WSLVT

[guy b]

That is true, I only linked that as proof that DP was a member of the WSL student association. That has nothing to do with the fact that DP himself was personally chosen however. Even LFJ acknowledged this as a fact, he tried to dismiss this by saying it was just a "thank you" which is simply illogical, a man like WSL would not do so for the reason I noted in the previous post, DP and his knowledge (or lack there of) would be a reflection on WSL due to such a selection.

WSL granted certificates to many people, many of whom don't understand the system and are far from being able to teach it effectively. The idea of these lame duck people setting themselves up as gatekeepers was probably unthinkable to WSL, but in many places that is exactly what they did.

I have personal experience with one of these people, and to hear someone that knows nothing of the situation defending a person like that on the basis of a bit of paper (they love bits of paper) is quite annoying, to say the least.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Hands not important in VT

So, a shorter arm, with less weight, and a lack of dexterity that can adjust its movement mid-arc is all somehow irrelevant? Shorter reach doesn't change anything? We're talking about the human body - removing that hand does have an effect. Some of the effect may, in fact, be positive. Some would certainly be negative. Some arts would be far more affected than VT, but I find it difficult to believe that it would have no effect, at all. Heck, if the arm was complete but 6 inches short, that would have a dramatic effect on some of the interplay of limbs. At the very least, the lower inertia/momentum of that arm would have an impact.

 

[LFJ]

I posted that DP lived in Hong Kong and trained there with WSL, though I also admitted that it was not for as long as PB. I then also noted that during breaks in the school year he would return to Hong Kong for as long as 2 months at a time to train with WSL until WSL's death. You claimed these to be false.

What I said was false was your claim that he lived there. The link only talks about his relatively short visits. He said those yearly visits started in '93 until WSL's death, which would make 3 or 4 times for "up to" two months.

So you contradict yourself. You claimed this to be simply false before. Even when contradicting yourself you have to again try to minimize the significance of this as you were clearly ignorant of it previously (hence the claim of falsehood.).

I have repeated the same thing at least 4 or 5 times in this thread, including before you posted links that say the same thing.

You have magnified the significance of holiday visits into "lived there".

He even said much of his time spent there was not under direct instruction of WSL.

That is true, I only linked that as proof that DP was a member of the WSL student association.

He's the big brother to the founders who all basically decided to give themselves membership. It means nothing.

That has nothing to do with the fact that DP himself was personally chosen however. Even LFJ acknowledged this as a fact, he tried to dismiss this by saying it was just a "thank you" which is simply illogical, a man like WSL would not do so for the reason I noted in the previous post,

This didn't come from me. PB said that's what they were. Probably why he never waves it around claiming "authorization", like some of these people whose knowledge and skill is not enough to speak for itself and need the sifu namedrop to get any attention.

For you to call this illogical based on a perception of a man you didn't know is kind of dumb.

 

[Juany118]

What I said was false was your claim that he lived there. The link only talks about his relatively short visits. He said those yearly visits started in '93 until WSL's death, which would make 3 or 4 times for "up to" two months.



I have repeated the same thing at least 4 or 5 times in this thread, including before you posted links that say the same thing.

You have magnified the significance of holiday visits into "lived there".

He even said much of his time spent there was not under direct instruction of WSL.



He's the big brother to the founders who all basically decided to give themselves membership. It means nothing.



This didn't come from me. PB said that's what they were. Probably why he never waves it around claiming "authorization", like some of these people whose knowledge and skill is not enough to speak for itself and need the sifu namedrop to get any attention.

For you to call this illogical based on a perception of a man you didn't know is kind of dumb.

Translation... Blah blah blah... Sorry if you are somewhere for months you are living there. That isn't just a "visit".

You have been reduced to semantics and that is not worthy debating.

 

[LFJ]

I don't consider a month or two living there. I did the same thing when studying another style in China. Spent summer vacations in the school and also had the teacher to the States for seminars.

