Wing Chun by Definition


Getting It Right ... the "Wong Way"!!!
By David Peterson & Enzo Verratti


There are many people claiming to teach Wing Chun, and as many different "versions"
of Wing Chun as there are teachers, or so it seems. The reasons for these variations are
many and complex, one factor which immediately springs to mind being that there are at
least three or four different systems of Chinese boxing which take the name Wing Chun
(though the Chinese characters may differ). At least two of these appear to have
originated in or around the city of Fatsaan (Foshan in the Mandarin dialect), the southern
Chinese city where Grandmaster Yip Man of the Hong Kong-style first studied the
system under his teacher, Chan Wa Sun, who in turn had learnt from the most celebrated
of Wing Chun "ancestors", Leung Jan, the undefeated "King of Wing Chun", a man who
was very protective when it came to passing on his skills.

Herein lies just one of the many causes of today’s confusion, that Leung Jan in fact seems
to have taught two interpretations of the same art, one to his own sons (whom he hoped
would inherit and pass on his skills), and a somewhat less sophisticated method to
"Chan the money-changer", the man under whom Grandmaster Yip Man began his Wing
Chun training. If we are to believe the stories handed down through history concerning
Leung Jan and his attitude to teaching "outsiders", it is fair to assume that Leung (who
was an intelligent, educated man) did in fact "simplify things" for his not so bright, but
physically powerful student Chan, who was a far more gifted fighter than he was a
thinking man. What Chan learnt and made use of was a cruder, less sophisticated, but
nevertheless very effective form of Wing Chun.

Two events in recent Wing Chun history tend to lend substance to this belief. One of
these is the well known story of how Grandmaster Yip was easily defeated by Leung
Bik, the son of Leung Jan. According to the story told by Grandmaster Yip himself, and
retold by many of his students over the years, he suffered his first and possibly only
defeat at the hands of an old man whom he had challenged while a student in Hong
Kong during the early part of this century. To cut a long story short, Yip Man was to
learn that his opponent was the son of his own teacher’s teacher, and Yip Man in turn
became Leung’s student during which time he was taught a much more refined and
subtle approach to Wing Chun, something which tends to have influenced what he was
to teach to his own students later on.

The second event, which is not so widely known, except to students of the late sifu
Wong Shun Leung (and anyone who attended his seminars on the ‘Siu Nim Tau’ form
over the years), concerns the fact that Sifu Wong’s "version" of the first form contains an
extra movement in the third section. The following story explains this fact. While
fighting a rather stubborn opponent during one of Sifu Wong’s many celebrated
"contests", his opponent, in a fit of desperation and at the point of exhaustion, dropped
to one knee and lashed out with a punch which Sifu Wong attempted to deflect with the
‘Jam Sau’ movement contained within his form. Because the attack was so low, the ‘Jam
Sau’ only partially deflected the blow which then struck Wong in the upper thigh,
leading to an injury which nagged him for months. He of course went on to dispatch his
opponent, afterwhich he and Grandmaster Yip got into some heavy discussion about
what had transpired. 

As a result of this discussion, Yip Man advised his students to include the technique
known as ‘Gaan Sau’ in place of the ‘Jam Sau’ previously found in this section of the
form. Prior to this time, the ‘Gaan Sau’ technique was only seen in the ‘Biu Ji’ and ‘Muk
Yan Jong’ ("wooden dummy") forms. Sifu Wong decided that both techniques were
important (especially in view of the fact that the ‘Jam Sau’ is an integral part of the basic
single-hand ‘Chi Sau’ exercise), and so continued to include both, while most, if not all of
his classmates (the instructors of today) dropped the "old" technique in favour of the
"new" one.

Grandmaster Yip Man had explained to Sifu Wong that the ‘Jam Sau’ movement had
been taught to him by Leung Bik, his second teacher, who had been a very small man
and had not needed to make much use of the lower action ‘Gaan Sau’. Chan Wa Sun, on
the other hand, being a taller man, would often make use of the lower action as many of
his opponents had been smaller than himself, and therefore were more likely to hit
lower. Grandmaster Yip, being more influenced by his second teacher, Leung Bik, had
therefore altered his form accordingly. ‘Jam Sau’ is also a much more subtle action than
the ‘Gaan Sau’ movement and therefore less likely to be included in the arsenal of a man
like Chan who tended to just blast his opponents out of his way.

It has often been suggested that Yip Man taught in a fairly un-systematic way, tending to
pass on skills according to the student’s size, reach and so on. It is also said that he
didn't have much time for his slower, less intelligent or less diligent students, and
actually taught few people the entire system in person. This, in turn, led to the fact that
many people learnt by observing others training, rather than at first-hand, and that quite
a few of these individuals actually learnt a "second-hand" or even "third-hand" version
of Wing Chun, filling the gaps in their knowledge with guesswork based on what they
could recall seeing others do, or even worse, making it up out of their own imagination.
This, of course, gave rise to the variations in technique (and the interpretation of these
techniques) extant today among instructors of the same generation, not to mention those
of their younger Wing Chun brothers and sisters.

