WSL on LSJC

[LFJ]

How would you know that?

Many of WSL's students have gatherings from time to time. They may all have their personal flavors, but all agree on the core teachings they learned from WSL. Go look up 1st gen. students within the WSLSA. None of them will agree with Graham who never trained with WSL.

Who said anything about lying to people? WTF are you on about?

You say several things he taught students were impractical, wrong, misconceptions, or pure bullsh!t (like each of the 3 taan-sau), while PB got the real stuff from him. That means WSL would have known what works and what doesn't, yet chose to teach other students bullsh!t, telling them that it will work. Is that not lying?

[guy b.]

Your concepts for the most part are the ideas of people in arm chairs.

Why would you practice wing chun if you think the concepts of wing chun were formulated by people without experience of fighting? This would be a waste of your time and an illogical thing for you to do. Are you mad?

Why do you assume that WC12345 or whatever he is called doesn't fight?

I do not know but I do not have these problems on the boxing forums or the bjj forums. I think the difference is the ratio of arm chair guys to people really doing it.

This is nonsense. MMA, bjj and boxing are sports with fans. A large number of these fans post on forums compared to the number of active fighters posting.

Many fighting sports are also infested with hobbyists who get all of the sprawl shorts, gumshield, shin pads and gloves but train rarely and without intensity, doing it for the reflected glory from their heroes, the fighters. It is a form of man-crush and quite embarrassing to see in a grown man. This is how bjj and mma teams fund the training of their real guys, generally.

Share what you do, share your experience doing it, share what you learned from that experience.

There was a great thread a while back called "experience thread". Surprised you didn't see it. Right up your street I would say.

[k gledhill]

Why would you practice wing chun if you think the concepts of wing chun were formulated by people without experience of fighting? This would be a waste of your time and an illogical thing for you to do. Are you mad?

Why do you assume that WC12345 or whatever he is called doesn't fight?



This is nonsense. MMA, bjj and boxing are sports with fans. A large number of these fans post on forums compared to the number of active fighters posting.

Many fighting sports are also infested with hobbyists who get all of the sprawl shorts, gumshield, shin pads and gloves but train rarely and without intensity, doing it for the reflected glory from their heroes, the fighters. It is a form of man-crush and quite embarrassing to see in a grown man. This is how bjj and mma teams fund the training of their real guys, generally.



There was a great thread a while back called "experience thread". Surprised you didn't see it. Right up your street I would say.

The " fan crush " ! Laughing out load

[KPM]

Like what?

The points I've raised here have been showing what WSL taught to his regular students.

You're telling me when you met PB he told you that was all bullsh!t and WSL routinely lied to every other student he had? So you believed PB and now have no questions.

I don't know who is right in this little debate. But I have to say that I follow LFJ's logic. You can't say things are crap, then be shown that WSL actually taught these things, then say that it was in a seminar environment and therefore was substandard and doesn't count. That is not doing WSL's teaching ability, reputation, or sense of honesty any justice. I refuse to believe that WSL taught his seminar students a substandard version of Wing Chun compared to what he taught his "regular" students. I am left to conclude that PB has indeed changed things around a bit compared to what WSL taught his students. There's nothing wrong with that. He is showing that he is Wing Chun's "master" and not its "slave." And I think its bit of a "cop out" to say that you can't explain it in writing and one has to just meet and work with PB directly. Either WSL taught these obvious things or he didn't. Either PB also teaches these things or he doesn't. No enlightenment experience needed!

[LFJ]

A Master Talks: The Wong Shun Leung Interview

Grandmaster Yip Man also had a different attitude to that which I have. He used to believe that teaching one good student would be better than teaching ten bad ones. Hence, he would not spend too much time with a student whom he thought not worthy of his time.

This is why some teachers of Ving Tsun teach in different manners. From Yip Man's one word of explanation they may have got the wrong meaning which they now pass on. Their grasp of the ideas which Yip Man gave depended very much on their intelligence, attendance to class and on their training attitude. This is not a criticism of Yip Man but rather it reflects the attitude of the time which was very much traditional.

Wherever and whomever I have been teaching, it has been my preference to convey the information to all people in attendance. I try to treat everyone equally during my lessons and seminars.

