Who Did Yip Man Learn Stuff From?

[Jicjeung]

This information is old...

I already explained it.

Jim is a good friend of mine and he has done a bunch of research since he first wrote that article - ask him about it, and he see what he says...



As far as Mr. Baniecki goes... "Many times to China"... And "training in that lineage"... So that should lend what he says more credence? They basically went there on a holiday trip and spent a few days in Saaping...

Saaping is just about 90 mins from my home and I know few sifus there quite well, so I go there quite often and have heard quite a few stories over the years.

So, yes... The information in those articles are not correct, Leung Jan did not pass away in Gulao Seui Heung / Dongbin Cun.

?

>>>>Ah I see, I am curious as to why he is now keeping this to huimself rather then updating his own website. Perhaps he does not wish to publicise what he learned for some reason? I will write to him as suggested,
Thank you

 

[Jicjeung]

Interesting article for those who havn't seen it and if interested: Lives of Chinese Martial Artists (6): Ng Chung So – Looking Beyond the “Three Heroes of Wing Chun”

 

[Jicjeung]

[QUOTE

As far as Mr. Baniecki goes... "Many times to China"... And "training in that lineage"... So that should lend what he says more credence? They basically went there on a holiday trip and spent a few days in Saaping..

>>>Sorry, forgot to address this but I am sure they would take issue with this. Yes, if they visit, train and speak directly with the Sifu's training in the lineage (rather the simply repeating what they read in a magazine) in Guluo or Kulo if you prefer (whether we like what they say or not, whether we want to believe what they say is accurate or not, it does add more credence to their statements as to what they claim were told as to unknown folks on the internet stating X or Y or Z. This of course applies to anyone on any forum, Now it is possible Mr. Baneicki is wrong, it is also possible Mr. Roselundo is wrong. We can only examine what we know and examining all available resources come to our own conclusions. So, that being said, From examining their website, blogs and facebook they have made some 10 or so trips to China in general doing training and research on their own he did not know exactly how many times to Kulo. Not taking his comments at gospel. I then looked at their blog and pictures and it appears they have trained in Pin sun making "at least" 3 trips (2006, 2007 and it appears from photo's 2016 ((there are possibly more, I will ask directly)) Met and trained with Various Pin Sun Sifu and discussed history with Fung Chun , so with all do respect, their connection appears to be more then the lone holiday stop over you make it sound to be, with respect to Mr. and Mrs Baneicki.
Just an FYI to the reader of this thread.

 

[KPM]

Interesting article for those who havn't seen it and if interested: Lives of Chinese Martial Artists (6): Ng Chung So – Looking Beyond the “Three Heroes of Wing Chun”

Good find! Thanks!

 

[jlq]

Jicjeung,

no one visiting Gulao was "training" with Fung Chun Sifu...

he liked demonstrating and showing some stuff to visitors, usually at restaurants or maybe his home.

but training?

That would be presuming too much...

Mr. and Mrs. Baniecki never stayed long to really "train" - depending on what one considers training, of course - with anyone, so while they did have a few lessons with Fung Keung Sifu, I wouldn't call that "training". But again, it depends on the definition of the term.

Anyhow, this is less relevant and interestig than the following:

Now, I explained it before, but you might have overlooked it in the forrest of posts since...

Leung Jan's family have released family documents with records of his birth and death dates, genealogy, etc. and even pictures/drawings and personal effects.

(some of) These are on display on the Yip Man Museum in ,Foshan, for everyone to see.

But apparently not many have...

At the time Jim wrote the article you were referring to and the Banieckis wrote theirs, this information was not available.

That is what I have been saying.

If you think time spent in China gives any amount of authority:

I have been travelling to China regularly since 2004, staying anywhere from 1 to 3 months on each visit learning Wing Chun, and been living here for almost 8 years.

I have been going to Saaping regularly for more than four years to visit senior sifus and to "train" there...

If I were to write an article, and put the information I am giving you in it, would that give it more credibility to you?

The information is the same whether I write an article or simply state it here...

 

[Jicjeung]

Good find! Thanks!

You are welcome sir!

 

[Jicjeung]

Jicjeung,

no one visiting Gulao was "training" with Fung Chun Sifu...

he liked demonstrating and showing some stuff to visitors, usually at restaurants or maybe his home.

but training?

