# Public vs private kulo?



## wckf92 (Jul 1, 2016)

Read somewhere that master or gm's or the gatekeepers of this style of WC sometimes would do a different version of their stuff in front of public vs in private. Anyone know of an example to share? Like, what specifically would they alter, edit, or leave out...? Or add in...?
Thanks. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## KPM (Jul 1, 2016)

Oh, this is very true!   And for many years the people outside of Ku Lo and the Fung family were never quite sure whether they had learned the "real thing" or the "public version."  Fung Sang was one of the main guys teaching outside of Ku Lo village in the 60's and 70's.  He taught a "public" version.  This is also how we have come to have some of the "variants" or branches of Ku Lo Wing Chun...like the 22 Point system that John Fung teaches or the 40 point system that Robert Chu teaches.

For an example, in that old footage taken when Leung Ting visited Ku Lo village researching his "Roots & Branches" book crusty old Fung Chun showed Leung Ting what he thought he wanted to see!  He strung together several of the short sets into one longer set to make it look like the Ip Man SNT form!

In recent years things have improved.  Most of the younger generation has left Ku Lo village.  So the "real thing" is being taught much more openly today.   Fung Chun's son Fung Keung has videos up on youtube showing some of it.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 1, 2016)

KPM said:


> Oh, this is very true!   And for many years the people outside of Ku Lo and the Fung family were never quite sure whether they had learned the "real thing" or the "public version."  Fung Sang was one of the main guys teaching outside of Ku Lo village in the 60's and 70's.  He taught a "public" version.  This is also how we have come to have some of the "variants" or branches of Ku Lo Wing Chun...like the 22 Point system that John Fung teaches or the 40 point system that Robert Chu teaches.
> 
> For an example, in that old footage taken when Leung Ting visited Ku Lo village researching his "Roots & Branches" book crusty old Fung Chun showed Leung Ting what he thought he wanted to see!  He strung together several of the short sets into one longer set to make it look like the Ip Man SNT form!
> 
> In recent years things have improved.  Most of the younger generation has left Ku Lo village.  So the "real thing" is being taught much more openly today.   Fung Chun's son Fung Keung has videos up on youtube showing some of it.



Thx KPM.
So, this guy 'Fung Chun' basically made up some stuff on the fly for the audience?
Do you know of a more precise example? I think you stated once that the guys you train with in Boston are a san sik / point based approach. And that each 'point' is done with a partner, on the jong, in chi sau, etc etc. Can you give an example of what the difference would be between the public and private version of say...point 1 or point ABC or however they are catalogued in that system? Like, would the public version have an intentional tactical or strategic 'flaw' embedded into it? That sort of thing?


----------



## Jens (Jul 1, 2016)

wckf92, what's your wing chun background and where are you located?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 1, 2016)

wckf92 said:


> Read somewhere that master or gm's or the gatekeepers of this style of WC sometimes would do a different version of their stuff in front of public vs in private. Anyone know of an example to share? Like, what specifically would they alter, edit, or leave out...? Or add in...?
> Thanks.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk



This is not uncommon in a lot of Chinese Martial arts styles


----------



## KPM (Jul 1, 2016)

wckf92 said:


> Thx KPM.
> So, this guy 'Fung Chun' basically made up some stuff on the fly for the audience?
> Do you know of a more precise example? I think you stated once that the guys you train with in Boston are a san sik / point based approach. And that each 'point' is done with a partner, on the jong, in chi sau, etc etc. Can you give an example of what the difference would be between the public and private version of say...point 1 or point ABC or however they are catalogued in that system? Like, would the public version have an intentional tactical or strategic 'flaw' embedded into it? That sort of thing?



Fung Chun didn't really "make it up" as much as just combine things together.  Also...most of the Ku Lo sets have one hand moving with the other in the Wu Sau position instead of pulled back to the side.  When Fung Chun demo'd for Leung Ting he pulled his fists back just like in Ip man Wing Chun. 

I haven't seen all of the "public version" taught by Fung Sang. And, of course,  I was told I was learning the "real deal."     But I have seen the instructional video of the 22 Point system that is up on youtube, and I have seen some of John Fung's stuff based on that system.  While a lot of motions are the same, sometimes the overall content of a given set is different and carries a completely different name.  The two man sets are different as well.   So while Fung Sang's version would likely be recognized as a Ku Lo variant, sometimes the 22 point system looks like a totally different version of Wing Chun.  Lee Shing incorporated a lot of Fung Sang's system into his own Wing Chun and taught his version of "Ku Lo" to some of his students.  I have seen a bit of that, and it is closer to what I learned than the 22 point system.

Another thing you see is that some Ku Lo branches have an actual dummy form.  You see this from the guys in Singapore.  But the original Ku Lo system had no formal dummy form.  You just practiced each short set on the dummy (sometimes slightly adapted/modified) and then you strung the various sets together in different combinations to suit yourself. 

