Good Wing Chun vs Best Wingchun [Archive]

red5angel

06-12-2002, 01:23 PM

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!

Roy D. Anthony

06-12-2002, 01:42 PM

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!!!

red5angel

06-12-2002, 01:46 PM

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?

Chum Kil

06-12-2002, 01:53 PM

"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.

Roy D. Anthony

06-12-2002, 01:58 PM

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!!!

06-12-2002, 02:02 PM

red5angel,

Just curious,why did you call his style a watered down version of Wing Chun?

red5angel

06-12-2002, 02:06 PM

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?

red5angel

06-12-2002, 02:09 PM

WT, pm me please on this, I promised Sihing73 I wouldn't mention names anymore but would be happy to talk to you privately.

Chum Kil

06-12-2002, 02:21 PM

"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.

gnugear

06-12-2002, 02:22 PM

I've never read any stories of Leung Sheung fighting anyone.

Did Yip Man ever get into a fight?

Zhuge Liang

06-12-2002, 02:23 PM

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.

1) 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.

2) 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?

3) 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

fa_jing

06-12-2002, 02:35 PM

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

planetwc

06-12-2002, 02:37 PM

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?

gnugear

06-12-2002, 02:37 PM

old jong

06-12-2002, 02:40 PM

Move this thread ...there! (http://www.vingtsun.com.hk/forum/default.asp)

red5angel

06-12-2002, 02:40 PM

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!

aelward

06-12-2002, 02:45 PM

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.

red5angel

06-12-2002, 02:52 PM

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!) ;)

reneritchie

06-12-2002, 03:19 PM

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

gnugear

06-12-2002, 03:20 PM

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.:)

Zhuge Liang

06-12-2002, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by planetwc
Take a look at the video clip on the following page:

http://members.tripodasia.com.hk/kungfumaniac/

The link translates to "Wing Chun's Great Battle against Karate." I don't know about anyone else, but I'm a little embarrassed...

Oh, and excellent points planetwc.

Zhuge Liang

planetwc

06-12-2002, 03:34 PM

Aelward,

I agree with you 100% on the lineage thing. It indicates a source and gives reference points, but says NOTHING about what the student within that lineage HAS in the way of hands.

Lineage also has a nasty way of degrading over time, if the students generationally down the line, don't rediscover the essence and have the skill to demonstrate it.

Just because I am a student of Sifu ___ doesn't give me the skills of Sifu ______ . It may give me the opportunity to obtain such skills if I have the time, patience and talent to devote to hard work study and practice.

If your teacher has great power, or great root, or great power and root and you have neither. First look to yourself to see that you are putting in enough time. The other thing is to check to make sure that what your teacher has in these things is an acquired skill that is transferrable.

If I study baskeball with Michael Jordan, it doesn't make ME MJ.
If I study Boxing with Lewis or Tyson (ugh), it doesn't give me their skill.

Originally posted by aelward
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.

yuanfen

06-12-2002, 05:05 PM

That karate-kungfu video was indeed embarrassing. One of the real problems in unevenness of wing chun traing. The wc young man's structure and chum kiu was terrible and he was just flailing away in his match. Bad wing chun practitioner versus better karate practitioner....

hunt1

06-12-2002, 05:32 PM

Rene I think you are closer to the truth of it than most.Look what happened.after a few years of study many many of Yip Mans students did start teaching.

The fast that he may have taught early students to fight well doesnt mean he didnt keep lots of goodies for himself or those who paid more.

churn-ging

06-12-2002, 05:34 PM

Now I know what I want my wing chun NOT to look like!!!:D

yuanfen

06-12-2002, 05:49 PM

Any idea on
1. where did that karate- kung fu match took place. mainland, HK...etc?

2. Curious- what school or lineage was that kung fu guy from?
Any details will be appreciated.
joy

Zhuge Liang

06-12-2002, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Any idea on
1. where did that karate- kung fu match took place. mainland, HK...etc?

2. Curious- what school or lineage was that kung fu guy from?
Any details will be appreciated.
joy

1) I'd love to find out myself. I couldn't find additional info on that site. If you'll notice, there were Japanese subtitles in the clip, and the background cheerers were Japanese ("Ora!"). That might be a clue, but David may know more.