That would be presuming too much...

>>>>I think you are reading into what I said rather then reading what I said. With all due respect I wrote "Met and trained with Various Pin Sun Sifu and discussed history with Fung Chun."

Mr. and Mrs. Baniecki never stayed long to really "train" - depending on what one considers training, of course - with anyone, so while they did have a few lessons with Fung Keung Sifu, I wouldn't call that "training". But again, it depends on the definition of the term.

>>>Well I don't know for sure, I wasn't there perhaps you were? In any event see my comments above, they certainly did more then a lone holiday stop over in Sapping as you stated and since I first mentioned them as a source of an article you dismissed I felt obliged to give another perspective to your off the cuff dismissal ..from 8 years ago .

from 10 years ago

and there are a few more on his you tube, so in any event they likely did discuss wing chun history with him just as Jim Roselundo did. But as to Depth of training , I don't know, in any event see my statement above.

Anyhow, this is less relevant and interestig than the following:

Now, I explained it before, but you might have overlooked it in the forrest of posts since...

Leung Jan's family have released family documents with records of his birth and death dates, genealogy, etc. and even pictures/drawings and personal effects.

(some of) These are on display on the Yip Man Museum in ,Foshan, for everyone to see.

>>>Yes, but many things are not there to actually be examined or read. A book opened to a page behind a case doesn't tell you what the other pages say or do not. I simply have not (as of yet ,but I will have to make another trip to the museum next visit) seen anything saying Leung Jan did not retire to then teach until he passed in Gulao. This would be very interesting to me if he moved on from there and passed somewhere else as it would mean he spent even less time then thought teaching in gulao. So I am surprised it has not been mentioned by anyone in any historic articles I can find on leung jan.

But apparently not many have...

At the time Jim wrote the article you were referring to and the Banieckis wrote theirs, this information was not available.

That is what I have been saying.

If you think time spent in China gives any amount of authority:

>>>There are no Authorities in such a vague area of history. There seem to be only various perspectives some more informed then others but all are mostly repeating what they are told as there is little documentation in most repects.

I have been travelling to China regularly since 2004, staying anywhere from 1 to 3 months on each visit learning Wing Chun, and been living here for almost 8 years.

I have been going to Saaping regularly for more than four years to visit senior sifus and to "train" there...

If I were to write an article, and put the information I am giving you in it, would that give it more credibility to you?

The information is the same whether I write an article or simply state it here...

>>>>I am believe you have. Of course then again..with all due respect..this is the internet! lots of people say lots of things! All I seem to be getting from you is a statement that Leung Jan did not die in gulao after retiring and teaching there. Your initial reply to my Posting Jim Roselundo;s article was to point out it was written in 2007 with an emoi beneath. Well my history books in High school were old but the Civil War did still happen. You then refered me to read Jim Roselundo but he was the one who wrote the article in the first place , so pardon my confusion, I then looked for more recent articles by him and found some ie... wing chun illustrated, but nothing contradicted the earlier article he wrote... Now, Maybe I missed something in the forest of posts that's true, but that's it ...you saying No, Jim Roselundo has different information. Ok, well to find out what this is I guess I have to write him but then again for a man who has written so much on the subject to find out something new and not write about it tells me he likely doesn't want to share it. Mr. Baneicki does post numerous pictures and video clips (taken over more then one trip, contrary to your previous implication) for people to take as they wish, He and his wife then write about information obtained in visits on their blogs ,Just like Jim Roselundo did. Now one source maybe more reputable to you because you know him but I do not know either personally. Everyone has a perspective, preferences and bias to what they believe and also that which they seek to promote (I don't mean that in a bad way). So I don't give more credence to one over the other, but regard them as two sources, especially when the last things they both posted to the internet world tend to corroborate the essential parts of leung jan retiring and teaching in Gulao until he passed. That is of more interest to me then how hard they trained, sweated or how long they stayed doing so. So your saying no this is all wrong and pointing to a museum out of reach of many ( Admittedly when I visited I was in awe and may have overlooked it?) of the readers here does not clarify things. Now, If your article had pictures and sources then yes I would give it more credence then someone just writing anything on a forum without further coroberation. Please understand, I am not stating this as an insult mind you, it is simply a statement of the obvious. Gosh, for all anyone knows here I could be an 8th grade girl from Detroit named Tabitha! ROTFLMAO
Anyway, thanks for your thoughts I sincerely appreciate the discourse.