I have a friend in Guangdong who has traveled around.  He visited Shaping.  This seems to be where most of the younger generation of Ku Lo villagers have set up shop.  There are several Ku Lo schools there and my friend tells me that are very "fighting" oriented and tend to dominate the local tournaments.  It would be very interesting to see how different or  similar what they are doing is to what I have learned.  I hope to pay a visit at some point.  But it is a little more difficult to travel to mainland China than it is to travel to HK.  I tried to find Fung Keung when I was in HK last and discovered that he had moved to Shaping!


----------



## anerlich (Jul 1, 2016)

William Cheung makes similar claims about YM WC.


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 1, 2016)

KPM said:


> Also...most of the Ku Lo sets have one hand moving with the other in the Wu Sau position instead of pulled back to the side.  When Fung Chun demo'd for Leung Ting he pulled his fists back just like in Ip man Wing Chun.



Do you mean, during the execution of a 'form'? (WRT the hand being in Wu or pulled back)



KPM said:


> I haven't seen all of the "public version" taught by Fung Sang. And, of course,  I was told I was learning the "real deal."     But I have seen the instructional video of the 22 Point system that is up on youtube, and I have seen some of John Fung's stuff based on that system.  While a lot of motions are the same, sometimes the overall content of a given set is different and carries a completely different name.  The two man sets are different as well.   So while Fung Sang's version would likely be recognized as a Ku Lo variant, sometimes the 22 point system looks like a totally different version of Wing Chun.  Lee Shing incorporated a lot of Fung Sang's system into his own Wing Chun and taught his version of "Ku Lo" to some of his students.  I have seen a bit of that, and it is closer to what I learned than the 22 point system.



Interesting. So, if I'm understanding you correctly, you did not learn a '22' point; but one of the other ___ point systems of Ku Lo?

At this point in your WC journey within the Ku Lo stuff...as you look back at your training, do you wonder or know for sure which version you were taught ("real" or "public") and if so, how were you able to distinguish the difference(s)?



KPM said:


> Another thing you see is that some Ku Lo branches have an actual dummy form.  You see this from the guys in Singapore.  But the original Ku Lo system had no formal dummy form.  You just practiced each short set on the dummy (sometimes slightly adapted/modified) and then you strung the various sets together in different combinations to suit yourself.



Hmmm...so, does the same thinking apply to the weapons in Ku Lo?



KPM said:


> I have a friend in Guangdong who has traveled around.  He visited Shaping.  This seems to be where most of the younger generation of Ku Lo villagers have set up shop.  There are several Ku Lo schools there and my friend tells me that are very "fighting" oriented and tend to dominate the local tournaments.  It would be very interesting to see how different or  similar what they are doing is to what I have learned.  I hope to pay a visit at some point.  But it is a little more difficult to travel to mainland China than it is to travel to HK.  I tried to find Fung Keung when I was in HK last and discovered that he had moved to Shaping!



How many different 'points' are there in the Ku Lo variants? You've mentioned a 22, and a 40?


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 1, 2016)

anerlich said:


> William Cheung makes similar claims about YM WC.



You mean about YM doing some stuff public vs private?


----------



## KPM (Jul 1, 2016)

_Do you mean, during the execution of a 'form'? (WRT the hand being in Wu or pulled back)_

----Yes.  In Ku Lo Wing Chun the short sets are done without one hand being held as a fist at the side.



_Interesting. So, if I'm understanding you correctly, you did not learn a '22' point; but one of the other ___ point systems of Ku Lo?_

----"Original" Ku Lo Wing Chun did not distinguish itself by any numbered "point system", it was simply "Ku Lo Wing Chun" or "Pin Sun Wing Chun" ....which was used to distinguish it form the "Juen Sun Wing Chun" of the other branches.  "Pin Sun" is "side body" and "Juen Sun" is "square body."   Traditionally there were 18 short sets of around 3 techniques each. Over time other short sets were added.  Robert Chu's version has 40 points because at some point someone broke things out further and further such that just practicing a Bong Sau over and over would be considered one of the 40 "points." 



_At this point in your WC journey within the Ku Lo stuff...as you look back at your training, do you wonder or know for sure which version you were taught ("real" or "public") and if so, how were you able to distinguish the difference(s)?_

---Being able to see some of the video that Fung Keung or people that have visited him over the years has increased my confidence that I did indeed learn the "real thing."   The major difference is that he seems to do things a bit "softer" and "flowy" than what I learned.  But the sequence of the sets I have seen him do are the same. 




_Hmmm...so, does the same thinking apply to the weapons in Ku Lo?_

---Kind of sort of?  There are no knives in Ku Lo Wing Chun originally.  Some lines do a knife set now, but it was a later addition....some say by Fung Ming.....Fung Sang's father.   But the same is said of Leung Jan's Wing Chun in general....no knives.  The knives were thought to have been added by his classmate, Fok Bo Chuen.   The pole form in Ku Lo Wing Chun is very short....it is a 3 1/2 point pole rather than 6 1/2.  I did not learn that part.  But I saw the form.  I wasn't very impressed with it.   Leung Jan had only about 3 years of teaching in Ku Lo village before he died.  He concentrated on providing a "refined" or "distilled" version of all of his empty hand fighting experience.  I think the pole was just an afterthought. 


