Leung Jan's system(s)?

[wckf92]

Ok, so on the FB WC forum there is an ongoing 'discussion' about who knows what and when etc etc but my questions are this:
1. Is Gulao wing chun the same as Pin Sun wing chun?
2. Is there a difference between the 12 point, 22 point, and 40 point "systems"?
3. Are the 12 and 22 contained within the 40?
4. Or, are each their own individual systems? And if so, are they all "Gulao" or "Pin Sun" or stem from Leung Jan's village / retirement years?

Thanks in advance for any clarifications.

Oh, and bonus question: do all three systems turn their horse on the front part of the foot vs the rear part?

 

[KPM]

1. Is Gulao wing chun the same as Pin Sun wing chun?

---Depends upon who you talk to! The Boston guys under Henry Mui seem to claim "Pin Sun" as referring to their specific version of the system. Others consider the "Pin Sun" and "Gulao" labels to be interchangeable. But the guys in China just seem to say "Gulao Wing Chun" and don't use the "Pin Sun" label very often from what little I have seen.

2. Is there a difference between the 12 point, 22 point, and 40 point "systems"?

---Yes. The 12 point system is the original. And most are doing a 12 + 5 version because over the years some valuable additional points were added to Leung Jan's original 12. The 22 point system was developed by someone that changed things around quite a bit. Some of the core motions are still the same, but some aren't. The 40 point system is an "elaboration" upon the 12 point system. Some of the "points" have been broken down into component parts to turn 1 point in 3 points. It also includes basic motions as a "point." For instance....just practicing the Bong Sau is one of the "points" in the 40 point system. But realize that the 22 point system was developed by and is practiced by only 1 guy who still teaches in China and his students including John Fung. It is a modern version of the system. The 40 point system, as far as I know, is only practiced by Robert Chu and his students. However, the 12 point system is the basis for what all the Gulao guys in China are doing...though there seem to be several variations.

3. Are the 12 and 22 contained within the 40?

---No. Its not like the 22 pt system is the 12 + 10 more, or that the 40 pt system is the 12 + 28 more.


4. Or, are each their own individual systems? And if so, are they all "Gulao" or "Pin Sun" or stem from Leung Jan's village / retirement years?

---They are their own individual systems. They can all claim a "Gulao root." But, for instance, it has been said that Robert Chu and his students are doing the 40 pt system with the biomechanics from his CSL method, and not the original biomechanics as done by the guys still in Heshan China. So can you really call it "Gulao"? I think that would be open for debate!

Oh, and bonus question: do all three systems turn their horse on the front part of the foot vs the rear part?

---Yes. All the "Gulao-related" systems pivot on the K1 point and not on the heels. This is also true of Yuen Kay Shan/Sum Nun Wing Chun.

 

[wckf92]

Thanks KPM. Appreciate the info and the input.

The Boston guys

Are they the only ones teaching "Gulao" / (Pin Sun) in the US that you know of?

For instance....just practicing the Bong Sau is one of the "points" in the 40 point system.

Ok, this is super helpful in clarifying so appreciate that!

So, if I understand correctly, the "12" is what distilled from all his WC knowledge and fighting experience and passed on in a village called Gulao. Correct?
Then, other folks, somewhere along the years broke it out into more "points"...

Is it also accurate to say that each system (the 12, the 22, and the 40) teach via san sik, along with muk yan jong, and pole/knives (just no hand forms?)

 

[KPM]

Are they the only ones teaching "Gulao" / (Pin Sun) in the US that you know of?

---Yes.

So, if I understand correctly, the "12" is what distilled from all his WC knowledge and fighting experience and passed on in a village called Gulao. Correct?

---Yes. The 12 sets are said to be Leung Jan's "condensed" version of Wing Chun. He is said to have taken his experience in learning, teaching, and fighting with Wing Chun and distilled it down to what he thought was the most essential points and something that could be learned relatively quickly.


Then, other folks, somewhere along the years broke it out into more "points"...

---Yes. At least 5 additional points were added to LJ's essential 12. But remember, the 22 pt system and the 40 pt system don't have the basic 12. They have their own version of San Sik. Some are very similar, but some aren't.

Is it also accurate to say that each system (the 12, the 22, and the 40) teach via san sik, along with muk yan jong, and pole/knives (just no hand forms?)

---Yes. Though Leung Jan taught only the 12 sets with dummy applications and a short 3 1/2 point pole form. The knives were added later. Some groups created a longer dummy form later. And some of the Gulao guys will string the sets together for demo purposes so that it looks like one long form.

 

[wckf92]

Are they the only ones teaching "Gulao" / (Pin Sun) in the US that you know of?

