Wing Chun & Jeet Kune Do

[Juany118]

There are many doors that can lead to the same place. Gary Lam has kept the core WSLVT principals in his teaching, just like Philipp Bayer. There's a massive difference between adding something to the way you teach, and modifying the subject that you teach.

I would caution you in pitting the mindset of Philipp Bayer students against other WSLVT students. While Philipp Bayer does not teach "closing", I don't think most of his students would have anything to say about it. What is learned from "closing" is still part of the core WSLVT principals. It's the end result and understanding of the system that matters most, not the label of a certain part of any curriculum.

I understand all of the above. My only point in my post was to provide the past context for a new member. Most of us here, regardless of lineage, try to engage in an informative give and take, without judgement towards our respective lineages. However there have been a couple, who perhaps coincidentally come from the same lineage that have not only been dogmatically judgemental on this forum but another well. I think understanding this history is important for a few reasons.

First it has encouraged some of us to be a bit more detailed than we may typically be. This might not seem like a big deal but it possibly informs the following. Now as things progressed Haz went into greater detail but initially I was having PM conversations with people where we were wondering if the dogmatic "WSLVT via PB uberalles" attitude was actually a standard attitude within the PB community.

Now is it right that two people managed to create this impression? I won't say it is but it is a preconception that has been created. So, sadly, even if it is a misconception born of say English as a second language issue, if someone appears to be going down that road, they may find themselves called out due to the frustration born of past debates. Kind of an "oh no here we go again" kinda thing.

 

[Juany118]

I don't have any interest in past arguments. I have nothing to do with it and don't want to have anything to do with it



What is a fiat statement? If by proof you mean things that are available on the internet then I think personal experience is worth much more than that. There isn't much info on WSL VT available on the internet . If you tell me something about your wing chun then I am not going to argue it with you.



If you mean David Peterson then he himself will tell you that he doesn't have as much experience in VT as Philipp Bayer does. We don't need to check his old flight tickets to HK to see this- just listen to what he says and look at what he does. Again it isn't insulting to David Peterson to say that he isn't the very most experienced and best, top, most gifted of WSL's students, it is just a fact, plainly observable if you have eyes. Nobody is "appointed a sifu" of WSL VT! DP does bring a lot to the table though, for example he has some excellent articles and even I think a book about WSL VT.

I don't understand why you are telling me about this stuff, please stop. Nobody here is saying the things you are complaining about. I don't even think there is a student of Philipp Bayer here?



Gary Lam has his teaching curriculum on his website I think? You can compare it with a standard WSL VT teaching progression if you really want to. Or you could even ask Gary Lam. I don't think he keeps it as any kind of secret.



Nobody here is saying this thing?!? I am confused

Well I don't want to pay to learn from a website, let alone from a purely "compare and contrast" position. And I agree GL doesn't tend to keep secrets or misinform.

As for the last all I was doing was trying to explain what happened before and make it clear that sometimes people will interpret categorical statements, without supporting evidence, as "omg here we go again!". Let me give an example.

Someone says "we do this in WSLVT via GL." Someone else responds "PB does that differently than GL". This is not seen as a problem in the least if you study PB.

However if someone says "we do this in WSLVT via GL" and someone says "Well that isn't WSLVT then" simply because it isn't in WSLVT via PB there are likely going to be a few people who call the respondent out because of the last history I noted. There is simply less tolerance for fiat statements as a response. Not saying right or wrong but there is a strong sense of "distrust and verify" around these parts anymore, largely because of two posters.

 

[Juany118]

I'm in a pretty unique situation because I study wing chun under a Sifu who studied under Wong shun Leung, chu shon ting, and moy yat, plus my Sifu is a white crane Grandmaster and studied Northern shaolin under two different Sifus, so we get some variety in our training especially our sparring. That being said in terms of kicks we practice:

-front kick
-side kick
-round kick
-hook kick
-turning back kick
-wheel kick
-sweep
There's a couple more but those are the main ones we do, and although in class we kick high for flexibility and power training, in application we kick low typically. Generally students will know all these kicks after a couple months.

Interesting. By hook kick do you mean a TKD style hook kick.
We do a few kicks as well.
Front kick
Side kick
Round kick
Oblique kick
Sweep kick

Some used more commonly than others of course. Also some will debate if there are other kicks but, to my mind due to how I am taught I am sure, they all basically fall into the above categories because angle doesn't matter, it's foot orientation and how the leg travels to attack, vs angle, that makes the kick.

