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.