If therefore, students are allowed such free interpretation as that which Yip Man allowed then the students may take Ving Tsun as an art. In fact it is a skill. We are not performing for an audience but rather doing a job.

[LFJ]

Combine the above quoted fact with the teaching and testimony of numerous students of his and the video footage of him teaching the same things in many places over the years... it paints a pretty clear picture of what WSLVT is about. Hard to believe anyone can deny it.

[Jansingsang]

I don't know who is right in this little debate. But I have to say that I follow LFJ's logic. You can't say things are crap, then be shown that WSL actually taught these things, then say that it was in a seminar environment and therefore was substandard and doesn't count. That is not doing WSL's teaching ability, reputation, or sense of honesty any justice. I refuse to believe that WSL taught his seminar students a substandard version of Wing Chun compared to what he taught his "regular" students. I am left to conclude that PB has indeed changed things around a bit compared to what WSL taught his students. There's nothing wrong with that. He is showing that he is Wing Chun's "master" and not its "slave." And I think its bit of a "cop out" to say that you can't explain it in writing and one has to just meet and work with PB directly. Either WSL taught these obvious things or he didn't. Either PB also teaches these things or he doesn't. No enlightenment experience needed!

Here here i solely agree also myself stemming from the WSL Lineage LFJ'S logic seems of sound mind and cant be disputed at this moment in time. For whats been said is backed up by evidence Ive been to two of WSL Seminars back in the days and too think now... I was being lied too Shatters the up most respect i have for the man. As he was honest in his explanations in regard to the system which was addressed in straight logical action and context which being very easy to understand there and then Not Nah mate you learn that way down the line BullSh!t The only one whos lied of to date is Clive Potter Grahams former Sifu Maybe his never really recovered cause something not right here

[Jansingsang]

I don't know who is right in this little debate. But I have to say that I follow LFJ's logic. You can't say things are crap, then be shown that WSL actually taught these things, then say that it was in a seminar environment and therefore was substandard and doesn't count. That is not doing WSL's teaching ability, reputation, or sense of honesty any justice. I refuse to believe that WSL taught his seminar students a substandard version of Wing Chun compared to what he taught his "regular" students. I am left to conclude that PB has indeed changed things around a bit compared to what WSL taught his students. There's nothing wrong with that. He is showing that he is Wing Chun's "master" and not its "slave." And I think its bit of a "cop out" to say that you can't explain it in writing and one has to just meet and work with PB directly. Either WSL taught these obvious things or he didn't. Either PB also teaches these things or he doesn't. No enlightenment experience needed!

Here here i solely agree also myself stemming from the WSL Lineage ....LFJ'S logic seems of sound mind and cant be disputed at this moment in time. For whats been said is backed up by evidence Ive been to two of WSL Seminars back in the days and too think now... I was being lied too would Shatter the up most respect i have for the man. As he was honest in his explanations in regard to the system which was addressed in straight logical action and context which being very easy to understand there and then Not Nah mate you learn that way down the line BullSh!t The only one whos lied of to date is Clive Potter Grahams former Sifu .....Maybe his never really recovered cause something not right here

[Graham H]

Here here i solely agree also myself stemming from the WSL Lineage ....LFJ'S logic seems of sound mind and cant be disputed at this moment in time. For whats been said is backed up by evidence Ive been to two of WSL Seminars back in the days and too think now... I was being lied too would Shatter the up most respect i have for the man. As he was honest in his explanations in regard to the system which was addressed in straight logical action and context which being very easy to understand there and then Not Nah mate you learn that way down the line BullSh!t The only one whos lied of to date is Clive Potter Grahams former Sifu .....Maybe his never really recovered cause something not right here

Ha! Not recovered? Nah mate. CP is a donut but he is still teaching under the WSL banner and is still regarded as an authority here in the UK. You know it wasn't just me that outed CP. It was a whole group of people many who now train under the DP banner and PB banner. Anyway that's in the past but it does have some sort of bearing on this conversation in the fact that CP did attend WSL seminars. He pretty much teaches a very poor version of what LFJ regards as WSL gospel. All the forms full of applications and three different types of Tan Sau. We all know he got it wrong so you can see the problem

[Paddington]

Ha! Not recovered? Nah mate. CP is a donut but he is still teaching under the WSL banner and is still regarded as an authority here in the UK [...]