Of all Yip Man’s students, Sifu Wong Shun Leung probably spent the longest time under
his tutelage because it was Sifu Wong who in fact did most of the teaching in Yip Man’s
school, whereas most of the other senior students opened their own schools and went
about doing things their own way. Wong was therefore always close to his teacher,
could confer with his teacher and, most importantly, could train with and observe his
teacher thereby picking up many of the subtleties which his peers never did. Sifu Wong
was also the one student of Yip Man who always put everything he had learnt to the test,
so he soon developed what can only be described as an intimate knowledge of the Wing
Chun system. Becoming known throughout Hong Kong as ‘Gong Sau Wong’, or the
"King of Talking with the Hands", Sifu Wong took the Wing Chun system to a whole
new level and was never defeated in dozens of real life encounters with practitioners of
a myriad of martial styles.

All of the ideas and opinions expressed above would tend to be supported by the fact
that the majority of Wing Chun teachers have a fairly similar looking ‘Siu Nim Tau’ form
(though concepts and applications still tend to vary), but that the more advanced forms
differ by greater and greater amounts, often appearing like completely different systems!
To make matters worse, some of these teachers have withheld certain techniques from
their students, or have been unable (or unwilling) to teach certain techniques or concepts
at a given time or to particular students. What a present day instructor teaches therefore
has many factors influencing it, depending on what his instructor learnt directly from his
teacher, or what he may have learnt indirectly from other sources (ie. other students).

We need to bear these factors in mind, and understand that Wing Chun is a unique
system of Chinese boxing, unlike any other fighting art, Chinese or otherwise. The Wing
Chun system is strongly influenced (one could say, obsessed) with three main qualities.
These are DIRECTNESS, EFFICIENCY and SIMPLICITY. These three qualities are
immediately evident in any genuine representation of the system, from the physical
application of the techniques to the structure, practise and content of the six training
forms (‘Siu Nim Tau’, ‘Cham Kiu’, ‘Biu Ji’, ‘Muk Yan Jong’, ‘Luk Dim Boon Gwan’ and
‘Baat Jaam Do’). While one would assume that the majority of Wing Chun practitioners
are aware of these three qualities, some present day instructors defy all logic by ignoring
them altogether! How often have we seen sequences of movements where the instructor
demonstrating his or her defence against various forms of attack, takes five or six
techniques to deal with a situation that should only have taken one, or at most, two
techniques to control?

What is even more disturbing (and frustrating) is that many very intelligent people
blindly continue to follow such instructors, even when confronted by convincing
arguments which clearly prove that what they are doing does not conform to this very
logical approach. Instead, they take what is basically a simple, straightforward method,
and turn it into a complicated and less efficient one. Like the person who pulls the
flower to pieces to discover its beauty, they completely miss the point, becoming
obsessed with needless analysis. So many Wing Chun practitioners invent endless
sequences of defensive actions when what is clearly the obvious message of the system
is that "attack is ALWAYS the best form of defence".

Let's pause here to define, in simple terms, what is meant by these three
above-mentioned qualities: 

DIRECTNESS: extending or moving in a straight line, or by the shortest route; not
crooked or oblique; going straight to the point. 
EFFICIENCY: productive; with minimum waste of effort; ratio of useful work
performed to energy expended. 
SIMPLICITY: easily understood or done; not complicated or elaborate; consisting
of, or involving only one element of operation. 

By recognising and understanding these three concepts, deciding if what you are
learning or teaching is valid and/or deserving of the title WING CHUN!! should (if one
has an open mind and a willingness to improve) be a relatively easy process. The sad
fact is, however, that the majority of people do tend to freely accept much of what they
are told by their instructors when in fact some healthy scepticism, coupled with some
positive discussion and experimentation, could and would lead to a better standard of
Wing Chun throughout the world. We are in no way advocating anarchy in the
classroom, simply that instructors should encourage their students to think rather than
blindly follow, to seek out ways of making what they do even more DIRECT,
EFFICIENT and SIMPLE.

This is the attitude with which the late Bruce Lee approached his personal training,
leading to the development of his now well-known fighting concepts. Lee departed
Hong Kong as a very young man and found himself without an instructor and with an
incomplete knowledge of the Wing Chun system. However, he knew enough of the
concepts of the system to realise that by applying those same three qualities to other
ideas and methods, he could begin to fill the gaps in his knowledge. Interestingly, Sifu
Wong Shun Leung, now generally acknowledged by many to be the most influential
teacher Bruce Lee ever had, noted that the more Lee explored the intricacies of combat,
the more his ideas and techniques began to resemble the Wing Chun he would have
eventually learnt had he remained in Hong Kong! In their many all night
discussion-come-training sessions on those occasions when Lee returned to Hong Kong
to work, Sifu Wong found that Lee was rediscovering many of Wing Chun’s most basic
concepts in his efforts to develop ways of becoming more DIRECT, EFFICIENT and
SIMPLE. It is unfortunate that Lee’s own followers have in many ways missed the point
of his philosophy, complicating things when the whole idea was to make everything
more streamlined.

