I want to know everything i can about Hung Fa Yi Wing chun [Archive]

passing_through

07-29-2002, 09:04 PM

wingchunalex,

After laboring through the aimless and wandering comments you’ve shared, I think I’ve managed deduce your arguments. To make sure things are clear, I’ll be restating your main points as they’ve come across to me. I couldn’t immediately understand your criticisms. If I’ve missed your point, I presume you’ll make the attempt to make your assertions and conclusions more clear.

First is a rather abstract "if it is such a superior style of wing chun like it claim to be, then where is the proof. its all talk." No where has it been asserted that HFY is a superior style of Wing Chun. It HAS been asserted that HFY is a complete system of Wing Chun. If you feel that complete is somehow synonymous with superior, I can’t stop you from coming to that conclusion on your own. If you feel that your own experience with Wing Chun somehow lacks in methodology, tactics, strategy, philosophy or theory, you would be well served in examining your own training and HFY training more critically. In my personal experience, I’ve found the teaching and training to be very rewarding and it has personally benefited me on several levels.

The next criticism, as far as I can tell, accuses Sifu Meng of abandoning his roots. "why would meng totally desert his moy yat wing chun? why didn't he have faith in what he was doing? why will he not teach moy yat wing chun if he was such a great disciple of moy yat?" While I don’t speak for Sifu Meng, please follow the logic of the following argument: If Hung Fa Yi is indeed a complete system and possibly the best kind of Wing Chun, wouldn't a serious student necessarily abandon past loyalties to study the best? For example, suppose that I am a renowned student of Continental philosophy (Kantian). One day, I realize that the Kantians can't answer all philosophical questions adequately, but another system of philosophy can. Why would I then continue to concentrate on Kant? Why would I endorse the Continentals as the best philosophers when I knew that they weren't? As for Sifu Meng’s preference in Wing Chun, if you seriously want an answer, maybe you should ask him yourself instead of posting aimless musings on an on-line forum. The VTM is not devoted to any specific lineage of Wing Chun. Research is conducted through direct, personal interaction and study of Wing Chun lineages. By necessity, this research approach requires a significant investment in terms of time and effort. To date, the VTM has researched Yip Man Ving Tsun, continues to research both Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun and Chi Sim Weng Chun, and is establishing contact with several other families to begin research on them as well. Information is published as it is collected.

The next criticism is "Why would he have a museum basically devoted to yip man wing chun and then teach hung fa yi?" You seem to believe there is a contradiction between hosting the Ving Tsun Museum and teaching Hung Fa Yi. Regardless of Hung Fa Yi, it does not follow that Yip Man Wing Chun is not worthy of being researched and studied, especially if it is something Sifu Meng knows well. Are you asserting that the VTM should discontinue investigating Yip Man Wing Chun? To continue with my earlier example, the fact that the Continentals are not quite as complete as other philosophers does not mean that they are not worth study. The VTM sponsors training, certification and promotion of the Yip Man lineage. The most recent video tapes produced in collaboration with TC Media is explicitly on the Yip Man lineage. If you question Sifu Meng's credentials and teaching methodology, I suggest you check out these excellent videos. Wouldn't it be odd for Sifu Meng to hide information yet make it publicly available in a 4 volume set (soon to be 6)?

The next criticism is quite fallacious: "he came back and said that he had tae kwan do students teaching the wing chun classes, and that they didn't even know sil lim tau." Why couldn't a student study both Tae Kwan Do and Wing Chun? Are they mutually exclusive? Notice that you said nothing about the quality of the instruction but merely that he was a Taekwondo student as well. For your information, Mr. Hayden is a 3rd Degree Black Belt in Taekwondo and a 1st Degree Black Sash in Wing Chun. He has been studying martial arts for over 10 years. Your friend, the one that was here for three whole weeks, seems to be misinformed. With a lack of clear information as to his instructor in the beginner classes, it would seem to cast doubt on any other assertions he has made about the VTM. If you question credentials or abilities, have you raised these issues with Sifu Meng? I have to wonder of what concern it is to you how or who Sifu Meng decides should teach classes for beginners. To what do you refer with the term "siu lim tau". In the Hung Fa Yi lineage, that represents a very specific concept. Siu Lin Tau and Siu Nin Tau are two different parts of the system, each with a specific natures.

"i've talked with meng about wing chun and hung fa yi doesn't hold up to basic logic. he tried to tell me that if he tan da (palm up block and punch) my punch on the inside of my arm, i couldn't bock his punch with my free hand. it just doesn't make sence. and they seem to have the thinking that no one punches lower than the head." First of all, it seems to me that you don’t have a clue what you are talking about. It really sounds like you are criticizing before you understand. If you are the person of whom I am thinking, I recall the explanation and demonstration in the office of the school. Sifu Meng was explaining the concept of time and space as well as giving you a demonstration of that concept using Taan Da. He was explaining the difference in using the front hand as opposed to the back hand when being attacked. If you didn’t understand or disagreed with the explanation, why didn’t you comment on that when he asked you? I am forever amused by people that have "brilliant" responses to questions after the fact. Sifu Meng is always open to learning and encourages his students to challenge everything that is taught - "Respect the teacher, but don't believe the teacher" is a motto around the school. A student's experience will validate or disprove the teaching and the student is the final judge. The only requirement is an honest heart and an open mind to truly investigate the material offered. Getting a piece of information and then jumping to conclusions is not fair to the system, the teacher, or (ultimately) the student.

Your next comment was outrageous, sensational, and a personal attack against Sifu Meng, himself. "i personally think that meng is hiding his moy yat wing chun and keeping it to himself because he doesn't want people to have the good wing chun." This is similar to calling someone a “dooky-head” (formally known as an ad-hominem attack). BTW, see my comments above about the Yip Man video tapes.

(continued)

passing_through

07-29-2002, 09:08 PM

"take for example the article on this website about if your martial art is a system or a style. he blantenly says that hung fa yi is a complete "system" and that other wing chun is only partially a "system"." I notice that you merely comment but don’t really try to counter the definition offered in the article. If Sifu Meng is correct in his assertion, and you are sincerely interested in finding the best training available to you, wouldn’t you be required of your own volition to validate or refute Sifu Meng’s claims? Do you consider 4 visits with no genuine give-and-take discussion to be a true search for what is right and true? In the artcle you have referred to twice, "System vs. Style", a definition is offered for a system with criteria. HFY matches this definition. The article makes no assertions about other lineages, merely stating that some lineages loop. This is a true statement. For example, the Yip Man laap sau exercise is a looping exercise and is not trained in this manner in the HFY system. When you have to apply a technique, it should solve the situation. If you loop the same technique for any length of time, you're giving your opponent a chance to read your moves and counter-attack. In the Yip Man system, laap sau is taught in a saan-sau format, then chi sau, then long bridge and finally for fighting. Each part of the progression "un-learns" mistakes contained at the previous level. This type of training is considered to be looping in HFY. Laap Sau in HFY is a "larger" movement that breaks an opponent's structre. No loop is possible when applied so no loop is trained.

"also with everything he writes one seems to need to have a degree in physics/philosphy to understand it. wing chun is complex but its not complicated like that. isn't wing chun supposed to be based on simplicity and econmy." I am intrigued by your differentiation of complexity and complication, but that is far from the main issue and I fear it was more accidental rather than incidental. While I dislike using physics as an example of simple vs. complex, often the most beautifully simple and efficient things are based on mind-boggling complexity. The simple, beautiful, elegant theory of relativity requires ten obscenely complicated equations to be solved simultaneously in order to use in even the most simplified problem. As is often the case, simple in operation is complex in development. Any "easy-to-use" system - such as ATMs, cars, webpages - are very complex behind the scenes. When you study kicking, throwing, grabbing, joint control together with striking, training gets complex. HFY is very simple and efficient but only if you know what you're doing. If I just demonstrate it and don't explain what I'm doing, you won't understand it. And as is often the case, such as yours, even the explanation is misunderstood if the student is not ready to hear it. Is it a crime that Sifu Meng’s education and eloquence is lost on you? I’d suggest that you write an article on Wing Chun and watch the backlash when other people disagree with you. Your lack of comprehension does not make Sifu Meng’s teachings wrong, merely incomprehensible to you. The study of martial arts is not easy or obvious. Sifu Meng is very patient with questions from stubborn students that don’t understand. Sifu Meng often has to give several examples for students to grasp the essence of the teaching because they have too many misunderstandings and illusions that have to be overcome first.

Finally, I wish to point out something to you. “There is another wing chun school in the area called bey's martial arts, it is in trotwood. you might want to check it out. good luck. i hope for your sake im wrong about meng's.” Was this whole post simply a promotion for your own school at the expense of another? *eyebrow* You claim that Sifu Meng is promoting HFY at the expense of other approaches in his recent column here on www.kungfumagazine.com yet here you are doing the same thing. How is it that you're operating out of noble motives to warn the public yet Sifu Meng is hiding something and trying to put everyone else down? Is it possible that Sifu Meng is being honest in his writings?

Jeremy R.

PS - by argument, I am making an assumption that you are sincerely looking for truth. One's loyalty is only to the truth. If you are not looking for truth, sorry to waste the bandwidth.

Hendrik

07-29-2002, 09:35 PM

Gene,

"Man, how you WC guys ever keep track of all your lineages astounds me."

We went back to the past.
We collected all the Kuen Kuit since 1850's.

You know those kind of Indiana Jones work which at the end get lock up in the top secret basement. ;)

Hendrik

Geezer

07-30-2002, 05:23 AM

BOOO-YAAAHHH

byond

07-30-2002, 12:00 PM

lol---
r loewenhagen---i must share with you my information on dr. wu--first off dr. wu taught wing chun as well as hsing i, baqwa, tai chi, hung gar, northern mantis, chinese astrology, i ching theory and wu tang sword. in the add in the phone book i still have, he lists wing chun as one of the systems he teach's. beyond this fact-- i have met 6 differant students who learned wing chun from dr. wu as well as a seventh person /"sifu" who teachs wing chun and baqwa in the columbus area. all 7 students of dr. wu perform there forms the exact same way. there is consistancy---so it obviously came from the same source-- i question the validity of dr.wu's wing chun though....principle and historicaly---i believe i have figured out where and how he developed his wing chun---but that is another discusion

chango-- sup ---well i suppose if meng sifu was trying to hord the moy yat/ yip man wing chun he isnt doing a good job of it , since he offers the option of learning the moy yat/ yip man instead of learning the hfy, at the vtm (last i heard)-

jeremy-- lol , you are the king of posting----
one point i disagree with---when you say "wouldnt a serious student necessarily abandon past loyalties to study the best"---imo a "student" isnt quaified to determine what is "best":)--in a students limited referance point many things at differant times might look to be the best....and of cource what the student already "does"/lineage may be the "best" and yet they have no understanding of this because they havnt developed yet, in the context of what they are "doing"---- so instead of "chasing a dragon" i feel a student needs to stay in one method,.....as long as the method is authentic,---before determining if what they study has merrit
i dont believe past loyalties should ever be abandoned---i believe we owe, for life, a debt of honor to the people/family who give us our roots........dont misunderstand me------if someone for example learns X lineage for 10 years and changes to y lineage ----that is an experianced wc guy who has developed (hopfully) a referance point and hopfully tested and pushed the limits to what he knows----but you still keep your roots--- communication is important in doing this----talking with your sifu---explaining what is in your heart----as we know there is a right way of doing things and a wrong way of doing things----and we dont have to give up our loyalties to change what we learn

brian scanlon

wingchunalex

07-31-2002, 11:32 AM

Please tell me more about when and where Dr. Wu learned wing chun. Could you please also tell me who the 7 students were that learned wing chun from Dr. Wu. And could you please tell me what questions you have the validity of Dr. Wu's history and principle.