That's the problem Graham, it is very hard to find quality WSL instructors in the UK. I am fully aware of CP btw and I share your opinion here.

Previously you were quite dismissive when I mentioned my inability to travel abroad (nothing wrong with being poor) to find quality WSL instructors that are regularly accessible. However, I think we are in agreement that it would be better if there were quality WSL instructors in the UK.

[LFJ]

He pretty much teaches a very poor version of what LFJ regards as WSL gospel. All the forms full of applications and three different types of Tan Sau. We all know he got it wrong so you can see the problem

Yeah, WSL obviously taught three types of taan-sau and presented possible applications as visual examples of concepts at work to aid in transmission. Kind of no way around that. It's a fighting method. You can't just talk. It's the fault of the student if they concentrated too much on the finger. WSL always expressed there are no set responses in VT.

And I don't believe for a minute that he'd make up nonsense to feed to seminar attendees and regular students some how less privileged than PB. He said he always endeavored to teach everyone equally, no matter where or who, so that they always got the full picture. It was then up to the student to receive it and do with it what they were able.

But as far as I've seen, CP didn't even get the basic shapes down right. His gaang-sau pulled all the way back to scratch his ass. You can't take a guy like that as a representation of anything. But I understand how you'd want to get rid of everything previously learned if he was your teacher, just to be thorough in your cleansing.

It's just irrational to tell yourself a story how WSL cheated select students. So what reason do you tell yourself it was for that WSL made up 3 taan-sau and consistently taught like that over the years if he knew it was impractical nonsense?

[GlennR]

I don't know who is right in this little debate. But I have to say that I follow LFJ's logic. You can't say things are crap, then be shown that WSL actually taught these things, then say that it was in a seminar environment and therefore was substandard and doesn't count. That is not doing WSL's teaching ability, reputation, or sense of honesty any justice. I refuse to believe that WSL taught his seminar students a substandard version of Wing Chun compared to what he taught his "regular" students. I am left to conclude that PB has indeed changed things around a bit compared to what WSL taught his students. There's nothing wrong with that. He is showing that he is Wing Chun's "master" and not its "slave." And I think its bit of a "cop out" to say that you can't explain it in writing and one has to just meet and work with PB directly. Either WSL taught these obvious things or he didn't. Either PB also teaches these things or he doesn't. No enlightenment experience needed!

I with you Keith.

You cant have your cake (we are WSL devouts) and then argue when it doesnt suit (video foorage of the era contradicts our current mantra)

FWIW, WSK and TST were together in Australia in the 90's (from memory) and when asked said they basically did the same thing

[LFJ]

Who said WSL lied or cheated students in seminars or anywhere else?

It's the implication, to say what WSL taught them was impractical nonsense, and then to say he taught the real stuff to PB is to say that he clearly knew the difference and knowingly taught nonsense to the other folks. That would be both lying and cheating.

I don't think that's what he did, by the way. Graham just wants to be a purist, seemingly an effect of having come to a good teacher after leaving a charlatan. But all evidence points to PB having a different approach to VT.

[guy b.]

It's the implication, to say what WSL taught them was impractical nonsense, and then to say he taught the real stuff to PB is to say that he clearly knew the difference and knowingly taught nonsense to the other folks. That would be both lying and cheating.

I don't think that's what he did, by the way. Graham just wants to be a purist, seemingly an effect of having come to a good teacher after leaving a charlatan. But all evidence points to PB having a different approach to VT.

While I sympathise with your point on this thread I don't think you can say it is PB against all others. You need to name names, as Graham has done. After all, according to him, aren't there some in HK that share PB's interpretation of WSL ving tsun?

[LFJ]

While I sympathise with your point on this thread I don't think you can say it is PB against all others. You need to name names, as Graham has done. After all, according to him, aren't there some in HK that share PB's interpretation of WSL ving tsun?

Yeah, like Chan Kim Man... the second guy on the video in the original post, doing the springing energy LSJC thing with WSL. Yeah? Pretty much everyone I can think of.