New video on Bong Sau by Alan Orr

[LFJ]

Sure. But I think you would agree that WSL's interpretation of YM's teaching is his own. And then PB's interpretation of WSL style would be is his own. To think that PB's wing Chun would be equivalent to Yip Mans is very hard to believe.

Very hard to form an opinion when you have 0 experience with any of their VT.

Instead of believing the opposite to be true, it would be a more rational position to withhold belief one way or the other until you go and examine the evidence. Don't you think?

 

[guy b]

Very hard to form an opinion when you have 0 experience with any of their VT.

Instead of believing the opposite to be true, it would be a more rational position to withhold belief one way or the other until you go and examine the evidence. Don't you think?

That would be the approach of someone who decided things based on evidence and didn't have any particular bias

 

[guy b]

Then that would make you one of the more reasonable and balanced WSL people on this site.

You are obviously new here. This thread is supposed to be about Alan Orr's lap sau ideas. But it got hijacked again and turned into a WSL debate. This always happens.

Why would it be reasonable to believe people who say they have added to the system, but not to believe those who say they have not added to the system, particularly when the system taught by those who admit to adding things appears to contain the core taught by those who say they have not added?

 

[Callen]

Gary Lam has added an entire structured teaching curriculum and has added to the system quite a lot, especially in terms of how it is taught. The reason I say that you could do worse than Gary Lam is that he has produced some good people and as far as I know he has not changes the core VT under what he has added.

The core VT has not been changed by what Gary Lam as added to his teaching curriculum.

Philipp Bayer hasn't added anything

Except what is uniquely his own. In this context, I wasn't talking about what any of them have or have not added to their curriculum. I was referring to the personal attributes which influences the outcome of their VT.

Things that some of them have said

Who have you trained with from Gary Lam's school and how do you define "back to the basics"?

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

We've been over this fellas. Another hijacked thread on why WSL is superior to all other lineages. Yip Man = WSL = PB. We get it. Thanks for your input.

 

[guy b]

The core VT has not been changed by what Gary Lam as added to his teaching curriculum

Yes, that was what I said.

In this context, I wasn't talking about what any of them have or have not added to their curriculum. I was referring to the personal attributes which influences the outcome of their VT

If you mean personal physical and mental attributes then these are different for everyone. These do not affect the system as taught and learned.

Who have you trained with from Gary Lam's school and how do you define "back to the basics"?

By back to basics I mean discarding the Gary Lam teaching curriculum.

 

[guy b]

We've been over this fellas. Another hijacked thread on why WSL is superior to all other lineages. Yip Man = WSL = PB. We get it. Thanks for your input.

Let's discuss bong and/or the bong lap drill, that would be great. I did try to discuss earlier but nobody wanted to.

 

[Callen]

These do not affect the system as taught and learned.

Interesting perspective. Are you saying that physical and mental attributes do not influence the outcome of someone's Wing Chun?

By back to basics I mean discarding the Gary Lam teaching curriculum.

Not being confrontational here, but I'm not sure I understand your stance. Are you saying that you have heard some of Gary Lam's students say things that have led you to believe they have discarded or moved away from his teaching curriculum?

 

[guy b]

Interesting perspective. Are you saying that physical and mental attributes do not influence the outcome of someone's Wing Chun?

The method is not its outcome. As long as the method is not broken then that is the main thing.

Not being confrontational here, but I'm not sure I understand your stance. Are you saying that you have heard some of Gary Lam's students say things that have led you to believe they have discarded or moved away from his teaching curriculum?

Yes that is correct.

 

[wingchun100]

I guess everyone missed the part where Ip Man taught things a little differently to each student, hence why there has been so many versions of WC.

I don't get why this doesn't happen to other styles. No one ever seems to debate what version of Shotokan Karate is.

 

[KPM]

Not being confrontational here, but I'm not sure I understand your stance. Are you saying that you have heard some of Gary Lam's students say things that have led you to believe they have discarded or moved away from his teaching curriculum?

I think Ernie Barrios certainly has. What I have seen him doing now looks more like Phillip Bayer's vids.

 

[Callen]

I think Ernie Barrios certainly has. What I have seen him doing now looks more like Phillip Bayer's vids.

Yeah, from a distance I can understand where you're coming from. However, there are many WSLVT practitioners who like to think of WSLVT as the system, not what they were taught by a specific teacher. Ernie Barrios is blending. He didn't necessarily discard Gary Lam's curriculum, it's still in there. He's merely utilizing what works for him within the WSLVT constructs and principals.

I have 2nd generation WSLVT friends that have had the fortune of training with several different 1st generation practitioners. While none of them abandon their Sifu(s) or forget the source from which they drink, they feel like their understanding of WSLVT as a system increases the more they learn.

 

[LFJ]

Ernie Barrios is blending. He didn't necessarily discard Gary Lam's curriculum, it's still in there.

He has said they haven't done GL's system anymore for many years, and I don't see much GL left. He has definitely been in contact with more fighting focused VT groups, and I like it.

 

[KPM]

^^^^^ Yes, I tend to agree. I have known Ernie from some of the forums for many years. I have seen his personal WCK style change over the years, and to my eye, become much more like PB's version. To me, "curriculum" means how you are organizing and teaching the material, not the specific content. I think Ernie has clearly changed the way he teaches Wing Chun compared to how Gary Lam is teaching it.

 

[guy b]

Gary Lam's teaching curriculum is available on line if anyone wants to have a look. It is different to the WSL VT method

 

[wckf92]

Gary Lam's teaching curriculum is available on line if anyone wants to have a look. It is different to the WSL VT method

Cool. Will look it up. Out of curiosity is the WSL VT teaching curriculum available online?

 

[guy b]

Cool. Will look it up. Out of curiosity is the WSL VT teaching curriculum available online?

Not that I know of, but you can get a basic idea by looking around

 

[guy b]

 

[wingchun100]

Let's discuss bong and/or the bong lap drill, that would be great. I did try to discuss earlier but nobody wanted to.

Topic drift is not a new thing. LOL

 

[geezer]

@ Guy B-- So Gary Lam has made changes in his teaching method. Do the other well known proponents of WSL VT (David Peterson, Philip Bayer, Wang Zhi Peng, etc.) all adhere to a similar basic curriculum or are there many approaches?

BTW, with regard to your previous post, trying to surmise someone's curriculum by looking at videos of some of their students doesn't sound like an accurate or very realistic method.