Yip Man's curriculum changes

[DALE80]

Show me where I "attacked" LFJ. I have commented only on his arguments, until such point as he started referring to my posts as untruths, relating my logic to "aliens did it", etc.

You are an incredibly biased person with a massive ego, commenting obsessively about a tcma system you don't have the slightest understanding of. I can only assume you are unemployed to spend your days in such a pathetic way. What I have learned reading this thread is that it isn't worth reading the self-indulgent and hateful waffle that you churn out in massive quantities to make yoursef feel important.

You are ignored.

 

[DALE80]

There may be no evidence for a "pre-weapons" empty hand wing chun, but there is also no evidence for a "weapons-based" empty hand wing chun prior to YM either!

YM VT is evidence for a weapons based empty hand VT. Who needs for it to be from before YM?

 

[DALE80]

I hate to interrupt, but there is a fallacy that needs addressed here. Yes it is true that the LDBK can be proven to exist prior to Yip Man. There are a couple of points to address here though.

1. The pole seen in YMVT, as verified by Lam Guei Chung's HSHK version, is also present in YKSWC & Kulo.

2. Since the existence of the pole is applicable as being pre-Yip Man, so must to be, the empty hand sets SNT, CK & BJ as these sets are also passed on by YKSWC & other Leung Jan lineages, the same as YMVT. Theory, principles, methodology etc. of the forms and pole of that time cannot be definitively proven, only outward appearance.

3. Even though the appearance of the empty hand sets differ slightly, it doesn't mean they didn't exist prior to the pole. We can deduce that at minimum they existed at the same time.

4. Yip Man's version of the empty hand forms didn't exist prior to YMVT, because YMVT didn't appear prior to Yip Man.

5. The significance of the YMVT empty hand forms being based on the pole is only applicable to YMVT and could only have occurred prior to Yip Man, with Yip Man or after Yip Man. But this does not at any point eliminate the existence of SNT, CK or BJ until the emergence of the LDBK. Because if we take the previous points into consideration, we see that the empty hand sets, like the pole were passed on independent of Yip Man's lineage.

6. This leaves the conclusion that any correlation to pole with empty hand occurred only within the Yip Man line and since the existence of SNT, CK & BJ can be verified prior to YMVT, that the merging of the theory could only have occurred in one of the following ways:

A. Leung Bik/Fung Wah taught it to Yip Man. Since no other students of Chan Wah Shun pass this on, he can be ruled out.

B. Yip Man re-engineered the hands to align with the pole and passed it on to a select few.

C. Wong Shun Leung formulated this methodology and passed it on.

There are no other possible solutions based on the available evidence that would support a plausible explanation.

ok?

 

[DALE80]

Kali grappling, especially ground fighting, isn't about submissions but actual breaks and dislocations.

Sounds like the kind of thing that doesn't work. Be careful!

 

[DALE80]

Oh! So anyone that disagrees with you and LFJ are simply "trolls"! How convenient!

Don't troll if you don't want to be called a troll

You should really look up what "troll" means! That is not trolling. Giving someone a dose of their own medicine is not trolling unless THEY were trolling to begin with!

intentionally harassing someone while contributing zero to the thread is trolling, yes

 

[Nobody Important]

ok?

Lol! I know it's over analytical, but the entire concept poses a paradox concerning origins. This has absolutely no bearing though on the validity of the premise of pole work influencing hand work.

 

[DALE80]

Not when you consider what I said after.

Sorry I have been ignoring your posts because you were trolling before. I tried to read this one but it was too boring to focus on. Might try again later.

 

[DALE80]

Well then, before you get too cozy with LFJ, you should know that he does not consider DP a valid student of WSL. He did not learn the "complete" system and was only a seminar student. His understanding is also "broken" compared to someone that knows the "complete" WSLVT. Now those are HIS words, not mine! I don't believe that at all. But this has come up in multiple discussions in the past. Therefore according to LFJ, your Wing Chun would also be "broken." So does DP actually teach what you and LFJ have been so dogmatically supporting? I don't recall this theory that Wing Chun derived entirely from the weapons being featured in the book that he wrote.

Please stop trolling and let LFJ speak for himself

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The fallacy of false equivalence is what you are doing. LFJ is not making a truth claim and so argument from silence etc is nonsense. All he is doing is pointing to the better theory on the basis of its simplicity and requiring no extra evidence, which is the one he has outlined.

Again, you need to learn a bit about logic. I'm done with you, but thanks.

 

[DALE80]

Lol! I know it's over analytical, but the entire concept poses a paradox concerning origins. This has absolutely no bearing though on the validity of the premise of pole work influencing hand work.

I don't see why some earlier figure could not have passed on the full weapon based system to some people, while passing on a simplified version with hands only or weapons and hands understanding missing? But it really doesn't concern me where it came from, only that it exists. LFJ's theory is a nice one and it is interesting to think about whenever the trolls take a breather from the attack. I can't understand why it provokes such opposition myself.

