KJ wrote:
Terence, you’ve got to admit, this is pretty funny coming from you.
**I’m a believer in experience, in testing things, in proving them to oursleves. Weren’t you the one in another of our threads that said you didn’t feel the need prove anything? If someone has no fighting experience what are they basing their opinions on other than either believing what someone tells you or working from inferences (relying exclusively on arguments)? You’re the pot, I’m the kettle. 
sihing wrote:
All I can guarantee is, IF you apply the principals learned from class, with proper timing and perception of the opponent’s movement, you will have a better chance of defending yourself against an unsolicited attack.
**Yes, exactly – but the rub is that “proper timing”, perception, etc. only comes from fighting not cooperative drills; cooperative drills, like chi sao or san sao, will never give you real timing or real sensitivity or real perception. Fighter’s lose their timing when they stop getting into the ring, no matter how many drills they do. Any good fighter will tell you that. The attributes you need to be able to fight come from fighting, not from drills.
In my mind, WC is the perfect MA, if applied perfectly.
**It’s easy to come to these self-aggrandizing conclusions when one is devoid of experience. Theoretically one can convince themselves of that – so has many of the tai ji folks, the aikido folks, etc. (they say the same thing).
That’s why debates like the tan sao thing are important in a way, because according to my understanding of the uses of tan sao, two ways of doing it (high or low level) are not correct, only one way is correct, IMO.
**This is like someone standing on the side of the pool saying “these debates on how to do a backstroke are useful, as I only thought . . . .” If you actually fought regularly, you’d find out for yourself how to make tan sao work for you (it may be very different than you’ve been taught, or how you’ve been doing it in drills, etc.). Application becomes your sifu. Ask yourself why the “lineages” have certain prescribed ways of doing tan sao in the first place. Because some person found that doing it like that worked for them. That doesn’t mean it will work for you (most likely it won’t) or that it is “correct.” You can only find that out from application (fighting).
Ray,
**It has nothing to do with being in a hurry, but it does have to do with wasting time being nonproductive. Getting in the water permits us to learn to swim. So what’s wrong with spending years on the side of the pool? Nothing, I guess, if becoming a better swimmer isn’t your concern (but then, why are we taking swimming lessons in the first place?). I just sort of see all those as wasted years. And now to your post –
YongChun wrote:
The angle of Tan sau is just a small point in the whole spectrum of fighting.
**Sorry, but I didn’t see anything about fighting in this thread (chi sao, yes, but no fighting).
Anything in this art is worth discussing in my opinion. And even the people who don’t compete regularly in MMA events have a right to an opinion. . . .
**I’m gratified you think everyone is entitled to an opinion – I agree. I just wanted to point out that those opinions should start with the warning label "Although I’ve never really tested this, I think or I’ve been told . . . " 
My POV is “go test whatever you’ve heard or whatever you think and find out for yourself, that’s the only way to answer your question.”
. . . Some people can never be turned into fighters. . . . .
**We can all fight. If someone attacks you, you’ll fight back. (Just like we can all swim; someone throws you in the water, you’ll swim, badly, but you’ll swim!). And anyone can become a better fighter through practice. Only those that don’t practice can never become better fighters. Practice = fighting.
. . . To become a fighter you have to fight. I learned that in the 1960’s. That’s obvious. Do you have anything else to say beyond that?
**If it is so obvious, why isn’t it a part of everyone’s training? And if they were fighting, the nature of the discussions would be different.
Regarding the elevation of the Tan sau, it has been a topic of discussion by various masters of this art. Are they all idiots too?
**You love talking about the “masters” – what makes them masters? Sure WSL had his way, just like Ali had his jab; that doesn’t mean it is the correct way to jab or that jabbing like that will even work for you. Ali found his jab by boxing. WSL found his tan sao from fighting. Now others want to find their tan sao by aping Wong or someone else (another “master” – but did that master find his tan sao from fighting or from drills?). We can discuss ad nauseum how many different excellent boxers had many different types of jabs. Which one was “proper”? They all were. Because WCK, like any fighting method, is based on individual performance.
Another apparent miss with my droll humor. An attorney who says arguments don’t count? Ah well. Guess you had to be there.