# Wing Chun vs Wing Tsun



## bushidomartialarts

Is there a difference?

I've heard some people really poo-poo one style or the other, but from the outside looking in they seem close to identical.

Could somebody explain?

Thanks


----------



## streetwise

Different organizations choose to romanize the Chinese in differnt ways to distinguish their schools from each other. Not to get into it too deep, but Wing Chun/Ving Tsun, etc, politics have made for great "kung fu soap opera" over the years.


----------



## bushidomartialarts

Thanks.  I had heard/read once that, really, it's a translation error.  I figured I'd confirm before continuing to shoot off my mouth.


----------



## streetwise

I don't know that I would say it was an error, I think it was intentional, and ther eare a number of ways to romanize Chinese.


----------



## bushidomartialarts

Fair enough.  But they're different romanized spellings of the same original art?


----------



## brothershaw

wing chun/ wing tsun etc is like karate or aikido  -  infinite variations on the same theme  and everybody thinks thier way is correct, while a good chunk of it is garbage. Which it were a little more consisitent like judo


----------



## Bobby135

I have studied both very briefly and I am certainly no expert on the matter.  One of the main differences that I came across was in the simple pattern block check strike in trapping hands.  I studied pien san (turning style) and then Wing Tsun.  In wing tsun the check portion of trapping hands was eliminated.  The general concept was that by eliminating a move that it was faster, and depending on who you were trapping hands with that could be true.  It was said that it was even more centerline oriented than other styles of wing chun.  That is mainly what I could see.

Bobby


----------



## streetwise

"But they're different romanized spellings of the same original art?"

Yep, same root, diferent branches.


----------



## bcbernam777

Should I ???????????


----------



## boothdos

Wing Chun and Wing Tsun is referring to the same art. Province is the difference in pronounciation. Although there are different applications taught in various branches of Wing Chun, the difference in spelling is not the reason or explanation for such.


----------



## tenth1

bcbernam sounds like you know something, please share it as this is an interesting topic that i wonder about but know very little on,


----------



## nontas

I ' ve studied traditional wing chun and wing tsun and i search a lot about the different lineages of wing wing chun..... I think that grandmaster Yip Man while he was teaching,wasn t  explaining in his students the applications . They had to learn wing chun only by seeing him , and making again and again the application without a lot of theory.Also Yip Man in the years change the wing chun so as to fix it with his self. At first was more stiff and at the end of his life more soft , using the opponents power....


----------



## Zenaphobe

I was looking at some of my old Kung Fu magazines and there was a WC interview with Li Ting and the writer said that the reason for the spelling difference was because in England the initials WC meant the "water closet" and the spelling was to avoid the association with the toilet room.

Sounds iffy, but that is just the answer they gave.

Zen


----------



## monji112000

Wing Chun = general English transliteration accepted by majority of people.

Traditional Wing Chun = William Cheung

Ving tsun = Moy Yat

Wing Tsun = Leung Ting 

Wing Tzun = Emin Boztepe 

Whats the difference? Well its allot of politics. 
If everyone learned from the same person it should be generally similar... well in some ways it is. Allot of the general ideas you can see in all the of "sub-Styles".

My opinion of the differences:
Traditional Wing Chun = William Cheung:
1). He was a good fighter in his youth, but he relied on his natural abilities more than anything else. This is evident in his "style". He was pretty big for a typical HK youth. He chain punches WAY too much. He has added Chi Kung to his style. 

2). Ving tsun = Moy Yat
Too soft, not enough hard. I can't comment on his training .. I don't know anything about it. Allot of people seem to just do things by blind faith, loosing allot of application... and basic ideas. JMO Do some research and find the real reason he spells it this way. Its pretty eye opening. 

3).Wing Tsun = Leung Ting & Wing Tzun = Emin Boztepe :
Emin is a very VERY large person, and his style is VERY much influenced by his natural skill. That being said I have seen some clips were his chi sao has many good characteristics.
Leung Ting..  its amazing how he has the largest organization giving his background and training.  They both tend to push the "blitz defense" and focus on chain punching and coming in. They tend to OVER train. What I mean by this is they will use too much force in training, at situations that are a waste of time. They have a &#8220;anti-Grappling&#8221; component to their style. (well emin does) It is mostly taken from his experience in Turkish oil wrestling. I have heard many times that they are training people for UFC and MMA.   


