The advanced student turns up at the WT class with a number of bruises, and complains to his teacher that while his WingTsun made him able to cope well in a recent fight, he did not experience the effortless superiority that he himself and others had led him to expect.
In priest-like high dudgeon, the teacher sets the student straight and blames his lack of personal skill for the fact that things did not work out as well as expected.
After all, if the original premise in the form of the WT system is not at fault – because things that should not be cannot be – then the student himself must be to blame.
But wait a moment! Could there possibly be another suspect apart from WT itself and the student?
Perhaps the way it is being taught?
The teacher dismisses this train of thought at once: "Whoever was clever enough to develop a system as ingenious as WingTsun, was certainly also clever enough to create a correspondingly good teaching method."
As the representative of WT in Europe, I used to issue similar pronouncements myself once. As a professor (from the Latin: one who propounds), I must propound what I regard as reality and put the question: in a scientific system, is it acceptable to follow a point of view or teaching convention blindly just because it is widespread?
What is the good of such piety?
It only serves to perpetuate superstition! Most people do not realise that they only believe they know what they believe they know.
Or do we really want to depart from our view that WT is an object of scientific research, and therefore of constant improvement?
That is exactly what we would be doing if we simply accepted that WingTsun as it is now and has always been, and also the way it is taught, cannot be improved upon.
If we declare WingTsun to be a perfect work of art which must remain untouchable and sacrosanct, we are putting ourselves in handcuffs. If we start convincing ourselves that the fighters and teachers of the past cannot and never will be bettered, we are programming ourselves for stagnation – and therefore for regression.
Like any other form of knowledge, we must rigorously subject WT to constant critical examination. And this examination of WT must not be with the methods employed by WingTsun. It is time to put a stop to this incest once and for all!WT only proves its worth in confrontations with non-WT concepts.
It was not without reason that Yip Man attacked his students with the punches of other kung-fu styles. Only in this way can WT remain a living science, and adapt to the circumstances of the time.
Do we really want to preserve WT to death, until it is merely a style? Where only external appearance, superficialities and formal correctness count?
If teaching methods such as forms and partner forms, whose purpose is only to show the way to the goal, become the goal itself, then the way is the goal. But we have lost sight of the actual goal.
So how do we find the goal again?
We start by going back to the original idea. By asking ourselves what the purpose of WT was and is. It was supposed to be the invisible weapon of the weaker person to protect him or her from (physical) attack. No matter who the attacker was!We will need to convince a lot of people before we can assume that every potential opponent out there is also a WingTsun man who practices the same "style" as we do.
Until the rest of the world has been blessed with the glad tidings of WingTsun, we must expect that our opponent will not strike with a "vertical fist" and an "unmoving elbow". And neither should we stake our life on the expectation that he will softly absorb our punch with "Bong-Sao".
Unfortunately many WT people around the world train with this naive attitude, and during a macho fight over a parking space they are suddenly taken aback because the other party does not cooperate and give way as in training.
Even the strategist von Clausewitz ("On War") was outraged that practice did not follow theory in real war, but instead spoiled the most careful advance planning with what he called "friction".
I love WingTsun, it is the mainstay of my life. And I would like to spare this most ingenious of all self-defence systems from becoming a rigid, embalmed cadaver which is only an object of veneration.
Doing something without understanding which others before us have already done without understanding is a waste of our intelligence.
WingTsun follows the way of the Tao. This way is formless, like water: it is not linear and plannable, it has no beginning and no end. There is a continuous interaction with our opponent, whom we see as part of us, so that without any delay, we can adapt ourselves to any change by changing ourselves until the moment when we disengage from him and deliver an irresistible attack.
With respect to the sensitivity (!) this requires, pre-planned partner forms are of no use whatever.
And yet there is nothing wrong with the partner forms. On the contrary! In my view they are indispensable when it comes to teaching more than a handful of students! And all recognition is due to my Si-Fu for them. But unfortunately they are nowadays practiced for the wrong reasons, and in my view incorrectly.
Most of the partner forms were developed – in part in my student accommodation – to provide students with a store of knowledge incorporating as many movement variations as possible. I like to refer to this as material to play with, so as to become familiar with the entire gamut of different solutions without danger.
Partner forms were originally conceived to further the following four of the "big seven" skills: 1. Awareness, 2. Looseness, 3. Coordination, 4. Balance.
And where is tactile sensitivity to be found in this list? Well, this is not really developed, or if it is, then only peripherally and more by chance than design.
While there is contact between the "sticking" arms during these partner forms, that is just about as far as it goes. The ability to use the tactile sense to establish where the opponent’s arms are going is not developed, and this is precisely because we already know in advance where his pressure is to be expected. The whole thing is choreographed down to the last detail, like a screenplay.
Now somebody might say: "Ok, but if the partner forms help to develop more than half of the seven (7) skills that are important in a fight, that’s pretty good!“
Well yes, that’s ok, but what is not ok is that many people "believe" they are gaining living reactions through "lifeless" (i.e. predetermined) partner forms.
Only personal and specific reaction training can bring this about!Some years ago I therefore began to develop a suitable programme based on scientific findings, and I now teach this – with "overwhelming" results.
On no account do I later want to be blamed of having forgotten the eternal principles we have made our own.
In 1979 my Si-Fu Leung Ting was already well aware that choreographed and memorised "combat dancing between partners" is nonsense when it comes to reaction skills (!) relevant to combat. He said so very clearly in his best book, "Wing Tsun Kuen":

"Another common mistake committed by many instructors, is over-emphasis of regularity of movements. They insist on applying movements, during attack and defence exercises between twos, in a regulated sequence, (ie. such a movement of yours should be dealt with such a movement of mine, etc.), until a whole series of movements of a fighting form have been applied. Exercises practiced in this way, I dare say, are not different to a social dance. For example, in the Waltz or the Tango, there is a fixed pattern of steps, such as three forwards followed by three backwards, or four forwards and then four backwards, all done to the beat of music and totally co-ordinated by the two partners. If any one of the partners does not keep the beat, or breaks step owing to negligence, or lack of skill, he will ruin the dance and probably make a fool of himself into the bargain. These kung-fu movements have to be kept even more regular than dancing steps. Therefore in a whole set of attack and defence moves, the two partners must be well practised as to maintain the sequence. (Please take note of the word 'sequence'!). If one partner make a tiny unexpected mistake, even in part of a movement, it will lead to a complete breakdown in the collaboration of the two partners.
On the other hand, someone aptly trained in the attack and defence forms between twos, need not necessarily be skilfully trained in fighting, for in a real fight, the ways in which moves can be made are greatly varied, even to the point of diverging from any regular movements. This is how the saying 'Killing the skillful master with disorderly punches' arises."

I want you all to work together with me in ensuring that our WingTsun – following its own philosophy, which is also its strategy of not having a strategy, and flexibly adapting to modern times and new scientific findings – not only survives, but becomes better and better. It has by no means reached its zenith yet!

Keith R. Kernspecht

PS: I am looking forward to an exciting future. I am sure that with the help of the youth-preserving and health-promoting power of Chi-Sao and our ChiKung, and supported by a highly motivated team of advisers who have played a substantial part in the success of this WT world, I will be available to the EWTO for many years to come in order to lead our WT to new shores.