San Sik training and Ku Lo Pin Sun WCK

[BPWT..]

Well it is strange and I think it has more to do than just maturity. Boxers for instance never talk that way since they know it is not about system but about the individual including talent drive effort and so forth. They talk about how they are better not their system or their trainer lol.

You might well be right. But would it be fair to say that people in boxing don't talk about lineages either, and don't talk about their system coming from a single source - as compared to X and Y Wing Chun teachers all having learned from one person, say, Yip Man (Z)?

I don't know any pro boxers, but would boxers not say that such and such a gym is better than another gym, or that one particular trainer/coach is better than another?

People are people. Everyone thinks what they have is of value and is 'special'.

[tc101]

You might well be right. But would it be fair to say that people in boxing don't talk about lineages either, and don't talk about their system coming from a single source - as compared to X and Y Wing Chun teachers all having learned from one person, say, Yip Man (Z)?

I don't know any pro boxers, but would boxers not say that such and such a gym is better than another gym, or that one particular trainer/coach is better than another?

People are people. Everyone thinks what they have is of value and is 'special'.

I agree with you 110% that everyone thinks that what they have is valuable and special. I guess what I am saying though is that the focus on what they have is wrong. Some people focus on the information as though this is what is important. I am saying it is not the information that is important but what you are able to do with it now that is important.

What matters is skill and conditioning which go hand in hand. You can't fake either. Someone arguing about how their system of conditioning is better or their knowledge of conditioning is better is silly. What matters is your level of conditioning. Imagine a bunch of poorly conditioned people arguing about whose system of conditioning was better or better still talking about other people stealing their conditioning information.

[KPM]

I agree with you 110% that everyone thinks that what they have is valuable and special. I guess what I am saying though is that the focus on what they have is wrong. Some people focus on the information as though this is what is important. I am saying it is not the information that is important but what you are able to do with it now that is important.

What matters is skill and conditioning which go hand in hand. You can't fake either. Someone arguing about how their system of conditioning is better or their knowledge of conditioning is better is silly. What matters is your level of conditioning. Imagine a bunch of poorly conditioned people arguing about whose system of conditioning was better or better still talking about other people stealing their conditioning information.

I disagree Twen. But I'm sure you're not surprised by that! The specific information is important as well as what you are able to do with it. Most boxers are doing very similar things. But Wing Chun is very different compared to Hung Ga, or Choy Li Fut, or Tai Chi, etc. So what these different systems teach IS important. Otherwise why pick and choose which one you will study? Just go with whichever one has the cheapest fees or is nearest to your home! Why pick a boxing gym just because it has a reputation and track record for producing good fighters? Just go with the gym that has the cheapest fees and is closest to you! After all, all that matters is what YOU can do, not what people may be able to teach you to do!

[tc101]

I disagree Twen. But I'm sure you're not surprised by that! The specific information is important as well as what you are able to do with it. Most boxers are doing very similar things. But Wing Chun is very different compared to Hung Ga, or Choy Li Fut, or Tai Chi, etc. So what these different systems teach IS important. Otherwise why pick and choose which one you will study? Just go with whichever one has the cheapest fees or is nearest to your home! Why pick a boxing gym just because it has a reputation and track record for producing good fighters? Just go with the gym that has the cheapest fees and is closest to you! After all, all that matters is what YOU can do, not what people may be able to teach you to do!

I think I was not clear. Yes different arts teach different things but this is not a about information. You hear a lot about knowledge and understanding but I learned what was important was knowing-how-to. You only know-how-to if you can do it. If you can't do it that means you don't know-how-to. You are taught how-to by someone who knows-how-to. This is not academic information but a demonstrable skill. Skill not information is what is important.

Different arts teach different skills or to put it another way how-to box is different than how-to fight with wing chun.

A boxing gym is only as good as the trainers who work there. That depends on their know-how-to. To learn or get better doing something you train with someone who knows-how-to. What matters is what you can do and you are not going to get better doing something by listening or working with people who don't know-how-to. Know-how-to as I said is demonstrated by performance.

This is my problem with all the Hendrik junk. He has lots lots lots of information. It is all hot air and nothing to do with skill. He has no know-how-to.

To put this in a different perspective think in terms of conditioning. Some people know-how-to get into fighting condition. How do we know they know-how-to? By looking at their conditioning or the people they trained. Are they well-conditioned? The only way to know is through performance.

Now I know what you are thinking. You think I may not be in condition but I read a lot or whatever and think I know know-how-to get in condition. My answer is no you really don't. You may have a general idea but you don't know-how-to.

[BPWT..]

For me it's two sides of the same coin - you need to have the knowledge/information know-how and know-how-to, as well as having the work put in to gain the skills.

Input on one side, output on the other.

To use a totally screwed up tennis analogy... imagine you are a talented player and you train hard. You look to enter the French Open (played on slow clay) and so you hire a coach. You hire John McEnroe. He's experienced, a grand slam champion, one of the most skilled (know-how-to) guys to ever pick up a racket.

But he coaches you in what he knows and what his know-how-to skill set was most developed in - how to play serve and volley... a tactic that works great on fast courts. You train hard, use his information and develop great serve and volley skills. Then you get your arse handed to you in the first round of the French Open, where those tactics just don't fit with the conditions.

McEnroe's great, but you'd have gotten better information from Jim Courier (a French Open winner, but someone who's career overall doesn't match McEnroe's).

Basically, I'm saying that how much work you put in is really important, but so too is the information you get to use when you put that work in. So the info inside of a WCK system is just as important as how hard you train it. In that sense, I understand that people might want to protect their info if possible.

[tc101]

For me it's two sides of the same coin - you need to have the knowledge/information know-how and know-how-to, as well as having the work put in to gain the skills.

Input on one side, output on the other.

To use a totally screwed up tennis analogy... imagine you are a talented player and you train hard. You look to enter the French Open (played on slow clay) and so you hire a coach. You hire John McEnroe. He's experienced, a grand slam champion, one of the most skilled (know-how-to) guys to ever pick up a racket.

But he coaches you in what he knows and what his know-how-to skill set was most developed in - how to play serve and volley... a tactic that works great on fast courts. You train hard, use his information and develop great serve and volley skills. Then you get your arse handed to you in the first round of the French Open, where those tactics just don't fit with the conditions.

McEnroe's great, but you'd have gotten better information from Jim Courier (a French Open winner, but someone who's career overall doesn't match McEnroe's).

Basically, I'm saying that how much work you put in is really important, but so too is the information you get to use when you put that work in. So the info inside of a WCK system is just as important as how hard you train it. In that sense, I understand that people might want to protect their info if possible.

McEnroe and Courier both are examples of know-how-to since they can and do teach what they can do. Yes they have different games like in boxing having a philly shell game versus a peek a boo game. If you want to learn that game then you go yo someone who knows-how-to play that game. Imagine trying to learn tennis from someone who has information like they read some books or whatever versus someone whose information comes from them knowing-how-to.

What I am talking about is information that does not come from know-how-to.

This is why Hendrik's views and information is a waste of time for example. It is not coming from knows-how-to because he can't do it. He won't show himself doing only talking for hours on end. He is the guy who read a book about tennis telling people how they should really play the game.