 So who do I &#8220;prefer&#8221;... I have come across some JKD people that are more Wing Chun that majority of Wing Chun schools. LOL  
 Sub-Styles I prefer:


 Hawkins cheung, Duncan Leung, Lo Man Kam, Allan Lee.


----------



## bcbernam777

As Monji so eloquently pointed out, Wing Chun, Ving Tsun etc etc, all follow similar principles, ideals and basic energies but the application and interpretation of those principles differ from Lineage to Lineage, simply because, from the founders of those lineages down to the students who learn under them, interpret and apply those principles differently. Wing Chun is very much a human art and therefore will take on the charechteristics of differences between different people.


----------



## monji112000

> As Monji so eloquently pointed out..


 
Different styles view general ideas sometimes differently. Perfect example is center. Everyone in martial arts has a idea of center even boxers. Some Wing Chun schools make it one of the most important ideas, something that is in everything little thing you do. Others don't or have completely different definition of center. Others may use both ideas but in a different way (ect..).

No litmus test or "correct"/"Incorrect" idea. Some schools of thought develop a feeling or general "look". This causes allot of confusion, because often this general look is exclusive.
Thats why you see things like " that doesn't look like Wing chun". or "I need to make it more Wing Chun".
JMO


 The real litmus test is your ability, nothing else.


----------



## brocklee

I'm currently enrolled in both WT and WC.  I would like to say that wish I wasn't enrolled in WT but I must fulfill my contract before I can leave them.  With that said there are many similarities and just as many differences between the two.  Stance in WT is, what they like to call, 100/0 foot ratio which isn't accurate itself because your foot does touch the floor making it probably 97/3 or else you would be hopping around on one leg chasing the aggressor.  My lineage Ip Man > Ho Kam Ming > Augustine Fong teaches 50/50 footing and the basic principles of a center line and rotating on its center axis.  WT has gone above and beyond in design and acts like a "turn-style" and pivits around the axis.  WT seems to be more directed towards "when in doubt, chain punch out" and WC is more "maintain structure and explode when given the opportunity."  Their both similar when it comes to triangles and line principles.  WT stance is a bit more exaggerated and WC more relaxed.  WC and WT punches are definitely different.  WT starts from the center point but the elbow is further in and the forearm runs along the centerline until fully extended (elbow locked ) while WC follows the protection of your forward triangle theory and the arms follow their natural path, with fists running up the center line.  Elbow doesn't lock.

What I like about WC over WT is things make sense.  I don't like asking a question and being told "Its because it's how we were taught".


----------



## KamonGuy2

Brocklee - good man. Don't let anyone tell you 'because that is how we are taught'. There are reasons for everything and if your instructor can't clarify why you do what you do then you are right to want to leave. 

WT have a contract? So you have to stay with them? Are you an instructor? 

You are always welcome at Kamon where you will find a friendly realistic atmosphere. 

For everyone else - I was told once on another forum that Leung Ting changed the name to WT as WC sounded like a toilet!!

I know that many federations change the name. It is called Kamon Wing Chun for example in order to say that we are not traditional wing chun and is a respect thing


----------



## brocklee

Kamon Guy said:


> WT have a contract? So you have to stay with them? Are you an instructor?
> 
> 
> For everyone else - I was told once on another forum that Leung Ting changed the name to WT as WC sounded like a toilet!!



Contract?  yes

and I do have to stay with them.  I'm not an instructor, no.