TO CHANGO (I think)- I did bring that question up to Mr. meng about my free hand being avalible to block his punch, he said that the punch is too fast. not to be any more rude than I alread Have been, I just wanted you to know that I did ask.

I will have a more complete response to the other responses that have been said later tonight.

passing_through

07-31-2002, 01:01 PM

Brian,

one point i disagree with---imo a "student" isnt quaified to determine what is "best"--

How are you defining “student”? What are the actions and desires of a student as compared to a non-student? Are all students of equal desire, intent, and action?

A student is one that quests after what is real and true. By this definition, most martial artists, meaning people that study martial arts for whatever reason, are not students. They study to the point of their understanding becoming comfortable and familiar and then stop progressing. I don’t make a judgment of that; I merely recognize it. For me, stopping when I am familiar and comfortable is not enough. For some martial artists, searching for what is real and true is the ultimate goal of their life, hence my usage of the term “serious students”. For martial artists that are less than serious students, because their goal of what is real and true is not driving their existence, the material studied is of less import.

Aren't we always and forever students? The day I stop learning is the day I die.

All experience will lead one to what is real and true given time and the desire to look for it due to the simple fact is that everything is interconnected and interrelated. Studying philosophy assists my study of combat which fuels and guides my study of harmony, etc. The question that must be answered individually for each of us is this: how much time do you wish to spend in searching for what is real and true?

so instead of "chasing a dragon" i feel a student needs to stay in one method,.....as long as the method is authentic,---before determining if what they study has merrit

True enough - but your argument begs a question - how does a student, which you've defined as someone not qualified to determine what is best, determine what is authentic? What distinction are you drawing between "authentic" and "best"? How is a student qualified to judge the former and not the latter? Where is the dividing line?

No experience is wasted. Often we learn from experience what not to do in the future. A student should stay with the training as long as it is providing what is sought. When initially beginning, a student knows nothing of what is real or true. Through experience and teaching, the student will build a frame of reference to judge what is taught against his or her own experience. If what is taught contradicts the student’s experience - the teaching should be questioned. If the student does not adequately understand his or her own experience, the teacher makes a correction and the training continues. If the teacher cannot explain the experience, or worse - ignores or attempts to invalidate the experience - the student has a decision to make: stay or move on. It is also possilbe that at some point the student may surpass the teacher's capabilities or interest. Just because an individual is a teacher does not mean that he or she cannot be come complacent and content with his or her own level of achievement. This is not wrong in and of itself. It becomes wrong when this teacher attempts to hold and limit her or her students from advancing beyond them. In this case, the student must move in on order to further his or her own search for what is real and true.

While a student should not simply jump from instructor to instructor based on whim or blind desire for novelty, a student must also not blindly accept whatever the teacher states as “gospel truth”. A student must respect and trust the teacher, regardless of the teacher's actual credibility. To do otherwise, to disrespect the teacher and to not trust the teaching, would preclude the possibility of learning as well as violate a fundamental student/teacher relationship: one of mutual respect, trust and loyalty. If, at a later date, the student discovers a more complete approach to teaching (a “better fit” if you will), the student - if honestly seeking for truth - must move on. Does this mean the student should resent the first teacher? Of course not. The first teacher prepared the student for moving on to the second teacher. In fact, without the first teacher, there would not be a second teacher. The student should only feel gratitude towards the first teacher. However, this is seldom the case, especially in martial arts. :( As was once said by Isaac Newton, "If I have seen ****her than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants." A student will always have respect and a certain debt to those that came before.

i dont believe past loyalties should ever be abandoned---i believe we owe, for life, a debt of honor to the people/family who give us our roots... and we dont have to give up our loyalties to change what we learn

Also true. As I stated in my example, studying the Continentals is not a wasted activity. You always have to keep an open mind because you never know when something will strike a cord within you and move you along on your journey. And as I stated above, without a teacher, a student would never progress in the first place. Upon reflection, it is possible to progress without a teacher but there will be a limit to personal growth without additional information. Therefore a student may never reach a full understanding of the path or the student's potential except with aid of a teacher. This is still true even if we progress beyond the teacher and move on to another. My parents taught me certain things. Should I now resent them because I have been taught information beyond what my parents knew? Should I curse them for being ignorant of combat and philosophy? What sort of son would I be if I did?

With that said, given that resources are limited - is it in my best interested to continue study in something that will ultimately not answer all my questions (assuming I’ve made the realization that the approach I study does not answer all questions to my satisfaction)? That's a personal decision to make and I'm not trying to answer that for anyone except myself. I just bring it to the table for consideration. Because it is recumbent on each of us to make that determination for ourselves, we have a duty to experience as much as we can of what is available. To simply discount something without honest experience is foolish. To discount something because someone I respect also discounts it is also foolish.

Loyalty and respect do not necessarily mean that a student must cling to tradition, lineage, or teacher. Our only loyalty is what is real and true. We can respect our teacher, even after moving on to other paths, but we must always focus on truth. Think about this: when you first desired to learn martial arts, was it “wing chun” that got you interested or “kung fu” or fighting or control of yourself or what? This a personal question each of us knows in his or her heart. When looking around at the arguments that occur between members of lineages or families, is it due to an honest search for truth or due to blindly clinging to one teacher, one path, or one way? I can appreciate what other people do, even if I don’t have an interest in serious study in their approach.

If I decide to study elsewhere, my Sifu will support my decision - and that is between my Sifu and myself; I don't need anyone else's approval or consideration for this decision. However, even after leaving could I deny my roots? Could I deny my heritage? I think the answer is a resounding, and obvious, NO. Even in kung fu, family is important. Where you start is where you start. I would, however, make a distinction between a client and a student. A client is someone paying a fee to learn a specific course of instruction. It's a simple fee-for-service relationship that ends when a specified commitment is reached. A student is someone that truly desires to learn and master the information offered. It is a relationship and a responsibility carrying greater rewards and liabilities (in my opinion). Before becoming a student of a particular lineage/art/style/system/teacher, you would be well advised to look around first. Often, people begin as clients and never progress into students. They attach themselves to ideas that they have not critically evaluated for themselves and argue only from one, narrow frame of reference. When people "buy in" to whatever is convenient rather than what is real and true it leads to a lot of confusion and miscommunication. In the “old days” one became a student by performing a Baai Si ceremony (literally “bowing to the teacher”). This signified that an individual was committed to a certain path. Whatever happens along the path - rocks or smooth roads, friends or thieves - the student must keep walking until the day he or she dies. Before making a serious committment, such as a Baai Si, it was required that an individual learn for a period of time (in a situation similar to what I refer to as a client) for the master to learn the student's character. If the charater was acceptable, the Baai Si could occur. If the character was not acceptable, no Baai Si was offered. This does not mean the person was required to leave the master and stop learning. Often people's character can change through training and personal effort, hopefully one of the goals of training in martial arts in the first place.

Studying the “best” and loyalty to our roots are two serious issues for students of the martial arts. It is worth the time and effort to honestly think about what we believe and for what reasons. I ask myself the following each day that I am alive: am I accepting something without critical thought? Am I blindly clinging to what is familiar for fear of what is alien? Do I dismiss without understanding?

Jeremy R.

wingchunalex

07-31-2002, 02:37 PM

what are you getting at? all of that is pretty much standard knowlege and common sense. Whats with all the "If I wanted to (blank) my sifu would (blank)? come one, you basically didn't say much in that that couldn't have been said in about 4 senteces.

Chango

08-01-2002, 02:08 AM

I really do not see any point in bothering with those that have a closed mind. It just gives Wing chun a bad name. It seems that the few on here seem to have aready made up their minds. it's sad but no further understanding seems to be possible here. Alex I'm sorry that you missed the point of what was being offered. Maybe you can pay us another visit and gain some better understanding. I cannot see it being gaind with a thread of this nature. The invite still stands you can contact the VTM. I will be more then happy to take the time to discuss wing chun in person. :cool:

Geezer

08-01-2002, 05:32 AM

On a more serious note, R loewenhagen still has not answered the question on the similarities/differences between Yip Man wing chun and HFY wing chun. Perhaps jeremy would like to enlighten us.
Maybe it's about time for Sunkuen to do some of his own research and look into the similiarities between Yip Man WCK and HFY WCK if there are any....?
If you have such a strong desire to find out the answers to your questions,why not go visit them yourself and find out.?
You can't expect everyone else to do the work for you and then give you a report on an open forum...?
There seems to be quite allot of reading material on the subject on the VTM website and in back issues of KF magazine..!

That would be a good start..!

Geezer

08-01-2002, 05:39 AM

what are you getting at? all of that is pretty much standard knowlege and common sense.

My dad always tells me "COMMON SENSE IS NOT THAT COMMON",there might be something in that for you.?:D

sunkuen

08-01-2002, 07:10 AM

"Maybe it's about time for Sunkuen to do some of his own research and look into the similiarities between Yip Man WCK and HFY WCK if there are any....?
If you have such a strong desire to find out the answers to your questions,why not go visit them yourself and find out.? "

Actually this forum is perfect for discussing this type of thing.Even though tempers will flare and insults will be thrown around,most of us here are big boy's and can take it. Benny dissed Moy Yat and the M.Y. family by studying under Garrett Gee. Even if it's not seen as a diss by the holier than thou VTMer's it is seen that way by the Moy Yat people.The question is what is it about the HFY thats so good that Benny would throw away his relationship with Moy Yat to study under G.G.? As far as running down to the museum to go find out why...DUH, what the hell do you think the forum is for??? The standard ******* response "go check it out for yourself" is really quite laughable when this forum exists to discuss these things. Are we only allowed to talk about technique's ,structure,rooting,blah blah blah?

