I was thinking about lineages and thier importance, and the whole argument about which is better and which is the ‘real’ wingchun. Here is my take on the Leung Sheung Line.
Real wing chun will always be a matter of opinion, some would even challenge that Yip Man was not teaching real wing chun. My whole trip is what is GOOD wingchun. So I was thinking about this from a lineage angle. Leung Sheung was one of Yip Mans first students in Hong Kong right? To survive Yip Man needed to teach, and to teach, Yip Man needed to prove his wingchun was good. What better way to do this then to teach you first few students in a quick and efficient manner! Skip the flowery stuff, and go straight to the effective stuff. This way you can send those guys out to fight on the streets and rooftops, kick some butt and show the people of Hong Kong that Yip Mans stuff is superior! You can go back later and teach the excess stuff, the little ‘secret’ techniques and such.
On top of this, Yip Man would need students to help teach classes as well, so another good reason to teach him to be good at wing chun. We know that Yip Man couldnt have been fooling Leung Sheung because he was much larger then Yip Man and so Y. Man had to be good to convince a practical giant of a man, who has had 20 years of martial arts behind him to compare to what he was experiencing with Yip Man.
This has so far led me to believe that whatever is authentic, Leung Sheungs wing chun was real and it was very good, because he had to be and he was there at the perfect time!
The Later the Lineage, the Better the lineage
Try this one on for size 5
The later disciples that learned from Ip Man, the better they were for they received the highest of refinements that Ip Man did to the system.
Enjoy!!!
Thats an interesting argument, but why wouldnt Leung Sheung? Yip Man had been practicing for a long time before his HK days right? How refined does it get before it just becomes different? Sometimes people even go so far as to make what they teach look good so as to attract a customer base. PLUS, Even though Yip Man taught many students, many of them were also taught by students of Yip Man!
Roy, its a logical enough theory but can you provide evidence? I listed off why I have come to the conclusion I have, can you please do the same?
Here we go again
"This way you can send those guys out to fight on the streets and rooftops, kick some butt and show the people of Hong Kong that Yip Mans stuff is superior! "
In all the accounts that I have read, Wong Shun Leung, William Cheung, and maybe Bruce Lee, Ho Kam Ming, and Wang Kiu were the only ones using Wing Chun to fight against other MA’s in Hong Kong (rooftops). Wong Shun Leung was always testing his Wing Chun and reporting back to Yip Man what worked and what didn’t, based on Wong’s experience Yip Man made changes to Wing Chun. I’ve never read any stories of Leung Sheung fighting anyone. If you have any, point me in the right direction, I’m more than willing to read them.
Why do you need to justify your Wing Chun? Can’t you get it by now that it’s not the style/system/lineage, but the person doing it. I can see it now I’M FROM THE LEUNG SHEUNG LINEAGE OF WING CHUN I’LL KICK YOUR ARSE. C’mon give us all a break with this lineage stuff/real wing chun. Just train hard and be the best you can.
Well you are suspect of spamming!!! However I will answer this with logical thought. The later versions or ineages of Wing Chun, are very unattractive. this can be attributed to higher refinement of the forms. The simpler the forms the better the Wing Chun.
It is a counter argument to yours.
Your theories of earlier lineages being helpful in teaching is valid, however have you ever considered the human factor?
Human factor will say that the Seniors would probably be extremely sarcastic and critical of their juniors especially when they become sifu level. SO to keep your business running, many criticisms, towards other Ip Man lineages.
And then I say, welcome to the forum, where so many of this is already carried on.
We have inherited not just Wing Chun, however we have also inherited it’s curse. That is we carry on our ancestors grudges. Proof is right here on the forum.
Stop Spamming!!!
Hope this helps!!!
Emin Boztepe
red5angel,
Just curious,why did you call his style a watered down version of Wing Chun?
Roy, I understand I am suspect, but really what it comes down to again is opinion. its some peoples opinions that I am spamming. In my opinion I am just discussing wing chun. Alot of guys on this forum like to talk about lineage so I thought I would get something going!
As for the human factor, read below!
Chum Kil - thats interesting, its probably a good idea to report back and talk about your experience on the street, talk about what is working and what isnt. I will see what I can dig up on him fighting, BUT, does fighting also imply good skill? It could, and I would bet LS fought, but if he didnt would that invalidate what he learned?
Its not about justifying anything, just talking about it, running some ideas an opinions past you guys thats all. To build a good wingchun man, what do you need? Good skill? Natural ability? Hard training? good training? there is a long list of stuff that can be thrown together in any combination to make a good fighter, but what about a good wingchun fighter?
