seen this comment. The lack of a hand does not impede Bayer's use of the pole in any way- he uses the standard method very well and is in fact the best I have seen with the long pole. To be clear, the pole method of Philipp Bayer is not altered in any way to account for his lost hand.





Again what you are saying appears to be contrary to what Callen is saying:



Callen is talking about focus on particular drills within the system in order to address student-specific strengths and weaknesses. This is a standard approach in WSL VT. You are talking about changing methods and teaching in terms of student specific strengths and weaknesses. This is a different approach, not something that is done in the WSL VT that I have experienced. The system is the system- it isn't tailored to be person specific, and it remains fundamentally what it is as it is passed from teacher to student.



If this is supposed to be some kind of relevant comparison with Philipp Bayer, then I can see why people might find your point of view to be offensive



I am just responding to what I read on the thread. Callen appears to be a WSL VT practitioner who has trained under Gary Lam. LFJ appears to be a WSL VT practitioner who has trained with someone else. You seem to want to agree with Callen (although often appearing to misunderstand or twist his meaning), while being antagonistic towards whatever LFJ says. Since the subject is WSL VT, it makes no sense to disregard 50% of the info being provided about that system from people that practice it.



P Bayer teaches mainstream WSL VT. His lack of a hand has been covered and does not change the system he learned from WSL. Your examples are poorly chosen in that David Peterson is not on the same level, and Gary Lam teaches his own system in his own way based upon what he learned from WSL. Philipp Bayer is the only example of mainstream VT that you have mentioned at this point. You are in effect comparing PB to different things and being surprised when there are differences.



WSL VT is not a a system that relies upon sensing and feeling. But you seem to want it to be that way. What more can I say?



I think you have some misconceptions about how WSL VT works in reality. There is no feeling for openings and flowing in WSL VT because fighting does not resemble the chi sau drill.



Can you please provide the quote? It is hard to respond when I don't know what you are talking about. I think though that you are a bit confused.



Simple, PB hasn't changed anything, he teaches what WSL taught and what YM taught. VT is not anything to do with sensing gaps and flowing through- this doesn't work in reality. It is simply a fighting method with a particular aproach, apparently quite different to the wing chun you have seen before. That it isn't completely foolproof is not really a criticism; no fighting method works 100% of the time. What is needed is a method which increases the odds, something WSL VT does very well.

I will simply leave it at this. Everything above is largely a straight up mischatacterization of what I have said.

As an example I always said PB can honestly say he taught exactly what WSL taught him. This does not mean however that someone else who teaches things in a slightly different manner can not say the exact same thing and they can both be telling the 100% truth.

As another example I didn't say WSLVT relies on any particular thing. No fighting system can be successful if in a specific facet it relies on any particular thing and that was my entire point.

As for chi sau I know fighting isn't chi sau, chi sau is something done to develop skill sets used in fighting, and is a "bridge" of sorts to sparring.

I put forward the quotes of WSL, I could also put forward quotes by PB himself, that are consistent with ones by Sifu Gary, that I learned from actual instruction, about how the students must engage in a co-operative reciprocal exchange of force with the partner. That kind of co-operation can only happen if you pay attention and feel what your partner is doing. I'm not trying to make this sound like some Zen mystical "feel the force Luke" BS, I am talking actual biological facts, science.

I could keep going but as I said earlier I am done with this. I don't mind when people have a different opinion but I do mind when statements I make are mischaracterized.
 
As an example I always said PB can honestly say he taught exactly what WSL taught him. This does not mean however that someone else who teaches things in a slightly different manner can not say the exact same thing and they can both be telling the 100% truth.

It doesn't matter.

We (not you) can clearly see why someone's thinking is different by analyzing their whole understanding of VT and looking at their training history.

Those who spent the most time with WSL and didn't openly change the system share the same understanding of it. Those who don't share this same thinking either changed it, and have done so openly, or didn't learn it fully as evidenced by their comparatively limited experience and lack of cohesiveness and functionality in the system they teach. It's clear as day to anyone who knows.

This may upset someone, but it is what it is. Your "everyone can be right in their own way" theory, even though their fundamentals are conflicting, isn't true and in the end just doesn't matter. What feels good has no bearing on the truth.

If you disagree, you can explain to me why my critique of the misunderstanding/misuse of the paak-sau drill in the other thread is flawed. These are things people who didn't learn fully unknowingly get caught up in.

I put forward the quotes of WSL, I could also put forward quotes by PB himself, that are consistent with ones by Sifu Gary, that I learned from actual instruction, about how the students must engage in a co-operative reciprocal exchange of force with the partner. That kind of co-operation can only happen if you pay attention and feel what your partner is doing. I'm not trying to make this sound like some Zen mystical "feel the force Luke" BS, I am talking actual biological facts, science.

I could ask you what you think "exchange of force" means and how it relates to fighting, but it's clear you don't know and aren't interested in finding out. Your mind has been made up. You have mastered WSL's method already and google quotes that you (mis)interpret to say what you want.

I could keep going but as I said earlier I am done with this.

We all know you can keep going, digging your hole, and as I said earlier, it'd be great if you didn't bring this same topic back up in two months and have to be told again how you are way off the mark on every point.
 
Maybe, but that subject has been dealt with by professional historians.

Wing Chun history on the other hand is a mish mash of legend, tall story, hagiography, misrepresentation and character assassination by a pack of chancers with hidden and not-so-hidden agendas.

The "conclusions" you seem to be trying to draw are based on those, plus the fact they are on the net of a million lies makes the likelihood of their accuracy about as remote as the Andromeda Galaxy, M31.

No good will come from this.

