WSL on LSJC

[Shads]

I really don't buy into the assertion that these more developed ideas around the idea of LSJC, cannot not be explained well in written English. However, I am not naive and the continued avoidance to explain seems more, to me at least, a maintenance of livelihoods. I do agree that deeper understandings can be gained face to face but that is not contrary to a call for written explanations; it is like Waiting for Godot.

Dont hold your breath, its easier to hide behind claims that everything is abstract and video clips are misleading or not understood, or that its got a snake engine or force vector

[Shads]

Dude PB told me he teaches exactly what he was taught by WSL. That is confirmed by others that were also taught by WSL. He also says that WSL always said he teaches exactly what he was taught by Yip Man. I wasn't there so I don't know but I do accept that as the truth. Why would they both lie? They don't strike as being those sorts of people.

This is the same WSL that is on record multiple times saying that what he practiced and taught was changed / evolved from what Ip Man taught him based on his own experiences?

[LFJ]

As has been proven even the written word can come across as confusing and contradictory. A result of an abstract methodology to combat.

The following contradictory statements are a result of abstract methodology to combat? Not just you wanting to have it both ways?

No he doesn't teach the springy effect of LSJC. Springy force BS is born from prolonged arm contact which in fighting there is none.

Dude PB told me he teaches exactly what he was taught by WSL.

The only way this is not contradictory is if PB didn't learn this which WSL taught to every other student he had. But that doesn't sound good because PB's supposed to be the true disciple. If that's so, then it begs the question why WSL taught this "BS" to his other students.

[LFJ]

This is the same WSL that is on record multiple times saying that what he practiced and taught was changed / evolved from what Ip Man taught him based on his own experiences?

Purity seems to have a lot of meaning in Graham's imagination.

Personally, if it works for the better, I don't mind admitting that WSL changed things YM taught him, and that PB changed things WSL taught him.

[Paddington]

I made several attempts but its confusing [...]

I agree. One thing Hendrik did to try to make himself more clear was to collaborate with others, to get something written down. The result of their efforts was a short and very rough and ready document put together by jox.

Although their success in this endeavour is open for debate, I am pretty sure Graham, T-Ray, yourself and others, are more than capable of putting a good document together that surpasses their efforts in terms of brevity and imparting knowledge.

[Graham H]

This is the same WSL that is on record multiple times saying that what he practiced and taught was changed / evolved from what Ip Man taught him based on his own experiences?

And there was me thinking this thread was finished.

No you are wrong. WSL said he taught EXACTLY what Yip Man taught him but due to his experiences in a more systematic way. I have it in writing.

[Graham H]

The following contradictory statements are a result of abstract methodology to combat? Not just you wanting to have it both ways?




The only way this is not contradictory is if PB didn't learn this which WSL taught to every other student he had. But that doesn't sound good because PB's supposed to be the true disciple. If that's so, then it begs the question why WSL taught this "BS" to his other students.

I thought we had finished? I'm dizzy and I'm going to be sick lol

[LFJ]

I thought we had finished? I'm dizzy and I'm going to be sick lol

We had finished by determining that PB doesn't teach everything WSL taught.

[Graham H]

Purity seems to have a lot of meaning in Graham's imagination.

Personally, if it works for the better, I don't mind admitting that WSL changed things YM taught him, and that PB changed things WSL taught him.

Why would WSL change things? Why try and reinvent the wheel? There are some instances that occurred based on WSL's Beimo but he didn't make up a new Kung Fu system. Nor has PB for that matter.

That logic just doesn't fit.

[Graham H]

We had finished by determining that PB doesn't teach everything WSL taught.

Ok have it your way. Its Friday and not time for bickering.

[Graham H]

Although their success in this endeavour is open for debate, I am pretty sure Graham, T-Ray, yourself and others, are more than capable of putting a good document together that surpasses their efforts in terms of brevity and imparting knowledge.

If there was such a document possible don't you think it would have surfaced by now???

[Paddington]

If there was such a document possible don't you think it would have surfaced by now???

It is possible. What is required is for you and your cohort to collaborate. The first step would be to have some type of meeting with them and the scope of the document set. I would then have each member write a paragraph or so on one theme to be covred therein. During a second meeting (can be done online) you could compare each others interpretations and after some debate, construct collaboratively, a group version of that paragraph. You could even work out some diagrams together.

The process can be iterated and a more fully formed document eked out.

[LFJ]

Why would WSL change things? Why try and reinvent the wheel? There are some instances that occurred based on WSL's Beimo but he didn't make up a new Kung Fu system. Nor has PB for that matter.

That's all I'm talking about. Things adapt to the individual. They teach what they understand to be the best method. To imagine PB's VT is exactly the same as YM's was is fantasy. As I said early, purity is not a virtue in fighting.

[Graham H]

It is possible. What is required is for you and your cohort to collaborate. The first step would be to have some type of meeting with them and the scope of the document set. I would then have each member write a paragraph or so on one theme to be coved therein. During a second meeting (can be done online) you could compare each others interpretations and after some debate, construct collaboratively, a group version of that paragraph.

The process can be iterated and a more fully formed document eked out.

Not possible mate! PB has written a whole book on it and it contains a lot of input from WSL himself. He won't put it to press for the same reasons that cause sandwich throwing on this forum.

[Paddington]

Not possible mate! PB has written a whole book on it and it contains a lot of input from WSL himself. He won't put it to press for the same reasons that cause sandwich throwing on this forum.

By sandwich throwing do you mean excessive criticisms and pedantic ramblings?