----------



## bcbernam777

brocklee said:


> I'm currently enrolled in both WT and WC. I would like to say that wish I wasn't enrolled in WT but I must fulfill my contract before I can leave them. With that said there are many similarities and just as many differences between the two. Stance in WT is, what they like to call, 100/0 foot ratio which isn't accurate itself because your foot does touch the floor making it probably 97/3 or else you would be hopping around on one leg chasing the aggressor. My lineage Ip Man > Ho Kam Ming > Augustine Fong teaches 50/50 footing and the basic principles of a center line and rotating on its center axis. WT has gone above and beyond in design and acts like a "turn-style" and pivits around the axis. WT seems to be more directed towards "when in doubt, chain punch out" and WC is more "maintain structure and explode when given the opportunity." Their both similar when it comes to triangles and line principles. WT stance is a bit more exaggerated and WC more relaxed. WC and WT punches are definitely different. WT starts from the center point but the elbow is further in and the forearm runs along the centerline until fully extended (elbow locked ) while WC follows the protection of your forward triangle theory and the arms follow their natural path, with fists running up the center line. Elbow doesn't lock.
> 
> What I like about WC over WT is things make sense. I don't like asking a question and being told "Its because it's how we were taught".


 
50/50 is fundamental footing 100/0 is an aspect of chum kui, so both aspects do exsist in WC however I find it very hard to understand how any lineage (even if it is WT) can exclusively teach 100/0? Elbow lock is taught in WC (I guess depending which lineage you are under), but it is a training tool in the proper release of power, and as with anything there is a right and wrong way to preform it. When punching you are to focus the fist from the centre (hence the syaing in Wing Chun "the punch is from the heart") however you are correct in that you arm is to follow the natural line, any attempt to try to manipulate the wing (limb) into the centre will lead to an overextension of the arm, and will actually disipate potential force but could possibly lead to a greater penetrating punch POSSIBLY


----------



## KamonGuy2

brocklee said:


> Contract? yes
> 
> and I do have to stay with them. I'm not an instructor, no.


 
Sorry I'm lost... When you started, they made you sign a contract saying that you wouldn't train at another school?

Who's your instructor and where can I find him/her?


----------



## brocklee

Kamon Guy said:


> Sorry I'm lost... When you started, they made you sign a contract saying that you wouldn't train at another school?
> 
> Who's your instructor and where can I find him/her?



Yes.  When I started I was made to sign a contract.  I didn't read the fine print because I was naive and believed that all Sifus we're of an honorable posture.  I pretty much thought it was a liability waiver.

His name is Sifu Sonnenberg and he is located here .
The situation created by him reminds me of Cobra Kai Dojo from karate kid  
HA!


----------



## brocklee

bcbernam777 said:


> 50/50 is fundamental footing 100/0 is an aspect of chum kui, so both aspects do exsist in WC however I find it very hard to understand how any lineage (even if it is WT) can exclusively teach 100/0? Elbow lock is taught in WC (I guess depending which lineage you are under), but it is a training tool in the proper release of power, and as with anything there is a right and wrong way to preform it. When punching you are to focus the fist from the centre (hence the syaing in Wing Chun "the punch is from the heart") however you are correct in that you arm is to follow the natural line, any attempt to try to manipulate the wing (limb) into the centre will lead to an overextension of the arm, and will actually disipate potential force but could possibly lead to a greater penetrating punch POSSIBLY



There are some smart people in these forums


----------



## KamonGuy2

bcbernam777 is an extremely intelligent person and he looks like he knows his stuff. 

brocklee - I think you should go on every martial art forum in the world and name and shame this individual. 

In Kamon we have a form you sign when you enter but this is for insurance. We have no right to stop you leaving to go to another dojo

If I were you I would go there every lesson and cause as much trouble as possible. If he wants to play paper games like that, beat him at his own game

If that doesn't work, give me a call


----------



## brocklee

Kamon Guy said:


> bcbernam777 is an extremely intelligent person and he looks like he knows his stuff.
> 
> brocklee - I think you should go on every martial art forum in the world and name and shame this individual.
> 
> In Kamon we have a form you sign when you enter but this is for insurance. We have no right to stop you leaving to go to another dojo
> 
> If I were you I would go there every lesson and cause as much trouble as possible. If he wants to play paper games like that, beat him at his own game
> 
> If that doesn't work, give me a call



Pretty smart idea   He did tell me that I'm able to come train whenever I like.  I should go there and do traditional WC and argue points against WT to make the students question their sifu's knowledge.  There's a few students there that I think I can sway to my WC class.  Cant beat the price either.  Only $50 a month for my current WC training.