2) I think we're all curious, but who knows. It reminded me of the style of one of the practioners of the conference vcd. For the well being of the forum, I think we should leave it at that. =)

Zhuge Liang

planetwc

06-12-2002, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Any idea on
1. where did that karate- kung fu match took place. mainland, HK...etc?

2. Curious- what school or lineage was that kung fu guy from?
Any details will be appreciated.
joy

I'm wondering if that was from the infamous "fighting black kings" Oyama tournament, where some newbie type WC guys were used as hors'doevres by the Kyokushinkai. :(

I'm guessing it was that tournament in Japan.

Lineage would only be important, if that young gentleman's teacher did Chum Kiu in the same fashion. :rolleyes:

planetwc

06-12-2002, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by hunt1
Rene I think you are closer to the truth of it than most.Look what happened.after a few years of study many many of Yip Mans students did start teaching.

The fast that he may have taught early students to fight well doesnt mean he didnt keep lots of goodies for himself or those who paid more.

The amount of time spent training in that time I think would make a difference. The very early Yip Man students literally LIVED and trained with him for at least 6 years before striking on their own. Nothing like doing some late night chi sao in front of your teacher in a wrong fashion to get him up out of the cot next to you to correct your Wing Chun. (often reputed to be done by Leung Sheung and Lok Yiu, to get even more training time with YM).

For the folks who trained with Leung Sheung, he was teaching 5 days a week 3 times a day. How many of us here or even in HK now have that kind of opportunity to train that often? My teacher was going to WC class 3 times a day. Walk in as a youngster in the mornings and crawl out dead tired like an old man after the final evening class. I think there was a lot more intense training time offered than we have now.

Go ask your current Wing Chun teacher if you can move in with him for the next 6 years. :D

I imagine his wife might have something to say about that. :rolleyes:

reneritchie

06-12-2002, 08:13 PM

Hi Dave,

One of my "cousins" once asked my sigung what the major difference was between WCK now and WCK back in the day. He replied in a very similar way. When he was learning, he would literally practice as much as possible all day, and give up a lot of sleep to keep practicing. He'd even train while visiting the wash room and while delivering Dim Sum trays (to the extent he lost his job ;). Also, he and his early students would fight all the time against other seasoned martial artists; long bridge, short bridge, shuaijiao, and western imports when they came around.

Now we (at least I) live in a world where we (I) work 9 hours a day behind a desk, and have all sorts of other commitments.

Another point to consider is quality vs. quantity. Instead of arguing over who supposedly got the most, how about those that just worked and worked the basics? I remember one of the interviews we did for Complete Wing Chun, with one of the lesser known students of Yip Man, he immediately said he didn't get everything, but that he was grateful for every bit he got, and worked hard as he could to get it right.

Rgds,

RR

yuanfen

06-12-2002, 09:45 PM

Now we (at least I) live in a world where we (I) work 9 hours a day behind a desk, and have all sorts of other commitments.

((Supposedly the advantages of modern life is the possibility of greater leisure for more people. But many have multiple commitments when push comes to shove- we have multiple desires and kung fu is just one of many things. It depends on what we want to do with our time))

Another point to consider is quality vs. quantity.

((Of course quality is much more important than quantity- but they are not always mutually exclusive virtues))

Miles Teg

06-12-2002, 10:05 PM

On Yip Man

From many accounts I've heard, Yip Man only really bothered with people who tried hard.

That makes sense to me, if you were (are) a teacher wouldn't you concentarate on the keen students. These are also the studens who deserve to be good and eventually get the most out of it.

Roy D. Anthony

06-12-2002, 10:19 PM

Well I do understand that you are stating your opinion. However, it seems that the opinion is on the margin of insinuating that yours is the only one that is right.
Not good to do!!!
Your enthusiasm is great, but it should be directed to Wing Chun not lineage.

red5angel

06-13-2002, 08:01 AM

Roy - have to hit other threads to discuss this, there are several out there at the moment discussing my zeal and opinion :)