"You can't expect everyone else to do the work for you and then give you a report on an open forum...?
There seems to be quite allot of reading material on the subject on the VTM website and in back issues of KF magazine..! "

All this reading material seems to be nothing more than history lessons and a few references to "time, space, nature" and the fact that siu lim tao is different than siu nim tao!!!

So what are the differences/similarities....Is your tan sau diff? Is your pak sau diff? Is your footwork diff? Does the five line theory really not exist in the Yip Man system? Are you sure the Yip Man system is not really complete? Is the dummy form diff? Is the staff form diff? Is the sword form diff? Is there a q tip big enuff to really clean R.L.'s ears??? Do you use the centreline in chi sau or do you simply attack it without really having a feel for it? Whats HFY's answer to the common headlock? Do you guy's use any stances besides the yjkym or the front stance/cat/bik ma? Is groungfighting a part of the HFY?

Since you guy's know the Yip Man system so well you should be able to tell us these things ,for after all who better to comment than someone who has trained in both systems.

Chango sez:
"I will be more then happy to take the time to discuss wing chun in person."

Please....are you givin' seminars now!!!:rolleyes:

p.s. chickencluck the only time you guy's bother responding to anything around here is when the VTM is mentioned.Sorta like Tom Kagan only responds when Moy Yat is mentioned. ;)

yuanfen

08-01-2002, 07:45 AM

The mysteries of marketing! To red5angel's credit he lets it all hang out-again and again and again.

Geezer

08-01-2002, 07:48 AM

So what are the differences/similarities....Is your tan sau diff? Is your pak sau diff? Is your footwork diff? Does the five line theory really not exist in the Yip Man system? Are you sure the Yip Man system is not really complete? Is the dummy form diff? Is the staff form diff? Is the sword form diff? Is there a q tip big enuff to really clean R.L.'s ears??? Do you use the centreline in chi sau or do you simply attack it without really having a feel for it? Whats HFY's answer to the common headlock? Do you guy's use any stances besides the yjkym or the front stance/cat/bik ma? Is groungfighting a part of the HFY?

You have so many questions,if I had as many questions as you I would want to check it out for myself...!

Think about it,it's not that hard.!
You don't go buying a car without test driveing it yourself.
You don't ask someone else to taste food for you(unless your Saddam,scared people are out to off you,LOL).!
How can someone elses experiance, affect your training(do you train.?),why don't you make the effort to experiance it,then you may have the answers your looking for.!:D

Geezer

08-01-2002, 07:54 AM

Even though tempers will flare and insults will be thrown around,most of us here are big boy's and can take it. Benny dissed Moy Yat and the M.Y. family by studying under Garrett Gee. Even if it's not seen as a diss by the holier than thou VTMer's it is seen that way by the Moy Yat people.

Didn't Yip Man have more than one teacher.?

Tom Kagan

08-01-2002, 08:16 AM

Benny dissed Moy Yat and the M.Y. family by studying under Garrett Gee. Even if it's not seen as a diss by the holier than thou VTMer's it is seen that way by the Moy Yat people.

I am the author of the agreement between the Ving Tsun Museum and Moy Yat.

I would be improper for me to discuss the details of my SiHing's relationship with our Sifu. However, I can assure you that whatever perceived issues you believe may or may not stand between Benny Meng and Moy Yat (and Moy Yat's wife), they have nothing to do with Mr. Garrett Gee.

Many people go through life searching for something that even they might not be sure what it is. Because of this, Ving Tsun couldn't possibly fit everyone. Also because of this, my sifu's system of teaching couldn't fit everyone, either.

Many of my SiHings have gone on to study not only from other martial art Sifus, but to other areas in life as well. This act, in itself, was never a problem. If you chose to have Moy Yat guide you through the complete Ving Tsun system or you chose not to, this one decision on your part made no difference in your relationship to Sifu.

yuanfen

08-01-2002, 08:45 AM

Geezer asks:Didn't Yip Man have more than one teacher?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So?...per tradition he lists his first teacher Chan Wah Shun in his well known lineage listing. While his teachers taught him different things- the roots were all in interpretations of Leung Jan's wing chun and therefore rooted in yee gee kim yeung ma, chum kiu etc.

On a list if things are introduced- one should be able to discuss and compare openly and clearly similarities and differences
in structure, theory, principles and motions. Specially when the claim is made that HFY is more advanced than Ip man or other non Ip man wing chun.Thats what sunkuen seemed to be asking in the first place.Comparison and details thereof.

Without that "come and see" is a form of spamming.In marketing-its a form of diversification in offering wares..

BTW Benny Meng is entitled to his museum- its his money and his school. He can offer TKD, WC, or HFY or anything else he may want to sell. In commercial offerings- the standard rule applies-caveat emptor. But on open lists like this one it seems to me that if someone associated with Meng's operation mentions a subject its fair game to ask for clear explanations specially when the inference is that the latest ****whaz on the market is the best that there is. Sunkuen's question it seems to me is a fair one.

Chango

08-01-2002, 09:22 AM

***Benny dissed Moy Yat and the M.Y. family by studying under Garrett Gee. Even if it's not seen as a diss by the holier than thou VTMer's it is seen that way by the Moy Yat people.The question is what is it about the HFY thats so good that Benny would throw away his relationship with Moy Yat to study under G.G.? ***

This shows exactly how much this person knows about the relationship between Sifu Meng and Sigung Moy Yat. In the Moy Yat family you are urged to find your own way and not to copy your teacher. Sigung had a Zen approach to martial arts. Anyone who knew him could see this. So there was no Diss. The VTM and it's members have nothing but positive things to say about the Moy Yat family. The"system approach" is one of many things that make this lineage a true treasure. However I can see that you're just trying to stir things up. Couldn't you use this time to develop your skills training instead of wasting all of our time.

***As far as running down to the museum to go find out why...DUH, what the hell do you think the forum is for??? The standard ******* response "go check it out for yourself" is really quite laughable when this forum exists to discuss these things. Are we only allowed to talk about technique's ,structure,rooting,blah blah blah? ***

This is another example of the lack of research and exposure to the WC community. you seem to be what I call a newstand kung fu master (LOL) If you really think that you can draw conclusions about a entire lineage from a chat forum or even any written word without experiencing it first hand you really have missed the boat. first of all through experiences of real research I can be the first to tell you that many WC systems use the same terms to express very different ideas. As a matter of fact sometimes they can be quite close to the same idea but with a few details changed they can be expressed quite differently. some of this can be due to the difference in lineages sometimes it can be due to personal expression. at any rate a chat forum is not a place where these things can be passed on. If that was the case. We could just offer a internet Wing chun correspondance course. LOL! This chat forum for me is a place to enjoy the company of fellow WC people. Nothing more and nothing less.

***So what are the differences/similarities....Is your tan sau diff? Is your pak sau diff? Is your footwork diff?***

Different then what? and to explain it would mean I would have to explain why we do every detail and from all angles. this is clearly not the place to waste my time and energy doing so. Especially when I know it must be experienced not discribed. Not to mention that you have attachment to what you consider to be the way of things.

***Does the five line theory really not exist in the Yip Man system?***

does the moon exist? however if you never notice it or point it out it does not exist to you. It is a constant my freind. but keep in mind if can not be referenced in every aspect of the system then the concept is lost. remember the system should point you to the truth. The truth should be there even if you do not see it.

*** Are you sure the Yip Man system is not really complete? Is the dummy form diff? Is the staff form diff? Is the sword form diff? Is there a q tip big enuff to really clean R.L.'s ears??? Do you use the centreline in chi sau or do you simply attack it without really having a feel for it?***

What is your understanding of what centerline is? and How do you "use it"? but then we would also have to cover how your system makes reference to three dementional space. but then we would have to ask if it does? No not causally brushing the topic but crystal clear references in every aspect.

The ears comment shows exactly how little kung fu you have. This is what you have to resort to when you lack any real substance. It only reflects on you. How old are you ? would even a High school kid take you seriously with statments like that? I hope that is your last attempt to show your wit. or should we say lack of wit?

*** Whats HFY's answer to the common headlock? Do you guy's use any stances besides the yjkym or the front stance/cat/bik ma? Is groungfighting a part of the HFY? ***

Come and see us we will explain! no better yet allow us to show you. What is your definition of YJKYM and stances? I know from your question that we do not share the same ideas on this. Isn't ground fighting a real part of combat? How could we call it a complete combat system if it ignores this or does not honestly address this reality?

***Since you guy's know the Yip Man system so well you should be able to tell us these things ,for after all who better to comment than someone who has trained in both systems.***

Exactly! You will not be able to grasp the idea without the experience! I have experienced them both and I can tell you this! So why argue any further? As I have said before and anyone that has seen them both with tell you. You have to experience it to honestly understand.

***
Chango sez:
"I will be more then happy to take the time to discuss wing chun in person."

Please....are you givin' seminars now!!!***

Now to conclude this "online" seminar I will open an invite for you and Alex to come to the VTM with a open mind (if possible at this point) and experience HFY for yourself. If you have a question on a particular issue please ask it and do your self a favor by not speculating on things. The idea that this is marketing is quite silly. Experience is the very nature of the subject at hand. To assume that is marketing seems to reflect the lack of understanding of what a marketing stratagy is. It also displays the fact that the point being made about experience being the true teacher is being missed as well. I hope this moves things to a more worth while focus. Thank you for your time.

byond

08-01-2002, 03:32 PM

hi!!
jeremy--still the king of post's sir!---o.k here we go...a student? well i think the" new college edition american heritage dictionary of the english language" defines a "student " in a simple and economic way--(student- one who makes study of something)
you asked me " What are the actions and desires of a student as compared to a non-student?" ---well by the definition, the "action" of a student , would be to actively study something....the desire, of a student would be "to want to study the "something" that they had chosen to study"----the actions and desires of a non student would be having no desire to learn "something" as well as not studying "something"
anything else would be a projection of my opinion on the definitions. i would agree that all students are of a differant desire, intent and action.

