WSL on LSJC

[guy b.]

All you are doing is repeating the same dogma that is circular and by saying it that makes it true.

Wing chun is a self contained internally consistent system (like nearly all TCMA). By this fact you can know it.

Wing chun is a set of skills.

Wing chun is a principle based TCMA system. To have wing chun skills you need wing chun thinking. Any old skills developed at random through sparring are very unlikely to be wing chun skills

The techniques of wing chun are ways of performing those skills.

Techniques? Wing chun isn't optional deployment of techniques. It is a systematic approach to fighting. Not optional.

The concepts and principles help you perform the skills successfully.

The principles of wing chun are wing chun.

It is by your attempts to use the techniques to perform the skills that you develop greater skill. Your performance and your performance alone tells you whether or not you are on the right track and whether our thinking is valid.

You are confusing performance in fighting with knowledge and ability in the wing chun system. Two different things. Without the correct thinking you will never be developing wing chun skill through performance. You will be developing something else, or nothing at all.

Your view of there is only one right way to do wing chun

Of course there is. Wing chun only works one way; the way it was designed to work.

No one who regularly spars thinks like that because they have that pounded out of them. Hendrik thinks like that. So do all the arm chair guys. That is the main characteristic of the arm chair martial artist.

I spar regularly. As far as I know all of the PBVT guys spar regularly. You on the other hand appear to be some words on a screen. Your blatant lack of knowledge of the system doesn't make your story very convincing

You do not get it I mean personal experience actually doing what you are talking about. A concept or principle is not a fully formed written in stone mandatory rule that must absolutely be obeyed. It is general idea that can help you use your tools more effectively. Through doing that you come to your own understanding of how to do things your way which you can only find by trying o do them.

The principles of wing chun are based on someone's idea of a good way to approach combat. The system is designed around these principles. The system only functions consistently according to these principles. There is no "your way" in wing chun. It is what it is, take it or leave it (or f@ck it up spectacularly), up to you.

First you need to learn the movement or actions or techniques of wing chun. Then you practice performing them. Then if you want to learn to fight using your wing chun you need to practice doing that. This is what sparring is or should be practice fighting. You only get better at what you practice.

You don't seem to have the vaguest idea about how the system functions.

If we spar and I use only wing chun actions and I put the hurt on you in my view I have used my wing chun successfully and who if they did the same would feel differently.

What is a "wing chun action"?

If you see wing chun as a skill and didn't WSL say that? then your performance is the only way to see the skill and the only way to measure the skill and the only way to compare skills. This is why boxers and bjj people spar when they meet rather than exchanging ideas and demonstrating what they would do.

Why do you think wing chun people don't spar? Aren't you a wing chun person?

When your wing chun is arm chair wing chun then all you have is ideas and performance is not what matters.

Wing chun is for fighting.

I keep telling you it is not who has the right or best idea it is who performs their ideas better that counts.

Having the right idea is important if you want to learn wing chun. If you don't care then it doesn't matter at all.

[tc101]

The whole principle based stuff is a load of hog wash used to sell wing chun to arm chair guys. The same line was used to sell FMAs too. Learn the principle and you too can fill in the blank. It just doesn't work like that.

All martial arts are skills. Skills are not principle based but performance based. You perform skills. You learn the skill, practice the skill, get better at the skill.

You say I am confusing performance and knowledge and ability. No I am not. Performance is where you see knowledge and ability expressed. Having ideas is not knowledge. Your concepts and principles are not knowledge. Knowledge comes from experience. Instead of talking knowledge instead talk know how to. KNOW HOW TO. Do you know how to do this or that? The only way is by trying to do it. We earn knowledge the know how to through performance. Performance is the root of everything since we are trying to learn and get better at a skill.

You see wing chun very differently than me. My focus is on using the wing chun tools and skills the best way I can to get the best results I can. I see wing chun as a overall skill that is made up of a subset of skills. It is the same in boxing or bjj or judo or anything else. That subset will vary between individuals since we will naturally be better at some things than others, our bodies are different, our temperaments different, and so on. So the ingredients going into the mix will be individual and that will produce an individual overall skill. We are not robots or copies but unique individuals and this is why all let me repeat all martial artists develop their own boxing or own bjj or own wing chun.

[guy b.]

Are those skills random or are they based on something...

Based on watching youtube clips in the case of tc101 I would guess.

[guy b.]

The whole principle based stuff is a load of hog wash used to sell wing chun to arm chair guys.

