David Peterson's new book on Wong Shun Leung

[Wing Chun Auckland]

I would disagree with that. Take the most dedicated YM students and there is still massive variance.

And putting your skills to the test is going to result in variance based on your experience in those fights. It is said WSL adjusted what he learned based on his experience in fighting. So he took his wing chun in a certain direction that worked for him. I don't think YM expected his students to go and test their skills in fights and all reach the same conclusion as a result.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Crap.... saw my message was unsent, so sent it again only to see that it had actually been posted!

 

[guy b.]

Admittedly when I watch PB videos of him chi sao, it looks stylistically different. However, recently someone showed me youtube videos of one of his instructors teaching his own school, I would honestly wouldn't not have been able to tell the difference in approach or application

Who did you see in the video clip?

Watching videos can be quite different to experiencing VT directly.

I assure you that DP doesn't teach the same thing as PB.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Michael Kurth was one of them.

Then I saw another guy who was bald doing pak sau entry drill that was identical.

 

[guy b.]

The difference between MK and DP is quite large. Maybe you can't see it on video. If not then I would recommend you travel to experience it in person.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Yes so I can't speak to David Patterson because I haven't met him in person.

Darren Elvey probably got most of his instruction from David Patterson in his Melbourne school and has been doing wing chun for 25 years I think he said. Now Darren runs that same school and Darren moved to Malaysian and runs that. Darren has met WSL several times and took different things from this experience in meeting WSL than DP did. He made a lot of adjustments to the instruction and I believe it has taken a more direct approach based on what I have seen of DP in youtube videos and from what I hear from people who have trained with both. As I was saying before, Darren is also active in exchanging with other WSL teachers via conferences and keeps in regular contact many. I have heard him say that he has adopted many things from these meetings with these guys.

It would be good to meet some PB guys one day. But I am primarily a CST guy.

 

[LFJ]

I would disagree with that. Take the most dedicated YM students and there is still massive variance.

Being dedicated doesn't mean they received much direct transmission, or that they understood the big picture.

And putting your skills to the test is going to result in variance based on your experience in those fights.

Speaking strictly about interpretations of things, only ever playing in chi-sau without much guidance and no fighting experience is going to limit one's understanding of the system.

The main goal of testing isn't to change or adapt the system to fill your gaps, but to find your errors so the system can correct them. The system is really a self-correction tool.

Without understanding that, chi-sau has no clear goal and becomes a playground where all sorts of blind theories get made up.

Fundamentally changing the system based on fighting experience would be revealing a misunderstanding of the purpose of the system. It's not a grab bag of applications that are to be swapped out.

Michael Kurth was one of them.

Then I saw another guy who was bald doing pak sau entry drill that was identical.

Pretty sure I know the clip you're talking about. It's in French, right? That's MK's student and the way they do this drill is not identical to DP's branch. It may seem so from an outside perspective, but there are subtle tactical ideas missing from DP's branch.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Being dedicated doesn't mean they received much direct transmission, or that they understood the big picture.

Sure, but there are plenty of people we can name that got direct transmission from YM and they still look way different.

Regarding the rest, I would just say variance happens.

Speaking strictly about interpretations of things, only ever playing in chi-sau without much guidance and no fighting experience is going to limit one's understanding of the system.

Sure, but that still won't stop variance of interpretation and focus.

The main goal of testing isn't to change or adapt the system to fill your gaps, but to find your errors so the system can correct them. The system is really a self-correction tool.

If you are implying that this would result in us all reaching the same conclusions having done these things and eventually having identical wing chun, I think you would be mistaken.

Without understanding that, chi-sau has no clear goal and becomes a playground where all sorts of blind theories get made up.

There's plenty of variance in YM wing chun chi sao. Are you suggesting that chi sao that doesn't have the same objectives and looks like PB/WSL is wrong?

Fundamentally changing the system based on fighting experience would be revealing a misunderstanding of the purpose of the system. It's not a grab bag of applications that are to be swapped out.

Please expand on this. My understanding is that WSL made adjustments based on his fighting experience. I don't think that means he added things that weren't in the wing chun he learned. But you might change a position or an approach or entry....

Pretty sure I know the clip you're talking about. It's in French, right? That's MK's student and the way they do this drill is not identical to DP's branch. It may seem so from an outside perspective, but there are subtle tactical ideas missing from DP's branch.

I don't remember it being French. COuld be. I would reiterate that the Melbourne branch which was DP's original school has taken on somewhat different approach than it did when run by DP. Not that I necessarily think there is anything wrong with DP. Haven't met him so cant say.


Look, I am not even with this school. It would be better to talk to one of the guys that is. Maybe one of them could go to europe one day. Or you could go to Melbourne.
I am just calling it like I see it. Could there be things that are very different? Sure, I would expect that anyway. Every school will and probably should have a different approach - its healthy.

 

[Phobius]

Thanks for your view on the matter. It seems like there are some nuances to the question I asked.

At least it answered the one major question I had which was if WSL taught as part of his system that it should continue to evolve. Seems not all have that teaching within WSLVT and as such it must not be one of the major points of the lineage.

As for differences, name several of the best boxers. Noone can say they do not optimize their sport nor that they are good. Still even the best of them are individually unique in their styles, while the art and way they were taught are identical. Reason being that they themselves are unique in how their body work, heigh, composition, the size of the opponents they had when starting training... the aggressivenes of their sparring partners. Their own mentality, and how they were born and raised. Heck even what block or street they lived on has a huge impact in style.

