Why the variations in Siu Lum Tao?

[ConfuciousSays]

Greetings all,

I am doing research on Wing Chun and I'm curious as to why there are variations in Siu Lum Tao? For example this is the "version" that I've seen most often:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8_ni3fblbc

The SLT in the above video is as taught by Master Duncan Leung, one of Yip Man's original students. I am curious if that was the "standard" version that Yip taught to all/most of his student?

Then there is this version of Siu Lum Tao:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2yHyjALoKY

Is this version from a different branch or school of Wing Chun....perhaps Pan Nam or Canton WC? Or could that be the "original" way SLT was taught and Yip Man himself changed it to the more common version seen today?

 

[almost a ghost]

The second video is showing Michael Wong from the UK. I went online to see if I could find his lineage and was unable to, actually one website ( http://www.wcarchive.com ) stated that he prefered not to say. Not trying to get into a lineage debate, but I feel it does apply to the context of the question.

I did notice some movements that were very similair so some southern styles of kung fu. I also noticed that there were certain movements that would be considered negative from the schools I went to, particular the ones where he is coming off the centerline, not terribly, but still. I would really like to see what his applications of the form are.

 

[almost a ghost]

Well, the first video is now available for viewing

It's practically the same form I have learned through the ip ching lineage except for 2 notable exceptions.

After the second pak-sao/palm to the head combo the video goes:
high Tahn-sao, gohn-sao, lifting palm, huen, palm, lifting palm, huen, chamber.

The way I've learned it.
Tahn-sao, gohn-sao, tahn-sao, huen, palm, huen, chamber

After the that set there video goes:
Bohng-sao, tahn-sao, palm, huen, chamber

The way I've learned it.
Bohng-sao, than-sao, lifting palm, huen, chamber.

In the end all the moves are the same, but interesting how the same movements are just in different sections.

 

[TaiChiTJ]

There are many different lineages of what is called "Wing Chun". There are CD's available that show a mainland version. It shows some applications too. The system of forms on the mainland style are significantly different than what came down through Yip Man. The cd's are instructive in that you get to see what the earlier versions are like.

http://www.plumpub.com/sales/vcd/coll_wingchun.htm

 

[profesormental]

Greetings.

Upon inspection of the forms presented, I say that the Duncan Leung Version is very much like the one I was taught and practice.

The other version seems to focus on "Qi Gong" like exercises. Unfortunately, they seem to lack the structure building drills that SLT ingrains if taught and executed correctly.

Many people, by their lack of understanding of what is behind the training, change stuff. If they have other exercises that cover these gaps, then it should be ok.

Many times, that is not the case.

Since I have not seen this person in action I cannot say more. All I say is that the version of SLT shown there does not teach all the stuff that SLT should teach.

daily practice os SLT ingrains what some call an "index" of correct anatomically correct and kinesiologically optimal movements that applied to combat are maximally effective.


When it is totally dark, if you touch a wall, that extra reference point increases balance and stability in the body.

When out of balance, just a finget touching a wall can balance your body (I teach this to begginers to learn basic kicking).

Thus the body appreciates reference points, and the effects are phenomenally noticeable!! Power, strength, stability and structure increase instantly!!

As in anything, performance is judged by your personal standards.

To Some people, the standard is measured by lineage and adherence to the way a founder taught a series of movements.

To others, like me, the standard is measured by how effective, efficient and optimal the results are of the movements taught as applied to Combat situations.

Hope that helps!!!

Enjoy!!

Juan M. Mercado

 

[bcbernam777]

The second video is showing Michael Wong from the UK. I went online to see if I could find his lineage and was unable to, actually one website ( http://www.wcarchive.com ) stated that he prefered not to say. Not trying to get into a lineage debate, but I feel it does apply to the context of the question.

I did notice some movements that were very similair so some southern styles of kung fu. I also noticed that there were certain movements that would be considered negative from the schools I went to, particular the ones where he is coming off the centerline, not terribly, but still. I would really like to see what his applications of the form are.