when you say " a student is one that quests after what is real and true"--- "real and true" are a specific "something" that a student can study. of cource a student could also decide that "false and illusion" might be the "something " they wish to devote there time to learn. but i understand what your 'opinion' of a "student" is and that to qualify as a student, by your definition, in your opinion, should study what is "real and true".
i agree, that by your definiton/opinion, most martial artists are not students. by the above definition i gave from the dictionary, we can see that all martial artists are students because they are studying "something"
i agree most people study to their point of becoming comfortable and familiar and than stop progressing. most people are simply lazy( imo)
when you said " i dont make a judgment on that; i merely recogognize it"---one definition of "judgment" is the mental ability to percieve and distinguish relationships.....in my opinion you have distinguished, what in your opinion/perception, is a student from a non student....so that is a judgment imo, but not a negative criticism type judgment.
your statement that" some m.a the search for what is real and true is the ultimate goal of there life, hence my use of the term "serious student"----i personaly like that---imo there is a huge distinction between a serious student from just an average student.
when you say "arent we always and forever students?"--well by your definiton/opinion of a " student "i would have to say no we are not always students since many people were never a student to begin with----if we use my dictionary definition of "student" --i would agree that we are students forever..but that is my opinion of cource.
when you say "all experience will lead one to what is real and true given time and the desire to look for it" ---so by this i could draw the conclusion that even "less"complete" or less authentic WC will lead to the same place as a "more complete" WC will....so if they both evail the same truth, than why would you worry, about having to discern, what is less complete or more complete or real and unreal....a waist of energy(imo) in the context of your statement...when i can just maintain my cource and sooner or later arive at the distination
:D
i love validation---i knew someone would bite my hook----authentic---"having an undisputed origin".... when something is "authentic"--- this is not a matter of opinion , it is verifiable amd traceable. there is criterea and standards that need to be met when classifying anything. this type of authenicating is fairly easy to do especially with the internet and a tad of common or uncommon sence as the case may be..lol ---------
imo there is no true "best" anything. there is only opinion on what is best, and opinion is in the state of constant flux, because of the changing referance point of an individual.

passing_through

08-01-2002, 03:38 PM

Sunkuen,

While I mull over the last few posts, here's something for you to read.

You asked about Taan Sau. There is a technical discussion contained in the following article:

Jeung Ngh, the Father of Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun (http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/loewenhagen/jeung_ngh.php)

The information I would like to bring to your awareness consists of three parts:

Part 1 - begins in the 8th paragraph (starting with the text, In Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kuen, Taan Sau is trained consistently...) and continues through to the end of paragraph 10. This first part establishes HFY's ideas about time and space.

Part 2 - begins in paragraph 11 and continues to the end of paragraph 14. The second part covers the Wing Chun Formula.

Part 3 - begins with paragraph 19 and continues to the end of paragraph 21. The third part covers when and where to employ Taan Sau and, more importantly, why.

I've outlined these paragraphs for you as you've noted that most articles written by VTM staff have been of an historical nature. This article, while discussing history, is also a fairly technical piece. Please post your feedback, issues for clarification, disagreements, agreements, etc. on this forum. The more specific the comments, the better we might discuss them.

Also for consideration, I would like to ask those following this thread the following question: how is taan sau employed with a focus on maximum efficiency? Wingchunalex, I am especially interested in your thoughts, as you've heard Sifu Meng discuss this in person. Once some ideas have been presented, including my own, we can discuss the merits of the answers.

I am, of course, making the assumption (always dangerous) that the questions asked about HFY in this thread are asked in a sincere attempt to understand HFY rather than criticize it without rational thought. If, at the end of this exercise, nothing more has been accomplished than to show the trolls and real "zombies" for what they are, I will be satisfied. Debates such as this help me to clarify my own thoughts and I welcome the chance to grow in my own understanding.

Jeremy R.

byond

08-01-2002, 04:14 PM

when you said " no experience is wasted"---i agree
when you said "a student must not except whatever the teacher states as "gospel truth"--i agree
when you said "you always have to keep an open mind"--in referance to studying the continentals.....if you have already decided that the continentals cannot answer all your questions than your mind is not open, your mind is made up. we must be multi dimensional in our thinking,imo ..... perhaps the problem is that the student, in this situation, simply didnt understand the answers that the continentals gave.

brian scanlon

byond

08-01-2002, 04:43 PM

hi jeremy---my 2 posts were meant to be together but things didnt work oot that way..lol....
i re-read the tan sau ng article and will respond tomorow...have a good night
brian

Rolling_Hand

08-01-2002, 09:07 PM

<<You dont ask someone else to taste food for you --Geezer>>

Geezer,
Well said, Sunkeun is always hungry for something.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This weekend’s activities have had a profound effect on me personally that permanently reshapes my thoughts, beliefs, and training approach to the martial arts. Having studied Shotokan for over 12 years with parallel study in Goshin Jitsu Karate, I felt secure in my abilities. In fact, I previously believed that no system was superior to another, that superiority was manifested by the attributes of the practitioner rather than in the methodology and techniques of the system. Now, my blindfold has been removed and I believe that with practice and study, I can begin to clearly see the true picture.
The most important realization for me this weekend was the utility, depth and breadth of the formula. As was stated numerous times, one expresses the formula or one does not - there is no effective approximation. No other art that I have studied can be broken down and expressed as a formula to efficiently communicate the content and intent of the system.
Prior to this weekend, I was holding myself back from contributing 100% of my mind, body, and spirit to kung fu because of the adherence to my constipated beliefs. Now I am ready and excited to devote myself 100% to the study of combat science through Hung Fa Yi. --From Brett M.

This weekend has reinforced my belief in the HFY system. Being a technically trained professional (engineer), HFY to me is more of a combat science than an art. But to technical people, science is art. From that perspective, it’s a combat art also. But I also understand that not all art is science. That is what sets HFY apart from other martial art that I’m familiar with.
As an engineer, I live in a digital world. Everything is a “1” or a “0”. With Hung Fa Yi, you have it or you don’t. Hung Fa Yi has a formula, it’s measurable. You can examine a person’s structure and observe whether the formula is present or not. The formula can be expressed in both words and body movements (positions).
This seminar has given me a much greater understanding of the language of Hung Fa Yi. I can express the formula with my body and with very few words. I understand the principles on which the formula is based - the most efficient use of the human body for combat.
The coverage or review of centerlines, 5 line theory, 6 and 4 gate theory, Jong Sao, Gate Jong, etc. has been great and most beneficial. If this was not great and I didn’t believe in this system, I would not be here on Easter Sunday. --From Carl D.

anerlich

08-01-2002, 10:02 PM

From Carl D.

Not ... THE Carl D? I hope red5angel is reading!

The testimonials are excellent and I'm sure these guys are sincere, though full names and contact details for verification of impartiality would make them more credible. Otherwise similar testimonials adorn a horde of dodgy advertising campaigns.

Anecdotal evidence is almost universally discounted in the search for objective proof in science, etc., as lamented by many pedlars of alternative health products.

This is not to say that HFY may not be everything it is purported to be, just that the articles on the site and these posts give no rigorous proof for (or against) it.

All sorts of claims of varying quality and outrageousness are made by various WC lineages by their proponents. Being from TWC, I've seen some that have made me cringe, my only solace being that many other style leaders who should know better have done the same.

Basically, Wing Chun excellence comes from within, not from secrets held by an elite. And scientific principles work the same for everybody, they are not exclusive to a particular lineage.

No, I WON'T go to the VT museum to check it out. I live in Oz and spent all my travelling money visiting my relatives in Britain last year. If I wanted another MA related OS trip (I've been to China, Taipei and Japan) it would be to LA or Brazil. Plenty of good stuff right where I live though.

The tan sao Ng article was pretty good.

yuanfen

08-01-2002, 10:07 PM

You asked about Taan Sau. There is a technical discussion contained in the following article:
------passing through
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not very technical...just words.
Scientism and science are quite different things.

sunkuen

08-01-2002, 10:21 PM

It's far too late to read your short storybooks right now (1:17am) I'll reply 2morrow. But to ease your little minds for now,I make fun of you guy's cuz well its fun seein' yous get your panties into tight little knots. Let's get this crystal clear though...I don't make fun of any Branch, Style,System or whatever of Wing Chun K.F. (even red5dangle'S)!!! I will however make fun of your own Kung Fu:D

R.I.P.

Sunkuen

anerlich

08-01-2002, 10:35 PM

If I wanted another MA related OS trip (I've been to China, Taipei and Japan) it would be to LA or Brazil.

****, I left out .... Minneapolis! :D

yuanfen

08-04-2002, 01:25 AM

Lots of silly fussing over tan sau on several sides, it seems to me anyway....about outside/inside or "scientific" and "new"approach to tan sao.
Tan with proper structure and timing can be used inside or outside the other fella's hand position when the line is there.

passing_through

08-05-2002, 09:33 AM

wingchunalex,

In reading your comments on this thread, you raised (at least) 7 points to which I responded. I have yet to see a more complete reply than : what are you getting at? all of that is pretty much standard knowlege and common sense. If what I have written in response to you was “standard knowledge and common sense” I trust that in the future you will refrain from making similar, baseless assertions as you did in this thread.

Jeremy R.

passing_through

08-05-2002, 09:37 AM

Before making a comparison between Yip Man, Yuen Kay-San/Sum Nung and HFY I want to make a few things clear:

1) "Come and See" - The study of martial arts includes gaining experience using your whole body, your mind and your spirit. The majority of this experience cannot be communicated through the written word. Email and internet discussion forums can only introduce basic ideas. Anything more than basic information requires personal, one-to-one interaction. After having a shared experience, email and forums are beneficial to discuss the shared experience. If you fail to accept this as an axiom, there is no basis for communication. I state that email and forums are limited and ultimately not reality - and that to completely understand something you must experience it. If you refuse to accept this, there is nothing to discuss. If you do accept this, I can only discuss to a certain point before your question has to be addressed in person.

2) HFY as "best" system - This depends on what you are using to define as the reason for studying martial arts. For the purpose of this discussion, I am defining the reason for study as of human, hand-to-hand combat. With that in mind, "best" is not a personal judgment based on personal criteria. When dealing with combat there are two aspects: the combat system and the person operating it. In W.W.II, it took 4 to 5 Sherman Tanks to stop one German Tiger Tank. If the crewmen of both sets of tanks were equally skilled the advantage was due to combat system. This is an example of a superior combat system. On the other hand, a combat veteran with a handgun can often kill a novice with an AK-47. This is the benefit of experience. A combat system must be based on science while the human factor must be based on experience. In hand-to-hand combat, there are superior systems and inferior systems. I submit that HFY is a system based on objective fact and not personal opinion and belongs to the "superior" system category. I make no statements about other lineages or families - I feel that is up to members of those families to make their own assertions or deny the validity of mine with clear reasoning.