Regards

 

[jlq]

JicJeung,

if you have been reading anybof the stuff I wrote, you should underdstand that I am not an 8th grade girl called Tabitha..

And not from Detroit.



Why you didn't see these things on display can be explained by the following:

1. You went to the Yip Man Tong in the Zumiao, but as I stated, you have to go to the newer on they built in Luochun, the ancestral home of the Yip Clan.

2. The documents I am referring to were not on display yet, when you were there. After all, they were just released a couple of years ago..

As I have been saying quite a few times, there is a wealth of information available about Wing Chun in China that is not available to people in the West, and most often when presented with this information people reject it because it doesn't correlate with the picture people already have - like you accepting Jim's old articles or the Baniecki's stuff because it corroborates what you believe.

But you have to realize:

Even Mr. Ben Judkin's great work is - when it comes to Wing Chun information - based on a handful of Wing Chun books only, which basically have the same sources or even borrow information from each other, and as such not really presenting anything which is not already known in the West. What he does mention about various Wing Chun ancestors, which is new to most readers, is information he got from a book called "Fatsaan Martial Culture", which is mainly about CLF, actually, and also very limited when it comes to information about Wing Chun's history.
Another problem is that people take Mr. Judkin's work THE authoritative source and use it as THE reference, not realizing that it is quite limited by the information the authors had access to writing the book.

So, if you really want to dig deeper into the history of Wing Chun and the oldtimers, you better not reject everything you hear out of hand because it doesn't match your conviction or the sources you know.

Of course I am not saying one should believe everything one hears, and always employ a good measure of critical thinking and fact-checking - the more information one has, the easier it is to critically assess new information and new theories, such as an "Ngor Mei Bak Hok ancestral connection" etc.



Since you are more inclined to believe what Jim is saying over what I am sharing with you, I will ask him to post something here.

 

[jlq]

Oh! Looks like I didn't read the "Detroit" part properly... Haha... My apologies - your point is a good one.

 

[jlq]

As far as the Banieckis go, I didn't mean to say they went once.... when I say holiday, I am referring to a trip going to different places not staying long to practice... They have done several of such tours, obviously.

 

[Jicjeung]

JicJeung,

if you have been reading anybof the stuff I wrote, you should underdstand that I am not an 8th grade girl called Tabitha..

And not from Detroit.



>>>>

Why you didn't see these things on display can be explained by the following:

1. You went to the Yip Man Tong in the Zumiao, but as I stated, you have to go to the newer on they built in Luochun, the ancestral home of the Yip Clan.

2. The documents I am referring to were not on display yet, when you were there. After all, they were just released a couple of years ago..

>>>Correct assumption, thank you I will look into it!

As I have been saying quite a few times, there is a wealth of information available about Wing Chun in China that is not available to people in the West, and most often when presented with this information people reject it because it doesn't correlate with the picture people already have - like you accepting Jim's old articles or the Baniecki's stuff because it corroborates what you believe.

>>>>> I think you are misinterpreting here. I do not seek out information to validate "What I believe" I seek information to guide me to conclusions and use many sources in coming to those conclusions until new evidence causes me to reevaluate those conclusions.

But you have to realize:

Even Mr. Ben Judkin's great work is - when it comes to Wing Chun information - based on a handful of Wing Chun books only, which basically have the same sources or even borrow information from each other, and as such not really presenting anything which is not already known in the West. What he does mention about various Wing Chun ancestors, which is new to most readers, is information he got from a book called "Fatsaan Martial Culture", which is mainly about CLF, actually, and also very limited when it comes to information about Wing Chun's history.
Another problem is that people take Mr. Judkin's work THE authoritative source and use it as THE reference, not realizing that it is quite limited by the information the authors had access to writing the book.
>>>I do not like to use the term "Authority" on a topic which so little conclusive information is available. Mr. Judkins does however take an academic approach to his writings states his conclusions and offers sources that the reader can (if so motivated) follow up on and either in doing so, agree, disagree or agree in part. While he does use more western sources had does source non westerns in his book on the creation of wing chun. Now that being said there are many stories/theories in China as well, and many no more accurate then their western counterparts. I am sure your aware of this living in Guandong. Many practitioners and lineages of WCK stayed hidden or fled prior to the cultural revolution or stayed under ground. So even so called Govt sources aren't always accurate, when things eased up athletic committees sought information on them which they often volunteered themselves and were incorporated into the record. So you will sometimes meet different sifu who say "ah we are very old lineage and this and that happened just look at the committee records (which their don't point out were submitted by themselves). This happens all the time so we must always examine and reexamine our sources...Look how many area's fought for government approval to be considered the home of the "Southern shaolin temple" and the tourist dollars it would draw to their region. SO what I am saying is just because it is a Chinese source it should not be accepted as gospel, but rather the same scrutiny.

