Wing Chun vs Wing Tsun

[bushidomartialarts]

Is there a difference?

I've heard some people really poo-poo one style or the other, but from the outside looking in they seem close to identical.

Could somebody explain?

Thanks

 

[streetwise]

Different organizations choose to romanize the Chinese in differnt ways to distinguish their schools from each other. Not to get into it too deep, but Wing Chun/Ving Tsun, etc, politics have made for great "kung fu soap opera" over the years.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Thanks. I had heard/read once that, really, it's a translation error. I figured I'd confirm before continuing to shoot off my mouth.

 

[streetwise]

I don't know that I would say it was an error, I think it was intentional, and ther eare a number of ways to romanize Chinese.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Fair enough. But they're different romanized spellings of the same original art?

 

[brothershaw]

wing chun/ wing tsun etc is like karate or aikido - infinite variations on the same theme and everybody thinks thier way is correct, while a good chunk of it is garbage. Which it were a little more consisitent like judo

 

[Bobby135]

I have studied both very briefly and I am certainly no expert on the matter. One of the main differences that I came across was in the simple pattern block check strike in trapping hands. I studied pien san (turning style) and then Wing Tsun. In wing tsun the check portion of trapping hands was eliminated. The general concept was that by eliminating a move that it was faster, and depending on who you were trapping hands with that could be true. It was said that it was even more centerline oriented than other styles of wing chun. That is mainly what I could see.

Bobby

 

[streetwise]

"But they're different romanized spellings of the same original art?"

Yep, same root, diferent branches.

 

[bcbernam777]

Should I ???????????

 

[boothdos]

Wing Chun and Wing Tsun is referring to the same art. Province is the difference in pronounciation. Although there are different applications taught in various branches of Wing Chun, the difference in spelling is not the reason or explanation for such.

 

[tenth1]

bcbernam sounds like you know something, please share it as this is an interesting topic that i wonder about but know very little on,

 

[nontas]

I ' ve studied traditional wing chun and wing tsun and i search a lot about the different lineages of wing wing chun..... I think that grandmaster Yip Man while he was teaching,wasn t explaining in his students the applications . They had to learn wing chun only by seeing him , and making again and again the application without a lot of theory.Also Yip Man in the years change the wing chun so as to fix it with his self. At first was more stiff and at the end of his life more soft , using the opponents power....

 

[Zenaphobe]

I was looking at some of my old Kung Fu magazines and there was a WC interview with Li Ting and the writer said that the reason for the spelling difference was because in England the initials WC meant the "water closet" and the spelling was to avoid the association with the toilet room.

Sounds iffy, but that is just the answer they gave.

Zen

 

[monji112000]

Wing Chun = general English transliteration accepted by majority of people.

Traditional Wing Chun = William Cheung

Ving tsun = Moy Yat

Wing Tsun = Leung Ting

Wing Tzun = Emin Boztepe

Whats the difference? Well its allot of politics.
If everyone learned from the same person it should be generally similar... well in some ways it is. Allot of the general ideas you can see in all the of "sub-Styles".

My opinion of the differences:
Traditional Wing Chun = William Cheung:
1). He was a good fighter in his youth, but he relied on his natural abilities more than anything else. This is evident in his "style". He was pretty big for a typical HK youth. He chain punches WAY too much. He has added Chi Kung to his style.

2). Ving tsun = Moy Yat
Too soft, not enough hard. I can't comment on his training .. I don't know anything about it. Allot of people seem to just do things by blind faith, loosing allot of application... and basic ideas. JMO Do some research and find the real reason he spells it this way. Its pretty eye opening.

3).Wing Tsun = Leung Ting & Wing Tzun = Emin Boztepe :
Emin is a very VERY large person, and his style is VERY much influenced by his natural skill. That being said I have seen some clips were his chi sao has many good characteristics.
Leung Ting.. its amazing how he has the largest organization giving his background and training. They both tend to push the "blitz defense" and focus on chain punching and coming in. They tend to OVER train. What I mean by this is they will use too much force in training, at situations that are a waste of time. They have a “anti-Grappling” component to their style. (well emin does) It is mostly taken from his experience in Turkish oil wrestling. I have heard many times that they are training people for UFC and MMA.


So who do I “prefer”... I have come across some JKD people that are more Wing Chun that majority of Wing Chun schools. LOL
Sub-Styles I prefer:


Hawkins cheung, Duncan Leung, Lo Man Kam, Allan Lee.

 

[bcbernam777]

As Monji so eloquently pointed out, Wing Chun, Ving Tsun etc etc, all follow similar principles, ideals and basic energies but the application and interpretation of those principles differ from Lineage to Lineage, simply because, from the founders of those lineages down to the students who learn under them, interpret and apply those principles differently. Wing Chun is very much a human art and therefore will take on the charechteristics of differences between different people.