3) System vs. style - For the purposes of this discussion, I define "style" as an artist's characteristic manner of expression and a "system" as an established orderly way of doing something, based on principles. A combat system, such as HFY, should be based on what is real and true rather than one's experience and opinions. HFY is based upon truth, a body of principles and facts. The expression of these principles and facts is an individual style. This is different than teaching a system based on one's personal experience, personality and opinions. However, the expression of this type of training is also an individual style. Do you see where problems can arise when a system is based on personal opinion rather than facts and science? That says nothing about other systems/styles; you may very well study a system based on facts but you have to make that assertion and support it, not me. Nor should you conclude that I am stating that if you study anything other than HFY you're a doo-doo head, stupid, vacuous, ignorant, or any thing in that vein. If you feel that your lineage/family/approach/whatever is also based on what is real and true, lay out support for your position.

4) From what information that has been gathered to date by the VTM, it is the conclusion of the VTM, as an organization, that HFY is the original style of Wing Chun from which all lineages that contain the three forms of Siu Nim Tau, Chum Kiu, and Biu Ji as their core originated. It is a comprehensive system that contains certain ideas, concepts, principles, techniques and methods that are unique and original to HFY. I'm not saying that if you learn HFY you're going to be able to beat your opponent 100% of the time. As I stated above, there is the human factor to consider. Alson, I am not making a value judgement on other systems; to state that HFY is the original form takes away nothing from other lineages and families. If you feel the need to infer that I am stating HFY is superior, I cannot stop you. However, I tell you now that you are the one making this assertion, not me.

A book is in the works by the VTM to present the evidence and conclusions in regards to Wing Chun history. It should be on the market early-to-middle next year.

===================

Now for a general comparison between HFY and Yip Man and Yeun Kay-San. I have actual experience in Yip Man and Hung Fa Yi. I have very limited experience in Yuen Kay-San/Sum Nung - primarily intellectual understanding. I'm awaiting the next YKS/SN workshop or Friendship Seminar for more information. :)

Philosophy
HFY - based on Chan Buddhism
YM - based on individual teachers
YKS - based on individual teachers

Heath training
HFY - Heigung (qigung): Siu Nim Tau form, Heaven, Man, and Earth postures, Iron Body, Iron Palm, and Faat Ging (Fa Jing) exercises, together with herbal knowledge. Without a foundation in SNT heigung, Biu Ji will never be fully expressed.
YM - Siu Nim Tau form, general introduction to heigung - anything more that is taught has been introduced by individual teachers from outside Yip Man's teachings. Most well-known disciples do not address the issue of heigung, focusing instead on fighting capability. Heigung information most often comes from sources outside Wing Chun
YKS - Kidney Washing, introduced from a source outside Wing Chun

Combat strategy/tactics
HFY - Five Methods of combat, all ranges from kicking to striking to locking to throwing/grabbing
YM - based on individual teachers, tend to avoid ground and long kicking
YKS - based on individual teachers

Science
HFY - dimensional awareness
YM - directional awareness
YKS - directional awareness

Chi Sau Methodology
HFY - Kiu Sau, Chi Sau (single, double, cross), Saan Sau
YM - Chi Sau (single, double - very few even attempt cross hand)
YKS - Chi Sau (single, double) and Saan Sau

Ultimately, YM and YKS training is based on individual teachers, changing with each generation. HFY is based on consistent reference points and utilizes checks and balances throughout the system. Again, this is not a value judgement. If you are happy and enjoy the system you train, I am happy for you. If you are curious about HFY, I'll welcome your questions. I am not trying to "win" anyone over. I share what I know and leave it up to you to decide matters for yourself.

passing_through

08-05-2002, 09:50 AM

Brian,

I'll have something for you tomorrow at lunchtime. I don't have much time to finish things today. I haven't forgotten.

Here's something really quick:

when you said "you always have to keep an open mind"--in referance to studying the continentals.....if you have already decided that the continentals cannot answer all your questions than your mind is not open, your mind is made up. we must be multi dimensional in our thinking,imo ..... perhaps the problem is that the student, in this situation, simply didnt understand the answers that the continentals gave.

I partially agree and partially disagree with your statements. This is not an issue of open-mindedness. If, through rational and logical investigation, I realize that the Continentals (or any other systems of thought) attempt to force a conclusion along the lines of 2+2=3, I must reject this system of thought. An open mind does not change logical fallacies and incorrect conclusions. However, while the Continenetals may not by completely true, I cannot discount valid conclusions even if only one part of the overall system of thought is erroneous. Additionally, and this is speaking for me personally, as I learn new information I compare it to old information to see if I came to the wrong conclusion in my investigation.

An open mind is one that allows us to think critically about what we have been taught and what we have experienced. A closed mind does not allow for critical thought. A closed mind might realize that a system of thought is proposing 2+2=3 and continues to argue for the validity of the system of thought regardless of this realization.

Jeremy R.

byond

08-05-2002, 11:56 AM

hi jeremy---what are you trying to do to me?? i dont know what to talk about first..lol...aaaaaaaarrrrrrr
o.k..on the continental example...... i see your point ....but if "through rationale and logical investigation"-----this depends on individual ability to use logical deduction---if someones logic is flawed, than they are not understanding the answer the continentals(as per our example) gave---i believe we have to be carefull so we dont miss something do to our ignorance-----i agree if one who is skilled in logical reasoning, determins that a particular paradigm is forcing an inncorrect conclusion,,,,they need to reject that particular paradigm....i personaly agree and always cross referance all my conclusions with all new data, imo as would anyone in search of the truth...and yes critical thinking is a must(imo)

anerlich---:D oh no ...time to start from scratch for red5angel

byond

08-05-2002, 12:43 PM

hi jeremy...this is a responce to your comparison post

1) "come and see"---i agree

2) hfy as "best" system---i dont have enough information nor experience to agree or disagree---when you say "i submit that hfy is a system based on objective fact and not personal opinion---lol....to me that statement is opinion...can you elaborate on your reasoning

3) i agree---but...doo doo head?
:D

4) historicaly i disagree---from the information i have gathered, it is my conclusion that yks and koolo village are the most original in flavor..... old style wing chun from wong wah bo traditionaly used small frame ygkym as seen in fok bo chun student yks as well as leung jans teachings in koolo village...it was passed down by the fung family that wong wah bo was the originator of the wing chun that contains the 3 hand forms......if we compare what fok bo chun taught to what leung jan taught in fatsan we see that there are almost identical except for some of the teachings from fung siu ching that yks learned and added in....though in the yks system they have preserved what came from fok bo chun and what came from fung siu ching.....many things are consistant with what leung jan taught in fatsan to what he taught in koolo village...though there was some modification...the structure for the transmision of knowledge changed....but over all,the common denominator's are"sound " in supporting what red boat performer wong wah bo passed on......
now if we look at things from a differant angle.....examining hfy...that is somewhat harder to do for me...i have limited access to hfy knowledge and experience....but a fast examination of the hfy curiculum,on the vtm web site,causes more questions for me than answers....for example the 2 seperate concepts of siu nim tao and siu lien tao.....from my understanding yip man exclusivly used the term siu "nim" to....no one else uses it...the use of the term bot tzam do is exclusivly a yip man word....im not sure how terms yip man came up with,would have made there way into an original version of the system. as well as the luk sao platform...this was something that was created by yks and yip man....koolo village doesnt have the luk sao platform..they have the circling hands....yip man came up with the dan chi sao concept....so ive never understood how this material is in a system that is supposed to predate the material im refering to.....additionaly hfy has hei gung in the system....red boat performer wong wah bo did not pass on any teachings on hei gung or chi...this can be verified in the yks system since there hei gung form was imported from external sources as well as in koolo village...which leung jan , a doctor, didnt pass on teachings on chi....he obviously didnt believe it was part of the system because he wasnt taught that way...also hei gung is something that takes lots of "time and energy to develope --i didnt think the early wc clan had time to learn like this....... one of the points of wc was shorter training time....
gotta go,lunch time for me , famine is kicking me arse.
brian

Tom Kagan

08-05-2002, 03:43 PM

Ultimately, YM and YKS training is based on individual teachers, changing with each generation. HFY is based on consistent reference points and utilizes checks and balances throughout the system. Again, this is not a value judgement.

What scientific experiment do you have to show reproducible proof that the Ving Tsun of Jeung Ngh is identical to what my SiHing is trying to teach you?

Of the Hung Fa Yi method, there seems to be only Mr. Garrett Gee trying to teach publicly in the past decade. His background comes from other martial arts. Benny Meng has been learning it only the past five years. His background is also in other martial arts. My SiHing, in turn, is now trying to teach it to you. If memory serves, your background also comes from other martial arts.

Whether the Hung Fa Yi method will remain constant - not based on "individual teachers, changing with each generation" - can only be proved with a far greater amount of branching of the lineage's tree than seen up until now.

Only time will tell whether you are correct. You haven't yet completed one of your systems you started and gone off and attempted teach others on your own. At this point, all that is evident is your faith and trust in your sifu's (in reality, your new SiGung's) ability to guide you through the Hung Fa Yi method of learning Ving Tsun and your belief that you will, eventually, "have the true system." To me thus far, this appears to parallel not only most other lineages of Ving Tsun, but other types of martial arts as well.

This is not a value judgment, either.

wingchunalex

08-05-2002, 04:16 PM

my comment about common sence was directed at the "article" about what a true "student" was. I may have made a mistake and thought you wrote that "article" on the forum. sorry if that was someone else. I wasn't refering to your replies about what I said.

wingchunalex

08-05-2002, 04:21 PM

What you said is exactly what I have been getting at with what I said about Meng, HFY, and the VTM. Thank you for writing that and putting it so clearly. You did a much better job than I did.

wingchunalex

08-05-2002, 04:24 PM

Thank you for pointing out some things that I neglected. What you pointed out is quite important in my oppinion.

wingchunalex

08-05-2002, 04:26 PM

great thinking on the lack of proof that hung fa yi is the original wing chun. And good ideas to back it up. I agree with you all the way.

Tom Kagan

08-05-2002, 04:37 PM

Moy Yat didn't mind if you studied OTHER martial arts, but don't slap him in the face by studying wing chun from another sifu.

You purport to know a lot about my sifu. I am, by far, not even close to an authority on Moy Yat. But, based on your posts, why is it that it appears that you have never spent any real time with him? Like many people, Moy Yat had his disagreements with others. But he truly believed there was never anything that could permanently come between him and a student which could not be worked out given enough time and effort by the student. He even had an expression for this: "Always leave the back door unlocked."

I have a SiHing who studied another martial art with a very famous sifu before that other sifu died. My SiHing lives in California and decided he wanted to learn Ving Tsun from my sifu. My sifu took him as a student and did what he could to guide my SiHing from a distance and whenever my SiHing could come to New York or sifu could travel to California. Sifu later discovered one of his own SiHings had emigrated to California and lived near my SiHing. Sifu told my SiHing to study with him instead.