I wish it we're the olden days, when respect mattered.  Why would you want someone to pay for a class that your not teaching?  No honor and not very rewarding.  I don't know about going everyone on the net and bashing him.  I don't think it will cause him to lose business and it wont do anything for me personally.  The contract is pretty vague and there are gaps to exploit but it's not worth it.  It would cost more $$ then its worth.


----------



## KamonGuy2

Yeah but it's more about not letting him get away with it. It means you will have lost out on WC training whilst you are contracted with him. 

The more you post it on forums, the more people like myself hear about it and word will spread. I know passionate wing chunners who would go down to his class and destroy it from within. 
Why? Because he has corrupted the system and given the art a bad name and messed with people's training. You won't get that time back

I am not saying that you shouldn't make a profit from classes, but you shouldn't force people to stay!!


----------



## brocklee

Kamon Guy said:


> Yeah but it's more about not letting him get away with it. It means you will have lost out on WC training whilst you are contracted with him.
> 
> The more you post it on forums, the more people like myself hear about it and word will spread. I know passionate wing chunners who would go down to his class and destroy it from within.
> Why? Because he has corrupted the system and given the art a bad name and messed with people's training. You won't get that time back
> 
> I am not saying that you shouldn't make a profit from classes, but you shouldn't force people to stay!!



very true


----------



## Si-Je

Quote: monji1200
Traditional Wing Chun = William Cheung
Ving tsun = Moy Yat
Wing Tsun = Leung Ting 
Wing Tzun = Emin Boztepe 

Quote:  bcbernam777:
"As Monji so eloquently pointed out, Wing Chun, Ving Tsun etc etc, all follow similar principles, ideals and basic energies but the application and interpretation of those principles differ from Lineage to Lineage, simply because, from the founders of those lineages down to the students who learn under them, interpret and apply those principles differently. Wing Chun is very much a human art and therefore will take on the charechteristics of differences between different people."

Seems plausable, but I don't think that traditional Wing Chun comes only
from William Cheung.  Yip Man had several students, and as bcbernam777 stated that everyone's interpretation is different no matter what or who you learn from.  I already have my own perceptions and ideas about WC that just about no one else I know share.  And I'm sure these will change with time and training too.

Quote: Brocklee:
"Stance in WT is, what they like to call, 100/0 foot ratio which isn't accurate itself because your foot does touch the floor making it probably 97/3 or else you would be hopping around on one leg chasing the aggressor. WT has gone above and beyond in design and acts like a "turn-style" and pivits around the axis. WT seems to be more directed towards "when in doubt, chain punch out" and WC is more "maintain structure and explode when given the opportunity." 

I agree with some of your viewpoint of WT stance, and the emphasis on chainpunching.  I took a break from using Advanced stance or 100/0 for over a year simply because I didn't like it at all.
(an advantage when your hubbie teaches you).  Every time I stepped inbetween the big guy's stance with advanced stance I ate shoulder and chest.  Ticked me off bigtime.  And hurt too!
I still won't use it that way.  But the Way WT humbo steps (half circle step) around to the outside of an opponent's leg and stance, now, that IS groovy!  Unbalances them, and gets my face out of their
centerline.  I'm not sure if WC does this too, but I'm sure they do something similar.
Now used like that you don't want weight on your front leg.  Your set up for a leg sweep.  Used to take Japanese Ju-Jitsu, would throw you in a heartbeat.  
Really I see the difference between WT and WC in a more simplified manner. WT works for Tall people (being that I'm not and WC works better for me in some instances) and WC for smaller folks.
Leung Ting's even pretty tall.  And I think is shows in his style.  Fung isn't and it definately shows in his approach.

Since I'm learning both at the same time I do get confused.  
But whenever my instructor shows me new technique or has me drill and I have difficulty with it I ask, "are you showing me WT?"  Usually he is.

For many of the techniques involve almost immediate manipulation of the opponent's head and neck, running straight into the opponent chian punching or whatever, which on a taller, heavier, and
larger opponent is very difficult for me.  That's where alot of the WC comes in.
Pivoting, palm striking to the kidneys, kicking as you come into the attack.
Then I can play with the head throws, and such. 

