Ip Man Wing Chun?

[LFJ]

stop spamming

How is it spamming to give a global directory to someone looking for a school near them?

[Graham H]

Or are you saying that Ip man WC only exists in the past?

Yes YMWC only exists in the past. Nobody these days is teaching it or practicing it they way it was up until 1972 although many claim to be.

Wing Chun has evolved sometimes for better sometimes for worse. IMO mostly for worse.

Let's pick two Yip Man students both at opposite ends of the spectrum in the context of fighting ability and thinking. Yip Chun and Wong Shun Leung. Both system are completely different and in many cases contradict each other. Surely if both were practicing Yip Man Wing Chun there would at least be some similarities. Outside of the names of the forms there are few. Unfortunately these days people use the "interpretation" excuse in order to justify this but any logical thinking person will know that's BS.

It is common knowledge that Yip Man was selective with his information and if the truth were to be believed only a small group of people studied under him to any great extent. The fact that there are millions of people that practice WC these days mostly taught by people that weren't there or weren't part of that group means that the majority of WC lineages are advocating something that will be quite different to what Yip Man was teaching and practicing over 40 years ago.

To make things even worse we have people who claim to be personal closed door students of Yip Man that are really teaching a load of old tosh but the said connection makes joe public flock to their like flies around sh!t.

Ironically that's what it is.........................

So no YMWC anymore!

[KPM]

I think one can look at the idea of "Yip Man WCK" in a number of different ways.

1. YMWCK is what Yip Man taught. But then you have to ask "taught when?" or "during which part of his career?" .....because Yip Man did and taught things a bit differently through-out his teaching career. What he taught before moving to Hong Kong was different than what he taught in his early career in Hong Kong which was different from what he taught in his final years.

2. YMWCK is what Yip Man himself did. No two people are exactly the same. Everyone will have a little different interpretation and a little different body type. Therefore YMWCK died with Yip Man.

3. YMWCK is the term for a lineage of WCK started by Yip Man. This lineage may have taken some twists and turns and differing interpretations, but it traces back to Yip Man himself and, even though various major branches can be quite different, they still have major common characteristics that originated with Yip Man and make them indentifiable with the lineage of WCK that he started.

Personally, I prefer to use #3 when referring to something as "Yip Man Wing Chun."

[Vajramusti]

It is common knowledge that Yip Man was selective with his information and if the truth were to be believed only a small group of people studied under him to any great extent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agree with that.

[Graham H]

I think one can look at the idea of "Yip Man WCK" in a number of different ways.

1. YMWCK is what Yip Man taught. But then you have to ask "taught when?" or "during which part of his career?" .....because Yip Man did and taught things a bit differently through-out his teaching career. What he taught before moving to Hong Kong was different than what he taught in his early career in Hong Kong which was different from what he taught in his final years.

2. YMWCK is what Yip Man himself did. No two people are exactly the same. Everyone will have a little different interpretation and a little different body type. Therefore YMWCK died with Yip Man.

3. YMWCK is the term for a lineage of WCK started by Yip Man. This lineage may have taken some twists and turns and differing interpretations, but it traces back to Yip Man himself and, even though various major branches can be quite different, they still have major common characteristics that originated with Yip Man and make them indentifiable with the lineage of WCK that he started.

Personally, I prefer to use #3 when referring to something as "Yip Man Wing Chun."

I don't agree and this discussion subject has been done to death already.

People are always pulling the "interpretation" card. VT is a very simple scientific approach to combat. It uses concepts which are open to misinterpretation not differing interpretations. There may be variations in how people move and what actions they prefer but conceptually and fundamentally we should ALL be on the same page. The fact is we are not so somewhere along the line somebody has got it wrong and/or filled in the gaps with their own ideas. As we can be pretty sure that the "group" of Yip Mans closest followers was very small it means that many people didn't get enough tuition but then went off and made their own ways. The reason people struggle to admit that is because it would like admitting they are doing things wrong. In many cases they are! That's not to say they cannot fight or use what they have very well but in the context of saying you are practicing YMWC you can never be sure. In fact in most lineages the further you go through the system the more vague and different things become compared to the next school up the road. This proves my theory IMO. Many similarities in SLT but massive differences and idea in say BJ or the weapons.