 

[geezer]

Well then, before you get too cozy with LFJ, you should know that he does not consider DP a valid student of WSL. He did not learn the "complete" system and was only a seminar student. His understanding is also "broken" compared to someone that knows the "complete" WSLVT. Now those are HIS words, not mine! I don't believe that at all. But this has come up in multiple discussions in the past. Therefore according to LFJ, your Wing Chun would also be "broken." So does DP actually teach what you and LFJ have been so dogmatically supporting? I don't recall this theory that Wing Chun derived entirely from the weapons being featured in the book that he wrote.

I think you are overstating things a bit, KPM. LFJ may have said some of those things, but his main point was that David Peterson hadn't spent the same amount of time with WSL as Philip Bayer and some others, and consequently LFJ feels that Peterson is not at the same level as Bayer. Furthermore he has stated that DP 's instruction is application-based rather than the more abstract, strategy based method of Philip Bayer, and some others (which he insists is the correct method).

You know, I don't have as much of a problem with LFJ's perspective as his attitude. If he wouldn't express his strongly held opinions as proven facts, I'd be a lot more receptive. He's a smart, articulate guy who knows a lot about his art, but he sure doesn't know much about the art of persuasion!

 

[DALE80]

Again, you need to learn a bit about logic. I'm done with you, but thanks.

This is like the third time you have been done with the thread, with me, with others. Just go already, and don't let the door hit your giant but damaged ego on the way out, you clown.

 

[Nobody Important]

I don't see why some earlier figure could not have passed on the full weapon based system to some people, while passing on a simplified version with hands only or weapons and hands understanding missing? But it really doesn't concern me where it came from, only that it exists. LFJ's theory is a nice one and it is interesting to think about whenever the trolls take a breather from the attack. I can't understand why it provokes such opposition myself.

As previously stated, the origins are irrelevant, the premise is plausible. It's a good theory of quality control IMO.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sounds like the kind of thing that doesn't work. Be careful!

Sounds like you also know nothing about grappling beyond submissions.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't see why some earlier figure could not have passed on the full weapon based system to some people, while passing on a simplified version with hands only or weapons and hands understanding missing? But it really doesn't concern me where it came from, only that it exists. LFJ's theory is a nice one and it is interesting to think about whenever the trolls take a breather from the attack. I can't understand why it provokes such opposition myself.

Have you seriously not noticed that I have said REPEATEDLY that it's a nice theory and not without support?? I've not opposed the theory, at all. Not once. I've only discussed the logic of the evidence.

 

[geezer]

Dale, no need to continue the name calling. My mom taught me that "Sicks and stones can break my bones, but names can never hurt me!" ....When the truth of that sank in, I took up Escrima.

 

[DALE80]

You know, I don't have as much of a problem with LFJ's perspective as his attitude. If he wouldn't express his strongly held opinions as proven facts, I'd be a lot more receptive. He's a smart, articulate guy who knows a lot about his art, but he sure doesn't know much about the art of persuasion!

I guess it's the thing where someone inside the system can see and understand things that are impossible from without.

Personally in terms of my short time on the forum, it looks like many of you guys are more into forum politics than learning something. There are a couple of posters here that know a great deal about their respective areas. LFJ is obviously one of these.

For me, it is a lot more interesting and rewarding to interact politely and learn from such people, rather than give any consideration to what they might be thinking or whether I like their attitude. It just seems so counter productive to focus on such trivial things.

 

[geezer]

Sounds like you also know nothing about grappling beyond submissions.

In competition and certain jobs like security/law enforcement you may use control and hold back, you cause pain and effect a submission. If you are fighting for your life you go all out and break things. That's pretty straightforward. I'm not sure why Dale made that comment.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In competition and certain jobs like security/law enforcement you may use control and hold back, you cause pain and effect a submission. If you are fighting for your life you go all out and break things. That's pretty straightforward. I'm not sure why Dale made that comment.

Everyone I know who practices submissions knows which ones easily turn into destructions, even if they only train for competition (they still need to know it for safety, of course).

 

[DALE80]

Dale, no need to continue the name calling. My mom taught me that "Sicks and stones can break my bones, but names can never hurt me!" ....When the truth of that sank in, I took up Escrima.

Are you some kind of moderator?

If so then maybe try and call off the some of the dogs here (KPM, Seymour, Juany). They are really ruining the forum from an outside observer's point of view and add very little to nothing of substance. If they back off and become civil then i am happy not to call them names which might hurt their poor feelings

LFJ is worth 100 of these because he actually knows what he is talking about and is willing to share it. Who cares if he isn't friendly and doesn't make you feel special? At the end of the day it's about learning VT, not mincing around the forum feeling good about yourself,