 

[DanT]

Interesting. By hook kick do you mean a TKD style hook kick.
We do a few kicks as well.
Front kick
Side kick
Round kick
Oblique kick
Sweep kick

Some used more commonly than others of course. Also some will debate if there are other kicks but, to my mind due to how I am taught I am sure, they all basically fall into the above categories because angle doesn't matter, it's foot orientation and how the leg travels to attack, vs angle, that makes the kick.

Yeah I guess "tkd" style is about right, we do it both with the spin and without the spin. The hook kick we've adopted more from northern shaolin and just kinda do it along with them, it works great in sparring. Yeah really in my mind for kicks either it's a whip or it's a thrust at the most basic level. Example:
Thrust: side, back, front kicks
Whip: roundhouse, hook, wheel, snap

 

[Juany118]

Yeah I guess "tkd" style is about right, we do it both with the spin and without the spin. The hook kick we've adopted more from northern shaolin and just kinda do it along with them, it works great in sparring. Yeah really in my mind for kicks either it's a whip or it's a thrust at the most basic level. Example:
Thrust: side, back, front kicks
Whip: roundhouse, hook, wheel, snap

We actually kinda "snap" all of the "straight" kicks. We break it down to... raise knee>extend>retract>lower. The idea being that if you just "thrust" (if I am understanding you correctly) it gives an opportunity for the leg to be caught. By snapping the kick, in both directions, if the kick is "caught" you either pull the opponent off balance or simply free your leg as a natural consequence of the mechanics of the kick.

 

[LFJ]

1. Only PB WSLVT is actually true WSLVT. His personal issues did not require any alternation or changes in training.

---See above about the "only" part. But this has most certainly been said here multiple times if you leave out "only". And this is definitely NOT a "strawman"!

Leaving out "only" changes the entire statement, doesn't it?!!

"Only" is the strawman, and it has been corrected countless times, yet Juany keeps saying it.

2. WSLVT is the true translation of YMVT/WC. All other Lineages claiming YM descent are incoherent and broken systems.

---No, only all lineages that LFJ and Guy B. are aware of! They have said that there MIGHT be other Ip Man lineages out there that are not "broken", they just haven't encountered them yet! And THAT has been stated here more than once! Again, no "strawman" here either!

And no one will understand this point of view without having experience with the systems under comparison. If you don't even know what we're comparing, how could you?

If you guys can't make the trip or aren't interested, there's no point in discussing it further.

 

[LFJ]

However if someone says "we do this in WSLVT via GL" and someone says "Well that isn't WSLVT then" simply because it isn't in WSLVT via PB

That has NEVER been stated! Stop with the strawman already.

It has nothing to do with PB whatsoever. PB's name only comes up because you single him out for some reason.

GLWC isn't WSLVT because he altered it, and he changed the spelling to reflect that it is his own system. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that!

What is so difficult to understand?

 

[wingchun100]

Last Sunday when I went to the little Chi Sao gathering that happens every weekend at Skidmore College, I was talking with one of the senior students who believes Wing Chun has no kicks. I was like, "Uh, then what is it we do in Chum Kiu?"

However, the more I thought about it, the more I saw his point. I can't quite articulate it just yet, so please be patient with me. However, I will say this: in that footage of Ip Man doing Chum Kiu, in the section where he turns, does a Lan Sao, and "kicks," it does indeed look more like a blocking leg than an actual kick because although he lifts it with leg bent, he does NOT straighten the leg out (AKA kick) and then bring the leg back. Instead it goes straight up and straight down. It looks more like a Bong Gerk-Jut Gerk motion.

Just an observation I had, with my own eyes, shared here with no intention of discrediting anyone else's opinions/experience/observations.

 

[Juany118]

Last Sunday when I went to the little Chi Sao gathering that happens every weekend at Skidmore College, I was talking with one of the senior students who believes Wing Chun has no kicks. I was like, "Uh, then what is it we do in Chum Kiu?"

