WSLVT

[Juany118]

I think the difference is in the use of "narrow". One can have a narrow approach that fits a broad range of situations. As someone commented in a different thread, just punching well works in a wide range of circumstances. So, perhaps the difference on this point is semantics - you're just using the term "narrow approach" to mean different things.

I tried to make a similar point earlier. If I specialize in Narcotics Investigations and don't train in Sex Crime Investigations it doesn't mean I am a bad cop, it just means that my focus is specialized/narrow.

 

[KPM]

It isn't awful. I would be perfectly happy if the WSL VT I preactice was a product of YM, WSL or PB. It doesn't really matter to me who created it. It is just extremely improbable that this is the case, given the content and organisation of the system vs that which it is supposed to have evolved from by those who do not understand it.

But how do YOU know what it is "supposed to have evolved from"??? You've said yourself you haven't seen all versions of Ip Man Wing Chun.

 

[KPM]

DP doesn't mean that WSL streamlined VT is that quote. It is just a misinterpretation by KPM

---And just how did I misinterpret that quote?



You didn't present any evidence

---He has presented far more tangible evidence than you have!

It isn't narrow to approach the broad sweep of combat situations with a certain strategy. It is systematisation. Non systematisation (i.e. lack of depth) is narrow, which is the problem with non-WSL VT

----You are simply choosing to apply one definition of "narrow" and ignore the other to suit your own purposes. If within your strategy you are focused on only landing the punch, then this is a more "narrow" focus than a strategy that is focused on breaking the opponent's balance and controlling them....whether by striking, or Kum Na, or simply angling.



Unarmed vs armed is low % fantasy land. WSL VT is a pragmatic system.

---Now that's funny! As one that has studied both Filipino Martials arts and Silat, I know plenty of people that would laugh you right out of the forum! Silat in particular spends lots of time with the blade!

 

[Juany118]

Unarmed vs armed is low % fantasy land. WSL VT is a pragmatic system.

---Now that's funny! As one that has studied both Filipino Martials arts and Silat, I know plenty of people that would laugh you right out of the forum! Silat in particular spends lots of time with the blade!

The problem is that pragmatism is not universal, what is pragmatic in one environment may not be in another. From my understanding of the challenge/roof top culture of HK in WSLs era his VT would indeed be pragmatic. In terms of self defense on the streets of the US, as illustrated by the FBI crime statistics, one could argue that WSLVT is missing a tool of real value.

One of the reasons I study both WC and FMA is because, while TWC does have Chin Na, I believe that knowing how to use various types of weapons makes for a more effective defense against such weapons. You more readily understand that your zoning and footwork needs to be more "open" than the typically tight foot work of WC due to the added reach a weapon provides (as one example.). The stick work is also directly applicable to my occupation as well but the first idea is a huge factor. Thing is, even without the FMA, TWC has the techniques to address the presence of a weapon in a safer manner.

 

[guy b]

Perhaps both occurred? Is it possible that YM had a coherent system that WSL made superior, while some others took it in a direction that wasn't as good as the original? From what I've heard, WSL seems an extraordinary martial artist and effective instructor - it seems unlikely he wouldn't have a positive impact on the overall structure and functionality of an art.

It is possible that WSL made a good system better.

But it is extremely unlikely that WSL made the system from anything like what I have seen of other YM VT in existence today, since those are lacking very large and important bits of information

 

[guy b]

None of your links have said anything different than what I have said.

DP visited HK once per year for a few years, for one or two months at a time, max, and had WSL to Australia for seminars a few times as well.

You have only assumed what DP must have learned given a period of time you think is sufficient to learn something you have no experience of.

Since you don't actually know what you're talking about, you've had to ignore the technical analysis, and continue to do so because it shows that despite what you consider sufficient time, without even knowing what for, and despite a friendship developing over the years, DP still only had a phrasebook level understanding of VT.

This is objectively verifiable through technical analysis of what he teaches, regardless of what further timeline you want to point to.

Excellent post

 

[guy b]

Indeed! Which leads one to wonder how much of PB's VT is actually tailored to PB....including the strategic and conceptual approach of focusing almost exclusively on the punch! This would explain differences between PB and DP.

What would explain the similarity between WSL and PB?