WT, pm me please on this, I promised Sihing73 I wouldn’t mention names anymore but would be happy to talk to you privately.
"I will see what I can dig up on him fighting,
I never read anything about him fighting.
BUT, does fighting also imply good skill?"
Yes and No depends where your fighting.
"It could, and I would bet LS fought, but if he didnt would that invalidate what he learned? "
No. Leung Sheung’s is a very good lineage.
What you need to do is not mention any names/lineage. otherwise all kinds of **** will be coming your way.
I’ve never read any stories of Leung Sheung fighting anyone.
Did Yip Man ever get into a fight?
Hi Red, let me play devil’s advocate. I don’t think your points are strong enough to prove that Leung Sheung was good. Of course, I’m not saying that he wasn’t good, I’m just saying, that from an outsider’s perspective, based on your arguments alone, I wouldn’t neccessarily be convinced that Leung Sheung was good.
- Leung Sheung had to be good because Yip Man wanted to make a name for himself.
There are many ways of making a name for yourself without having to spend the time and energy to make sure your student is good. We all know that a good fighter doesn’t neccessarily equate a good Wing Chun practitioner. For all we know, Yip Man could have taught his students enough Wing Chun to do well in those challenge matches and leave the finer details out. Besides, it wasn’t Leung Sheung that was famous for challenge matches. It was later students, like Wong Shun Leung (still early, but later than Leung Sheung, Lok Yiu, and Tsui Sheung Tin), William Cheung, and Bruce Lee.
I would think that if Yip Man really wanted to make a name for himself, he’d want all of his students to be good.
- Yip Man needed good students to help him teach.
Take your average martial arts school. Take a look at the “assistant instructors”. Would you bet money that these assistant instructors are good? Better than the beginners, sure, but so what? Also, Yip Man used assistant instructors throughout his teaching career. Why would Leung Sheung be better than any other assistant instructor?
- Yip Man had to be good in the face of Leung Sheung because Leung Sheung, being bigger and having experience, would not have been fooled with the fake stuff.
Why not? As long as Yip Man was better than his students, I see no reason why he couldn’t fool them. I mean, he’s the Wing Chun expert and he students weren’t. What basis do they have to say that he is wrong?
Finally, let’s look at this from another point of view. Let’s say that you’re correct and that Yip Man, for one reason or another, really did want to make his first students his best. My question is, does that guarantee that his first students will be best?
Zhuge Liang
I don’t think any of us can really see inside the mind of Yip Man, and base any sort of conclusions on that. I mean, the people who had direct contact with him, were yet mystified by some of his decisions.
-FJ
Good Wing Chun vs student Not ready
Take a look at the video clip on the following page:
http://members.tripodasia.com.hk/kungfumaniac/
click the link in chinese (ignore the offer to install chinese language packs if offered).
Is there anything wrong in the exectuion of this fellow’s Chum Kiu (prior to him gettting creamed by the Karate guy)?
I think the answer is yes.
Now the question becomes, when his teacher performs the same form, does he look just as bad? If the answer is no, then the fault here lies with the student not training ENOUGH.
If the student’s instructor looks no better, THEN we have to move higher up the food chain of that lineage to see where the problem is.
If you were to have the generic discussion about Wing Chun principles, execution of techniques and body mechanics, I’d just bet this student at that point in time (when the video was made) would feel they were doing things just fine and had “good wing chun”. we could talk until we were blue in the face about posture , structure, strong root and ground path and whole body energy.
Yet when I look at this fellow, I think he lacks root and ground path. I think his movements lack the right whole body mechanics and that he is missing “intent”.
Without even seeing the “action” following the form, my prediction would be that he would get his behind handed to him in a fight – given the level of skill demonstrated.
Now, it may be that this was someone junior and with little time in the art or with little time to develop skill. On the other hand what if he hasn’t progressed beyond this and is now TEACHING that to others?
He can probably speak volumes on the theory, recite the kuen kuit, and describe the approach in terms of Wing Chun principles. Yet in the execution of the forms and in fighting there are HUGE gaping holes that makes this no more than a pale shadow of what Wing Chun truly is; or at least what it CAN BE.
I say this without knowing who this guys’s teacher is, what his lineage is, or years of training.
So getting at the heart of this question really doesn’t happen until someone is really at the level to demonstrate proficiency.
Heck, we don’t even have an objective measure of what WC proficiency IS.
So, at the time of the video did he have good WC? No.
Does his instructor have good WC? No way to tell.
Does his lineage have good WC? No way to tell.
Is this guy going to be in trouble in a fight? Ummm Yep.