 

[monji112000]

As Monji so eloquently pointed out..

Different styles view general ideas sometimes differently. Perfect example is center. Everyone in martial arts has a idea of center even boxers. Some Wing Chun schools make it one of the most important ideas, something that is in everything little thing you do. Others don't or have completely different definition of center. Others may use both ideas but in a different way (ect..).

No litmus test or "correct"/"Incorrect" idea. Some schools of thought develop a feeling or general "look". This causes allot of confusion, because often this general look is exclusive.
Thats why you see things like " that doesn't look like Wing chun". or "I need to make it more Wing Chun".
JMO


The real litmus test is your ability, nothing else.

 

[brocklee]

I'm currently enrolled in both WT and WC. I would like to say that wish I wasn't enrolled in WT but I must fulfill my contract before I can leave them. With that said there are many similarities and just as many differences between the two. Stance in WT is, what they like to call, 100/0 foot ratio which isn't accurate itself because your foot does touch the floor making it probably 97/3 or else you would be hopping around on one leg chasing the aggressor. My lineage Ip Man > Ho Kam Ming > Augustine Fong teaches 50/50 footing and the basic principles of a center line and rotating on its center axis. WT has gone above and beyond in design and acts like a "turn-style" and pivits around the axis. WT seems to be more directed towards "when in doubt, chain punch out" and WC is more "maintain structure and explode when given the opportunity." Their both similar when it comes to triangles and line principles. WT stance is a bit more exaggerated and WC more relaxed. WC and WT punches are definitely different. WT starts from the center point but the elbow is further in and the forearm runs along the centerline until fully extended (elbow locked ) while WC follows the protection of your forward triangle theory and the arms follow their natural path, with fists running up the center line. Elbow doesn't lock.

What I like about WC over WT is things make sense. I don't like asking a question and being told "Its because it's how we were taught".

 

[KamonGuy2]

Brocklee - good man. Don't let anyone tell you 'because that is how we are taught'. There are reasons for everything and if your instructor can't clarify why you do what you do then you are right to want to leave.

WT have a contract? So you have to stay with them? Are you an instructor?

You are always welcome at Kamon where you will find a friendly realistic atmosphere.

For everyone else - I was told once on another forum that Leung Ting changed the name to WT as WC sounded like a toilet!!

I know that many federations change the name. It is called Kamon Wing Chun for example in order to say that we are not traditional wing chun and is a respect thing

 

[brocklee]

WT have a contract? So you have to stay with them? Are you an instructor?


For everyone else - I was told once on another forum that Leung Ting changed the name to WT as WC sounded like a toilet!!

Contract? yes

and I do have to stay with them. I'm not an instructor, no.

 

[bcbernam777]

I'm currently enrolled in both WT and WC. I would like to say that wish I wasn't enrolled in WT but I must fulfill my contract before I can leave them. With that said there are many similarities and just as many differences between the two. Stance in WT is, what they like to call, 100/0 foot ratio which isn't accurate itself because your foot does touch the floor making it probably 97/3 or else you would be hopping around on one leg chasing the aggressor. My lineage Ip Man > Ho Kam Ming > Augustine Fong teaches 50/50 footing and the basic principles of a center line and rotating on its center axis. WT has gone above and beyond in design and acts like a "turn-style" and pivits around the axis. WT seems to be more directed towards "when in doubt, chain punch out" and WC is more "maintain structure and explode when given the opportunity." Their both similar when it comes to triangles and line principles. WT stance is a bit more exaggerated and WC more relaxed. WC and WT punches are definitely different. WT starts from the center point but the elbow is further in and the forearm runs along the centerline until fully extended (elbow locked ) while WC follows the protection of your forward triangle theory and the arms follow their natural path, with fists running up the center line. Elbow doesn't lock.

What I like about WC over WT is things make sense. I don't like asking a question and being told "Its because it's how we were taught".

50/50 is fundamental footing 100/0 is an aspect of chum kui, so both aspects do exsist in WC however I find it very hard to understand how any lineage (even if it is WT) can exclusively teach 100/0? Elbow lock is taught in WC (I guess depending which lineage you are under), but it is a training tool in the proper release of power, and as with anything there is a right and wrong way to preform it. When punching you are to focus the fist from the centre (hence the syaing in Wing Chun "the punch is from the heart") however you are correct in that you arm is to follow the natural line, any attempt to try to manipulate the wing (limb) into the centre will lead to an overextension of the arm, and will actually disipate potential force but could possibly lead to a greater penetrating punch POSSIBLY