So, if you really want to dig deeper into the history of Wing Chun and the oldtimers, you better not reject everything you hear out of hand because it doesn't match your conviction or the sources you know.

>>>I have never done so, I look at every possible source (and the "Old timers" don't always agree with each other BTW) I can find in writing or in person and come to my own conclusions and opinions.

Of course I am not saying one should believe everything one hears, and always employ a good measure of critical thinking and fact-checking - the more information one has, the easier it is to critically assess new information and new theories, such as an "Ngor Mei Bak Hok ancestral connection" etc.

>>>Naturally, otherwise I would be a devoted disciple of the one and only original shaolin Black flag ancient wing chun kuen! or what is the latest new ancient style to come out? LOL in this particular instance on the topic, I agree with Mr. Chu :
"WCK has some pieces of Emei Shi Er Zhuang, as evidenced in their Xiao Zi Zhuang set, and some Fujian White Crane, as evidenced in Lee Kong’s Shi Er Jie Li Quan, but it is the fusion we are interested in, not these mother systems, as they are also “Wing Chun like”, but not WCK. These arts have an old history and have undergone revision, over generations. We cannot just “jump to conclusions” based on a paragraph here, a sentence there, as clues, as this is misleading. We cannot be arrogant enough for letting future historians judge, as there are enough contemporary historians which can judge right now, given the evidence."
https://tambulimedia.com/robert-chu-search-wing-chuns-truth/




Since you are more inclined to believe what Jim is saying over what I am sharing with you, I will ask him to post something here.

>>>I am sorry if you feel insulted, that is not my intent but I appreciate your willingness to do so JLQ! I would be interested in whether Leung jan really retired to Gulao and taught until he passed or not?? and if not where did he go etc..... I must be off to work now but thank you for your responses.
Regards

 

[jlq]

Jic Jeung,

I am not insulted at all!



The basic information you ar asking for, I already provided. I will leave it up to Jim to provide further details, if he so desires.

 

[Jim Roselando]

Hello all,

Anyone who has done any research will know one fact, Every Year We Learm More!

Knowing this you can see how and why information that at one time was considered ok is now no longer ok.

Anyone who thinks and believes the exact thoughts or info on our art from a decade ago hasn’t kept up with today’s research. We are truly lucky to have the info we have today and if you read WCI, I am always updating and promoting today’s research.

As for my old website, it’s just that! Old! Ex: In 2007 we did not even know my Sigong had two teachers. So there is no mention of Fung Min, who was his first teacher but still the old site has much rare info one can find on Gulao such as translated articles etc..

The reality is, I do not even have the passwords to change the info but to be honest I probably wouldn’t. I wanted to take the site down but it is a time stamp for that era so we kept it online. Plus, the photos of our Boston family from that time are only found on that site which is another reason we kept it online.

I’m happy to say, actually, I have absolutely no problem saying there are many things I no longer believe or now know to be no longer accurrate.

As for Leung Jan, birth and death discussion. We know that Leung Jan was born and Gulao and retired in Gulao. Most thought he was buried in Gulao but the location was not known. I’m recent years we heard that while Leung Jsn was living in Gulao, he decided to visit his old friends in Futshan and possibly died while visiting. The body was buried but later relocated to another location which was the tradition of the time. Today the location is lost to antiquity.

Hope this helps!

Jim

www.gulaoboxingassociation.com

This information is old...

I already explained it.

Jim is a good friend of mine and he has done a bunch of research since he first wrote that article - ask him about it, and he see what he says...

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Jic Jeung,

I am not insulted at all!



The basic information you ar asking for, I already provided. I will leave it up to Jim to provide further details, if he so desires.