Did this occur to you while sat in your armchair typing a message on this forum?

All martial arts are skills. Skills are not principle based but performance based. You perform skills. You learn the skill, practice the skill, get better at the skill.

Where do these skills come from? Can any skill be a part of wing chun or is the skill set bounded and exclusive? Can contradictory skills be assimilated into wing chun, i.e. could you add bobbing and weaving, Thai round kicks, etc?

You say I am confusing performance and knowledge and ability. No I am not. Performance is where you see knowledge and ability expressed.

Lol, you just confused them again. Performance of wing chun depends on knowledge and experience of the wing chun system. Any and all performance =/= performance of wing chun.

The only way is by trying to do it. We earn knowledge the know how to through performance. Performance is the root of everything since we are trying to learn and get better at a skill.

You have to know what you are doing and why before trying to do wing chun. Wing chun is not the physical form. You can resemble wing chun without doing wing chun.

You see wing chun very differently than me. My focus is on using the wing chun tools and skills the best way I can to get the best results I can.

What is a wing chun tool?

Using wing chun to get the best results you can would be using in in accord with the way it was designed to be used.

We are not robots or copies but unique individuals and this is why all let me repeat all martial artists develop their own boxing or own bjj or own wing chun.

It is impossible to develop "your own" wing chun without understanding the principles and experiencing the whole system first. Unfortunately there is very very little real wing chun in existence. This is not the case with bjj and boxing. Most wing chun is $hit

[KPM]

TC101 wrote:
The whole principle based stuff is a load of hog wash used to sell wing chun to arm chair guys.

I've been doing some reading and reviewing some of my resources lately. Let me list just some of the authors I have come across that have written about Wing Chun being concept or principle based:

1. Wong Shun Leung
2. David Peterson
3. Robert Chu
4. Duncan Leung
5. Victor Kan
6. Randy Williams
7. Augustine Fong
8. Alan Gibson
9. Stephen Chan
etc.

So tell us again, just who is your Sifu???????

You see wing chun very differently than me. My focus is on using the wing chun tools and skills the best way I can to get the best results I can.

But you had to start with an idea of what those tools and skills were before you ever tried using them in sparring, didn't you? You had to learn the basics of Wing Chun before you tried sparring with it, didn't you? Your instructor showed you how to do a YGKYM and how to punch before you ever gloved up and went at it, didn't you? Did you not learn the basic principles and concepts behind why Wing Chun does things the way it does before you tried to spar with it? Were you not told that the techniques in the forms are not choreographed fighting routines, but rather Wing Chun concepts and principles in a physical format? Again, just who is your Sifu????

[guy b.]

So tell us again, just who is your Sifu???????

Good luck getting an answer. This is an internet troll

[WC1277]

TC101,

WC is developmental. The entire system is based on "developing" fighting attributes. It has a very specific set of drills to develop those attributes. When you fight, you just fight however you're going to fight. Period. Fighting doesn't develop skill. It only either justifies it or disqualifies it. Or more realistically, a little bit of both. Show me one example of a boxer, mma, or whomever say that they got better as a result of a fight. No, they only say 'now I know what I need to work on'. And they go back to training with drills, footwork, conditioning, etc.

What we argue about on these forums, 9 times out of 10, is the best way to "train". Training concepts are not "arm chair ideas" and can be translated through descriptions with words. And while there are guys on here who have no fighting or sparring experience, a knowledge of training 'concepts' doesn't necessarily require that if you know what a particular drill develops. It's just a forum. You need to relax a little bit with your rhetoric. It's just a bunch of amateur "coaches" trying to discuss methods. Of course people will think their way is best. And that can be for a myriad of reasons. It can be ego, lack of legitamate understanding, inability to translate to words, loss of context, a whole host of negative reasons. But there are some who do know what they're talking about and do have experience. And by consequence, because it's an online forum, their points on training methods will usually be lost amongst the sea of chaos.

You're fighting a losing battle simply because of the platform. So either participate and try to navigate all the noise or add to it. It's your choice.

[LFJ]

Uh oh! More "BS" from WSL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-nGwcE5B5A

In this video @13:07 WSL says "there are three different taan-sau in SNT. The first one is for training LSJC", referring obviously to the springing energy effect which Graham calls a "common misconception" and "BS".

He then explains and demonstrates how the second taan-sau can be used to shut down round punches by stepping into it as on the MYJ. This is another idea which Graham has repeatedly dismissed as arm-chasing nonsense that doesn't work in previous threads.