Stating that a style must never be unique as there can only be one way that is optimal for all people. It to me sounds like a belief that system/style/lineage is what wins a fight, not a fighter or his physique. (Wont say that does not exist, it just is not my belief. I can be wrong just like anyone else can be)

 

[LFJ]

Are you suggesting that chi sao that doesn't have the same objectives and looks like PB/WSL is wrong?

Right or wrong is subjective. Some methods are objectively more useful than others. Most are pretty useless.

Please expand on this. My understanding is that WSL made adjustments based on his fighting experience. I don't think that means he added things that weren't in the wing chun he learned. But you might change a position or an approach or entry....

What adjustments did you hear he made?

What I mean is that when you find errors revealed in fighting, the training system should be used to correct them.

If instead the system is being modified to fill gaps, one's understanding is inverted. That's using errors to fix the system, rather than using the system to fix the errors.

The result is not better VT fighting skills, but a different VT fighting style.

The latter could go on forever, to the point of having a vastly different style, without the former ever having a chance to improve. (We see this a lot today...)

 

[Phobius]

If instead the system is being modified to fill gaps, one's understanding is inverted. That's using errors to fix the system, rather than using the system to fix the errors.

System is not same as style. Style in my meaning is what each individual fighter has. The system itself is what it is, the concepts basically and the forms. Interpretation is what becomes your style.

Systems has to change because style is individual. Each teacher has his own interpretation of the concepts and movements. This means that his students will make their own interpretation based on their teachers style mixed with the system he teaches. If not then you do not think style should be an individual thing but rather identical between everyone training a specific system.

The system already contains errors by the way, which it probably did not earlier times. Those errors are being taught because they are needed due to the change in other arts as well as the world. Everything changes and if your martial art style and system does not it becomes stale and spoilt with time. Noone learning biu jee can say that WC/WT/VT is without need of errors in order to work in all situations.

But I would not call it errors, rather other theories and movements. Errors would mean inferior. One thing we learn early on, there are not inferior movements. Just suited and non-suited ones, the rest is a matter of training them properly.

 

[guy b.]

I don't remember it being French

Please post it here so that we can see what you mean. You said it was on youtube right?

 

[LFJ]

The system already contains errors by the way, which it probably did not earlier times. Those errors are being taught because they are needed due to the change in other arts as well as the world. Everything changes and if your martial art style and system does not it becomes stale and spoilt with time. Noone learning biu jee can say that WC/WT/VT is without need of errors in order to work in all situations.

But I would not call it errors, rather other theories and movements. Errors would mean inferior. One thing we learn early on, there are not inferior movements. Just suited and non-suited ones, the rest is a matter of training them properly.

That is a bizarre use of the term errors, and is not what I meant.

Errors in fighting means I overturn, overshoot, overreact, underreact, etc..

The training system is there to fix these errors through chi-sau, gwo-sau drills, etc. until I get back up to free fighting speed and go again to see if the errors have been fixed and/or to find more.

If instead of doing this, I alter the system to fix the errors, eventually I will end up doing something other than VT.

Maybe that's fine if it works, and you no longer call it VT, but how many people are really doing that?

Most modifications people have made to the system have been done just theorizing while playing around with what works and doesn't work in chi-sau, which is probably entirely useless for free fighting.

 

[Phobius]

Sorry if I misunderstand what you mean with errors. So you are claiming that one or both of DP and PB are doing these errors and as such it explains the difference?

Or am I missing something in your meaning.?

Asking because it does not seem like something you would want to say.

 

[LFJ]

I'm talking about what the system is to be used for. That is, after laying the foundation, it is used to correct errors made in free fighting to continually improve VT fighting skill. Everyone makes errors. Otherwise we wouldn't need the training system.

However, if people aren't testing their skills but only playing chi-sau and theorizing, especially if they aren't getting close instruction over time, they are bound to come up with ideas that only work in chi-sau with other people doing the same thing, because their training has no frame of reference outside of that unrealistic environment.

So, my point is to say that much of the variation in YMVT and WSLVT lines is due to few people actually testing their skills and using the system for its designed purpose... plus lack of longterm, careful instruction and not understanding the system in the big picture of fight training.

 

[KPM]

However, if people aren't testing their skills but only playing chi-sau and theorizing, especially if they aren't getting close instruction over time, they are bound to come up with ideas that only work in chi-sau with other people doing the same thing, because their training has no frame of reference outside of that unrealistic environment.

.

Can you provide us all with some video examples of WSL people testing their skills with something other than Chi Sau?

 

[Phobius]

Can you provide us all with some video examples of WSL people testing their skills with something other than Chi Sau?

Do not go into that discussion, it leads us nowhere nice. There are schools we could visit for that part.

YouTube is a bad place to find sparring videos, it only holds bragging videos mostly.

 

[guy b.]

Systems has to change because style is individual. Each teacher has his own interpretation of the concepts and movements. This means that his students will make their own interpretation based on their teachers style mixed with the system he teaches.

A coherent error correcting system like VT shouldn't change because of individual stylistic differences. Changing it for this kind of reason is a misunderstanding of what it is for. Someone's own interpretation of concepts is a change to the system, not a stylistic difference.

 

[guy b.]

Can you provide us all with some video examples of WSL people testing their skills with something other than Chi Sau?

No

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

It sounds like what you are suggesting is that WSL's wing chun is the best and closests to Yip Man's wing chun. As such, all other YM students who do not resemble WSL's focus/theory/interpretation are wrong. Also that PB is the closest representation of WSL. Therefore anything different from him is wrong.

In other words YM = WSL = PB?