But by and large it's not totally effective for me to barrel straight into a stronger attacker.  Running straight up their centerline.  I tend to bounce off! lol! And theirs no point close lining myself on my opponent's arms, chest, and shoulders.  These are the barriers in the way for me with taller people.  I have to clear the arms, chest and shoulders (which are usually at my face level!) before I can chain punch these guys in the head.  Hence why I so strongly recommend KICKING.  And focus more 
on getting out of my opponent's centerline by pivoting, stepping, etc so I can more effectively attack and am not constantly on the defense.

Plus, I tell people, "if it's not easy, your doing something wrong."  Too much effort spent to execute a techique, you will pay dearly for in a conflict.  My teacher is 6'4", WT suites him perfectly.  It's when he teaches me that he has to revert to WC at times.  

But I love the WT anti-grappling, which you won't learn anywhere elese as far as I know.  And feel that is is a cruitial addition to WC/WT, for it gives a striking art a strong defense against wrestling, or grappling.  (but enough on that, just my opinion.  let's not start up with this discussion again, okay?)

Either of the styles are great, and have strengths and weaknesses for different people.  I say learn all of it, just because I love it.  Take what works best for you.  

Anyways, the more I learn the more I think of WC/WT whatever in a totally different manner than what I've heard any of these guys teach.  But I come from a totally different view point and perspective
than the instructors, masters, etc.  I really desire to go back to the root of all of Wing Chun.  At least in philosophy, concept, and principle.


----------



## CheukMo

monji112000 said:


> Ving tsun = Moy Yat
> 
> 2). Ving tsun = Moy Yat
> Too soft, not enough hard. I can't comment on his training .. I don't know anything about it. Allot of people seem to just do things by blind faith, loosing allot of application... and basic ideas. *JMO Do some research and find the real reason he spells it this way. Its pretty eye opening.*


 *????*


----------



## profesormental

Greetings.

I've not seen Wing Chun/Wing Tsun/Ving Tsun taught the same (except if demanded by Organizations... and then there are variations) anywhere.

It all depends on the Instructor and the teaching skills, preferences, strategies, tactics, etc. that the instructor has.

Also, Teachers change how they teach every about 5 years to reflect their growth and insight on the training.

This does not mean that they teach different material, just the insight into the material and the stress given to certain aspects tends to change and refine with time.

All in all, I would go where you're most comfortable and able to experiment and train more as to make your abilities grow. If they have what you want, train there.

Hope this helps.

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## KamonGuy2

Exceptional advice


----------



## bcbernam777

profesormental said:


> Greetings.
> 
> I've not seen Wing Chun/Wing Tsun/Ving Tsun taught the same (except if demanded by Organizations... and then there are variations) anywhere.
> 
> It all depends on the Instructor and the teaching skills, preferences, strategies, tactics, etc. that the instructor has.
> 
> Also, Teachers change how they teach every about 5 years to reflect their growth and insight on the training.
> 
> This does not mean that they teach different material, just the insight into the material and the stress given to certain aspects tends to change and refine with time.
> 
> All in all, I would go where you're most comfortable and able to experiment and train more as to make your abilities grow. If they have what you want, train there.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Juan M. Mercado


 

True, any martial art is an evolution


----------



## jeff_hasbrouck

Zenaphobe said:


> I was looking at some of my old Kung Fu magazines and there was a WC interview with Li Ting and the writer said that the reason for the spelling difference was because in England the initials WC meant the "water closet" and the spelling was to avoid the association with the toilet room.
> 
> Sounds iffy, but that is just the answer they gave.
> 
> Zen



That particular interview can be found in Leung Ting's "Roots and Branches of Wing Tsun".

What I heard from my Si-gung's mouth, in his own words "I needed a spelling (that differed from everyone else's) and the "T-S-U-N" worked. 

Remember, back in the late 1960's, he was the head of GGM Yip Man's "Ving Tsun Althletic Association". So he wanted to break off and start his own branch, which he did under the banner of "Leung Ting Wing Tsun Althetic Association".