However, the more I thought about it, the more I saw his point. I can't quite articulate it just yet, so please be patient with me. However, I will say this: in that footage of Ip Man doing Chum Kiu, in the section where he turns, does a Lan Sao, and "kicks," it does indeed look more like a blocking leg than an actual kick because although he lifts it with leg bent, he does NOT straighten the leg out (AKA kick) and then bring the leg back. Instead it goes straight up and straight down. It looks more like a Bong Gerk-Jut Gerk motion.

Just an observation I had, with my own eyes, shared here with no intention of discrediting anyone else's opinions/experience/observations.

Remember something else though, and this may be seen as heresy. I look at the YM videos and say "not bad, for a guy literally on his death bed from cancer who needed long breaks simply between forms because he was so exhausted.

Admittedly in TWC the kicks are clearly kicks in the form (above the waist even), but I have always found using the YM films as definitive source problematic at best due to his physical state at the time. Some of the videos, afaik, were actually filmed as little as a week or even days before he died. Then we have the disputed use of Opium. Even if one wants to say the claims of use, according tosome of his students, are exaggerated I don't think it would be out of bounds to say he would have been using leading up to his death as throat cancer in particular can be VERY painful, let alone the complications. Even if we discount the Opium the combination of his age, the harsh life he had had at times and the cancer itself makes those videos a wonderful tribute to his passion and legacy but I think a poor source of instruction.

 

[wckf92]

...the little Chi Sao gathering that happens every weekend at Skidmore College,...

That's cool!!! Do you go there often and get to practice with lots of different lineages?

I was talking with one of the senior students who believes Wing Chun has no kicks.

Wow...a "senior" student said this!?!? Interesting. What lineage is he from?

However, I will say this: in that footage of Ip Man doing Chum Kiu, in the section where he turns, does a Lan Sao, and "kicks," it does indeed look more like a blocking leg than an actual kick because although he lifts it with leg bent, he does NOT straighten the leg out (AKA kick) and then bring the leg back. Instead it goes straight up and straight down. It looks more like a Bong Gerk-Jut Gerk motion.

Maybe Yip Man was trying to tell us something about the nature of WC leg methods / kicking?

 

[wingchun100]

Remember something else though, and this may be seen as heresy. I look at the YM videos and say "not bad, for a guy literally on his death bed from cancer who needed long breaks simply between forms because he was so exhausted.

Admittedly in TWC the kicks are clearly kicks in the form (above the waist even), but I have always found using the YM films as definitive source problematic at best due to his physical state at the time. Some of the videos, afaik, were actually filmed as little as a week or even days before he died. Then we have the disputed use of Opium. Even if one wants to say the claims of use, according tosome of his students, are exaggerated I don't think it would be out of bounds to say he would have been using leading up to his death as throat cancer in particular can be VERY painful, let alone the complications. Even if we discount the Opium the combination of his age, the harsh life he had had at times and the cancer itself makes those videos a wonderful tribute to his passion and legacy but I think a poor source of instruction.

Hmmm..I would like to offere a different take on that. We could take them as a practitioner showing us the way someone would have to modify their training in the face of all those forms of adversity. There is way in which our teachers show us Wing Chun. However, in time we make it "our own." While I am not saying this means someone who is young and virile should do the leg movements in the same manner as Ip Man's last videos, I AM suggesting that they still could be a good source of instruction.

I am not trying to say you are wrong...merely seeking to offer a different perspective.

 

[wingchun100]

Wow...a "senior" student said this!?!? Interesting. What lineage is he from?

I don't understand the quotes around the word "senior." If someone has been studying for twice as long as I have, then that makes them a senior above me. As for lineage, I prescribe no importance to those politics. Anyone from any lineage has the ability to offer a perspective you might not have had before they said it. Even within the same lineage, we can meet people who open our eyes to new interpretations...if we allow it to happen. So again, I don't see what difference it makes if the people I meet are all from the same lineage or different ones. You can get different levels of interpretation even within the same lineage.

 

[Juany118]

Hmmm..I would like to offere a different take on that. We could take them as a practitioner showing us the way someone would have to modify their training in the face of all those forms of adversity. There is way in which our teachers show us Wing Chun. However, in time we make it "our own." While I am not saying this means someone who is young and virile should do the leg movements in the same manner as Ip Man's last videos, I AM suggesting that they still could be a good source of instruction.

I am not trying to say you are wrong...merely seeking to offer a different perspective.

And that's fine the practice of all of us will change as we age, become ill etc. My only point is that to use the videos of a 79 year old man in the final stages of death to be instruction for a healthy person to do WC isn't the best of choices is all.

