It's not surprising that LFJ and KPM can look at the same evidence and draw such different conclusions.
LFJ has used very similar logic to argue that Yip Man's VT did not evolve or change as many claim. Rather, he holds that that WSL-VT, by virtue of its functionality and systemic cohesion is correct VT as YM intended. I believe he has said that the other branches of WC he has experienced are different, lacking the effectiveness and logical integration or systemic cohesion. They are the result of incomplete learning and are "broken" VT.
His interpretation of earlier VT being created separately from other older boxing methods and being engineered so as to reflect the strategy of the long pole shows an identical perspective.
I understand the evidence, and his conclusions, but do not share his perspective. IMO it is far more likely that VT has developed organically and incrementally from what went before. Like KPM and others, I guess I have more of an evolutionist vs. creationist outlook.
LFJ has used very similar logic to argue that Yip Man's VT did not evolve or change as many claim. Rather, he holds that that WSL-VT, by virtue of its functionality and systemic cohesion is correct VT as YM intended. I believe he has said that the other branches of WC he has experienced are different, lacking the effectiveness and logical integration or systemic cohesion. They are the result of incomplete learning and are "broken" VT.
His interpretation of earlier VT being created separately from other older boxing methods and being engineered so as to reflect the strategy of the long pole shows an identical perspective.
I understand the evidence, and his conclusions, but do not share his perspective. IMO it is far more likely that VT has developed organically and incrementally from what went before. Like KPM and others, I guess I have more of an evolutionist vs. creationist outlook.