----------



## geezer

Yeah Jeff, that's why the group I'm connected with went back to the old spelling "Ving Tsun" as used by Grandmaster Yip Man. Although we all trained under  Sifu Leung Ting in his "WT"system, we have not been associated with him for a long time, so we prefer to use the generic name of our lineage as spelled by Si-gung Yip.


----------



## jeff_hasbrouck

geezer said:


> Yeah Jeff, that's why the group I'm connected with went back to the old spelling "Ving Tsun" as used by Grandmaster Yip Man. Although we all trained under  Sifu Leung Ting in his "WT"system, we have not been associated with him for a long time, so we prefer to use the generic name of our lineage as spelled by Si-gung Yip.



Ya I broke from the IWTA over some seemingly simple problems. There were accusations that I was teaching "advanced" material to a SG 5... I taught him how to defend an elbow (kup-jarn) and during the class (in the guy's school who tattle-tailed on me) I did biu-tze reaction to deflect the elbow and all of the sudden I was a technique stealer and a rebel lol. 

I revieved a call the next morning from my then sifu saying that I would kicked out if I ever did it again, and I futilely tried to explain that I hadn't commited any wrong-doing, but I digress.

That was about a year before the CWT guys disbanded taking some of my texas contemperaries with them. We have folks from cali, to texas, to new york who have this grand alliance and it's just a wonderful group of people. Im very happy to free of the politics and to just have people who want to see WT grow 

All the best,



Jeff


----------



## WTchap

It's really sad - I don't know why, or how, some of these things have happened in the WT organization. I train in the EEWTO, so directly related to Leung Ting's IWTA, and there is a very open approach. We have the same grading structure, etc, but in classes it is not uncommon for student grades to be working on drills and lat sao that incorporate some Biu Tze level material.

And really, it shouldn't matter too much (the sharing of little nuggets of gold . Heck, the second Chi Sao section has a double-grab and pull+pivot that is from the third form, and that Chi Sao section (2nd) is taught, of course, to student grades.

Recently our Sifu had a seminar on the long pole, and people of various grades could attend (including some higher-ranked student grades). I couldn't make it, sadly, but I asked the question of a friend: is it normal for people at various levels to start training the pole? I was told that our Sifu had been asked this before, and his response was something along the lines of: "It takes many, many, many years to become skilled with the pole - so it doesn't hurt to begin basic pole training/exercises early."

I'm not sure why exactly, but something seems to have gone wrong with the WT org in the US. There are some very experienced guys there, and yet we see how things have become so 'splintered'.  :-(


----------



## Ediaan

One of the biggest differences between WT and WC is footwork. In WT one foot is turned on exactly the middle of the sole, whereas in WC both the feet are pivoted on the heels when turning. The forms are a little different, the same basis and principles with slight differences. Also, I've heard some WC schools say that WT is a little too aggressive.

As for lineage, WC is more centred towards the traditional style whereas WT has used eskrima, knife applications and some grappling techniques.


----------



## geezer

Ediaan said:


> One of the biggest differences between WT and WC is footwork. In WT one foot is turned on exactly the middle of the sole, whereas in WC both the feet are pivoted on the heels when turning. The forms are a little different, the same basis and principles with slight differences. Also, I've heard some WC schools say that WT is a little too aggressive.
> 
> As for lineage, WC is more centred towards the traditional style whereas WT has used eskrima, knife applications and some grappling techniques.



Be careful not to generalize. WC is varied, depending on _whose_ WC you are talking about even sticking to just the Yip Man lineage. Some branches are geared toward competitive fighting (Alan Orr's guys, for example) some are not. Some turn on the balls of the feet, some on the heels, and some on the center of the foot like WT. Some weight their turning stances 50-50, some 70-30, some 90-10, or even 100-0. And some are far less traditional and more ecclectic than WT, even bordering on being JKD like.

LT chose the spelling WT to distinguish his own personal approach. But his approach is pretty traditional, reflecting mainly what he learned from Leung Sheung and Yip man. Check out how the Hong Kong branch trains. Other WT groups do things quite differently, especially the "rebels". Check out what Emin Boztepe, Sifu Fernandez, Victor Gutierrez, Sergio Iadarola, and others have done with WT. It's fascinating.