---Yes.

So, if I understand correctly, the "12" is what distilled from all his WC knowledge and fighting experience and passed on in a village called Gulao. Correct?

---Yes. The 12 sets are said to be Leung Jan's "condensed" version of Wing Chun. He is said to have taken his experience in learning, teaching, and fighting with Wing Chun and distilled it down to what he thought was the most essential points and something that could be learned relatively quickly.


Then, other folks, somewhere along the years broke it out into more "points"...

---Yes. At least 5 additional points were added to LJ's essential 12. But remember, the 22 pt system and the 40 pt system don't have the basic 12. They have their own version of San Sik. Some are very similar, but some aren't.

Is it also accurate to say that each system (the 12, the 22, and the 40) teach via san sik, along with muk yan jong, and pole/knives (just no hand forms?)

---Yes. Though Leung Jan taught only the 12 sets with dummy applications and a short 3 1/2 point pole form. The knives were added later. Some groups created a longer dummy form later. And some of the Gulao guys will string the sets together for demo purposes so that it looks like one long form.

Thanks kpm! This helped a lot! Much appreciated.

 

[obi_juan_salami]

---Yes. All the "Gulao-related" systems pivot on the K1 point and not on the heels. This is also true of Yuen Kay Shan/Sum Nun Wing Chun.

Yuen kay san wing chun does not pivot on the "k1" point of the foot

 

[KPM]

Yuen kay san wing chun does not pivot on the "k1" point of the foot

They don't pivot on the heel from what I've seen. So how would you describe it?

 

[obi_juan_salami]

They don't pivot on the heel from what I've seen. So how would you describe it?

I wouldnt describe it. Your right though it is not on the heels nor is it on the k1 point

 

[wckf92]

I wouldnt describe it. Your right though it is not on the heels nor is it on the k1 point

If it's not on the front of the foot, nor the middle (k1?), and not on the heels...where? I mean, the foot is only so big...

 

[wckf92]

@obi_juan_salami if you prefer not to say or just not say publicly then no worries man. I appreciate the input regardless. I'm just trying to get a better understanding of "Gulao"...but would also love to learn more about Yuen Kay San if your willing.

 

[KPM]

I wouldnt describe it. Your right though it is not on the heels nor is it on the k1 point

Why so evasive with your answer? Realize that saying the K1 point is just to give people the idea of the general area. Its not on the heel. Its not on the ball of the foot. Its at the mid-foot behind the ball of the foot. No one pivots on an exact point.

 

[Marnetmar]

Why so evasive with your answer? Realize that saying the K1 point is just to give people the idea of the general area. Its not on the heel. Its not on the ball of the foot. Its at the mid-foot behind the ball of the foot. No one pivots on an exact point.

Gotta keep those ancient deadly techniques secret, maaaaaaan.

 

[obi_juan_salami]

@obi_juan_salami if you prefer not to say or just not say publicly then no worries man. I appreciate the input regardless. I'm just trying to get a better understanding of "Gulao"...but would also love to learn more about Yuen Kay San if your willing.

Thanks for the understanding. I am not in a position to be giving out lessons or teaching the style. It is not mine to share.

I just saw an incorrect comment on a style i practice and thought i would offer at least some clarity as we do not turn on the k1 point of the foot.

There is plenty of info if you do some digging online or perhaps renee ritchies book which has a fairly comprehensive description of basic practice.

 

[Poppity]

In the UK, it is slightly different, in the sense of any Chinese Whispers game through which Wing Chun appears to flourish. Lee Shing (Shing Lei) showed the gulao system, 12 horses system in a form call Dai Lim Tau (the mysteriously named fourth form). Whether Lee Shing "taught" the gualo system or not (as opposed to just showing the form for reference) is a matter of debate amongst the lineage, as is what first or second generation students of this lineage later invented themselves or were actually shown. In either case, the terms Pin/Pien San and Gulao Wing Chun have been widely used interchangeably in the UK.

 

[KPM]

Thanks for the understanding. I am not in a position to be giving out lessons or teaching the style. It is not mine to share.

I just saw an incorrect comment on a style i practice and thought i would offer at least some clarity as we do not turn on the k1 point of the foot.

There is plenty of info if you do some digging online or perhaps renee ritchies book which has a fairly comprehensive description of basic practice.

Since you brought it up.....providing clarification on what you meant is not exactly "teaching the style." If my comment was incorrect, then what is correct? If you don't turn on the heel or the K1 point....do you turn on the ball of the foot?? It is a relatively simple question and shouldn't be viewed as some kind of secret. That attitude is just plain silly!