Yip Man is part of a line. His name has been popularized through out the world because he is regarded as the last Great Grandmaster. Most of this has come via the media and if stories were to be believed he shunned the limelight and was reluctant to teach many people.

How many people today are Grandmasters? There seem to be many mostly self -proclaimed. Is Yip Chun a Grandmaster? Is Yip Ching? Does bloodline have anything to do with it? No it doesn't and IMO they are not.

It's better just to say you practice Wing Chun and are putting in the work to improve and develop yourself in your own bubble. Some people can make use of it and some people cannot. Some rely heavily on marketing and BS and some others do not.

No point in giving it any more thought than that. The problem is many people these days act like they were joined at the hip of Yip Man. I find some it very amusing................

[GlennR]

I don't agree and this discussion subject has been done to death already.

People are always pulling the "interpretation" card. VT is a very simple scientific approach to combat. It uses concepts which are open to misinterpretation not differing interpretations. There may be variations in how people move and what actions they prefer but conceptually and fundamentally we should ALL be on the same page. The fact is we are not so somewhere along the line somebody has got it wrong and/or filled in the gaps with their own ideas. As we can be pretty sure that the "group" of Yip Mans closest followers was very small it means that many people didn't get enough tuition but then went off and made their own ways. The reason people struggle to admit that is because it would like admitting they are doing things wrong. In many cases they are! That's not to say they cannot fight or use what they have very well but in the context of saying you are practicing YMWC you can never be sure. In fact in most lineages the further you go through the system the more vague and different things become compared to the next school up the road. This proves my theory IMO. Many similarities in SLT but massive differences and idea in say BJ or the weapons.

Yip Man is part of a line. His name has been popularized through out the world because he is regarded as the last Great Grandmaster. Most of this has come via the media and if stories were to be believed he shunned the limelight and was reluctant to teach many people.

How many people today are Grandmasters? There seem to be many mostly self -proclaimed. Is Yip Chun a Grandmaster? Is Yip Ching? Does bloodline have anything to do with it? No it doesn't and IMO they are not.

It's better just to say you practice Wing Chun and are putting in the work to improve and develop yourself in your own bubble. Some people can make use of it and some people cannot. Some rely heavily on marketing and BS and some others do not.

No point in giving it any more thought than that. The problem is many people these days act like they were joined at the hip of Yip Man. I find some it very amusing................

Good post graham, not bad for an old wanker

[Graham H]

Good post graham, not bad for an old wanker

Yes a self proclaimed wanker not Grandmaster! I prefer it that way!

[HybridWarrior]

How many people today are Grandmasters? There seem to be many mostly self -proclaimed. Is Yip Chun a Grandmaster? Is Yip Ching? Does bloodline have anything to do with it? No it doesn't and IMO they are not.

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...

[chousos]

stop spamming

It is a global directory, it is not spamming..

[Graham H]

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...

Most people in Wing Chun like all the stuff that goes with it. They like the wooden puppet on the wall with the picture of Yip Man above it, the chinese banners either side and the kung fu pyjamas. Being associated to such a well known figure must give them a sense of belonging. There's nothing wrong with that but when people claim they are teaching and/or practicing "authentic" "genuine" Hong Kong YMWC they are pulling the wool over their own and other peoples eyes.

For me Yip Man was responsible for an evolution in Ving Tsun. He was one of the stepping stones in a lineage. There was and is no BS attached to his character even though people like to play up to his social habits sometimes. He was just a normal human being with all the facets that come with it. He just so happened he was very good at Kung Fu. Good by today's standards? Who knows? It's like the Bruce Lee thing. If Bruce Lee were alive today you probably wouldn't even know him. There are Bruce Lee's everywhere now. Maybe it's the same with Yip Man. They were ahead of their time and very good at what they did but in was in their time not ours.