----------



## WingChunIan

KamonGuy2 said:


> Sorry I'm lost... When you started, they made you sign a contract saying that you wouldn't train at another school?
> 
> Who's your instructor and where can I find him/her?



Unfortunately this is fairly common in certain organisations. There is a school not far from my own that has this approach. One of my students went there first (silly boy) and was allowed to watch a class and then told that to join he would have to pay £200 and sign a contract, I've had others come to me asking if they can train but asking me not to include them in photos etc because they are still under contract and this particular organisation has a reputation for threatening legal action. It seems to come with the larger organisations that operate on almost a franchise basis


----------



## Ediaan

geezer said:


> Be careful not to generalize. WC is varied, depending on _whose_ WC you are talking about even sticking to just the Yip Man lineage. Some branches are geared toward competitive fighting (Alan Orr's guys, for example) some are not. Some turn on the balls of the feet, some on the heels, and some on the center of the foot like WT. Some weight their turning stances 50-50, some 70-30, some 90-10, or even 100-0. And some are far less traditional and more ecclectic than WT, even bordering on being JKD like.
> 
> LT chose the spelling WT to distinguish his own personal approach. But his approach is pretty traditional, reflecting mainly what he learned from Leung Sheung and Yip man. Check out how the Hong Kong branch trains. Other WT groups do things quite differently, especially the "rebels". Check out what Emin Boztepe, Sifu Fernandez, Victor Gutierrez, Sergio Iadarola, and others have done with WT. It's fascinating.


Agreed, some WC lineages are very different, and most WT branches are different. Our specific WT branch from he Yip Man - Leung Ting lineage have even implemented some of the European (Keith Kernspecht) as well as EBMAS principles.

I must say that Eming Boztepe has exceptional groundwork and Grand Master Kernspecht has developed the art to a point where, at his aging years, he is still very formidable. I believe he was quite a body builder in his younger days.


----------



## Ediaan

WingChunIan said:


> Unfortunately this is fairly common in certain organisations. There is a school not far from my own that has this approach. One of my students went there first (silly boy) and was allowed to watch a class and then told that to join he would have to pay £200 and sign a contract, I've had others come to me asking if they can train but asking me not to include them in photos etc because they are still under contract and this particular organisation has a reputation for threatening legal action. It seems to come with the larger organisations that operate on almost a franchise basis


This is so sad, my Sifu encourages us to also practice other martial arts, because we already have such a versatile art ( we have escrima and knife applications included in our training ). Organizations who insists on making prospective students sign contracts are doing it because, to them, it is only a business. I have met many trainers who teach purely for the love if it and encourages their students to be versatile in the arts. Why should we not have the right to choose if we want to study a third or fourth art as well?


----------



## geezer

WingChunIan said:


> Unfortunately this is fairly common in certain organisations. There is a school not far from my own that has this approach. One of my students went there first (silly boy) and was allowed to watch a class and then told that to join he would have to pay £200 and sign a contract, I've had others come to me asking if they can train but asking me not to include them in photos etc because they are still under contract and this particular organisation has a reputation for threatening legal action. It seems to come with the larger organisations that operate on almost a franchise basis



Ethically indefensible. Worse yet --the way some of those organizations go after their instructors if they decide to leave the fold. And, even if you are legally in the right, the organization may be willing to outspend you to make an example of you. Can't win a suit in court if you aren't willing to spend the many thousands of dollars necessary. Happened to someone I know.


----------



## jeff_hasbrouck

brocklee said:


> Yes.  When I started I was made to sign a contract.  I didn't read the fine print because I was naive and believed that all Sifus we're of an honorable posture.  I pretty much thought it was a liability waiver.
> 
> His name is Sifu Sonnenberg and he is located here .
> The situation created by him reminds me of Cobra Kai Dojo from karate kid
> HA!



I know Sifu Keith personally and his WT is sub-par at best. I've rolled with him quite a few times. I was a newly promoted first tech when I rolled with him last at a seminar in Chicago under my old sifu (Will Parker)... 

Anyways, tell him to shove that paper **** up his ***. 