Renee - I would agree that time put into it can be a big factor, especially if you are doing the basics correctly! however the time thing is questionable to me. Most people throughout time have had to work for a living, and some longer and harder then us. Its a matter of finding the time, like you said about the guy who practiced it whenever he could. Alot of our other engagements are often by choice and I would say we have a greater freedom to choose how we use our time, and a lot more option as well!
That is also interesting you mention sifu not giving all of the information over, my only issue with that would be that it could be used as a tool of propogada as well. If you were a later student and people were taking the earlier studets more seriously, what better way to draw some attention away from them!

aelward - "IMO, there is no such a thing as "Best Wing Chun." I agree! I think that there are better tools though and there are definitely better concepts in some then in others! Also, I would have to say, and agree that sometimes it is the person and not the art. But doing the art right and having the right tools can take you a long way!

black and blue

06-13-2002, 09:12 AM

Your posts were beginning to p*ss me off, but then I read something you typed on the main forum. I laughed until I p*ssed my pants.

You, good sir, are redeemed!

Red5angel wrote: "Also, something Philbert said made me think of something. Way back in my punk/skatin days, I had this friend who was dating this chick. now this chick was a nut and she got mad at him at this party see. So they go back to his room, drunk and hopped up on something or another, she makes a pit stop, meets him there, gets his pants down and before he knows it is given him a hand job with sandpaper! He was so tough, that he screams, pushes her away, tears the sandpaper out of her hands and has sex with her anyways!!!!!!!

A week later they are going to have sex, and she goes down on him and jabs him in the balls with a pin!!!!!!!!"

fa_jing

06-13-2002, 09:40 AM

I know I'd be really embarassed if someone were to copy any of the more outrageous things I've written in the main forum, and post them for all to see on the Wing Chun Forum!! Perhaps you are paying him back...Anyway, we all want to appear serious and studious here, so that the WC elders among us see fit to divulge their information!!!!

;) :p

red5angel

06-13-2002, 10:52 AM

LOL B&B! I have a couple of friends who hang out there and they asked about a story so I told them! Glad it made you laugh.
Its funny because I think if we were discussing things in a room or at a bar, most of us wouldnt get half as upset as we seem to on this forum........

aelward

06-13-2002, 11:08 AM

I also agreed with your earlier post 100%. Great way of looking at things. I probably wouldn't have written my post if had I seen yours first.

byond

06-13-2002, 12:12 PM

just my 2 cents......leung sheung did have many fights as did lok yiu. chu shong tin had several fights but wasnt one of the main guys. yip bo ching was a fighter as well. wsl came into the school slightly before leung sheung and lok yiu left to start there own schools. he obviously was know for becoming the top fighter. william cheung and his younger brothers bruce lee, hawkins cheung and i think duncan leung were the newer generation of fighters. in the 60's from my understanding ho kam ming was the main fighter. moy yat had several fights . (this info is from students of the grandmasters im talking about, i was not there)
just because you can fight using wing chun tools, does not mean you have good wing chun. ive seen fighters who couldnt chi sao to save there arse but were killers in real fight situations. and the opposite i believe is true..just because you have good chi sao doesnt mean you can fight.....hopefully we all work on doing both....
it is imposible to say anyone yip man student is best. yip man was of a unique personality..it is hard to say why he did what he did.. obviously the periods that yip man was activily teaching probably produced the better students. in the early period he was teaching first hand...in the middle period i have heard he didnt take as much of an active role as teacher due to personal problems....the third period i understand he started being more active again. another thing to consider is everyone had a differant educational background as well as martial art background...this may change how they percieved wing chun. leung sheungs method is more like yuen kay san wc than say moy yat wc. but they had the same teacher...do you guys really think that one was taught differant than the other?? or that leung sheung and moy yat are 2 differant people with differant points of referance...and 2 differant understandings of the same thing.... brian

red5angel

06-13-2002, 12:43 PM

"just because you can fight using wing chun tools, does not mean you have good wing chun"

True but if you fight good, using good wingchun tools, then you have good wingchun.
just about anyone can be taught to be a good fighter, whether it is in a martial art or not. UFC type stough are mostly just tough guy contest with a little grappling. If you go home every night, run a few miles and then hit your self, and have someone hit you a lot, take up a little grappling, you can 'fight good'. But to be able to be a good wingchun guy and a good fighter, that is another story.
There are a lot of people who do taiji, but very few of those people really study it for fighting.