But I know better than to think I learned anywhere as deeply as the domestic students who trained all day long year-round. I was on my own the rest of the year back home, and always had corrections when I returned.

 

[Juany118]

I don't consider a month or two living there...

That is subjective

That said he went there when his career allowed him on a regular basis over years. Then add WSL not only living in his home when WSL was in Australia (where he spent a fair bit of time) then you are the guy being the punching bag an being the translator for a man I would call a genius throughout the region.

As a lapsed teacher, and former soldier, that is one of the best ways to learn. Finishing a meal and just talking, "shooting the ****" in a casual atmosphere. I learned at least as much during my first years as a cop on "smoothy nights" (hanging out and drinking a few beers on our last shift of the cycle) at a squad mates house as I did sitting next to my field training officer in a patrol car. In the end learning is learning regardless of the skill.

 

[LFJ]

What you are suggesting is that someone can learn just as well and completely as others who train all day, every day year-round under close guidance of their teacher in a fraction of the time. Literally thousands of hours less per year. At least, you are convinced that it's sufficient to learn something you've never learned.

Close personal guidance is extremely important in one's formative years. That's why PB stayed there for his first 18 months straight. DP never had such experience, and it shows.

In any case, you have a timeline and figure it must be enough for DP to have learned the full system. So, what do we do now?

The next logical step to objectively confirm your theory would be to perform a technical analysis of what he teaches and compare it to that of longterm students, but when we do this we find application-based thinking every step of the way, phrasebook level knowledge, and no understanding of the conceptual or strategic base of VT.

Ask why, then look at his timeline and it becomes obvious. He lacked close guided instruction at the time it was most important and never had uninteruppted training for more than a couple months once per year for a few years.

The problem now is that you ignore these facts and stick to your theory that no! he must have learned fully, because... Who knows?

 

[Transk53]

There is zero QC done with that list



What's the simplest explanation for the fact that different people are teaching different things?

The simple answer is that some people find what is affective. Does not mean that things have to be diluted, just improved upon. If the technique is sound, I.E. sticking to the core of what that technique has evolved, there is nothing to say that an improvement is invalid. Sticking to doctrine is a sticky wicket, and one that can be found out, especially when one is blind to doctrine.

 

[KPM]

What you are suggesting is that someone can learn just as well and completely as others who train all day, every day year-round under close guidance of their teacher in a fraction of the time. Literally thousands of hours less per year. At least, you are convinced that it's sufficient to learn something you've never learned.

----No one would argue that part-time training is as good as full-time training. But PB has written that the approach of WSLVT could be learned in person in an afternoon. You yourself have even referred to the "simplicity" of WSLVT. Wing Chun is a much simpler system than the majority of other CMAs. What we have been saying is that DP spent enough time with WSL to grasp the conceptual and strategic approach you guys have mentioned. And if he hadn't, wouldn't that have been apparent to WSL when they were together? Wouldn't have WSL sought to correct that deficiency? You are making WSLVT out to be far more complicated than most of us have seen Wing Chun to be.



Ask why, then look at his timeline and it becomes obvious. He lacked close guided instruction at the time it was most important and never had uninteruppted training for more than a couple months once per year for a few years.

----And you actually believe that during those month long sessions with WSL DP would have never said...."but Sifu, how do you fight with Wing Chun?".....which would have prompted an explanation of the strategic and conceptual approach of WSLVT?

 

[guy b]

Translation... Blah blah blah... Sorry if you are somewhere for months you are living there. That isn't just a "visit".

You have been reduced to semantics and that is not worthy debating.

It simply isn't enough time. Look at the results and see.

 

[guy b]

Sticking to doctrine is a sticky wicket, and one that can be found out, especially when one is blind to doctrine.

I believe this may be a content free sentence

 

[guy b]

But PB has written that the approach of WSLVT could be learned in person in an afternoon.

You can understand the goals of the system in an afternoon. You won't have a clue how to achieve them though

What we have been saying is that DP spent enough time with WSL to grasp the conceptual and strategic approach you guys have mentioned.