The fact that he prefers not to say I find remarkably strange, as too the duncan Leungs version (this is the first time I have seen it) the pattern is there, but I hope the two students are not a representation of his best.

Sui Lum Tao should be preformed smoothly and as relaxed as possible, I could almost smell the tenseness from here, also the extended arm movments (e.g. Kuen) are not finished with tense energy, as was demonstrated in both videos, there is no quick advancing snap, not even for a few milimetres there is simply the transition of structure, otherwise we become no better than Karate.

had to edit to make it clear I am not knocking Duncan Leung, or his teaching methods, or his own martial ability and yes I am aware they where demonstrating the form so there was no time to perform it properly

 

[profesormental]

Agreed.

The pattern is there, yet the execution wasn't as optimal as possible.

Many threads have been written about SLT and its execution that should be elightening to those interested.

Juan M. Mercado

 

[monji112000]

You would have to ask Sigung Duncan if he felt that his "version" of the form was the standard. I know of 2 other "version" and the variations are very small. They are present because the people who learned them from Ip Man emphasized aspects the other people didn't. Its not because one is correct and the other wrong. (although that is possible)

The second form, I don't know the sifu so I don't know why he does it the way he does.

The clip is out of context to the DVD as a whole. The DVD was made for people who don't live in traveling distance and for documentation purposes. The moves were supposed to be done clearly and slowly. JUST TO GET THE MOVES. Not to learn the "speed", "timing" or "spirit" .. thats not practical to learn from a DVD.

Its not perfect, I don't know how many takes they did or what they did before taping. Larry (the white person) looks tired and My Sifu seems to look good. I don't think they did many takes (I think only one).. it seems to be a "rough" product. But very informative and useful. (which is all that counts to me).


Some people are very good at the forms, other just get by. Also some people “emphasis” aspects that other just brush over.


Some people focus more on the application and only small parts of the form.


All in all the clip shows the first form in its very basic version, in two angles. I think they could have gone slower and stopped at each move. (maybe done 10 takes and made things more perfect too).

 

[storkandrodent]

Sui Lum Tao should be preformed smoothly and as relaxed as possible, I could almost smell the tenseness from here, also the extended arm movments (e.g. Kuen) are not finished with tense energy, as was demonstrated in both videos, there is no quick advancing snap, not even for a few milimetres there is simply the transition of structure, otherwise we become no better than Karate.

This is correct. Once there is tension, internal energy cannot flow, you lock your body up, and you restrict your speed and power. Furthermore, you will not be able to defend against someone physically stronger than yourself.

 

[Changhfy]

Hey Confucious,

Just to give some of my ideas on Siu Nim Tau (Xiao Lien Tao).

For myself ive studied Ip Man Ving Tsun, Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun and Chi Sim Weng Chun. As well as seeing Pan Nam's form.

It seems that the differences generally arise from the exponent that is demonstrating as opposed to the general system. (not to say that Wing Chun doesnt have reference points and concepts that are used in all expressions)

So to say that one expression is correct or more original as opposed to another is incorrect. For instance some practitioners pay special attention to internal cultivation in the form, where as other pay more attention to the structure and composition of the tool or bridge.

Plus there are many different ways to practise Siu Nim Tau and with the various methods comes various appearances given that Ip Man Ving Tsun in itself has no set of formulas that guide how the form must be performed.

So to say that the Grandmaster performed the form this way then it must be correct is truly a falicy, and in no way is viable to how we as Wing Chun practitioners should practise Wing Chun in a way that suits our body type and physical needs that have to be addressed in daily practise.

Anyways thats just my two cents, I thought the other posts were insightful thanks alot.


take care,
Zach

 

[tenth1]

i am just a beginner in wing chun and have just learned siu lum tao and was not aware of these differences in the form, just reading the posts you guys put up is an education in its self and widens my veiw point on wing chun continually.
thanks for all the great info and video you guys keep putting up, i apreciate it