 

[wingchun100]

And that's fine the practice of all of us will change as we age, become ill etc. My only point is that to use the videos of a 79 year old man in the final stages of death to be instruction for a healthy person to do WC isn't the best of choices is all.

I understand.

I guess a better example would be if I could find a younger, healthier practitioner doing the move in a similar manner.

I think there is some merit to what my Sihing said though. So much in Wing Chun relies on our stance, our rooting, and our structure. It is incredibly easy to blow that all to hell when you kick and have one foot off the ground. Since rooting is one of the things with which I currently struggle, I tend to skip on the kicking practice and work on rooting. (See my post about Kim Sut.)

 

[KPM]

That has NEVER been stated! Stop with the strawman already.

It has nothing to do with PB whatsoever. PB's name only comes up because you single him out for some reason.

GLWC isn't WSLVT because he altered it, and he changed the spelling to reflect that it is his own system. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that!

What is so difficult to understand?

But, by default, Gary Lam's system is now "broken" by your standards, since it is no longer WSLVT. Isn't that true?

 

[KPM]

Leaving out "only" changes the entire statement, doesn't it?!!

"Only" is the strawman, and it has been corrected countless times, yet Juany keeps saying it.

---Yes it does. But....when posting in arguments you and Guy B. have not always emphasized that PB is not the "only" one. Maybe that's because PB is the one with the most vids up on youtube to use as examples. Regardless, the impression left behind is often that he is the only one, even if that is unintended.



And no one will understand this point of view without having experience with the systems under comparison. If you don't even know what we're comparing, how could you?

---Because it just goes against logic and probabilities that WSLVT is the ONLY lineage of Wing Chun that is not "broken". And that multiple people that were students of WSL that don't do things like PB are also "broken." I think this is part of the "logic chain" that Juany was talking about.

 

[Juany118]

Leaving out "only" changes the entire statement, doesn't it?!!

"Only" is the strawman, and it has been corrected countless times, yet Juany keeps saying it.

---Yes it does. But....when posting in arguments you and Guy B. have not always emphasized that PB is not the "only" one. Maybe that's because PB is the one with the most vids up on youtube to use as examples. Regardless, the impression left behind is often that he is the only one, even if that is unintended.



And no one will understand this point of view without having experience with the systems under comparison. If you don't even know what we're comparing, how could you?

---Because it just goes against logic and probabilities that WSLVT is the ONLY lineage of Wing Chun that is not "broken". And that multiple people that were students of WSL that don't do things like PB are also "broken." I think this is part of the "logic chain" that Juany was talking about.

You last point is precisely the logical chain I am speaking of and it starts with YM's first gen students.

If all of YM's first gen students say simply "I teach what YM taught me" and not "I am the only one to teach true YM WC" how do we, other than via a twisted adherence to dogma, say "the head of my lineage is the only true YM WC." This is especially true when it is documented by more than one student that those taught personally by GM were taught with their strengths and weaknesses in mind.

You can then go to any of the students of YM's students. None of them, to my knowledge, say "I alone teach the true...", WSL, Ting, IP Ching or Chun WC etc. They say "I teach what they taught me.

To turn these personal statements into a global statement of "Truth" has no logical basis. It has a dogmatic basis which is by definition has no evidence that can be observed or verified, where as a logical conclusion is based on verifiable observation.

 

[DanT]

We actually kinda "snap" all of the "straight" kicks. We break it down to... raise knee>extend>retract>lower. The idea being that if you just "thrust" (if I am understanding you correctly) it gives an opportunity for the leg to be caught. By snapping the kick, in both directions, if the kick is "caught" you either pull the opponent off balance or simply free your leg as a natural consequence of the mechanics of the kick.

I agree with the way you break down the kick 100%. For example, front kick could be broken down into:
-lift knee up
-thrust foot forward like kicking down a door
-quickly pull leg back into chambered position
-put foot on ground

I don't like the idea that many wing chun schools have of just lifting the leg into the target in a straight line with no prior flexion of the knee. I used to go to a school that did that, and the power was maybe 5% of what I have now.

 

[LFJ]

But, by default, Gary Lam's system is now "broken" by your standards, since it is no longer WSLVT. Isn't that true?

No! What the hell, dude? You just quoted me saying there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Why do you keep trying to sow discord on here?