I don't know exactly what DP learned and what he didn't, but he doesn't have any appreciation of the technical workings of the WSL VT strategy and mostly takes an application based approach.

And if he hadn't, wouldn't that have been apparent to WSL when they were together? Wouldn't have WSL sought to correct that deficiency? You are making WSLVT out to be far more complicated than most of us have seen Wing Chun to be.

WSL VT is both more pared down in that it contains nothing superfluous, and much more complex in that it is a real system. I don't know what WSL thought of DP, but quite obvious that whatever time they spent together was not enough just by looking at what he teaches.

 

[Transk53]

I believe this may be a content free sentence

No not at all. I could exand, but you clearly have no idea what it is to face the situation where you have to fight. Trolling is not fighting, real life is. Why don't you just accept that, it does not matter what skill set is used, and to what doctrine is used. There is only one, the opponent goes down hard. I have to question just what you have been taught. Go into a real live situation, you seem like mince meat. And yes, I was drunk the other night, but I have mixed it. What have you done?, apart from disparaged every other user on this forum, and continue to do so.

 

[Juany118]

No not at all. I could exand, but you clearly have no idea what it is to face the situation where you have to fight. Trolling is not fighting, real life is. Why don't you just accept that, it does not matter what skill set is used, and to what doctrine is used. There is only one, the opponent goes down hard. I have to question just what you have been taught. Go into a real live situation, you seem like mince meat. And yes, I was drunk the other night, but I have mixed it. What have you done?, apart from disparaged every other user on this forum, and continue to do so.

I have been wanting to go here but then decided against it because in an earlier post he responded to someone saying that what ultimately matters is that it works in a real encounter. He said that he doesn't accept such a premise. He is so steeped in the dogma and theory of his particular WSLVT that he can't see past the theory to the practical application of a TMA in a real life violent encounter.

 

[Transk53]

I have been wanting to go here but then decided against it because in an earlier post he responded to someone saying that what ultimately matters is that it works in a real encounter. He said that he doesn't accept such a premise. He is so steeped in the dogma and theory of his particular WSLVT that he can't see past the theory to the practical application of a TMA in a real life violent encounter.

Yes agree. To be quite honest about it, in a real life situation, I did use a knee tickle as I put it, but to use what I know, would have likely meant doing bird (slang meaning prision). I just get a bit het up around trolls that clearly don't know what it means to be in a real life encounter. Especially true around here when quite a few members are ex forces, current LEO's, or both. Simply put, you could not use Wing Chun on the street, a person would simply be crusified under U.K. law (no offesnse intended with the use of that term). So my take is, anybody who thinks that the Martial Arts has any street application is deluded. I will opnengly admit that Guy B winds me up, not so much with Wing Chun speak, more to the point that even I would not disparage members that are clearly more skilled than I am. You just don't do it, especially if you have the skills that are conveyed in posts. Maybe I am just being naive, but there are things you just don't do. Self defence is about what is necessary, no amount of WSLVT is going to change. Which I suspect Guy B will never understand. Cupcakes probably.

 

[LFJ]

But PB has written that the approach of WSLVT could be learned in person in an afternoon. You yourself have even referred to the "simplicity" of WSLVT.

The theory is simple, but the system is complex.

In other words, VT fighting is simple, but VT training is complex.

It's easy to screw things up without close guidance during your formative years. That's exactly what DP lacked.

----And you actually believe that during those month long sessions with WSL DP would have never said...."but Sifu, how do you fight with Wing Chun?".....which would have prompted an explanation of the strategic and conceptual approach of WSLVT?

DP noted in one of those interview links that much of his time in WSL's school was not even under direct instruction of WSL. It's not like he had month long private lessons.

So, it sounds like WSL, similar to YM, was more attentive to regular students, and taught phrasebook ideas to the occasional visitors and seminar attendees into whom he didn't have the time to invest careful instruction.