I wonder, if he were present would he have spoken up and told WSL that such ideas are impractical and will get your nose broken by anyone who knows how to punch...

Not to mention, the whole idea of there being three different taan-sau or three different bong-sau is nonsense, because in PBVT they are all just a single "punching concept" or "elbow rotation".

There are a number of other examples of things WSL taught that Graham says are not in his system. Makes you wonder just how much simplification PB made to WSLVT. A lot of things aren't present.

But of course, this was just a brief seminar and WSL always lied to participants, making up impractical nonsense. He only told PB the real meaning of those actions.

[Graham H]

Oh dear! You are developing a bit of a crush on me aren't you.

FWIW I stand by what I say and I don't relate to 3 different types of Tan Sau is SLT.

Feel free to keep using WSL seminar videos to try and prove your point.

I wonder, if he were present would he have spoken up and told WSL that such ideas are impractical and will get your nose broken by anyone who knows how to punch...

If I had been taught by WSL away from the seminar environment and understood the kind of thinking he passed on to PB I wouldn't ask him. I would already know.

It must be hard for you to swallow that there are ideas out there that you don't know about or understand. It would be for me. In fact I would contact PB personally and ask if he could spare some time for me to explain and show me....................oh hang on...................I already did that.

[LFJ]

If I had been taught by WSL away from the seminar environment....

You do realize this is the same stuff he had been consistently teaching to his regular students in class through the years, away from seminar environment, right?

It must be hard for you to swallow that there are ideas out there that you don't know about or understand.

I would say I both know about and understand PB's approach as you guys explain it on here and as I see him perform. It's quite similar to what I've been learning for the most part. Just that many other parts of WSLVT that I also accept seem to be missing.

It seems hard for you to swallow that PB doesn't teach all that WSL taught. Maybe he didn't agree with some things from his experience, or he had to adapt to his disability. For whatever reason, these many things aren't present, but WSL indeed taught them, as evidenced by the testimony of all his other students that are in agreement including a head coach of his school in HK, and of course undeniable video footage of him actually teaching it...

It's amazing how despite all of this you still convince yourself that it's not WSL's really real teaching. You maintain transmission purity and remain voluntarily ignorant. There's no shame in admitting PB only teaches the parts of WSLVT he finds useful and has discarded many things. His method is effective.

[Graham H]

Dude listen. I don't care much for your POV. I'm going to say this for the last time and if you wish to keep on then I will not respond.................

UNTIL YOU HAVE MET PB AND DISCUSSED WITH HIM ABOUT HIS AND WSL'S THINKING ON VING TSUN, HAD AN EXCHANGE WITH HIM AND EXPERIENCED FIRST HAND WHAT WAS TAUGHT WITH REGULAR TUITION OVER MANY YEARS YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!

[Jansingsang]

Dude listen. I don't care much for your POV. I'm going to say this for the last time and if you wish to keep on then I will not respond.................

UNTIL YOU HAVE MET PB AND DISCUSSED WITH HIM ABOUT HIS AND WSL'S THINKING ON VING TSUN, HAD AN EXCHANGE WITH HIM AND EXPERIENCED FIRST HAND WHAT WAS TAUGHT WITH REGULAR TUITION OVER MANY YEARS YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!

ROFL Keep your hair on Sunshine Ahh don't let him Big bully beater LFJ Upset our Graham Simply isn't cricket

[Frost]

nice to see the true believers are still fighting amongst themselves

[GlennR]

Dude listen. I don't care much for your POV. I'm going to say this for the last time and if you wish to keep on then I will not respond.................

UNTIL YOU HAVE MET PB AND DISCUSSED WITH HIM ABOUT HIS AND WSL'S THINKING ON VING TSUN, HAD AN EXCHANGE WITH HIM AND EXPERIENCED FIRST HAND WHAT WAS TAUGHT WITH REGULAR TUITION OVER MANY YEARS YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!

Well he does raise some good points G................

[rett]

Can anyone help with the acronyms please? Cheers.

ACWC
BPWT
BL
BS
DP
GL
IM
IMO
JPF
FWIW
LFJ
LGBT
LLHS
LOL
LSJC
LTWT
MA
MYJ
PB
PBVT
PFJ
PM
POV
SNT
TCMA
UK
VT
WC
WCK
WSL
WSLPBVT
WSLPBVTK
WSLVT
WTF
YM