That SiHing's name is Dan Inosanto.

There are countless other SiHings who chose to study with other Ving Tsun sifus. Some were even sent with a letter of introduction to some of sifu's classmates so that SiHing could have a better chance to be accepted as a student. I even have SiHings who have chosen to become students of other SiHings!

Moy Yat was not "slapped in the face" by these SiHings choices. Of course, by the same token, he did not give his blessing, either. Study with him; study with someone else; it really was up to the student. I'll say it again: this one decision made no difference in your relationship to Moy Yat. What he cared about was how you treated him and what he observed in the way you treated others.

Rolling_Hand

08-05-2002, 05:14 PM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moy Yat didn't mind if you studied OTHER martial arts, but don't slap him in the face by studying wing chun from another sifu.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If anyone can turn on Benny Meng's hair, it's Moy Yat himself, not Sunkeun or Alex. You act impressed with your lips, but you might need to wash your mouth once awhile. With all these jives about what Sunkeun said, what Alex said... the good news is that you still have time to get a haircut and come back to entertain us with your new hair-do.

sunkuen

08-05-2002, 05:24 PM

So Tom,
Why did Moy Yat get so ****ed when he found out about Benny learning from Garrett Gee?

sunkuen

08-05-2002, 05:27 PM

Glad to see yer back dude!!!

Rolling_Hand

08-05-2002, 05:35 PM

LOL, all thanks to you...dude!!

Rolling_Hand

08-05-2002, 07:34 PM

one finds these thing out through sparring. you can talk all day about theory, but in the end it doesn't mean anything. being able to apply wing chun under pressure is where the proof is.--Alex

Alex - Open your mouth....ARRRRRRRR....do you feel it?
You believe there's a reason for why your lips intches, but keep rationnalization to yourself.

Rolling_Hand

08-05-2002, 08:20 PM

Alex - Your fat lips gets you everywhere, but your fang runs into corner!!!

Chango

08-05-2002, 09:27 PM

sunkuen,
I don't see any point in going further with your poor behaivior. Myself and the rest of the "VTMer's" will no longer respond to childish statments like:

-what do you think meathead???
-Do you even read your own idiotic post's??? Or do they just spew from some cesspool located somewhere near your temporal lobe?
-I guess this is why Benny,Richy and chickencluck are publishing all kinds of articles all over the place then, right smartguy!!!(LOL)
-This is exactly how G.G. tricked you guy's into believing he was superior...It doesn't work on those with an I.Q. above 20.!!!
-You guy's may have experienced the real Moy Yat Wing Chun but you have not learned it from the guy who says " This is where the centreline ends and tae kwon do begins"!!!

This just demonstrates your level of understanding. Not to mention your lack of class. Sunkeun "if that is your real name"please visit the VTM if you ever get a chance. We are above these silly attacks. we remain open to a real discussion about Wing chun.

-sunkeun-- What this really shows is how Benny keeps you guy's in the dark as to what really went on. The relationship may have been good but when Benny took up with G.G. , Moy Yat kicked him out of the family.

You have to realize as one of Sifu Mengs closest students I witness generally everything that goes on in the VTM. So you must realize how silly this statment of yours must seem. However I will not even go down that path with you. The "VTMer's" will not engage in your little games of politics. was it you that mentioned an I.Q. of 20. You are so far off base it's not even funny. But again you play your politics I will wait for you to move to more worthy topics.

Thankyou for your time. I hope to see a improvement in the future.

sunkuen

08-05-2002, 09:46 PM

"But again you play your politics I will wait for you to move to more worthy topics."

What more worthy topics....according to you none of these things can be discussed here on an internet forum!!! According to you guy's these "discussions " must be done only at the VTM in order for one to understand!!!

:rolleyes:

Chango

08-05-2002, 09:57 PM

I have no problem discussing things in a less hostile setting. I cannot see anything being covered here on this thread. Things would be handled more like a interigation instead of a discussion. It does not take scientist figure that one out. Sunkeun no hard feelings here let's just move on.:cool:

sunkuen

08-05-2002, 10:02 PM

Do you like the Hung Fa Yi better than the Chi Sim of Andreas Hoffman? Theres a guy in brooklyn teaching the Chi Sim in case your interested.

Chango

08-05-2002, 10:28 PM

I cannot I say I like one better then the other. I enjoy them both. my identity is HFY. I also practice Chi Sim! I find them both very comprehensive. I cannot say that I compair. I don't see a reason to. In fact I don't find myself compairing one Wing chun to the next. That is not the point of the VTM.

sunkuen

08-05-2002, 10:33 PM

"I cannot say that I compair. I don't see a reason to. In fact I don't find myself compairing one Wing chun to the next. That is not the point of the VTM."

Don't make me call you a meathead again!!!

For the sake of discussion I asked for your comparison!!!

Jeff Preston

08-05-2002, 11:00 PM

I think you are a funny guy. You think sparring is real combat. When you are sparring do you and your partner take the gloves and pads off. Do you go all out ? hold nothing back? I think not, I think that you know nothing of real combat. Go compete in a tournament, Im sorry its not real either because you cannot go all out because they call that excessive force. Talk about sparring all you want but, it is not combat. The Mighty Might Wing Chun Kids class is calling you.

Train

08-05-2002, 11:28 PM

Sunkuen!! wow! It sounds like you are a sifu or something.. who the heck are you to say those things? You are a nobody. Nobody knows who you are and nobody ever will. Are you on the rag dude? That time of the month huh? why don't you go down to the VTM then? too much **** talkin here and your breath stinks man!! Wassup? Go down to the VTM and show then what a real man or woman you are... get drunk go with some buddies or girl friends and handle your biz meathead. Go and make a name for yourself meathead!! Eye of the tiger man!! Over the top!! Just go!!

sunkuen

08-05-2002, 11:48 PM

I'll repost the direction's to my club in case you decide you wanna come up here and show me what it's all about. I originally put these up for chris99 and co.

Now, when you come here, you cross into Canada at the Windsor/Detroit border crossing and go east on the 401 to toronto. Go south on the Don Valley Parkway Till you get to Lakeshore Blvd. Go east on Lakeshore Blvd till you get to Carlaw Ave. Turn left onto Carlaw Ave (north) and the first set of lights is Eastern ave. Go left about two blocks and we're at the corner of Eastern and Logan Ave. It's actually the third building in , on the northeast corner (there is no number on the building) There is a big brick wall in front of the door. Just bang on the door loud so we can hear you, and we'll show you our friendly chi sao. We're very hospitable.

see you soon

Sunkuen

Chango

08-06-2002, 12:03 AM

sunkeun,
your comments speak for themselves.

-For the sake of discussion I asked for your comparison!!!

Again you remind me of a trailer park queen watching soap opras and gossiping! Compair why so we can discuss the politics your are trying to stir up? Unlike yourself I respect each lineage and I'm mature enough to understand that not all Wing chun will be the same as the lineage that I identify with. I'm also smart enough to realize how much of a great opertunity it is to see so many systems demonstrated and presented first hand by the top representatives of that lineage. How many people can say that they have played the dummy in Ip ching's home. Or went to dinner in Hong kong with William Cheun. Or have had Sifu Hoffman flip me (300lbs plus) like I was rag doll. Or have Li Hoi San correct my SNT form over dinner in his resturaunt! My point is not to brag but to demonstrate the fact that if I had the compairing attitude I would never have these great opertunities. These and other legends of Wing Chun have offered me the honor of experiencing what they have to offer in person. Not to compair but to appreciate the dynamics of each of these treasures. So again I offer to you a visit to the VTM. You will see we have a very friendly and open place for all Wing Chun.

Train

08-06-2002, 12:06 AM

Wow !! Why did you all of the sudden change your tone?? Just wondering? BTW, that's real detailed directions you gave me and thanks. Maybe someday I will come down and visit your school, and don't worry, I will not knock that hard becuase I do have some courtesy. You being friendly? :) I'm not sure becuase you do not seem to friendly. Maybe your students or sihing, sidai will be a little nicer. Cheers

Chango

08-06-2002, 12:19 AM

Sunkeun

Let me just say that You have the questions. We do not have questions for you. So the burden of travel would have to be yours. Keep in mind we are not trying to recruit people. We offer our information. It is up to you to decide if you want to get more information. Beleive me if there was a post headed Sunkeun. not a single VTM member view it. But it seems you seek out post on our material and you attack it every chance you get. My point being that we do not have any desire to seek you out to give you our knowlege. You must realize this. I mean come on we do not even know your real name! I mean this with out emotional attatchment or as a personal attack. but you are not as important to us as you seem to think. Your opinion is yours and we cannot force you to change it. we just offer our information you can take it or leave it. If you challenge the information please do so with facts supporting your challenge. This childish approach really does not show you in a good light. But of course I expect more of the same from you.

sunkuen

08-06-2002, 12:22 AM

"Unlike yourself I respect each lineage and I'm mature enough to understand that not all Wing chun will be the same as the lineage that I identify with"

Au contraire

I do respect the lineages what I don't respect is the IDIOTS askin' people to run down to ohio to see for themselves!!!

The comparison thing was simply curiosity about the two systems, but your paranoid schizo self got it all wrong and as usual we end up with the VTM putting up it's shields and preparing to photon torpedo any frigin post that doesn't conform to your 3dimensional wierdo wing chun agenda!!!;)

Chango

08-06-2002, 12:46 AM

Sunkeun,
I will just let your words speak for themselves. You really missed the point. But I think it is clear that I will not get through. Reread this thread. I think you will see who is attacking who here. To this day the VTM does not attack any lineage of Wing chun. If you feel threatened then the problem is clearly yours. you have not presented any facts to support your attitude. Just name calling a poor attempts at politics. I cannot see any progress in this post so if you will please excuse me if I direct my energies to a more productive venture. I wish I could say it was a pleasure. but you know how that is. ;)

wingchunalex

08-06-2002, 05:45 AM

You are getting a little to hostile in your wording, especially with the name calling. Just put what you have to say out there, just the facts.

Geezer

08-06-2002, 05:58 AM

So again I offer to you a visit to the VTM. You will see we have a very friendly and open place for all Wing Chun.
This is about the 3rd time he has given an open invite to come to the school and discuss WCK.
wingchunalex why don't you take him up on the offer.?
I'm sure they would love to Chi Sao as well.!:)

Please don't come back with a star fist response,I'm not travelling I live too far away come visit me,my mum won't let me have the car.!:D

Geezer

08-06-2002, 06:18 AM

If you can't apply bong sau when someone is going light contact in a friendly match, then there is no way you could apply it in "real combat". saying sparring isn't "real combat" so sparring isn't usefull or important is just an excuse not to sparr.