DP would not need to ask that question because he already had an application in mind for everything in the forms, from his phrasebook, which is what he teaches still today. That's how he thinks one fights with VT.

He would have naturally learned more had he spent more time and fought. He was also never a fighter. In fact, PB has said that whenever WSL mentioned there being sparring planned for the next class, few people would even turn up.

It's no mystery why we have a bunch of chi-sau addicts in WSLVT, but only a few real fighters. Similar situation, I suspect, with YM students. Very few were actual fighters, and most testing was done outside, while class was used for correcting. No fighting, no correcting, nothing to improve. Just endless hours of chi-sau games.

 

[Juany118]

Yes agree. To be quite honest about it, in a real life situation, I did use a knee tickle as I put it, but to use what I know, would have likely meant doing bird (slang meaning prision). I just get a bit het up around trolls that clearly don't know what it means to be in a real life encounter. Especially true around here when quite a few members are ex forces, current LEO's, or both. Simply put, you could not use Wing Chun on the street, a person would simply be crusified under U.K. law (no offesnse intended with the use of that term). So my take is, anybody who thinks that the Martial Arts has any street application is deluded. I will opnengly admit that Guy B winds me up, not so much with Wing Chun speak, more to the point that even I would not disparage members that are clearly more skilled than I am. You just don't do it, especially if you have the skills that are conveyed in posts. Maybe I am just being naive, but there are things you just don't do. Self defence is about what is necessary, no amount of WSLVT is going to change. Which I suspect Guy B will never understand. Cupcakes probably.

Well I am one of the LEOs and have actually used WC and it works but you are half right. It works for me because I know if I bil sau to the eyes I better be able to justify lethal force, if I kick the knee intentionally and hyper extend it I best be able to articulate that the suspect was not only using active aggression but was of a size (or high on something) that my skinny butt was not going to be able to control him otherwise. In short I know the laws governing use of force and so adapt my fighting strategy to meet the level of resistance I am encountering.

Where you are right is that, in my experience, most Traditional Martial Arts instructors teach the "how" but not the "when" of fighting. Heck some actually teach with what we call "Cobra Kai" (Karate kid reference) strategy as the only way to fight regardless of the circumstance... Put the opponent down with extreme prejudice.

My instructor teaches the when but he is also a former operator and also a Forensics and Combatives consultant for a number of LE agencies but, at least in my area, he is the exception that proves this rule.

 

[Transk53]

Well I am one of the LEOs and have actually used WC and it works but you are half right. It works for me because I know if I bil sau to the eyes I better be able to justify lethal force, if I kick the knee intentionally and hyper extend it I best be able to articulate that the suspect was not only using active aggression but was of a size (or high on something) that my skinny butt was not going to be able to control him otherwise. In short I know the laws governing use of force and so adapt my fighting strategy to meet the level of resistance I am encountering.

Where you are right is that, in my experience, most Traditional Martial Arts instructors teach the "how" but not the "when" of fighting. Heck some actually teach with what we call "Cobra Kai" (Karate kid reference) strategy as the only way to fight regardless of the circumstance... Put the opponent down with extreme prejudice.

My instructor teaches the when but he is also a former operator and also a Forensics and Combatives consultant for a number of LE agencies but, at least in my area, he is the exception that proves this rule.

Thanks, learnt something new there. It must be quite difficult to choose what technique as it were. With the knee, would that be statistics, or would you favour that move as something that works. Of course within the confines of the law. I mean it become like half a move? Or just something that if you followed through, would than likely be excessive force. Just curious, just how far could you go?

 

[KPM]

I have been wanting to go here but then decided against it because in an earlier post he responded to someone saying that what ultimately matters is that it works in a real encounter. He said that he doesn't accept such a premise. He is so steeped in the dogma and theory of his particular WSLVT that he can't see past the theory to the practical application of a TMA in a real life violent encounter.

You said "application"!!!!!

 

[Transk53]

You said "application"!!!!!

Yes. Hence why I asked why you get way with?