It seems you shared a lot more info here:

Let's talk about Tan Sau

So I"m not quite sure why you are so against sharing info that is so basic now.

 

[obi_juan_salami]

Since you brought it up.....providing clarification on what you meant is not exactly "teaching the style." If my comment was incorrect, then what is correct? If you don't turn on the heel or the K1 point....do you turn on the ball of the foot?? It is a relatively simple question and shouldn't be viewed as some kind of secret. That attitude is just plain silly!

It seems you shared a lot more info here:

Let's talk about Tan Sau

So I"m not quite sure why you are so against sharing info that is so basic now.

With all due respect, it is up to me what i share and what i don't. Also, the video in the thread i posted is about hong kong wing chun not guangzhou wing chun.

 

[KPM]

With all due respect, it is up to me what i share and what i don't. Also, the video in the thread i posted is about hong kong wing chun not guangzhou wing chun.

With all due respect, why are you participating in a discussion forum in which you are unwilling to discuss? And why even comment on this thread in the first place if you are unwilling to clarify what you meant?

 

[APL76]

With all due respect, why are you participating in a discussion forum in which you are unwilling to discuss? And why even comment on this thread in the first place if you are unwilling to clarify what you meant?

What Nick was doing is clarifying what he saw as an obvious error concerning Guangzhou (Yuen Kay San) style wing chun, that is why he made the comment. We don't turn on the K1 point of the foot. We don't turn on the heels either. That is why he commented; because what you said was dead wrong. As was your statement about no one turning on a specific point of the foot, where one turns on the foot in Guangzhou style wing chun is very specific and must be done correctly and consistently in order to do the turn correctly. If Nick wants to elaborate or not, that is up to him.

In the video you reposted all I do or talk about is the Yip Man wing chun we do, so there is no information about Guangzhou wing chun in it, that's why we are happy to put information about like that; we are totally open about our Yip Man style. When we practice Yip Man style wing chun we do however turn on the ball of the foot. (that is something I changed from turning on the heels for various reasons after discussing it with my sifu).

The reason why Nick is reticent in elaborating on how we do Guangzhou wing chun is in loyalty to our sifu (Nick learns from both my sifu and myself). This loyalty stems back to my sifu's sifu, Sum Nung, and the conditions he put on my sifu. That is that he was to keep Guangzhou wing chun 1) utterly separate from the Yip Man wing chun he learned, and 2) not to film, photograph the stuff, commit the lot to memory and not take notes, not to discuss it with outsiders and to only show it to people on the receiving end of it (i.e. beat the crap out of someone). Sum Nung himself was incredibly careful not to publicise what he did. The video of him doing su lim tao is the "public consumption" version of the form, and the dummy form in the air is also altered. It took my sifu about 4 or 5 years of trying to convince him to be filmed in the seminars he did here in Australia, and he only agreed to be filmed on the condition that the films never become public. So these are the reasons Nick is a bit tight lipped about just how we do Guangzhou wing chun.

But, then again. 1) my sifu has given us permission to film a little of it provided we don't give the essence of it away; something we might get round to eventually. 2) I think my sifu is a bit irritated about all the nonsense about Guangzhou wing chun floating about and is working on his own website to counter some of the nonsense; so a bit of stuff will become available eventually for people to have a look at if they feel like it; and 3) I think people here are a clever bunch, I'm sure if someone puts on their thinking cap they could figure it out, after all as someone else said, a foot is only so big, if it isn't on the heel, ball, K1 point, there aren't too many more places to chose from. Figure it out.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not meaning any disrespect to those who feel they need to protect secrets of their art - just expressing myself. This kind of stuff drives me batty. I completely do not understand continuing secrecy in the modern environment. I can see no reason not to share what we know with each other.

That doesn’t make you wrong, but it does make me frustrated.

 

[KPM]

Not meaning any disrespect to those who feel they need to protect secrets of their art - just expressing myself. This kind of stuff drives me batty. I completely do not understand continuing secrecy in the modern environment. I can see no reason not to share what we know with each other.

That doesn’t make you wrong, but it does make me frustrated.

I absolutely agree. All this secret stuff is ridiculous in this modern age. In the past you might have wanted to keep things secret so the guy in the next village over wouldn't gain an advantage over you if you had to defend your village's wealth or honor. But nowadays it serves no real purpose. And it actually works against arts that are at a real risk of dying out, or of being transmitted with lots of bad information because the people that knew the important details wouldn't share that knowledge. This is just one more in a long list of reasons I have become rather disenchanted and fed up with "traditional" martial arts.....Wing Chun included. There is just too much BS that goes along with them.