Same here, WCKF92. I'd like to share and learn with people, but don't really want to get into a whole new lineage from the ground up.
I began WC briefly back in '79 with an instructor in the Ho Kam Ming - Augustine Fong branch of the Yip Man lineage, and then switched to LT's WT branch. I had to unlearn all the "wrong" stuff I had previously learned in the Fong system and rebuild muscle memory aligned with the WT version. It took years. Now I train with an old kung fu brother under LT who later learned with Keith Kernspecht in Germany. Now, teaching in his association, I had to re-learn his American variation of the German variation of LT's Hong Kong variation of Yip Man's lineage of WCK. That's more than enough for me!
On the other hand, I also work with the DTE guys who don't exactly teach Wing Chun, ...in fact they don't exactly teach techniques at all. They mostly just teach me how to apply what I already know more effectively through concepts and principles that align very nicely with WC. At my age, this is a much better use of my time than having to empy my cup and start over again learning "the true WC" of another lineage or branch.
The problem with just working out with and learning the different approaches of other lineages is the whole cult-like attitude that so many groups have. They don't believe in openly sharing, rather they jealously guard their branches "secrets". If they do work out with you, it's often only to prove that they are "right" and either convert or, at least, to humble you -- their opposition.
If WC is to succeed as a vital and effective fighting system we've got to get over ourselves and not be afraid to share, to learn from each other, address our weaknesses, and build on our strengths.
This is perhaps the single biggest thing that bothers me about Wing Chun. To be honest, I'm more interested in discovering
my Wing Chun - and practicing in a way that aligns with my understanding, rather than fitting some very particular mold of another practitioner who has, himself, adopted and adapted the system.
Now, that's not to say that one should think himself knowledgeable enough to "know what's best" and pick and choose what to listen to his teacher on, as that's recipe for disaster, or at very least, you'll miss a lot which any teacher has to offer with that attitude. But, I am also the kind of person who cannot subscribe to something without understanding it, and cannot refrain from questioning an examining everything from all sides. I believe that there are objective conclusions which we can arrive at in our training, and that everyone has holes and flaws in their practice.
For example, I trained with a group from the Leung Sheung lineage while on vacation. And, the teacher was quite good, and it goes without saying, far more experienced than myself. But I couldn't agree with how they practiced fook-sau in their forms -- the teacher actually corrected my fook, moving my wrist off of the centerline, putting the fingers there instead. Yet, the elbow was still tight in, angling the arm off-center. I cannot reconcile this approach with my understanding of the centerline. And, sure enough, as I rolled with his students in practice, I found them consistently open on the high inside line. Rolling with the teacher, however, I did not discover him to be open there, and so I figure that he managed to train around this apparent defect in his form. In essence, his practice does not align with his form. Now, if I trained with him, it may be possible for him to honestly convince me to change this about my practice, but I think the chances of this are very slim. Even if I remain open-minded and change my practice, if I still then find it deficient and inconsistent with my understanding of the centerline, what am I to do? Go on to teach others this "wrong" method one day? Or change my practice? And, if I opt to change my practice, am I still able to train in that lineage?
There are things that I would change in the lineages that I've practiced as well. For example, I previously practiced Ip Ching's lineage, and my teacher taught me to shift all of my weight to the "rear" foot in Chum Kiu -- even when only shifting 45, as opposed to 90 degrees. I practiced Chum Kiu this way for a long time -- particularly the Bong / Lan-sau section. And, in chisau, I found that I was consistently getting thrown off balance when shifting with bong-sau against energy coming in -- I was shifting too much weight in relation to how much I was angling off. So, I changed my practice such that I shift smoothly, and with a proportional amount of weight to my rear leg in relation to the amount off center that I turn - if I am square, in YJKYM, my weight is 50/50. If I am faced 45 degrees to the right, my weight is more 66/33, and if I am turned 90 degrees, it's most, or all weight on the rear leg. That way I don't over commit my balance when shifting by a small amount. And, after practicing that way, I no longer threw myself off-balance. Of course, the next time I would see my Sifu, he would correct me, and I would practice it his way in front of him. Was I being humble, or dishonest in doing so? Or, would it be dishonest to not change my practice to suit my understanding? As much as I tried the shifting 100/0 thing with bong-sau, I found that habit to be deficient and directly impact my performance in chisau. Perhaps I'm not able to separate in habit what I do in my forms versus what I do in application (though I don't think this is desirable), or perhaps this kind of deficiency is more evident for me personally as I'm very light weight and usually training with people who are half again or twice my weight. But in any case, while I tried to remain open-minded, I found that ultimately, I couldn't practice this way in accordance with my own experience and understanding.
The thing is, I'm not interested in learning to copy someone else's Wing Chun. I'm interested in expanding and refining my own understanding of Wing Chun. While I don't believe in adopting an incoherent mish-mash by picking and choosing what you like and dislike, I do believe that broad experience and exposure to different methods allows one to take a more examined look at their practice and understanding. And, ultimately, if I'm just going through the motions and doing things simply because I was told to do them, then I don't understand them to begin with -- it's only by discovering for myself their significance that they are worthwhile and productive. The worst thing that I can do is to start rationalizing why I do something, and making up reasons in the absence of understanding.
Anyway, sorry -- that's a bit of a long rant, and one that I'm sure is worthy of criticism
As for the OP's original question, though; if I had to choose one other lineage that I'd like to study, I'd have to pick the WSL lineage under David Peterson, or someone similar. I'm very impressed with the Wong Shun Leung lineage in general, and there's not much that I can find to criticize in their forms!