Should that guy have been teaching at the time? No way Jose.
All I can do is make an observation based on his invididual performance at that time. If he hasn’t evolved to something better, then who is to know if it is within him, or his instructor or a combination of the 2?
Heck if I know. For all we know he could be someone’s private student, who just had not yet packed in enough time.
What do the rest of you think?
Hi Red, let me play devil’s advocate. I don’t think your points are strong enough to prove that Leung Sheung was good. Of course, I’m not saying that he wasn’t good, I’m just saying, that from an outsider’s perspective, based on your arguments alone, I wouldn’t neccessarily be convinced that Leung Sheung was good.
- Leung Sheung had to be good because Yip Man wanted to make a name for himself.
There are many ways of making a name for yourself without having to spend the time and energy to make sure your student is good. We all know that a good fighter doesn’t neccessarily equate a good Wing Chun practitioner. For all we know, Yip Man could have taught his students enough Wing Chun to do well in those challenge matches and leave the finer details out. Besides, it wasn’t Leung Sheung that was famous for challenge matches. It was later students, like Wong Shun Leung (still early, but later than Leung Sheung, Lok Yiu, and Tsui Sheung Tin), William Cheung, and Bruce Lee.
And conversly, one could argue that his Wing Chun was at a very high skill level since he advocated the soft approach to WC. When a martial art becomes more internalized I believe that indicates a higher level of skill than just being a “fighter”.
JMHO
Please!
Move this thread …there!
Zhuge Liang - good post! I dont mind devils advocate at all! SO I will address it…
“I would think that if Yip Man really wanted to make a name for himself, he’d want all of his students to be good”
True, it would seem anyway. I dont think that is reality though. A good teacher wants all of his students to be better, but most students choose a few and concentrate on them Most of the Sifu who teach Yip Man stuff or have, are just a small representation of how many people he taught.
As for famous fighters? Who made them famous? I wasn’t aware Bruce Lee was famous for fighting in HK.
"Would you bet money that these assistant instructors are good? Better than the beginners, sure, but so what? "
Yes, would you as an instructor allow a bad student to teach the class?
As for Yip Man fooling LS, maybe I wasnt clear enough. Leung Shueng had 20 some years of martial arts under his belt, and was no slouch when it came to it, but when he met Yip Man and saw and experienced what he had, he tossed it all out to learn from him. This means that a man who is familiar with the arts was impressed by the skill and ability of this little man and his art.
Of course third doesnt guarentee his first students will be the best, but I think he would have taught them precisely and efficiently for the above stated reasons!
lineage matters only as much as the person following it
R5A: Your entire assessment on Leung Sheung is based on presumptions about the motivations of a man who has been dead for 30 years. Did you ever have a chance to ask Yip Man first hand? It is no better than someone who might argue in favor of the “later = more refined” outlook; or the arguement that YM would certainly teach his own children all the secrets. Outside of conjecture, can you offer hard evidence? Or are you just trying to sell your lineage off as not only good Wing Chun, but “best” Wing Chun? How does your lineage compare to that of Leung Ting’s WT, which you dismissed in an earlier post? Afterall, Leung Ting first learned with Leung Sheung as well.
IMO, there is no such a thing as “Best Wing Chun.” As for good Wing Chun: it is the approach that optimizes your physical and mental attributes through the personalization of fundamental WC theories.
Lineage is important only to the extent that if somewhere up on your family tree, an ancestor “just didn’t get it,” the principles upon which your lineage is based might be incomplete or off target.
Your skill will derive from half of what you are taught, half of what you do with that teaching. You could have the best teacher in the world, but if you never listen to him, what good is your lineage? On the other hand, your instructor might not be the best in the world, but he was sure to teach you the basic principles and theories, and made sure your forms were good; if you were smart enough, you could probably become a good practitioner and teacher yourself.
Dangit! some good replies but I will have to get back tomorrow as it is time for me to go home! (I can hear the sigh of relief form the wing chun forum from here!) 
There’s another school of thought (not saying its the case here, but it is heard of), that a teacher does not teach everything to his first few students, since if he does, they can just go down the street, open up schools of their own, and take away his business. So, to “protect his rice bowl”, he teaches them just enough.
In general, though, first, middle, or last student doesn’t seem to have mattered. Teachers taught general material to everyone, picked out a few for more specific training, and a couple for in depth training. Or sometimes not.
(Don’t believe any hype is my advice)
Rgds,
RR
Take a look at the video clip on the following page:
http://members.tripodasia.com.hk/kungfumaniac/
LOL!
I’m sorry to laugh, but that guy looked absolutely terrible!
I agree … no root.