 

[guy b]

I have presented links to articles, referred you to the videos you are already aware of as well as links to biographies and interviews. These are called evidence. You may disagree with it but it is then incumbent upon you to produce similar evidence to support a counter argument, vs unsupported statements which is all we have received to date.

This evidence isn't showing anything that I disagree with. DP studied a short while with WSL compared to PB and others.

Unarmed vs armed is not small % fantasy land. Check out the FBI crime statistics. Almost 20% of all Robberies, and over 50% of all Aggravated assaults, in the US are committed with knive/cutting instruments or other dangerous weapons (firearms and unarmed are seperate categories). This also doesn't count weapon use in simple assaults or sexual assaults

By low % I mean the chance of success of the person without the weapon in an armed vs unarmed situation. Chance of succes is low. Since 80% of robberies and 50% of assaults are committed without weapons, and since I have a much greater chance of success in crimes without weapons, it is best to focus my efforts on high % tactics vs unarmed opponents (since these are more likely to happen, and my success % is higher).

On the last bit, again, it is not disingenuous if you are simply asking "how many WC Lineages have Chin Na vs those that don't."

It is disingenuous since those other wing chuns are wildly divergent and the grappling they contain is not based on anything but a need to fill gaps.

 

[guy b]

But how do YOU know what it is "supposed to have evolved from"??? You've said yourself you haven't seen all versions of Ip Man Wing Chun.

I have not seen all versions of Yip Man wing chun. I am using what I have experienced as a guide. If you would like to present an example of YM derived wing chun that is different then I would be interested to see it.

 

[guy b]

And just how did I misinterpret that quote?

You misconstrued what DP meant

He has presented far more tangible evidence than you have!

His evidence says that DP studied VT for less time than PB. This is not news.

You are simply choosing to apply one definition of "narrow" and ignore the other to suit your own purposes. If within your strategy you are focused on only landing the punch, then this is a more "narrow" focus than a strategy that is focused on breaking the opponent's balance and controlling them....whether by striking, or Kum Na, or simply angling.

I disagree. If your approach to fighting doesn't contain a strategy or a conceptual base then it will not work in fighting, no matter how many gaps you try to fill with grappling. A martial arts system lacking systematisation and not suitable for fighting is quite narrow in approach.

As one that has studied both Filipino Martials arts and Silat, I know plenty of people that would laugh you right out of the forum! Silat in particular spends lots of time with the blade!

Defending unarmed against an armed attacker is lower % than defending against an unarmed attacker. Being attacked by an armed attacker is less likely than being attacked by an unarmed attacker. What am I missing?

 

[guy b]

Why would you think it wouldn't?

Hands not important in VT

 

[Juany118]

This evidence isn't showing anything that I disagree with. DP studied a short while with WSL compared to PB and others.

And I never said otherwise. My issue was with dismissive terms such as "brief". If you total up the time and accept WSL personally authorized DP to teach WSLVT, the time had to be of some significance.

By low % I mean the chance of success of the person without the weapon in an armed vs unarmed situation. Chance of succes is low. Since 80% of robberies and 50% of assaults are committed without weapons, and since I have a much greater chance of success in crimes without weapons, it is best to focus my efforts on high % tactics vs unarmed opponents (since these are more likely to happen, and my success % is higher).

He thing is it isn't laughable IF you train to deal with an armed assailant. You changes of disarming someone in your typical street encounter go up dramatically if you train. Simply saying "well since I will only be faced with a subject armed with a knife, club etc in 30% of all encounters so why bother" isn't being pragmatic, it's being dismissive. That would be like me saying at work "well in over 18 years I haven't been shot at so I don't need my bullet proof vest.". It's actually worse in this case because at least 1/3 of the time in all major violent crimes (I omitted homicides but the % there is also significant) you would simply say "why bother?"

It is disingenuous since those other wing chuns are wildly divergent and the grappling the contain is not based on anything but a need to fill gaps.

This only makes sense if you accept the premise that WSLVT is the only WC to not have gaps. It's actually kinda odd how here you said the others have it to fill gaps and then try to dismiss the serious possibility that WSLVT has a gap when it comes to addressing an armed assailant.

 

[guy b]

And I never said otherwise. My issue was with dismissive terms such as "brief". If you total up the time and accept WSL personally authorized DP to teach WSLVT, the time had to be of some significance.

