[QUOTE=hunt1;996136]CFT there were and are several contradictory practices. Which in and of itself should tell you most methods of wing chun taught are in error. The question is which ones.
[/QUOTE]
That in itself is an observation that it seems many never make.
A follow up question is why does this “error” arise in the first place? And the answer is because people aren’t doing it – aren’t fighting with skilled people – or they would see it for themselves.
You must start with and admit there is one true fact and one constant. We are human. We all are built the same and operate within the same parameters of the human body. If you don’t accept this then you can’t combine different methods and determine what is right and what is wrong. 1+1=2 and anyone that teaches a method the adds to 3 is wrong no matter what reasoning they use. Prime example is the slant body structure taught by Leung Ting. There is no human athletic activity other than wing chun that uses this structure. You have to ask yourself why is that. If this structure is so great why is it not used in any other activity? If it worked you would see it in football,golf, MMA. Anywhere where you see millions of $s going to the winner of an athletic activity you will see the best possible use of the human body and human dynamics.
That too is a very good observation. I would only add that body structures or body mechanics are ALSO (keeping in mind these general athletic parameters) task dependent – what is the best way to use your body to accomplish a spectific task.
There are methods of wing chun that teach body mechanics that you will find across all different types of activities. For example when watching the Olympic downhill they talked about the skiers body usage and positions. Guess what ,that same as wing chun.
I know what you are getting at and you can make those comparisons when you already have good mechanics/structure (you see the parallels). However, people without that don’t and can’t see it – these things are just theories to them.
That’s how I resolved the contradictions. If it didn’t add up,if I could’nt use it when playing golf or Olympic lifting or playing tennis or skiing or wrestling I knew to dump it or change it.
Chee’s question is how to you resolve different ways of doing things – the answer is: by working it out for yourself (which is what you’ve apparently done).
You hear a lot of talk and theory about how things should be done. Most of it is nonsense. How can we know what is good and what is nonsense? By working it out for ourselves. THAT (the process of working it out for ourselves) is the MOST important thing, not the specific answer itself. It’s the old give-him-a-fish-or-teach-him-to-fish metaphor: once you learn how to work things out for yourself (how to fish) you can’t be fooled and you aren’t dependent on someone else to give you fish (so you don’t need to follow a “master” for the rest of your life!).
This process of working it out for yourself is nothing extraordinary or secret-- we do it in all forms of athletics. You did it when you learned to ride a bike or to swim. It’s our natural process for learning and developing skill. Thornton calls it the I-method, others call it by other names. Robert calls it “let application be your sifu.” Morris calls it “let the fight be your teacher”.
But you can’t work it out for yourself by not doing it.
Well, I’ve only ever had one Wing Chun Sifu, and have yet to find any other (not that I’m looking!)