_
How many different 'points' are there in the Ku Lo variants? You've mentioned a 22, and a 40?_

---The 22 and the 40 are the only ones I am aware of that give a count like that as part of the title.  I don't know how many points Fung Sang's version had.


----------



## anerlich (Jul 1, 2016)

_You mean about YM doing some stuff public vs private?_

Yeah. The story has it that Leung Jan taught his sons the private system and Chan Wa Shun used to spy on them, which LJ knew. So Leung Jan came up with a "modified" system that he taught while CWS was watching. CWS taught YM the modified system, but one day YM ran into the aging Leung Bik, who easily beat him up. He then taught YM the private system. YM taught all his students but William Cheung the public system, and only taught William Cheung the private system.

According to William Cheung, the differences (abridged) include neutral stance, central line, side neutral stance, footwork, height of tan and bon sau, wrist position in bon. etc.

The "modified" system sounds like a total straw man that no one teaches.

He's stuck to this story since the 1970s or earlier, and I think he sincerely believes the history part at least.

Sounds way too implausible for me, though my instructor was his direct student.


----------



## KPM (Jul 1, 2016)

I have never believed that story.  It has way too many holes in it!   In Ku Lo village Leung Jan taught Wong Wah Sam.  Wong Wah Sam taught Fung Chun.  So Fung Chun heard stories about Leung Jan from a direct student.   And Fung Chun lived into his 90's with a clear mind and only died a few years back.  So here was a grand-student of Leung Jan that could tell stories of what he did and what he knew.   And none of it was anything like what William Cheung claims.  And Fung Chun wasn't the only student of Wong Wah Sam.  Others were around in Ku Lo village to corroborate.  So the only person to do anything like what William Cheung considered the "private" version of Wing Chun was William Cheung himself. But there were several people around to show what Leung Jan taught Wong Wah Sam before his death.  And at that point there was no reason for him to keep anything a secret.


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2016)

Having two versions, i.e. the "public-private" thing is pretty wide spread in kung fu. Many teachers have been said to teach a watered down version, keeping something back for their closest disciples. Robert W. Smith pointed this out way back in 1974 in his book _Chinese Boxers,_ commenting on how excessive secrecy caused many systems to deteriorate and eventually die out.

I've seen this in the many cheesy books and posters of WC forms sold by my old Chinese sifu. They are full of intentional errors and omissions designed at "cleverly" misleading those outside the inner circle. A really bad idea IMO since sharp people from other WC lineages will spot these "errors" and mistakenly assume that his lineage is crap.

On the other hand, WC  "true believers" are always assuming such negative things about other lineages anyway, so maybe it doesn't matter. Still, I just don't think it's ethical to be d_eliberately_ selling false and misleading information. Another reason not to try learning from books and videos I guess. 

BTW William Cheung was not the first or only self-promoting sifu to reference _the Leung Bic story_ regarding what was "public and private" or "higher level and lower level" WC in the Yip Man lineage. Before William Cheung got a lot of publicity with his so called "traditional vs. Modified" WC in the 80's, my old sifu was claiming something very similar when he advertised himself as the "last closed door disciple" of GM Yip and maintained that his soft, "springy" approach to WC represented the final and most evolved stage of Yip Man's kung fu.

It makes a good story and feeds into the whole idea expressed in the Ng Mui and Yim Wing Chun legends that the secret techniques of highest level of WC will enable even an old woman or slightly-built teenage girl to defeat powerful attackers. Hey, I like a good story too, but I also live in the real world and I like to think that I can distinguish fantasy from reality. ...Even when my own lineage is involved.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jul 2, 2016)

KPM said:


> I have never believed that story.  It has way too many holes in it!   In Ku Lo village Leung Jan taught Wong Wah Sam.  Wong Wah Sam taught Fung Chun.  So Fung Chun heard stories about Leung Jan from a direct student.   And Fung Chun lived into his 90's with a clear mind and only died a few years back.  So here was a grand-student of Leung Jan that could tell stories of what he did and what he knew.   And none of it was anything like what William Cheung claims.  And Fung Chun wasn't the only student of Wong Wah Sam.  Others were around in Ku Lo village to corroborate.  So the only person to do anything like what William Cheung considered the "private" version of Wing Chun was William Cheung himself. But there were several people around to show what Leung Jan taught Wong Wah Sam before his death.  And at that point there was no reason for him to keep anything a secret.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leung Jan  retired to Kulo two years before his death and taught some self defense moves
to several villagers.What those villagers learned hardly seem to be systems  IMO.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 2, 2016)

Vajramusti said:


> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Leung Jan  retired to Kulo two years before his death and taught some self defense moves
> to several villagers.What those villagers learned hardly seem to be systems  IMO.


Excellent point.
I teach several 'self defense' classes to the public every year and have done so for over 20 years.
These programs have a strong wc base within them and I will reference where the material comes from as I instruct. At these classes a group of followers has developed with some becoming regulars but only training with me at these classes. 
Have heard talk of them learning wc from me.
'Uh... no you haven't'


----------



## KPM (Jul 2, 2016)

Vajramusti said:


> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Leung Jan  retired to Kulo two years before his death and taught some self defense moves
> to several villagers.What those villagers learned hardly seem to be systems  IMO.



