KPM wrote:
—So what things have you changed about your WCK based upon your “fighting” experience? I am not trying to be facetious or argumentative. I would truly like to know what insights you have gained and how you have changed your Wing Chun from the “traditional” way it is done based upon those insights. Again, this was the original intent of this thread. KPM
To be honest, I don’t even think about it in that way. The number one thing that has changed is in how I train and teach WCK. That has changed my perspective. Terence
----Now come on Terence! Like I said before, that attitude is total …B…S…!
**I wouldn’t expect you to know what I was talking about – when you begin to practice WCK, you will see. If you never practice WCK, you won’t.
What I have really taken exception to in your past posts is the constant implication that there is something wrong with following a “traditional” approach
**Of course one follows a traditional approach – the forms, for example, are traditional, as are the drills like chi sao.
and sticking to doing things the way a specific lineage teaches (which, BTW, does not exclude using progressive sparring drills).
**If a lineage tries to enforce a certain way of doing things, then the student of that lineage will never achieve significant results (in terms of fighting performance) regardless of “using progressive sparring drills.”
You have supported the idea on more than one occasion that fighting should be what determines how you do your WCK, and not what your Sifu has taught you.
**That is exactly right – there is no other way. This is what all fighters do, boxers, BJJ, muay thai, etc.
You even implied that whether one is using a K1 pivot or a heel pivot (which is a major biomechanical difference) should be determined by what works in fighting and not what your lineage teaches.
**You are so blinded by your lineage you don’t see the forest for the trees. Look – name anyone that fights at a high level, regardless of lineage, and if you look, you’ll see that they all move/weight/stand on their toes (k1, ball of the foot, etc.). No good stand-up fighter, whether boxer, muay thai, kickboxer, wrestler, etc., puts their weight (except in transition) on their heels or “middle of the foot”. And there is a reason for that: biomechanically, that provides us with the best way to move quickly, powerfully, etc. Anyone that fights with good people will begin to move on their toes because they’ll have to. I don’t move on k1 because Robert told me to; I move on k1 because it works for me.
You have come across as endorsing a very “Jeet Kune Do-like” approach to Wing Chun.
**Theoreticians are always concerned with “purity” of lineage, method, etc. They are WCK facists. They are trapped by their theoretical view of WCK.
Now you are asked to provide a few examples of how this approach has given you insight and changed how you perform and teach your Wing Chun and you can’t do it??? You can’t provide one example of something like “I have learned to do Bong Sau this way because in fighting I found…”, or “I no longer practice this as I was taught because I have not found it to have any fighting application…”?
**I don’t think like that and never did – I always considered those sorts of things examples of using the tools, not how they should be used by everyone. Someone can show you how to use a jab, but that doesn’t mean you should use the jab that way. You may, you may not. You determine that works best for you by fighting. You learn to box your way, not as a poor clone of Mohammed Ali. You don’t get it because you’re not fighting.
If you are going to classify everyone with a “traditional” approach to Wing Chun as a “theoretician”, then you darn well better be able to do more than just say “I don’t even think about it that way”, because that sure sounds like a “theoretician’s” attitude to me. KPM
**I’m not classifying you, that’s what anyone is that doesn’t fight – that doesn’t actually use their WCK. If someone isn’t actually swimming but does all kinds of stuff without getting in the water they are at best theoretical swimmers (it’s all intelllectual babble to them).