Sparring isn't real combat,it's a training tool nothing more nothing less.:confused:

Writing that people who say sparring is not combat is just an excuse not to spar is a joke.:confused:
Maybe it's just that you haven't come to that realization yet.?
Why don't you go to Hilltop,Germantown,Yuma Place behind the 5th Precinct or 5 Oaks but make sure before you get into it that you let them know you only want to SPAR.!:D

Geezer

08-06-2002, 06:34 AM

Now, when you come here, you cross into Canada at the Windsor/Detroit border crossing and go east on the 401 to toronto. Go south on the Don Valley Parkway Till you get to Lakeshore Blvd. Go east on Lakeshore Blvd till you get to Carlaw Ave. Turn left onto Carlaw Ave (north) and the first set of lights is Eastern ave. Go left about two blocks and we're at the corner of Eastern and Logan Ave. It's actually the third building in , on the northeast corner (there is no number on the building) There is a big brick wall in front of the door. Just bang on the door loud so we can hear you, and we'll show you our friendly chi sao. We're very hospitable.

Is there a name for your club,or are you deep deep deep undercover.?:D

Why are we visiting YOU again.?:D

Geezer

08-06-2002, 06:45 AM

when people go on about how sparring isn't real combat its just an excuse not to sparr.

Why not walk out the front door at Beys and turn left,I'm sure you'd get some real life combat over there.?;)
Then come back and tell me that Sparring and Combat are the same thing.!

Jeff Preston

08-06-2002, 07:52 AM

I didn't say that sparring wasn't useful in developing your natural reactions, and I didn't say that I don't use sparring. What I said was sparring isn't real combat. If you think it is then are wrong because there are rules and it is a controlled environment. That's not real and don't let your self think that it is. Anytime there are rules and pads it's not real because of the environment.

Geezer

08-06-2002, 08:00 AM

When dealing with combat there are two aspects: the combat system and the person operating it. In W.W.II, it took 4 to 5 Sherman Tanks to stop one German Tiger Tank. If the crewmen of both sets of tanks were equally skilled the advantage was due to combat system.
I think I understand what you're saying here,Tank for Tank there was no match,the only way to overcome the Tiger was to completeley overwhelm them with speed and numbers.

When you think of what Stalin said about the T34,I think it was quote Quantity has a Quality all in itself.:)

reneritchie

08-06-2002, 10:59 AM

Interesting conversation all around. Some points I'm left to ponder:

On open minds. 2+2=3 may be incorrect in the context of arithmetic, but, for example, what if you changed the context to sets? 2 socks (1 red, 1 blue) + 2 gloves (1 blue, 1 yellow), equal 3 color sets (red, blue, yellow).

On tanks and guns. Tanks and guns are machines and not subject to emotion and other "baggage" that comes with being human. Thus comparing tank combat might be simpler than human combat. In human combat (even if restricted to one-on-one, which can still vary from duel to ambush, etc.), machine like response could prove less useful than something that takes nature more into account (straight limbs shake less under stress, simple reflexive responses function where complex patterns break down, etc.).

On "Science". Remember flogistron? What was science yesterday is not always science tomorrow. In a lay sense, it can be useful to talk about "science" but even in pure sciences "real truths" are disproved and sometimes disagreed upon among experts.

On History. Sun Yaat-Sen once came up with a history full of Shaolin and rebels and Societies and told his historians to find proof for it. They failed. History isn't easy. Its often fragmented, sometimes contradictory, possibly nonsensical at times, and dependant upon the whims of those who wrote it and those who read it. And often "evidence" can be used equally well to support opposing points of view. There are some good theories out there, strong and weak points in each, but it will take a lot of *specific* and independantly varifiable information to start moving any of them away from simple theory.

On "original". Likewise, specific evidence would be needed showing positively where one branch pre-dated the others. Even in Brian's example (which Jim is fond of as well), the counter-argument could be "all the other lineages got it from HFY (at some point from some individual)". More likely vs. less likely could still be argued, but ruling some out will be a process. And then, the work would just be beginning (unless someone is arguing a divine inception wholely apart from related culture ;).

(ran out of time but will hopefully continue later...)

RR

Chango

08-06-2002, 11:18 AM

Maybe I can offer information on sparring from a boxing point of view. When training for matches you will find a boxer will have several sparring partners. This gives him different looks, timming,habbits etc... But you must remember if you are a sparring partner you will starve if you knock the boxer out or even get the best of him when you spar! You are a live tool for the boxer to use to prepare for the fight. this being said sparring gives you a human factor to work with. Training your reactions,energy transfer, movement etc... It is one of the closest things you will get to live combat. But it is not the same. In fact the fight is closer to real combat becuase atleast the stress from the threat of danger will simulate the stress of a life a death situation. But again it is still not the same. No this is not a excuse not to spar. As a matter of fact it is a reason to sparr as often as possible. I do some type of sparring every day! It helps us gain experience and apply techniques in real time. But don't be fooled to think that this is real combat. Maybe you see it different please explain. :D

passing_through

08-06-2002, 11:19 AM

Wingchunalex,

tan sau can be used in a variety of ways.

True enough. However, how is Taan Sau employed with a focus on maximum efficiency? That was the point of my question. Not "how can you use it?" So, again, how do you use Taan Sau in the most efficient way, at the right place and right time, in a realistic combat scenario? I am not asking how many way can you use Taan Sau. I could use Taan Sau everyday if I was a waiter, carrying trays. This is not the most efficient use of Taan Sau for combat, is it?

I do not put myself in a box of only one way to use tan sau.

We're all in a box of time/space/energy... HFY uses gates to define and control space. Does your approach utilize gates? Would you use Taan Sau in the lower gates?

tan sau can be used most preferably when it can be used to the ouside of the opponents forarm, because it is harder for the opponent to coninue the attack with his free hand because he would have to cross his own body.

Understood. And yet you later note in your post that the opponent could recover with bong sau. "If applying tan da to the outside gives the opponent a chance to respond to one's punch with a block, then one can easily coninue the counter attack with a number of wing chun responses. for instance if one's opponent punches at him and he uses tan da to the ouside of the opponents forarm, but the opponent bong sau's with the same arm the punch was launched from, one can gaum sau the opponents bong sau with the da hand of the tan da and continue the counter attack with a chang jeung. "

If you've applied Taan Sau, how could an opponent react? Your response is an example of looping. Rather than solve the initial problem, you're playing a catch up, if-I-then-he-then-I-then-he game that ultimately requires you to be faster, stronger, quicker, more sensitive, etc.

Tan sau can also be used to the inside if the situation calls for it, but one must be aware that a posible coninuation of the opponents attack can occure because the other hand is free.

So the opponent can continue the attack not only from the outside and also from the inside? If that is the case, then there must be no most efficient way to use Taan Sau, right?

I also do not subscribe to the use of tan sau at head level because it leaves the lower gate too open, especially if the opponent feints.

If you use Taan Sau at the level of the throat or chest, aren't you leaving your head exposed to potential challenge? If you are punched at the chest and use Taan Sau to engage the attack, you leave your head open to a continued threat from the attack. When you use Taan Sau at the right time and space, you cover both your chest and upper gate at the same time. This one action covers more area - saving you time and energy by using the best position to protect your upper gate.

I do not limit myself to only one "perfect" way of using tan sau, wing chun is adaptive, flexible, and alive in my oppinion.

If a tool exists, it must exist for a purpose. A screwdriver exists to drive screws. It can be used for other things such as opening paint cans but this is not the most efficient use of a screw driver. Taan Sau can use used numerous ways, I don't disagree with that point. However, there better times and places to use Taan Sau. If there is a "better", there must also be a "best". It does not follow that all ways are "better" ways. If this was the case, no way would be any better than any other. Common experience contradicts this assertion. If there is a "more efficient", then there has to be a "most efficient".

If you do something perfect, that is not a limitation. That is all you need. However, I'm asking about the most efficient Taan Sau not a perfect Taan Sau. If a motion is not efficient, you need more technique to recover for mistake. If you don't solve the problem in first place, then you have to have second place.

Instead of saying "wing chun is adaptive, flexible, and alive" you should say realitic combat (and reality itself) is adaptive, flexible and alive. All good fighting systems require adaptiblity, flexibility, and responsiveness - not just Wing Chun.

Using six different Taan Sau to cover every possibility compared to one efficient technique covers multiple possibilities. This is efficiency. One way to do multiple things - no wasted movement or energy. If you use one technique more efficiently than another, you use one move instead of looping and requiring many moves.

Tell you what, let's just cut the chase and just meet and settle this directly. When's good for you? I'll be out of town the 16th to the 26th of August and I have some training this Saturday on the 10th. We could meet over tea, discuss differences in our approaches, and then touch hands to test our assertions. We could even spar if you wish. Ball's in your court.

Jeremy R.

Chango

08-06-2002, 11:28 AM

I understand your position on these matters. But I must ask you to offer your off the record opinion on things. I would like to see where you would draw your conclusions on a technical level as well as a historical level. I think the VTM's position it quite clear. The articles will support that position. As a insiders note there is quite of bit of information in the works at the moment to be releasted this year. However I'm just asking you on a personal level where do you believe the system come from and how did it stay consistant if it is subject to change from generation to generation? :cool:

Do you spar? if so how often? if not why not?

yuanfen

08-06-2002, 11:44 AM

passing through sez:
If you use Taan Sau at the level of the throat or chest, aren't you leaving your head exposed to potential challenge? If you are punched at the chest and use Taan Sau to engage the attack, you leave your head open to a continued threat from the attack.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What? If one is the wooden dummy and...
Only if you dont know what you are doing!!!
HFY folks on the list seem to make low level "straw man" arguments. Good old wing chun aint a straw man. HFY folks have a way to go
demonstrate otherwise. Generalities are not enough.

yuanfen

08-06-2002, 12:09 PM

Passing Through sez:From what information that has been gathered to date by the VTM, it is the conclusion of the VTM, as an organization, that HFY is the original style of Wing Chun from which all lineages that contain the three forms of Siu Nim Tau, Chum Kiu, and Biu Ji as their core originated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROFLAO-
Success has a thousand fathers! Fukien crane folks, wu mei folks,
now HFY folks...so many ancestral claims...may be some more are wandering in the Gobi desert ready to file a paternity claim..

Specially when one does the claim, the marketing, the methodology, the inferences, the logic, the "reasearch" all at the same time and place. Another wallah. A new philosophy of science! All you need is a preferred conclusion-then just affirm it whenever you can.

