I would have to disagree about experience not being the best teacher.After you have a firm understanding of your art experience is what you need and only that experience can push you forward as a martial artist and for the art you represent. one example IMO is Wong Shun Leung. Without all his fighting exerience he would not be the man he was.
Right. But, what made WSL great in my opinion was not just his experience, but his aim of applying Wing Chun's core principals pragmatically.
It's very possible to take the wrong things away from experience. I've seen a lot of guys who modify their Wing Chun in ways that are not very congruent with the system's aims and core principals, because they find it "works for them." Others still develop bad habits that lead to success in the short term, but hinder their development in the long run, such as trying to speedily execute sloppy combinations, or just using strength.
I'm not a die-hard purest when it comes to technique in Wing Chun, but I am when it comes to it's core principals. Wing Chun is an art with a very specific aim and approach to fighting. And it's somewhat counter intuitive, and takes a lot of work to apply those principals pragmatically. But people can become good at anything they do, with time and experience, and that's why I think many people "get good" at "bad" Wing Chun through lots of sparring or chisau.
In short, you need to cultivate the right kind of experience.
And more than that, we need to recognize when our experience is simply too limited to draw on reliably. Dylan obviously based his opinion off of one month of training at a single Wing Chun school. Now, I'm sure he has far broader exposure to, and far more experience with Silat. His opinions are colored purely by his limited experience. I'm sure if he met some top-notch WC guys - preferably one kicking his *** - he would have a positive change in opinion
Last edited: