WSL VT Differences

[bully]

Since attending the Gary Lam seminar last October, I have been reading a bit about WSL.

So my question is, what are the main differences in the WSL method to say what is being taught by Ip Chun etc?

I am not interested in what lineage you think is better, as that is subjective.

Am hoping David will come in to this one and post his views.

Anyway, as usual I am interested in anything posted, but leave politics out of it please.

Try and make it simple too, the old brain isn't as sharp as it used to be.

Cheers

Bully

 

[Vajramusti]

A Comment on Bully's post. David would be the right person to comment on
WSL's wing chun. I have a broad interest in other good styles of wing chun
including WSL's which I respect. But I pursue in some depth the wing chun
coming from Ho Kam Ming and further developed by my sifu in Tucson, Arizona-Augustine Fong. I live and teach as Steve knows in Tempe, Arizona...about 110 miles up the road.
I have rolled twice with WSL- during his US visit- once in San Francisco and once in Houston. I have corresponded with a couple of WSL people from Oz- Rolf and Andrew and I have visited with a Pakistani friend Siddiqui who was student of Louison in UK who also learned some WSL wing chun.
If there is any "politics" in a narrow sense in my comments it is not intentional.
Ho Kam Ming is not as well known as WSL but HKM studied with Ip Man as long as anyone with hours and hours and years and years of private training and staying in touch with his teacher even on the day of his death.
I have rolled with TST, Victor Kan and Hawkins Cheung among others as well.
A singular characteristic of the lineage that I learned in can be summed up in two words- structure and timing.Of course there are lots of other details.

joy chaudhuri
www.tempewingchun.com

 

[chisauking]

As I've said many times, the highest level of wing chun is the expression of oneself. No 2 wing chun practitioners wing chun will be indenticle, even coming from the same source.

Each wing chun practitioner may be inclined to focus more on a specific, and I personally feel sifu Wong focus more on combat than most.

I haven't experienced every lineage of wing chun, but from my own experience so far, I can honestly say the WSL method brings results very fast. Not only is the training effective, but I also feel many of the WSL lineage practitioners are very generous & open with their knowledge.

In my experience, the best way to discern differences between lineages & methods is to actually feel it for oneself. Listening to people on the net is a waste of time because in the main, most people are generally bias towards their own lineage & way of training.

 

[geezer]

In my experience, the best way to discern differences between lineages & methods is to actually feel it for oneself. Listening to people on the net is a waste of time ...

\

Probably true, yet here we are! One thing, if you make friends on the web, maybe it can lead to more open-minded attitudes and maybe even a chance to risk some cross-lineage Chi-Sau without it getting all competitive. Heck, when I do chi-sau and someone totally dominates me... (whether within my own lineage or outside it) I see that as a real chance to learn. BTW, I got smacked around pretty good just yesterday. It was great! LOL

 

[bully]

As I've said many times, the highest level of wing chun is the expression of oneself. No 2 wing chun practitioners wing chun will be indenticle, even coming from the same source.

Each wing chun practitioner may be inclined to focus more on a specific, and I personally feel sifu Wong focus more on combat than most.

I haven't experienced every lineage of wing chun, but from my own experience so far, I can honestly say the WSL method brings results very fast. Not only is the training effective, but I also feel many of the WSL lineage practitioners are very generous & open with their knowledge.

In my experience, the best way to discern differences between lineages & methods is to actually feel it for oneself. Listening to people on the net is a waste of time because in the main, most people are generally bias towards their own lineage & way of training.

I understand this, what I was wondering was, is there a broad way of explaining the differences? Some people might be biased to their way of training and that is fine. Surely it is up to me to separate the wheat from the chaff so to speak. If the explanation comes from an unknown source then I will make my own decision about it. I respect quite a few guys on here and whilst it is "The Internet", most of what is on here in particular is pretty straight. I do agree that it is better of course to train with and find out for yourself......not everyone has that luxury due to geographical locations ;-)

Lets say we are trying to explain the difference between Drum and Base and House music?? They are both forms of dance music, but you can differentiate between them. They also have their fans who are biased towards each kind. However, you can still say, House music came from ......., it has ...... beats per minute generally and the sound is different because .........

A generalisation? Yes.

A waste of time? Not in my opinion as it is knowledge.

 

[chisauking]

The problem with the written medium is, how do we know the writer is knowledgable & is telling us the 'truth'?

The answer is, you can't.

Some people can really write well & convey all their points across 'convincingly'.....However, from my own experiences, I've read many articulate articles with seemingly good points, but in reality it's little more than BS. Some people that's not very experienced with wing chun will buy their BS line, hook and sinker! Conversely, some can't write to save their lifes, but have excellent wing chun skills. Others may be in between the 2 -- a little bit of skill, a little bit of knowledge....but they have their own propaganda \ agenda to push.

So, the best way to gauge anyone's skill is to actually 'feel' them in person.

As for me, I only come on this forum for a little bit of fun, and I sincerely hope no one believes a word I say.

 

[chisauking]

I would just like to add that since the advent of cheap computers & internet access, there's certainly lot more readily available information out there, but more information doesn't neccessarily mean more knowledge as far as wing chun is concerned.

 

[Vajramusti]

I would just like to add that since the advent of cheap computers & internet access, there's certainly lot more readily available information out there, but more information doesn't neccessarily mean more knowledge as far as wing chun is concerned.

-------------------------------------------------------
Completely agree- in fact the net is full of much misinformation.

 

[bully]

The problem with the written medium is, how do we know the writer is knowledgable & is telling us the 'truth'?

The answer is, you can't.

Some people can really write well & convey all their points across 'convincingly'.....However, from my own experiences, I've read many articulate articles with seemingly good points, but in reality it's little more than BS. Some people that's not very experienced with wing chun will buy their BS line, hook and sinker! Conversely, some can't write to save their lifes, but have excellent wing chun skills. Others may be in between the 2 -- a little bit of skill, a little bit of knowledge....but they have their own propaganda \ agenda to push.

So, the best way to gauge anyone's skill is to actually 'feel' them in person.

As for me, I only come on this forum for a little bit of fun, and I sincerely hope no one believes a word I say.

I think you are missing my points in my last post, I pretty mush answered your points, which you have just repeated.

Fun is why I am here too, a bit of knowledge too when possible.

It seems that no one wants to or can answer my question then?

 

[KamonGuy2]

The trouble is, that within wing chun you cant really describe the differences because every practitioner is different. Even the instructors teaching from WSL lineage are completely different from each other

If you think of Kamon - how many instructors look and feel different from each other. I will testify now that not one Kamon instructor will play chi sao the way I do and vice versa
Certainly set structures/drills are the same (ie In Kamon we all work from the same syllabus) but we will perform them differently

And that is just within Kamon! Your question is similar to asking how a Brit compares to an American! It is impossible to answer because there is no clear 'model'.

It is good that you are asking these questions, but try to refine your questions, otherwise we will end up answering '42'...

 

[chisauking]

Bully:

I'd tried to answer your question, but maybe I hadn't made my points clear.

If you are really interested in WSL's way, then David's book 'look beyond the pointing finger' will paint a vivid picture. Personally, I will say that only WSL could apply the WSL way, since I've already stated that wing chun & fighting is really a personal thing.

If you only wanted a comparision between WSL & Yip Chun, than I'd already stated the main -- and most important -- differerence: combat. One is combat driven and the other isn't. Beyond that answer, and it would be impossible to reply without perceived politics.

Good look to your research.

 

[geezer]

It is good that you are asking these questions, but try to refine your questions, otherwise we will end up answering '42'...

Excellent post, and thanks for all the fish.

I also like your point about practitioners varying a lot even within the same lineage. That's true in the group I belong to as well. Physique, ability, even personality, all influence how we adapt and apply our techniques. Still you can make some generalizations about how different groups approach things. For example, in the system I train in, yielding, "springy energy" is cultivated, but then so is an aggressive, offensive approach to sparring...as I've said before. Other lineages may emphasize a harder, more forceful use of techniques like bong-sau... or maybe not. Still, it's hard to say much more than these kinds of generalized comments. The rest, as Chisauking pointed out, must be felt.

 

[Vajramusti]

I understand this, what I was wondering was, is there a broad way of explaining the differences?
-----------------------------------------------------
Bully- I am not sure exactly what you are asking--but if if I understand your question at all-differences are in part related to- who learned what from whom
and for how long and when and where did they learn?

 

[bully]

Ok we are getting there now!!

CSK, cheers, that is one general difference that I thought, combat side of things. I have the book you mentioned, it is excellent.

Kamon Guy, I thought my question was going to fairly easy to answer, but now I am having second thoughts!!

Vajramusti, that is another question!! But probably one better left to me too research on my own.

Ok the guy who managed to answer how I wanted answering was Geezer!!

I sort of thought that the question would be answered like this:

WSLVT uses a ........... bong sau, which is different because he thought......

and perhaps some more general differences. Obviously that statement above is an example and something I have just made up.

If it can't be written/explained then why not? And yes, I DO REALISE THE BEST WAY TO FIND OUT IS TOO FEEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Due to my location I cannot just walk into a WSL school and ask to Chi Sau with someone. If I could I would.

At least I am getting us talking in here ;-)

Cheers

Bully

ps I also dont believe everything written on the internet CSK ;-) PM'd you btw.

 

[KamonGuy2]

If it can't be written/explained then why not? And yes, I DO REALISE THE BEST WAY TO FIND OUT IS TOO FEEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Due to my location I cannot just walk into a WSL school and ask to Chi Sau with someone. If I could I would
.

It is the same as trying to describe why KFC is different to boiled chicken
You know its different, but until you actually taste it, you cant really understand

Ive seen numerous clips of Ip Chun on the net, but until I actually rolled with him it was hard to understand why he was so good and different to other practitioners

 

[Nicholas82555]

I thing I've learned in life, is that questions are never a waste of time. It's what you do with the answer. Questions give you possible solutions and directions, once again what you do with it is your call.

Have u ever heard, "that's a stupid question?" ...Well, too whom??? And if we were to be honest with ourselves, those "stupid question" causes us to think and search for an answer because it was a question "outside of the box". Common sense is now not so common after all. Common sense is based on a certain amount of knowledge obtained to make an educated response.

Parents who have children hear these kind of questions all the time and alot of times they scuffle for an answer

 

[KamonGuy2]

I thing I've learned in life, is that questions are never a waste of time. It's what you do with the answer. Questions give you possible solutions and directions, once again what you do with it is your call.

Have u ever heard, "that's a stupid question?" ...Well, too whom??? And if we were to be honest with ourselves, those "stupid question" causes us to think and search for an answer because it was a question "outside of the box". Common sense is now not so common after all. Common sense is based on a certain amount of knowledge obtained to make an educated response.

Parents who have children hear these kind of questions all the time and alot of times they scuffle for an answer

It is true, that a lot of questions are not always stupid (ie it was asked for a reason). However, sometimes things are very obvious (ie if a guy asks where his keys are and they are in his hand - thats a stupid question!)

Questions are generally good. It annoys me that on some martial websites, newbies are punished for asking questions that have already been covered previously. It is importnat that questions are 'updated'

Obviously, students shouldnt plague their instructors with trivia (who would win in a fight between Bruce Lee and The Hulk etc), but they should feel comfortable asking a question here and there which is relevant to their training

 

[Coda]

To answer the original question…

I can only answer with regards to my own personal VT training in the WSL method…there are variation amongst WSL students depending upon how long they trained with Wong Shun Leung, when they trained with him (at what stage in his life), how clever the students themselves were, whether they had previous VT training and could truly empty their cup or not, whether they were fighters or not, whether Ah Wong liked them and who know what else…maybe even ethnicity.

The forms in WSL way have no applications (no bear hug defences etc.) – they just teach and train behaviours that follow principles …such as elbow always on centreline for punch etc. When you start to truly understand the principles of WSL VT, you start to realize that looking for applications in the forms is like focusing on the finger that points to the moon and missing the celestial beauty of the heavens altogether J You can only appreciate the truth in this comment when you truly understand the principles and why you use them. This goes deeper than people think…

There are you-tubes out there showing Wong Shun Leung teaching applications – he may have just been showing what people wanted to see or even maybe deliberately misleading people? Or maybe he showed applications to those who were yet lacking sufficient understanding to see the true intent of the moves within the form – which is to help understand principles of Wing Chun and not to learn a number of self defence moves for specific situation. It is true to say however, that in some films of Wong he is deliberately doing the wrong technique so as to identify those who learn from film.

In WSL way we want to punch and not block / deflect. The winner of the fight will be normally the person who punches successfully first. At same time, we don’t believe in endless chain punches, pseudo Ju Jitsu twisty arm techniques, throws, stamping on somebody’s head etc. All of this could be valid fighting, but it is not what you learn from practising VT. You should be able to knock somebody out with one VT punch – I have witnessed this happening. Some people who train in WSL style still have problem with this, especially later generation and ‘seminar’ students.

In my WSL training, sticky hands is a bi-product and not the true intention of Chi Sau training. To some it is a relatively useless bi-product. I think of Chi Sau as ‘energy arms’ training – maybe should be called ‘energy body structure training’. We do lots of Chi Sau. When I ‘converted’ to WSL way I Chi Sau’d with somebody and was thrown around like a rag doll – too busy trying to balance to be able to stick – to busy being hit to be able to ‘deflect’!!!

Some examples of specific differences in method include:-

Dahn Chi – instead of using Jut or Wu, we use Jum (elbow in). This part of the exercise is just to teach you to get elbow in ready to hit and not to teach sticky hand. Also to teach elbow stay low during punch. Very very important to punch with bent arm and elbow low! Eventually you punch with whole body and not just arm….but that comes later.
Poon Sau – is tiring at first. It is an exchange of forward force. Not sitting and relaxing…but hands, shoulders etc must be relaxed…hips and elbow push forward. Balance very important – power with no leaning, just structure.
Lots of Chi Sau and chi sau exercises but all for teaching principles involved in fighting with VT and not for training to be sticky.

SNT, CK, the Pole and first part of dummy should be taught fairly quickly / early. To be told that you can only learn pole after ten years of training is like telling a boxer that he can only hit the heavy bag after ten years of training! They all teach / practise different elements of the same principles.

Knives also very important but in early days would only be taught to people who would be prepared to chop somebody for real with them (i.e. real fighters with guts).
Knives and Pole are big assistance to learning unarmed fighting in WSL method. In fact you can not truly know the unarmed fighting until you have also learnt Pole and Knife.

Really – to learn WSL VT is to learn a different martial art from say Ip Chun style…very different. Also note I’ve made no comment about being better – just different. I see many WSL schools (some high profile sifus) who teach bull WSL VT.

The most important thing about WSL VT is that it is a style of fighting, like boxing or kickboxing, and not a bunch of self defence moves with sticky hands thrown in. Every part of the system works together to train an element or exercise in achieving the principles needed to make the system work. We have no self defence moves, just a way of fighting. Consequently we do not need to mix in boxing and kickboxing to make it feel more comfortable. At same time we not worried about range. We have two ranges … in range and out of range. Taught to deal with both via a method of moving and fighting - we don’t need to get in range before letting VT ‘kick-in. The whole thing is dealt with via VT methods taught.

Some good examples on you-tube include Wan Kam Leung (some good examples of power generation), Cliff Au Yeung (good examples of power and elbow training), Tommy Yuen (RIP – this was one of Wong’s best fighter), Philipp Bayer (best examples of sparring with Wing Chun). Chiu Hok Yin and Ng Chun Hong would also be good to learn from in Hong Kong. Barry Lee and Philipp Bayer well regarded if in Europe.

 

[bully]

That reply is much appreciated.

I will take your comments on board and I hope to be traveling later this year so may try and spend some time with the Sifus mentioned.

Glad you took the time to try and answer me.

May ruffle a few feathers mind you!!

 

[KamonGuy2]

I will take your comments on board and I hope to be traveling later this year so may try and spend some time with the Sifus mentioned.

The only Sifus I would spend time with in Hong Kong are Wan Kam Leung and Sam Lau

The others either had no time for us, had very odd ideas about the nature of fighting, or just werent very good