Oh get off it Joy.  Why do you always try to disparage and discredit the Ku Lo system every time it comes up?  The Ku Lo guys say he was there for 3 years.  I think they would know better than you.   There is  far more to the system than just "some self defense moves."  That should be clear to anyone that has paid any attention at all to what I or Jim Roselando has written in these forums over the past several years.  Why do you carry such a grudge against Ku Lo Wing Chun?


----------



## KPM (Jul 2, 2016)

Danny T said:


> Excellent point.
> I teach several 'self defense' classes to the public every year and have done so for over 20 years.
> These programs have a strong wc base within them and I will reference where the material comes from as I instruct. At these classes a group of followers has developed with some becoming regulars but only training with me at these classes.
> Have heard talk of them learning wc from me.
> 'Uh... no you haven't'




I have actually studied the Ku Lo system in pretty good depth.  I say it is far more than just "some self defense moves."  So it was not an "excellent point" because Joy doesn't know what he is talking about.  So who do you believe?  Someone that has actually studied the system?  Or someone that has become rather bitter and crotchety in his old age?


----------



## Vajramusti (Jul 2, 2016)

KPM said:


> Oh get off it Joy.  Why do you always try to disparage and discredit the Ku Lo system every time it comes up?  The Ku Lo guys say he was there for 3 years.  I think they would know better than you.   There is  far more to the system than just "some self defense moves."  That should be clear to anyone that has paid any attention at all to what I or Jim Roselando has written in these forums over the past several years.  Why do you carry such a grudge against Ku Lo Wing Chun?[/QUOTE
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I call it as I see it. I have met Jim in Boston and I have seen the videos he took. No grudges.]


----------



## KPM (Jul 2, 2016)

^^^^ Baloney.  You spent an evening in a hotel with Jim and you think you're an expert on Ku Lo Wing Chun??     You've got a grudge for some reason.  Either that or you are really developing some dementia.   And for someone who posts very rarely here nowadays, why would you choose now to post and discredit Ku Lo Wing Chun?


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2016)

KPM said:


> I have actually studied the Ku Lo system in pretty good depth.  I say it is far more than just "some self defense moves."  So it was not an "excellent point" because Joy doesn't know what he is talking about.  So who do you believe?  Someone that has actually studied the system?  Or someone that has become rather bitter and crotchety in his old age?



I'm feeling really bitter and crotchety lately, so let me chime in! Factually speaking, Joy is right. Leung Jan only lived a couple of years after retiring to Gu-lo village. So there is no way he could have taught the whole WC system from scratch.

On the other hand, if some of the villagers he taught were physically gifted and already accomplished southern boxers, he could have imparted the conceptual essence of his WC through a set of streamlined drills. Then, over the next couple of generations, the inheritors of this core could easily flesh it out into a complete WC system. Just one possibility.

My old sifu experienced something similar. He got most of his WC from his first sifu, Leung Sheung and some of his hing-dai (kung fu brothers). Much later he trained privately with Yip Man. His period of instruction under Yip Man was fairly brief, but deep. That on top of what he already knew gave him an entirely new perspective on WC. So no, you can't teach a system from scratch in such a short time, but if you have "good wood" to work with, you can do a lot.


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2016)

KPM said:


> ^^^^ Baloney.  You spent an evening in a hotel with Jim and you think you're an expert on Ku Lo Wing Chun??     You've got a grudge for some reason.  Either that or you are really *developing some dementia.*   And for someone who posts very rarely here nowadays, why would you choose now to post and discredit Ku Lo Wing Chun?



Hey Keith, can't you agree to disagree without being insulting? That's _uncalled for_, and you are better than that. C'mon bro!


----------



## Vajramusti (Jul 2, 2016)

geezer said:


> Hey Keith, can't you agree to disagree without being insulting? That's _uncalled for_, and you are better than that. C'mon bro!


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KPM's comments are not worth a response. I move on.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 2, 2016)

KPM said:


> I have actually studied the Ku Lo system in pretty good depth.  I say it is far more than just "some self defense moves."  So it was not an "excellent point" because Joy doesn't know what he is talking about.  So who do you believe?  Someone that has actually studied the system?  Or someone that has become rather bitter and crotchety in his old age?


I believe Joy's point was:
The System wasn't taught but that bits and pieces for some self defense was. Was the complete system being taught in the short time Leung Jan was there?


----------



## geezer (Jul 2, 2016)

Danny T said:


> I believe Joy's point was:
> The System wasn't taught but that bits and pieces for some self defense was. Was the complete system being taught in the short time Leung Jan was there?



Agreed. That's what I was trying to address in my previous post, #20. I also find it hard to understand how the complete system could have been taught in such a limited time-frame. But if the right seeds were planted in fertile soil, I do understand how a complete, and somewhat distinct system of WC could have eventually emerged.