You say this because you have no clue what the WSL VT system entails and how much time and effort it takes to learn properly. DP spent a brief time with WSL and the results are pretty clear to see. I am not sure why you are getting offended on his behalf?

He thing is it isn't laughable IF you train to deal with an armed assailant. You changes of disarming someone in your typical street encounter go up dramatically if you train. Simply saying "well since I will only be faced with a subject armed with a knife, club etc in 30% of all encounters so why bother" isn't being pragmatic, it's being dismissive. That would be like me saying at work "well in over 18 years I haven't been shot at so I don't need my bullet proof vest.". It's actually worse in this case because at least 1/3 of the time in all major violent crimes (I omitted homicides but the % there is also significant) you would simply say "why bother?"

I think there are much better ways to prepare for with people armed with knives when you are unarmed (if that is your concern) than to train awful wing chun grappling in an attempt to deal with it. It reminds me of the comments where people were trying to convince me that adding grappling to VT is worth doing when bjj, judo and wrestling exist and are easily available in most places.

From what I have seen of wing chun grappling I would prefer to rely upon good WSL VT skills if I was unarmed, than to attempt some second rate grappling. But since I am a judo blackbelt and bjj purple in all honestly if someone came at me with a knife I would most likely try to secure the weapon arm, trip them to the ground, and break the arm.

Thankfully defending unarmed against weapon attacks has not been a big part of my life so far, whereas I have had a few unarmed altercations. If people were regularly attacking me with knives then I would carry a weapon.

This only makes sense if you accept the premise that WSLVT is the only WC to not have gaps. It's actually kinda odd how here you said the others have it to fill gaps and then try to dismiss the serious possibility that WSLVT has a gap when it comes to addressing an armed assailant.

VT addresses an armed assailant through the weapons. A much higher % approach.

 

[Juany118]

You say this because you have no clue what the WSL VT system entails and how much time and effort it takes to learn properly. DP spent a brief time with WSL and the results are pretty clear to see. I am not sure why you are getting offended on his behalf?

I don't have a horse in that race. My issue is that you seem to dodge WSL personally saying DP was fit to teach WSLVT. When something like that happens it is the head of the "family" saying the person's knowledge of his art is very extensive. As you say it takes time to learn WSLVT, heck any art. So this is, in essence, an indicator of the time involved.

I think there are much better ways to prepare for with people armed with knives when you are unarmed (if that is your concern) than to train awful wing chun grappling in an attempt to deal with it. It reminds me of the comments where people were trying to convince me that adding grappling to VT is worth doing when bjj, judo and wrestling exist and are easily available in most places.

I think it is inappropriate to make a global statement that all WC lineage has bad grappling.

I agree with your last bit though. To personally try to add something into any existing system, not just WSLVT, and maintain coherence isn't a good idea. However cross training in another art would, imo not be out of the question and as I said, some WC Lineages do have functional Chin Na.

From what I have seen of wing chun grappling I would prefer to rely upon good WSL VT skills if I was unarmed, than to attempt some second rate grappling. But since I am a judo blackbelt and bjj purple in all honestly if someone came at me with a knife I would most likely try to secure the weapon arm, trip them to the ground, and break the arm.

And here you kinda make my point. My point was simple really, just 3 parts.

1. A significant amount of self defense scenarios have someone encountering a weapon.
2.thus if you are training for self defense Chin Na is an advisable skill.
3. Some WC Lineages have function Chin Na, so they should be considered IF #2 is true. If you want to cross train as you have done, that works as well.

Thankfully defending unarmed against weapon attacks has not been a big part of my life so far, whereas I have had a few unarmed altercations. If people were regularly attacking me with knives then I would carry a weapon.

I look at such skills as a "be prepared" thing. Off duty I usually carry weapon(s) of some sort but action beats reaction and sometimes trying to deploy a weapon can put you in a bad spot, you just need to control that weapon bearing limb and do what you have to to disarm the suspect. Sadly where I work violence is not uncommon.

VT addresses an armed assailant through the weapons. A much higher % approach.

As do other Lineages BUT walking around with the pole or butterfly swords is a bit impractical for street self defence.

 

[guy b]

My issue is that you seem to dodge WSL personally saying DP was fit to teach WSLVT

Have a look at who else WSL provided certificates to. It is not an inspiring list.