But....when posting in arguments you and Guy B. have not always emphasized that PB is not the "only" one. Maybe that's because PB is the one with the most vids up on youtube to use as examples. Regardless, the impression left behind is often that he is the only one, even if that is unintended.

I have never brought PB's name up on my own. It is always you guys bringing him in.

And I most certainly have emphasized that he is not the only one. In fact, every single time you prop this strawman back up after it's been knocked down!

Don't tell me "the impression left behind is often..." when I explicitly correct you every single time.

---Because it just goes against logic and probabilities that WSLVT is the ONLY lineage of Wing Chun that is not "broken". And that multiple people that were students of WSL that don't do things like PB are also "broken." I think this is part of the "logic chain" that Juany was talking about.

The problem is you're working blindly with "logic" and "probabilities" to set up a hippy theory that says everyone can be right in their own ways, rather than analyzing facts and data to arrive at a justified conclusion regardless of how uncomfortable it might make you feel.

You can't even begin to calculate anything while missing huge chunks of data (experience/knowledge of systems to be compared), and what you think is probable is only that... what you think is probable about something you have no experience with. How can you analyze and compare what you have no knowledge of?

I have summed up the point of view previously, toward the end here for example.

You guys are either unable or uninterested in going to examine the evidence yourselves, taking the necessary trips and whatnot. So, best just to leave it.

I don't feel like drawing this discussion out with you guys again. You never listen and will turn around in a couple weeks or months and claim I said the exact opposite. I'll do you all a favor and won't mention it again, but I hope to not see the same strawman accusations later.

 

[KPM]

Why do you keep trying to sow discord on here?

---I am just supporting what Juany wrote, since you attempted to blow it off and make it sound like he didn't know what he was saying. You and/or Guy B. have most definitely said that WSLVT is the only lineage that you know of teaching what Ip Man actually taught. You have said that there might be other lineages out there from Ip Man that teach what WSL taught, but that you haven't seen them yet. You have said that other Ip Man lineages that don't do things as WSLVT does them are somehow broken. Don't try to deny either of those points, because too many people here were around when they were written in this forum! Now, since you have also said that Gary Lam is no longer doing WSLVT because he has changed things....logically he must fall within that grouping of "others" outside of WSLVT that are broken. So are you saying that you don't consider Gary Lam Wing Chun to now be "broken" because he changed things from what WSLVT taught? Are you saying his Wing Chun isn't "broken" even though it seems quite different from PB's Wing Chun? If not, then you really need to clarify that. Because saying that you are "ok" with the fact that he changed things is not the same thing! So....Gary Lam WIng Chun..."broken"....or just as good as PB's Wing Chun? Which is it? I'm not sowing discord. I'm just following up on your own statements here, and backing up what Juany said before.




The problem is you're working blindly with "logic" and "probabilities" to set up a hippy theory that says everyone can be right in their own ways, rather than analyzing facts and data to arrive at a justified conclusion regardless of how uncomfortable it might make you feel.

---No. The problem is that you seem to have a very different sense of logic and analysis of facts than the rest of us.



You can't even begin to calculate anything while missing huge chunks of data (experience/knowledge of systems to be compared), and what you think is probable is only that... what you think is probable about something you have no experience with. How can you analyze and compare what you have no knowledge of?

----So are you saying you have huge chunks of data and first hand experience/knowledge of....Ho Kam Ming Wing Chun? Traditional Wing Chun? Tsui Tsung Ting Wing Chun? Ip Ching Wing Chun? Duncan Leung Wing Chun? Hawkins Cheung Wing Chun? Etc.??? Or is your analysis that all of these are "broken" compared to WSLVT based upon the same kind of data that the rest of us are using?

---Do you have in-depth knowledge and first hand experience with all of the more well-known lineages from Ip Man other than WSLVT that you have declared to be "broken"? And remember, you and/or Guy B. have stated that there MIGHT be another lineage out there that teaches what Ip Man really taught, but that you had not encounter it yet.



You guys are either unable or uninterested in going to examine the evidence yourselves, taking the necessary trips and whatnot. So, best just to leave it.

---I agree it is best just to leave it. But then you can't just blow off Juany's summary that was done for Hazardi's benefit either. You completely dismissed his opinion and what he had to say. That is the only reason I have been replying.