----------



## anerlich (Jul 2, 2016)

Realising I may be setting up and knocking down a straw man here, even a couple, but maybe "some self defense moves" may be better than a bunch of flowery forms and some chi sao?

Boxing and MT are pretty effective and it could be argued all they are is " a few punches and kicks".


----------



## anerlich (Jul 2, 2016)

If you believe many of the YM WC student stories, none of them spent decades with him, some high profile ones only a few years in which they learned the complete system (according to some, both the public and private systems. On that basis, learning a substantial amount in two years is not inconceivable. The Gracies didn't spend a huge amount of time with Mitsuo Maeda either.

Of course, most, perhaps all, perhaps even including KuLo's and the Gracies', of these stories require some suspension of disbelief.


----------



## KPM (Jul 3, 2016)

geezer said:


> Hey Keith, can't you agree to disagree without being insulting? That's _uncalled for_, and you are better than that. C'mon bro!



What?  He said Ku Lo Wing Chun was nothing more than "some self defense moves" and not a "system."  THAT is insulting.  Especially after the multiple times here I have posted to explain how Ku Lo Wing Chun is organized and to point out how untrue that is.  Yet he chooses not to believe me.  THAT is insulting as well.   Here is yet another occasion when I am chastised for saying something yet someone else seems free to be disrespectful.  Why is that???


----------



## KPM (Jul 3, 2016)

_I'm feeling really bitter and crotchety lately, so let me chime in! Factually speaking, Joy is right. Leung Jan only lived a couple of years after retiring to Gu-lo village. So there is no way he could have taught the whole WC system from scratch._

---Yes, maybe you are developing some dementia as well!    The people from Ku Lo...who should know better than Joy or you....said he was there teaching for 3 years.   He taught a "condensed" or "refined" version of his Wing Chun....something easily learned in 3 years.  He lived amongst them and saw them daily for 3 years.  You don't think someone could develop a firm foundation in  Wing Chun in 3 years?   So what "facts" are you referring to?

----Penchak Silat Serak is based upon 18 Jurus.  Each Juru is a short set of movements, similar to the 18 short sets in Ku Lo Wing Chun.  Maha Guru Stevan Plinck has told me personally that he could teach someone to fight with just 2 or 3 of the Jurus.   Why would Wing Chun be any different?


----------



## KPM (Jul 3, 2016)

So let me explain....once again...about Ku Lo Wing Chun to dispel this idea that it is "only a collection of self-defense moves" and not a "system." 

First, the villagers say that Leung Jan was there for 3 years before his death.  So why do people here keep repeating this "only a couple of years" thing?  3 years is plenty of time to develop a firm foundation in Wing Chun.  As Andrew pointed out, many of Ip Man's students were only with him for around the same amount of time.  

Knowing he didn't have long to teach, Leung Jan "refined" his decades of Wing Chun experience down to what he considered the essentials and changed the way he taught the system.  He took portions of the forms and broke them out into shorter sets of 3 or so movements each.  That way they could be repeated over and over individually to really develop them.  Each set contained a core concept as well as important techniques.  Many of the more advanced sets also taught a specific footwork pattern.   Each of these short sets had a version that was also practiced on the dummy.  There was no dummy form to learn, but the short sets could be mixed and matched and strung together however you please to create a great variety of movements to practice on the dummy.  Each of the short sets could also be practiced in combination with others to create longer sets.  Each of the short sets had a 2 man drill or Chi Sau exercise that taught the concept behind the set.  The concept behind each of the short sets was also utilized in free Chi Sau.   I'm not convinced that Leung Jan taught this part....but people realized that one could easily pick up the double knives and with some adaptations apply each of the short sets with knives in hand as well. 

Now, does that not sound like a "system" to you?   Does that sound like "just a collection of self defense moves"???   Personally, I think it was pretty ingenious on Leung Jan's part, so it kind of ticks me off when Joy repeatedly posts to discredit what Leung Jan achieved at the end of his life.  

And to just decide you know all about an entire version of Wing Chun simply from watching a few youtube videos and spending a couple of hours talking to a Sifu in that system.....that you know more about it than someone that has actually studied the system and been granted instructor status.......is that not insulting?


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 3, 2016)

KPM said:


> So let me explain....once again...about Ku Lo Wing Chun to dispel this idea that it is "only a collection of self-defense moves" and not a "system."
> 
> First, the villagers say that Leung Jan was there for 3 years before his death.  So why do people here keep repeating this "only a couple of years" thing?  3 years is plenty of time to develop a firm foundation in Wing Chun.  As Andrew pointed out, many of Ip Man's students were only with him for around the same amount of time.
> 
> ...



Is this "condensed" version what is be taught here in the US? (i.e. that Boston group you mentioned once?).


----------



## KPM (Jul 3, 2016)

^^^^^^ Yes!  The "condensed" version is Ku Lo Wing Chun!  The content is not significantly different than any other Wing Chun system descended from Leung Jan.  It is the teaching method that is different.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jul 3, 2016)

anerlich said:


> The Gracies didn't spend a huge amount of time with Mitsuo Maeda either.