So this is, in essence, an indicator of the time involved

The time involved is the time involved. Not enough in the case of DP. As you can probably see by looking at video of him

some WC Lineages do have functional Chin Na.

Assuming that is true it is still not as good as the easily available alternatives, so why bother with it?

And here you kinda make my point. My point was simple really, just 3 parts.

1. A significant amount of self defense scenarios have someone encountering a weapon.
2.thus if you are training for self defense Chin Na is an advisable skill.
3. Some WC Lineages have function Chin Na, so they should be considered IF #2 is true. If you want to cross train as you have done, that works as well.

I think unarmed vs weapon ideas are very low %, no matter what they entail. VT takes the approach of using weapons against weapons, which is much more sensible

walking around with the pole or butterfly swords is a bit impractical for street self defence.

If you regularly encounter weapons when unarmed then there are much better ways to deal with it than wing chun grappling. Simply carrying a weapon would be the best way. It doesn't need to be a wing chun weapon. A gun would be the best bet. A baton would be a good thing to have if you didn't have a gun.

If for some strange reason you need to remain unarmed when facing a high chance of weapon attack then a stab vest and good grappling, or a specific weapon countering system would be a good idea. Relying on wing chun grappling would probably amount to semi insanity in such a scenario.

 

[Juany118]

Have a look at who else WSL provided certificates to. It is not an inspiring list.



The time involved is the time involved. Not enough in the case of DP. As you can probably see by looking at video of him



Assuming that is true it is still not as good as the easily available alternatives, so why bother with it?



I think unarmed vs weapon ideas are very low %, no matter what they entail. VT takes the approach of using weapons against weapons, which is much more sensible



If you regularly encounter weapons when unarmed then there are much better ways to deal with it than wing chun grappling. Simply carrying a weapon would be the best way. It doesn't need to be a wing chun weapon. A gun would be the best bet. A baton would be a good thing to have if you didn't have a gun.

If for some strange reason you need to remain unarmed when facing a high chance of weapon attack then a stab vest and good grappling, or a specific weapon countering system would be a good idea. Relying on wing chun grappling would probably amount to semi insanity in such a scenario.

As for the list of teachers comment... That seems to infer that WSL did not have pride in his art because, at least according to tradition, the instructors chosen by the Master, and their ability, is a reflection of the Master himself.

As for why bother with WC that has effective Chin Na, why not bother? Many of the better grappling systems are not as proficient at striking, as an example. If the WC system is well rounded and effective in its various techniques do it. So people only have time to study one art so going for something that is well rounded (again so long as it maintains effectiveness) is a reasonable choice.

As for the last bit, I understand that VT addresses weapons with weapons but the weapons involved are impractical to carry in the modern world and in some jurisdictions illegal. As for why use a more rounded WC lineage, for only one of the reasons see above.

 

[guy b]

As for the list of teachers comment... That seems to infer that WSL did not have pride in his art because, at least according to tradition, the instructors chosen by the Master, and their ability, is a reflection of the Master himself.

Lol, make of it what you will.

As for why bother with WC that has effective Chin Na, why not bother?

Because BJJ will teach you strategies vs strikers, strategies vs weapons, along with fantastic grappling. Wing Chun grappling is a complete waste of time in comparison. Play to your strengths. Simple, direct, efficient.

As for the last bit, I understand that VT addresses weapons with weapons but the weapons involved are impractical to carry in the modern world and in some jurisdictions illegal.

VT uses the weapons of its time and place. The idea though couldn't be more obvious: use weapons when confronting weapons. The VT weapons also teach a lot about weapons in general.

 

[Juany118]

Lol, make of it what you will.

Well I dont make it to be that way so, using logic, the people personally chosen by WSL should be skilled as they are a direct reflection upon him. You can always debate who the better one is, but those debates always exist.

 

[guy b]

the people personally chosen by WSL

The list you found is not a list of people personally chosen by WSL.

 

[Juany118]

The list you found is not a list of people personally chosen by WSL.

That is true, I only linked that as proof that DP was a member of the WSL student association. That has nothing to do with the fact that DP himself was personally chosen however. Even LFJ acknowledged this as a fact, he tried to dismiss this by saying it was just a "thank you" which is simply illogical, a man like WSL would not do so for the reason I noted in the previous post, DP and his knowledge (or lack there of) would be a reflection on WSL due to such a selection.