I also consider the person responsible for my direction in VT (Wong Shun Leung) to be one of those people but these days I am reluctant to say I practice WSLVT or YMVT. My ideas and my system are in conjunction with the ideas of Philipp Bayer who was taught by WSL and WSL was taught by YM.

Whether it is the same or a close representation of what YM practiced and taught really doesn't concern me.

[KPM]

It's better just to say you practice Wing Chun and are putting in the work to improve and develop yourself in your own bubble. Some people can make use of it and some people cannot. Some rely heavily on marketing and BS and some others do not.

No point in giving it any more thought than that. The problem is many people these days act like they were joined at the hip of Yip Man.

But there are many other varieties of Wing Chun other than Yip Man Wing Chun. I practice Pin Sun Wing Chun. So it is not unreasonable for someone to qualify what Wing Chun they actually practice for purposes of some clarity when speaking with others. At least calling it "Yip Man" Wing Chun puts someone in the ballpark and people will generally have an idea of what they do and that it is different from Pin Sun WCK, Sum Nun WCK, etc.

Too often everyone assumes that "Wing Chun" means the Yip Man variety and all of its off-shoots. Your posts sound that way as well. But in a world where more and more people are doing Wing Chun that didn't originate with Yip Man, using the "Yip Man" designation when talking about your Wing Chun is useful.

[KPM]

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...

Keep in mind that this is based on a Confucian family model. Your Sifu is the equivalent of your father and therefore your Sigung is your grand-father. Putting it in modern western terms this becomes "master" and "grandmaster". So in actuality, anyone who has been around enough teaching Kung Fu that now has graduated students in the system that are also teaching his Kung Fu has become a "grandmaster" in the sense of "grand-father." It doesn't mean that he is some lofty fighter that can fly through the air kill people with only a touch!

[BPWT..]

My ideas and my system are in conjunction with the ideas of Philipp Bayer who was taught by WSL and WSL was taught by YM. Whether it is the same or a close representation of what YM practiced and taught really doesn't concern me.

It's good that you are honest when saying it doesn't concern you. It shouldn't, as you have no way of knowing one way or the other. Yet you continue to talk about 'closed door students' (mainly referring to Leung Ting, I suppose) and say what they do is BS and that they (he) didn't learn much from Yip Man. Which is something you also have no way of knowing.

[Graham H]

[B]

But there are many other varieties of Wing Chun other than Yip Man Wing Chun. I practice Pin Sun Wing Chun. So it is not unreasonable for someone to qualify what Wing Chun they actually practice for purposes of some clarity when speaking with others. At least calling it "Yip Man" Wing Chun puts someone in the ballpark and people will generally have an idea of what they do and that it is different from Pin Sun WCK, Sum Nun WCK, etc.

Too often everyone assumes that "Wing Chun" means the Yip Man variety and all of its off-shoots. Your posts sound that way as well. But in a world where more and more people are doing Wing Chun that didn't originate with Yip Man, using the "Yip Man" designation when talking about your Wing Chun is useful.

I wasn't aware we were discussing "other" lineages of Wing Chun. My apologies. I must have missed it.

I have practiced another Foshan lineage of Wing Chun and can honestly say it was more of a mess than some of the worse YM lineages I have seen. Maybe I was just unlucky.

[Vajramusti]

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Students of a sifu recognize their teacher
as a sifu. A grandmaster is such to their student's students.


Ip Chun and Ip Ching have taught several generations of their students... so they are grandmasters to their grand-students.
I do not do their versions. My sigung Ho Kam Ming spent quality time including class time, lessons, discussion of principles and extensive chi
sao with IpMan and for a long time, regularly keeping in touch. And, Ip Man used to come to his school. That is fairly close to Ip Man wing chun. Jiu Wan, WSL , Leung Shun and TST were also good students of a true grandmaster.

On a side note- yeas IMWC is not the only wc. But without IM the attention to wing chun probably would not be the same.
Ip Man's wing chun at it's best is very conceptual. Speaking for myself, I would not have been attracted to other
variations of wing chun which has produced their own practitioners.

I have no problem with people practicing other varieties of wing chun except the spamming.Its a big world.There is room and time to tolerate each other.