Carlos Gracie studied under Maeda at most 2-3 years. There's some reason to suspect that he may actually have studied under Donato Pires (a student of Maeda's) rather than under Maeda himself. (If this was the case, then the claimed direct association with Maeda would have been an effort to claim legitimacy and authority in the art.)

Starting from this fairly minimal introduction to jiu-jitsu/judo, BJJ was developed through a process of personal exploration, sparring, challenge matches, and exchange of information with practitioners of judo, wrestling, and lutre livre. Along the way it developed into a remarkably deep system with its own flavor which is still connected to its roots enough so that some call it Basically Just Judo.

I don't know anything about Ku Lo Wing Chun other than what KPM has posted, but I don't see any reason why the same sort of process couldn't have occurred there.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 3, 2016)

Don't know much about wing chun other than what has been taught to me and I'm still learning.
I don't know anything much but I can and have taught several persons to fight in a physical self defense situation using some wing chun fundamentals in a very short period of time. Three 1 hour sessions a week for 12 weeks...36 hours of training using 'some' basic wc fundamental techniques. I have a curriculum and method to teach them but I cannot say I am teaching them wc. If these persons were to pass on what I taught them what would they be teaching New Iberia or danny t wing chun and would that be wing chun? In my opinion that would be a no. But then that would be my opinion; yours may well be different after all it is only an opinion. Who's would be correct?


----------



## KPM (Jul 3, 2016)

Danny if YOU named it "Wing Chun" and granted them permission to pass it on to others, then would it not be a version of Wing Chun?  That is what happened with Leung Jan in Ku Lo village.  And it was more than just a few "self defense moves" as I pointed out.  And it was taught pretty much on a daily basis for 3 years straight.  Think about it....if you had several hours a day to spend with your teacher, 5 days a week for 3 years,....how much would YOU learn and how good would you be?    Wouldn't that end up being much more that just a handful of self defense techniques?


----------



## KPM (Jul 3, 2016)

Who here thinks that  someone with a bit of talent could not obtain proficiency and a good foundation in their Wing Chun if they spent several hours a day training with a Master teacher, 5 days a week, for 3 years straight???  Heck....I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt!  Who here thinks that someone with a  bit of physical ability couldn't get pretty proficient in the same circumstance training for 2 years straight....5 or 6 days a week....for several hours a day....directly with a Wing Chun Master who had decades of experience???


----------



## drop bear (Jul 3, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Carlos Gracie studied under Maeda at most 2-3 years. There's some reason to suspect that he may actually have studied under Donato Pires (a student of Maeda's) rather than under Maeda himself. (If this was the case, then the claimed direct association with Maeda would have been an effort to claim legitimacy and authority in the art.)
> 
> Starting from this fairly minimal introduction to jiu-jitsu/judo, BJJ was developed through a process of personal exploration, sparring, challenge matches, and exchange of information with practitioners of judo, wrestling, and lutre livre. Along the way it developed into a remarkably deep system with its own flavor which is still connected to its roots enough so that some call it Basically Just Judo.
> 
> I don't know anything about Ku Lo Wing Chun other than what KPM has posted, but I don't see any reason why the same sort of process couldn't have occurred there.



I think people teach after uchi deshi programs. Which is a similar concept.

Or it is like the south park satire on Joseph smith.

Depends on the practitioner.


----------



## KPM (Jul 3, 2016)

This is Fung Leung, Fung Chun's oldest son, teaching and demo'ing....stringing together several of the more advanced 2 man sets.  Who thinks this doesn't look like a Wing Chun system?

古劳咏春拳掌门冯良大师在扬州咏春拳馆示范十二式对拆—在线播放—优酷网，视频高清在线观看


----------



## geezer (Jul 3, 2016)

KPM said:


> So let me explain....once again...about Ku Lo Wing Chun to dispel this idea that it is "only a collection of self-defense moves" and not a "system."First, the villagers say that Leung Jan was there for 3 years before his death.  So why do people here keep repeating this "only a couple of years" thing?  3 years is plenty of time to develop a firm foundation in Wing Chun.  As Andrew pointed out,* many of Ip Man's students were only with him for around the same amount of time.*



Keith, I've already acknowledged this (bolded section above) in post #20. I never dismissed Ku lo village Wing Chun. I have no knowledge of it beyond youtube and the information you have posted. I do think it's important to be able to disagree politely and counter mis-information with better information as you have since done.

Look, two years ago this month I lost my mother, a brilliant and creative woman, to dementia. It wasn't easy. So when you threw out that comment at Joy, I reacted strongly. Joy does have his beliefs, and clearly it is important to him that his si-gung, _Ho Kam Ming_ had a very long association with GM Yip, possibly the longest of any of Yip Man's students.

Other's may_ not_ think that _the number of years_ spent with a sifu is the best way to measure skill ...any more than you can judge the value a painting by measuring its dimensions. As I stated before, my own sifu openly stated that his time as a personal student with GM Yip was brief, yet I believe his kung-fu was very good. Others have rudely disagreed. _Whatever!_ The simple truth is that informative comments, like the one of yours that quoted above, do more to change _a reasonable person's_ mind than angry responses.