Hope you get it resolved man, and remember stay away from the LT org in the US, they are all a bunch of bastards.


All the best,


Jeff


----------



## jeff_hasbrouck

WTchap said:


> It's really sad - I don't know why, or how, some of these things have happened in the WT organization. I train in the EEWTO, so directly related to Leung Ting's IWTA, and there is a very open approach. We have the same grading structure, etc, but in classes it is not uncommon for student grades to be working on drills and lat sao that incorporate some Biu Tze level material.
> 
> And really, it shouldn't matter too much (the sharing of little nuggets of gold . Heck, the second Chi Sao section has a double-grab and pull+pivot that is from the third form, and that Chi Sao section (2nd) is taught, of course, to student grades.
> 
> Recently our Sifu had a seminar on the long pole, and people of various grades could attend (including some higher-ranked student grades). I couldn't make it, sadly, but I asked the question of a friend: is it normal for people at various levels to start training the pole? I was told that our Sifu had been asked this before, and his response was something along the lines of: "It takes many, many, many years to become skilled with the pole - so it doesn't hurt to begin basic pole training/exercises early."
> 
> I'm not sure why exactly, but something seems to have gone wrong with the WT org in the US. There are some very experienced guys there, and yet we see how things have become so 'splintered'.  :-(



IMHO the only guy that is still associated with the IWTA is worth a **** is my old sifu. He is definately a master. But he can't teach very well. He never shows up to class, and usually makes others do it for him.

I've rolled with all the others, Sifu Keith (Arizona) and Sifu Mike (Chicago) and those guys are just terrible. I think the only reason sifu will is good is because he goes to HK and Europe and trains with those guys. And he used to have Sifu Webb to train with. 

The problem is that when people started leaving in the 90's people started getting all *** hurt that they didn't want to train with them and started strangling the remaining students and spreading rumors about the ones who left.

My old sifu has told me countless times that people leave because he refuses to give them material above their level and that they won't amount to anything because he is the only one qualified enough to make people better. He is such an arrogant prick. 

Honestly there is no fixing this, just let their "civilization" crumble and make way for the new improved era where people are more tolerant and don't have a problem training with others, seeing other peoples points of views without acting like a bunch of f'in kids.

Anyways, all the best in your training!

Jeff


----------



## geezer

Jeff don't waste your time. _Brocklee_ hasn't been active on this forum for at least five years, and frankly he was a flake. He loved to trash WT in favor of his lineage of WC. Ironically, I am a personal friend of the WC man he claimed was his sifu. And he told me that _Brocklee_ only trained for a short time. Little knowledge, big mouth. Or, if you prefer the old Chinese proverb from LT, "The bottle that is half empty makes the most noise when shaken."

Now, as far as _Sifu Keith_ goes, for many years he was my si-hing and friend ...I thought. We knew each other since 1979. We even kept in touch occaissionally during all the years I left the martial arts. Sent Christmas cards and such. But, when around the end of 2007, I decided to train with some "rebels" he totally stopped speaking to me. _That silence speaks volumes. 

_But you know what?_ Just gotta let it go._


----------



## jeff_hasbrouck

Geezer,

Your right, honestly, I'm still a little ***-hurt over it.

Many of those guys were very close friends and mentors. And when I broke, and everyone found out all the "rebel's" I associated with they treated me like I was sub-human.

Hurts my heart to know that people I would have backed no matter what turned on me with viscious slander and absolute conetmept for me as a person.

And I really don't apperciate certain NASty folks speaking about my lack of credibility and personal skill when honestly I rolled over them. And their self promotion of being "only qualified", or "only traditional; legitamate etc"... BS strikes a nerve lol. And honestly I meant no offense to anyone on here or out there who are/was friends with those people. But the fact remains that they are a bunch of *******s, and I really have no problem letting everyone know how fake they are as martial artists, people, and "instructors".

My problem is I always get sucked into writing down my opinion when people bring up the IWTA, and your right, its better to just let it go.

All the best,


Jeff


----------



## Nabakatsu

I get sucked into saying things I shouldn't too.. let it go.. let it go.. yes.. that seems like a good idea.


----------