Out of curiosity, what is your preferred way of dealing with obvious trolls?

 

[jlq]

If you are referring to me, whether people are trolling or not, doesn't matter... The important thing is that people who read this have the chance to expand their horizon - it is information offered, people can accept it or not, if they do great, if not... well, my loss it isn't...

 

[hunschuld]

Being very Covid Bored I found myself on this site and a read this thread. I have not posted on any forum in at leats 8 years maybe longer. Since it has been 2 years I won't ad anything unless there is actual interest . As it would be fair to say I am the foremost expert on Lo Kwai's Wing Chun in the west since I was the first westerner to learn the art I would be happy to answer the questions about this version of wing chun that were raised in the thread.

 

[wckf92]

Being very Covid Bored I found myself on this site and a read this thread. I have not posted on any forum in at leats 8 years maybe longer. Since it has been 2 years I won't ad anything unless there is actual interest . As it would be fair to say I am the foremost expert on Lo Kwai's Wing Chun in the west since I was the first westerner to learn the art I would be happy to answer the questions about this version of wing chun that were raised in the thread.

Hi @hunschuld ...welcome to the forum. Would love to learn more / ask questions about Mr. Lo Kwai...but can you tell us more about him? I'm not familiar with his name. Who is he? Who did he learn from? Are you his representative in the west? etc? Thanks for sharing!

 

[hunschuld]

This link is as good as any for brief background.The History of Wing Chun According to Lo Kwai - By Chao Tseng-Ming and Brian Scanlon | eWingChun.
Lo Kwai was a student of Leung Jan and along with Leung Jan developed the Knife form. Leung Jan did not teach knife form in Gulo The form was more of a Lo Kwai Fatsan thing Stories outside the family have him as the person that acted as Leung Jans second in challenges etc. he was the one that Fung Siu Ching's people reached out to to keep things calm when Chan Wah got upset that someone else was in Fatsan claiming to be a wing chun expert and had no ties to Leung Jan.

There is no representative . We do not teach publicly or for money. We have original writings going back to 1870's of what was taught etc. However we make no claims and have no interest in being part of wing chun politics and religious like zealotry often seen. Our wing chun is what we do. Everyone else's is theirs and its what they do.

Lo Kwais wing chun was based and is based on fighting effectiveness only. To get to the point where you can actually be considered qualified you have to have demonstrated your actually ability to use wing chun Kuit in a fight against another trained fighter is a fair contest.

 

[Cynik75]

...Lo Kwais wing chun was based and is based on fighting effectiveness only. To get to the point where you can actually be considered qualified you have to have demonstrated your actually ability to use wing chun Kuit in a fight against another trained fighter is a fair contest.

All WC lineage claim that are based on fighting effectiveness. But available videos of fights between pure WC stylist and a trained fighter/sport combat athlete show that WC practitioners without modern sport upgrade cannot fight even on low amateur MMA/boxing/MT/etc level. Even very often metioned Alan Orr and his students are (at the best) mediocre fighters (and their WC is very much upgraded with MMA training methodology).
Do you have any evidence that "Lo Kwai's Wing Chun is based on fighting effectiveness only"?

 

[wckf92]

This link is as good as any for brief background.The History of Wing Chun According to Lo Kwai - By Chao Tseng-Ming and Brian Scanlon | eWingChun.
Lo Kwai was a student of Leung Jan and along with Leung Jan developed the Knife form. Leung Jan did not teach knife form in Gulo The form was more of a Lo Kwai Fatsan thing Stories outside the family have him as the person that acted as Leung Jans second in challenges etc. he was the one that Fung Siu Ching's people reached out to to keep things calm when Chan Wah got upset that someone else was in Fatsan claiming to be a wing chun expert and had no ties to Leung Jan.

There is no representative . We do not teach publicly or for money. We have original writings going back to 1870's of what was taught etc. However we make no claims and have no interest in being part of wing chun politics and religious like zealotry often seen. Our wing chun is what we do. Everyone else's is theirs and its what they do.

Lo Kwais wing chun was based and is based on fighting effectiveness only. To get to the point where you can actually be considered qualified you have to have demonstrated your actually ability to use wing chun Kuit in a fight against another trained fighter is a fair contest.

@hunschuld I'm going to move this Lo Kwai Q&A into its own thread...