Now there are also a few_ blatantly unreasonable_ folks on this forum. Neither information nor scathing invective seems to get through to them. That's when I take a deep breath and move on.


----------



## geezer (Jul 3, 2016)

drop bear said:


> I think people teach after uchi deshi programs. Which is a similar concept.
> 
> Or it is like the South Park satire on *Joseph Smith*.



But not as funny!


----------



## KPM (Jul 4, 2016)

_Look, two years ago this month I lost my mother, a brilliant and creative woman, to dementia. It wasn't easy._

---Sorry to hear that!  I know it isn't easy.  Same with my mother 4 years ago.


_Joy does have his beliefs, and clearly it is important to him that his si-gung, Ho Kam Ming had a very long association with GM Yip, possibly the longest of any of Yip Man's students._

---And can you imagine the reaction if every time Joy posted about Ho Kam Ming I popped up with a comment saying Ho Kam Ming really learned most of his Wing Chun from a student of Ip Man rather than Ip Man himself and really only studied with Ip Man for about 1 year?  And that Ho Kam Ming's Wing Chun was "just" the "modified" version and not what Ip Man taught to his closest students?    (none of that is true, of course, but neither is what he always pops up to say about Ku Lo Wing Chun)



_Now there are also a few blatantly unreasonable folks on this forum. Neither information nor scathing invective seems to get through to them. That's when I take a deep breath and move on. _

---This is true.  But I never really considered Joy to be part of that group.  Until now.   Because I have given the same information that I posted on this thread multiple times now and it never seems to make a difference to him.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jul 4, 2016)

geezer said:


> Keith, I've already acknowledged this (bolded section above) in post #20. I never dismissed Ku lo village Wing Chun. I have no knowledge of it beyond youtube and the information you have posted. I do think it's important to be able to disagree politely and counter mis-information with better information as you have since done.
> 
> Look, two years ago this month I lost my mother, a brilliant and creative woman, to dementia. It wasn't easy. So when you threw out that comment at Joy, I reacted strongly. Joy does have his beliefs, and clearly it is important to him that his si-gung, _Ho Kam Ming_ had a very long association with GM Yip, possibly the longest of any of Yip Man's students.
> 
> ...


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NB: I don't have a problem with anyone learning gu lo. I don't care to, that is all.


----------



## KPM (Jul 4, 2016)

Vajramusti said:


> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> NB: I don't have a problem with anyone learning gu lo. I don't care to, that is all.



And no one is asking you to.  But please refrain from saying disparaging and untrue things about the Ku Lo Wing Chun system.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jul 4, 2016)

KPM said:


> And no one is asking you to.  But please refrain from saying disparaging and untrue things about the Ku Lo Wing Chun system.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's July 4.I can give my opinion on Kung Fu including ku lo, as a system. My comments were to the list
and not directed at you KPM


----------



## KPM (Jul 4, 2016)

Vajramusti said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> It's July 4.I can give my opinion on Kung Fu including ku lo, as a system. My comments were to the list
> and not directed at you KPM




But your opinion is wrong.  I have clearly pointed out why it is wrong.  Why can you not see that?  And why would you assume that your opinion...based only on watching some youtube videos and spending a couple of hours talking to Jim Roselando, would carry more weight than mine....when I have actually studied the system and have been granted instructor status in that system?  I just don't see why you carry such a grudge against the Ku Lo system that you cannot see simple reason.   Or is Steve right, and you are just one of several here who are "_blatantly unreasonable_ folks on this forum. Neither information nor scathing invective seems to get through to them"???  Because to anyone reading along, it certainly seems that way!


----------



## geezer (Jul 5, 2016)

KPM said:


> ...Or is Steve right, and you are just one of several here who are "_blatantly unreasonable_ folks on this forum. Neither information nor scathing invective seems to get through to them"???  Because to anyone reading along, it certainly seems that way!



Please don't drag me into this. I was definitely *not* referring to Joy when I mentioned "unreasonable people".  For the last time, when people disagree, present your side, and then move on. There is no reason to make it personal.


----------



## KPM (Jul 5, 2016)

geezer said:


> Please don't drag me into this. I was definitely *not* referring to Joy when I mentioned "unreasonable people".  For the last time, when people disagree, present your side, and then move on. There is no reason to make it personal.



But he has made it personal.  Who else here represents Ku Lo Wing Chun but me?  How would you like it if every time you mentioned DTE escrima in a thread someone popped up to say that it wasn't a "real" form of escrima?  I HAVE presented my side, multiple times, but he persists in slandering Ku Lo Wing Chun.   I'm sorry, but any time he posts inaccurate and untrue statements about Ku Lo Wing Chun, I will speak up.   I owe that to my teachers!

But, I think we are likely both right to a degree.   My own father is 84 now and it is getting increasingly more difficult to carry on a coherent phone conversation with him when I call to check on him on the weekends.

Joy, take care of yourself!