I guess I was projecting. My father is a retired history professor and I remember one of the things that made me take that path first as a kid was reading some of his published papers. Some of of them were purposefully taking obscure stuff that were scant on original sources and taking what was there, the "folk tales", and the overall context of the time and place and then breaking it all down then analysing it to create a plausible picture of the real person or events. This works even better when you have open minded people bouncing ideas off of one another.

I enjoy that kind of back and forth, which is why I enjoyed my back and forth with Callen because it was an actual dialogue that at least acknowledged certain possibilities. In my experience people can acknowledge that something else is possible even if they believe the truth more likely lays elsewhere. But this is an anonymous internet forum so I should have reminded myself that kind of dialogue isn't all that common at times.
 
I understand your stance on this, anerlich, but your tone is a bit more aggressive than is necessary.

That's a fair point, and I should apologise for my tone to lansao and yourself for that. And to anyone else that was offended. No sarcasm intended.

Not that it's an excuse, but I did spend way too much time with a Xingyi / Bagua teacher that used the family and father sort of schtick to manipulate a number of people to deleterious effect. My marriage was lucky to survive my dealings with him, others were less fortunate.
 
lol Because of people learning off videos? Even if everything were accurate, people learning off videos would still screw it up.

Not arguing, but I wonder why this seems to only be a problem with TMAs.

I've learned some great Jiu Jitsu techniques from video and use them to good effect. Some of my goto techniques I first learned from video. I think nearly all BJJ guys would have done the same.

I don't think there is more "subtlety" or "feel" in Wing Chun than anything else. Maybe it's the relative speed of the movements.
 
Given that I have never met WSL or studied WSLVT, I have no opinion as to whether WSL engaged in the practice of "guarding" the method by deliberately presenting incorrect information on video or at seminars or in interviews. I've encountered enough stories of this happening in both Chinese and Japanese martial arts circles, that I assume it must happen at least occasionally. I have no idea whether WSL was the sort of person who would do such a thing.

I will say that in my opinion any instructor who engages in such a practice in this day and age is being unethical.

Personally I'm a big fan of the open source approach to martial arts. I believe it's the best way for martial arts to grow and progress. Anything I've learned is freely available to those who are interested. That said, I will offer no negative judgment towards those who choose to hold back some of what they know, for whatever reason. I will judge those who deliberately offer misinformation. I believe it violates the spirit of being a teacher. I also believe it causes the state of a martial art to deteriorate. Those who engage in such a practice have only themselves to blame if the art they practice and teach becomes worse in their time.

Isolationist as a red flag pretty much.
 
lol Because of people learning off videos? Even if everything were accurate, people learning off videos would still screw it up.

No worries. VT is alive and well in the hands of those who know it and teach it freely to all who show up and put in the time and effort. It is only growing.

Not if they have a the other tools in place. It depends what you are learning.
 
Not arguing, but I wonder why this seems to only be a problem with TMAs.

I've learned some great Jiu Jitsu techniques from video and use them to good effect. Some of my goto techniques I first learned from video. I think nearly all BJJ guys would have done the same.

I don't think there is more "subtlety" or "feel" in Wing Chun than anything else. Maybe it's the relative speed of the movements.

BJJ is trained differently. in mabye two ways that apply here.

1. Each BJJ player has a different game. There is no one linage of the correct BJJ. So my methods do not have to be my instructors methods. I can go on line and look up super cool move A. and if it works for me it is the true BJJ.

2. It gets tested by quality guys who are all connected. So if the youtube super cool move A. Has kinks in it. Then some other expert will look at it try it out work it out and re post it. It is much harder to spread misinformation.
 
That's a fair point, and I should apologise for my tone to lansao and yourself for that. And to anyone else that was offended. No sarcasm intended.

Not that it's an excuse, but I did spend way too much time with a Xingyi / Bagua teacher that used the family and father sort of schtick to manipulate a number of people to deleterious effect. My marriage was lucky to survive my dealings with him, others were less fortunate.

Yeah. brothers would be a better dynamic of family. Than father and son.
 
That's a fair point, and I should apologise for my tone to lansao and yourself for that. And to anyone else that was offended. No sarcasm intended.

Not that it's an excuse, but I did spend way too much time with a Xingyi / Bagua teacher that used the family and father sort of schtick to manipulate a number of people to deleterious effect. My marriage was lucky to survive my dealings with him, others were less fortunate.

Hey man, totally cool. Definitely sounds like there are some people who abuse that relationship. Also sorry to hear that you went through that. If I could ship you a beer, I would.
 
That's a fair point, and I should apologise for my tone to lansao and yourself for that. And to anyone else that was offended. No sarcasm intended.

Not that it's an excuse, but I did spend way too much time with a Xingyi / Bagua teacher that used the family and father sort of schtick to manipulate a number of people to deleterious effect. My marriage was lucky to survive my dealings with him, others were less fortunate.
As I said, I understand your stance. While I don't share it, you're certainly not the only person who has had a bad experience from someone abusing the "family" concept. My attitude falls somewhere between yours and lansao's.
 
Not arguing, but I wonder why this seems to only be a problem with TMAs.

I've learned some great Jiu Jitsu techniques from video and use them to good effect. Some of my goto techniques I first learned from video. I think nearly all BJJ guys would have done the same.

I don't think there is more "subtlety" or "feel" in Wing Chun than anything else. Maybe it's the relative speed of the movements.
I think it tends to be a problem more often in TMA's (in this case, using "TMA" to refer to arts with a relatively long history) because of the historical practices Tony and others have mentioned. Arts with a relatively short history didn't have that as part of their history, so they tend to be more open.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top