Present day instructors need to take a long hard look at themselves and what they teach,
to put aside pride and ego in preference to developing a higher standard of teaching.
Even if it means going back to the basics to re-learn and perfect their knowledge, surely
it’s worth it, and their students will respect them for it as well, not to mention the pride
the instructor will feel when he starts being honest with himself and starts producing
even better students. Take it from two people who have been down that very same road
... it’s a big step to take but you'll never regret taking it. Having had our eyes well and
truly opened up by our teacher, Sifu Wong, after many years of far less efficient Wing
Chun training (under an instructor with a poor understanding of the system), we’ve
never looked back!

In the long run, when all is said and done, the concepts of Wing Chun are far more
important than any particular technique/combination, though obviously if the
movement being utilised meets the aforementioned criteria (DIRECT, EFFICIENT and
SIMPLE) it has far more likelihood of succeeding. With this in mind, the examples
offered on these pages are not to be taken as "The Way", but as illustrations of methods
already available to the Wing Chun practitioner within the basic forms, examples which
exhibit the three qualities being discussed. In particular it is hoped that they clearly
show how the "tools" within the forms can be applied as needed, rather than in set
combinations as practised in the training forms. As Sifu Wong Shun Leung so often
repeated over the years, "Be the master of Wing Chun, not it’s slave!"

To put it even more plainly, the sequence of the movements in the Wing Chun forms
MUST NOT be taken literally, to be copied and applied verbatim, because if so used, the
real purpose for doing them is missed altogether, often with disastrous results. The
forms contain a combination of theory and technique, of structured movements and
concepts which, when seen in the right perspective, provide the Wing Chun student with
a system of combat which adapts naturally to any situation, without the need to rote
learn an infinite number of combinations to deal with an equally infinite number of
possibilities.

Like learning a language, Wing Chun starts with an alphabet (‘Siu Nim Tau’ form, the
"young idea" from which everything grows) and proceeds to teach the student to make
words and sentences, to "engage in conversation" in a natural way, responding to the
opponent’s movements and the changes that angling and positioning bring to the basic
concepts of the first form. This is the purpose of the ‘Cham Kiu’ form which provides the
keys for "finding & maintaining the bridge" with the opponent. Finally, like the tertiary
stage in one’s education, ‘Biu Ji’ form highlights the need for looking beyond one’s own
ideas, to step outside one’s own universe and consider potential weaknesses or
problems and to apply the logic of the three qualities mentioned so as to overcome
adverse situations whilst sustaining the least amount of damage to oneself. The ‘Biu Ji’
form "points the finger" to the fact that rules sometimes need to be broken, that no one
and no method is infallible. Through ‘Chi Sau’ ("sticky hands") training, the Wing Chun
student learns to utilise this knowledge and to improve his or her skills and
understanding in a free-flowing exercise that develops the "language" and is forever
emphasising the need for, and advantages of DIRECTNESS, EFFICIENCY and
SIMPLICITY.

As a final point, please keep in mind that this article has been written with the deliberate
intention of provoking some thought, comment or inquiry into what it actually is that
some instructors/schools are teaching. It is our intention to make Wing Chun
practitioners everywhere question the validity of what they have been taught, to test the
effectiveness and practicality of their "brand" of Wing Chun, and to be prepared to
change their approach if it fails to live up to the definition presented here. It is also
deliberately aimed at the average martial arts enthusiast, and to those contemplating
becoming involved in the martial arts, to help them sort out the WING CHUN!! from the
WING CHUN?? To this end we can only hope that we have succeeded in invoking a
response which will lead to an even brighter future for this most dynamic form of
Chinese boxing.

Wing Chun owes its very existence to the fact that somewhere back in time, someone
bothered to question the combat theories that they encountered and sought a method
that offered more than those at their disposal. Sifu Wong Shun Leung, the "King of the
Challenge Fight", spent much of his life attempting to raise the curtain of ignorance
surrounding the martial arts, and to test, improve and teach the Wing Chun system
minus the "bull****" that keeps on raising its ugly head time and time again. His
personal motto was "... To better myself with each day of training". Now it’s up to us, the
next generation of Wing Chun practitioners, to see that we pass on the best system
possible, to ensure that only the very best that this system has to offer survives into the
21st century. So then, it’s time to ask yourself, ... how does your Wing Chun measure
up?




About the authors: David Peterson, a martial artist with 25 years experience, has been a
regular contributor to ‘Inside Kung-fu’ since 1991 (Vol 18/No.2), and is one of only two
people authorised by the late Sifu Wong Shun Leung to represent him in Australia. A
teacher of the Chinese language and principal instructor of the ‘Melbourne Chinese
Martial Arts Club’ (MCMAC) which he established in 1983, Peterson is also a freelance
writer whose articles have appeared in many Australian and international journals, and
more recently, on several Internet sites around the world. Enzo Verratti, a martial artist
for 20 years, has been assisting Peterson in running the ‘MCMAC’ since 1983. Verratti, a
qualified fitness instructor and former security worker, is also Hong Kong-trained in the
"Wong Shun Leung Way", and has recently established the ‘Wing Chun Chinese Boxing
Club’ in suburban Melbourne.


Send comments, additions or corrections to:
sidai@wingchun.org