----------



## wckf92 (Jul 5, 2016)

I guess this won't be helpful but I can kind of see both Geezers and KPM's points on this.
KPM is speaking up for his art/system/teachers...
Geez is basically saying...agree to disagree and move on.
From my own experience on here...a certain individual from a certain lineage had typed some negative comments about an elder in my line. It got my blood boiling in about 3 seconds...but I withdrew from the keyboard for a while, not wanting to type a response while I was angry, etc. Then it occurred to me: this highly-opinionated individual is just an uninformed nobody on a keyboard thousands of miles away. Once I had realized that, I actually laughed to myself, ignored his negative comment, and moved on...IOW... don't fight force with force.


----------



## Jens (Jul 5, 2016)

Jens said:


> wckf92, what's your wing chun background and where are you located?



wckf92, I haven't received a reply in regards to your wck linage


----------



## KPM (Jul 5, 2016)

A new one from Jim Roselando.   Just a collection of "self defense moves"??


----------



## geezer (Jul 8, 2016)

KPM said:


> A new one from Jim Roselando.   Just a collection of "self defense moves"?



That just looks like Wing Chun to me. 

I'e seen similar Chi Sau drills a lot of places. That part where he says "like two snakes going down a hole" is (or should be) a pretty universal WC idea. I'm constantly saying _"Be fluid. Flow in. Fill the hole!"_


----------



## KPM (Jul 8, 2016)

^^^  If you watch closely, you'll be able to spot the major difference between the Pin Sun roll and the Ip Man roll.  Ip Man roll goes more or less "up and down".  The Pin Sun roll is a coiling action....hence the saying "two snakes searching for the opening."  You don't simply drop from Bong to Tan, you actually circle the partners forearm on the way down.....like a snake!  ;-)


----------



## geezer (Jul 8, 2016)

KPM said:


> ou don't simply drop from Bong to Tan, you actually circle the partners forearm on the way down.....like a snake!  ;-)



Although that is not our standard or "default" mode, we _do_ train something _similar_ to that which we call _woon-sau_. And of course there is some huen-sau/woon sau involved any time you circle around change and hand positions from tan sau/inside gate to fook sau/outside gate, etc.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 8, 2016)

geezer said:


> Although that is not our standard or "default" mode, but we do train something similar to that which we call _woon-sau_. And of course there is some huen-sau/woon sau involved any time you circle around change and hand positions from tan sau/inside gate to fook sau/outside gate, etc.


We do a version of this as well and it is a screwing action to meet in the middle and not just a up/down or rolling action.


----------



## geezer (Jul 8, 2016)

Danny T said:


> We do a version of this as well and it is a *screwing action* to meet in the middle and not just a up/down or rolling action.



There are just soooo many tempting responses to that comment. 


Instead, let's just say ...I concur.


----------



## Danny T (Jul 8, 2016)

geezer said:


> There are just soooo many tempting responses to that comment.
> 
> 
> Instead, let's just say ...I concur.


Yeah...when I posted this my thought was; "someone is going to have fun with this".


----------



## PiedmontChun (Jul 12, 2016)

KPM said:


> ^^^  If you watch closely, you'll be able to spot the major difference between the Pin Sun roll and the Ip Man roll.  Ip Man roll goes more or less "up and down".  The Pin Sun roll is a coiling action....hence the saying "two snakes searching for the opening."  You don't simply drop from Bong to Tan, you actually circle the partners forearm on the way down.....like a snake!  ;-)



Not to derail the thread at all but I was genuinely curious about the video you posted. Is this the normal, typical rolling for this lineage, or something that is trained separately? The action itself is very similar to how I learned in WT to "switch" from one side to the other while rolling without disengaging at all, i.e. my tan / bong becomes fook and my partner vice-versa.


----------



## KPM (Jul 12, 2016)

^^^Yes, this is the "typical" or "normal" rolling platform for Ku Lo Pin Sun Wing Chun.   Some have also adopted the "Ip Man" rolling platform so that they can play with others.


----------



## Marnetmar (Jul 12, 2016)

PiedmontChun said:


> Not to derail the thread at all but I was genuinely curious about the video you posted. Is this the normal, typical rolling for this lineage, or something that is trained separately? The action itself is very similar to how I learned in WT to "switch" from one side to the other while rolling without disengaging at all, i.e. my tan / bong becomes fook and my partner vice-versa.



Wait, does that mean most WC guys _don't_ do this? I learned something new today. Maybe it's something exclusive to Leung Sheung guys which technically includes Leung Ting.


----------



## KPM (Jul 12, 2016)

^^^^^ Maybe so!  This "coiling" action that is in the video and that I tried to describe is not part of the Ip Man systems that I have seen and trained.  Other than as a transition between sides, as was previously mentioned.


----------



## KPM (Oct 24, 2017)

Resurrecting this old thread, for anyone that cares to read through it, because it illustrates several of the points that I made on the "Pin Sun & WIng Chung Boxing" thread that was locked.  Not trying to stir anything up again.  Just supporting what I  wrote in that other thread.


----------