Chango asks Rene- whther he spars. What does that have to
do with the logic if any in the thread?

Geezer

08-06-2002, 12:20 PM

We could meet over tea, discuss differences in our approaches, and then touch hands to test our assertions. We could even spar if you wish. Ball's in your court.

I wonder if he will take you up on the offer.?:D

yuanfen

08-06-2002, 12:40 PM

geezer sez:I wonder if he will take you up on the offer.?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearances at least- the VTM folks wiriting on this list have some compulsive tendencies.Short on substance ,long on repetition. Why not invite red5angel or his mentor...they also are in Ohio some of the time. A great time could be had by all.

reneritchie

08-06-2002, 12:55 PM

Hi Chango,

As you know,I go out of my way to be nice and polite. I do this for several reasons. First, I believe true character is displayed not when dealing with those with whom we agree and/or are affiliated with, but when dealing with those with whom we do not agree and/or are not affiliated with, and I make an effort to retain my own ethics and integrity even in the face of some pretty slimy behavior. Second, I believe reasonable people can look at what I and others present and draw their own conclusion, so no one need ram anything down their throats. Third, in public forums, I remember that what I write is read by others and could be around a while, and since I'm responsible enough to put my real name to my words, if I look back on them in a few years, hopefully wiser and not just older, I still want to be able to hold my head high and not be ashamed of some rantings I left on some message board somewhere. Forth, as you well know, its a common dirty tactic to try and change a conversation into name calling or personality attack if logic and reason are not on your side, and I refuse to sink to such depths and allow such petty manipulations to succeed. That's just me, though. I fully understand others will do as they will, even in spite of their own best interests.

On to your questions (and once again, I'm flattered you went out of your way to ask ;)

My opinion? My current working theory is that Weng Chun (County) White Crane came into Guangdong from Fujian during the large migrations that followed the Qing Dynastic Succession (the same forces which led to the formation of Ti Xi's Tiandihui), and onto the Wandering Opera junks. At the same time, Hakka immigrants brought in their arts, as may some Sichuan immigrants (or again, in parallel to established Tiandihui history, migrants moving from Fujian, through Guangdong, into Sichuan, and back). Weng Chun White Crane evolved into the Weng Chun Kuen of the Red Junk, which was later developed, in combination with Hakka and/or Sichuan boxing, into Wing Chun Kuen, which spread off the junks following Ye Mingchan's massacre of the opera. The art was then refined and developed over succeeding generations, with various legends mixed in to spice things up along the way. Thus, it is constant through change - through the necessary human pursuit of perfection that drives us all, and that is final only in death (or stagnation leading to death). After all, everything evolves, even our understanding of everything and evolution ;)

What about you? Do you have any personal, individual, unique opinions?

And I currently spar 3-4 times a week. How about you?

May I ask you some personal questions (off the record ;)?

Do you believe in the golden rule? If so, how do you exemplify it? If not, why not?

And what's your all time top score in pac man?

RR

Geezer

08-06-2002, 01:03 PM

What's wrong with the "Golden Rule"? Conundrums of conducting ethical research in cyberspace. Information Society v12, n2 (Apr-Jun 1996): 175-187.
Three key values for ethical cyberspace research practices are evident in recent discussions: 1. protect the subject from harm as a result of the research fieldwork and the research practices, 2. produce good social science research, and 3. do not unnecessarily perturb the phenomena studied. Much of the argumentation aims to negotiate the ethical conflicts that often emerge between these goals. Bakhtin (1981,1984, 1986, 1990, 1993) argues that one can only strive for a bottom-up ethical wisdom built upon concrete examples, and disputes the possibility that rigid top-down application of universal rules constitutes ethical action. His perspective has key implications for ethical research practices. This perspective is illustrated through recent fieldwork and writing practices in a virtual community.

http://www.slis.indiana.edu/TIS/abstracts/ab12-2/allen1.html

reneritchie

08-06-2002, 01:35 PM

Sheldon - 'Bollocks' doesn't sound so bloody complicated anymore, now does it? 8P

RR

Geezer

08-06-2002, 01:50 PM

Barry White:D

wingchunalex

08-06-2002, 04:46 PM

thank you for the offer. But I regret that I can not take you up on it right now. last friday I had my wisdom teeth removed. Because they had to remove part of my jaw to get to the teeth my jaw is 20% weaker for 2 months, and for a while my gums are going to be sensitive. So I will take you up on your offer in 2 months. I talked to sifu Bey about sparring and he suggested that we set up a sparring and chi sau competition between our schools, just in a friendly way of corse. He thought it would be a bad idea for just the two of us to sparr considering we both have a lot of pride in our schools and emotions could get running hot and accidents could happen. So he suggested the inter-school competion so that it would be a more controlled setting with set rules and precautions. If you want to talk about it more you can call me, alex wall, at home at 833-0373, or on my cell-470-0818.

yuanfen

08-06-2002, 05:14 PM

Poor Firehawk- all he wanted to know was evrything about HFY.
So far we have :
1. HFY is the mother of all wing chun

2. Invitations to the Museum

3. Invitation to alex to spar or whatever.

3. Research is being done and more will be out soon.

4. Rene - do you spar...type of question.

5 Dont tan sao at neck or chest level- your head will be exposed.

6. Somewhere in the 5th dimension there is the scientifically true
single tan sao.

I may have missed some other dazzling insights. Mea culpa.
Are you ready to sign annual contracts.?

Hung Fa Yee is dark and deep
But I have miles to go before I sleep. wallah. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Rolling_Hand

08-06-2002, 06:01 PM

ZZZzzzZZZ.....

Yuenfen - Have you forgotten Augustine Fong's dummy???

Should you add that to your Yuanfen's list???????????????

Geezer

08-06-2002, 07:03 PM

We could meet over tea, discuss differences in our approaches, and then touch hands to test our assertions. We could even spar if you wish. Ball's in your court.

This seems like a friendly invite to Meet,Discuss,Chi Sao and Spar if wingchunalex wishes to Spar.!

I talked to sifu Bey about sparring and he suggested that we set up a sparring and chi sau competition between our schools, just in a friendly way of corse. He thought it would be a bad idea for just the two of us to sparr considering we both have a lot of pride in our schools and emotions could get running hot and accidents could happen. So he suggested the inter-school competion so that it would be a more controlled setting with set rules and precautions.

He ran and got his Sifu involved bringing his Sifu to believe it would get out of hand.!
Passing_Through offered a friendly invite for wingchunalex and him to meet,where the hell did getting both schools together come into it.?
Inter school competation,this isn't the Brady Bunch you know,I thought this was wingchunalexs thoughts and ideas or is Ron Bey putting you up to all this.?Putting ideas into your head to start trouble.?

I think you're reading more into the invite,than was really there,or are *YOU* saying it will get out of hand.?
The ball was left in your court to make the decision,if you believe so strongly in your convictions *YOU* should stand by them.
I can't understand why you've got the world and his wife involved.?:confused:

Sui

08-06-2002, 07:04 PM

r-h thats no way to speak to your dieing king.lol

yaun has proved himself while all the "big"hitters were on holiday.

he has much to learn though as he wants to constantly defend his school of "nim lik" where as "lim lik"is beyond his comprehention.

yuanfen

08-06-2002, 07:17 PM

Really sooey- you wouldnt have followed the University of Arkansas basketball team would you... with nim and lim you never know. I have "seen" TST's nim/lim at work. Ah-the mysteries.

yuanfen

08-06-2002, 07:33 PM

sui- you may wish to follow rolling hand's gibberish at the VTAA
list. Both of you can then throw your simulated pearls before some genuine swine. You could hold up his mirror for him as he
gasps--where is the dummy, where is the dummy? Watch out though red 5 may soon be holding forth on the dummy, Gotta go do some wing chun.

wingchunalex

08-06-2002, 09:24 PM

ps- sorry, I kinda over emphasized the sparring thing. I would like to meet for tea some time. that would be nice. I do apologise for bashing you guys so hard. I could have said what I needed to a little more gracefully. I do feel like I owe it to you to explain how I got to be so negative toward you guys. When I first heard about the VTM my oppinion wasn't what it is now. If you would like to hear my explaination please tell me, I feel like I owe it to you. So yes I would like to meet over tea. Want to meet at a chinese food place in huber hights?

Train

08-07-2002, 01:57 AM

Yo!! Firehawk!! I am not sure if you are still reading this thread but as you can see, things got outta hand. I didn't mean to be rude in here, but i just think sometimes that people do not think before they say things. Sometimes i think it is sad that WC people always fight with each other. If you really think about it, we should be working together or helping each other out. we are from the same style For God's Sake!! Instead, people try their hardest to find ways to stab each other on their backs. It's all a **** shame.
Well anyways, Firehawk, i think you should go check out the HFYWCK. Why not? It's not going to kill you dude!! Looks harmless to me.....
Actually, I would advise to check out all the schools. Even Sunkuens :) We all know how to get there now!!

Andreas Hoffman

08-07-2002, 02:40 AM

Dear Sunkuen,

you wrote: There is a guy in brooklyn teaching the chi sim in case your interested.

The guy in brookly cannot teach Chi Sim Weng Chun Kuen, he developed his own wing chun kuen system and visited me a few times in Germany. He don´t know and don´t teach the basic of weng chun kuen: Weng Chun Fa Kuen, 7 principles (fighting, Ging, Hei etc.), 10 wisdoms, Tíen-Dei-Yang Kiu Sau, 18 Kiu Sau, Weng Chun Sap Yat Kuen Doy Dar etc.
Next year we start the first instructor programm for chi sim weng chun in USA and we are looking for people who like to learn this old style from the weng chun tong. For more informations write me directly, please.

By the way I visited two times the Ving Tsun Museum, even they have their HFY and "GM Moy Yat" identity the people were heartly, open and it was
great to share my weng chun kuen with them.
Peace
Andreas Hoffmann

Chango

08-07-2002, 03:20 AM

Sifu Hoffman,

It is a pleasure to hear from you! Thank you for clearing up the information on the school in Brooklyn. It confused me to when I read that.

I find that since your visit to the VTM. I have applied alot of the information to not only my Kung Fu but also to my way of life. It is profound how certian knowlege and wisdoms can change everthing!

:) Just wanted to say hello and thank you again for sharing a true treasure with the VTM and myself.

Chango

Chango

08-07-2002, 03:32 AM

I have to say to the rest of the forum. If you get a chance to experience Chi Sim. It is a true treasure! On every level it offers wisdom beyond words. I think it will change alot of martial artist points of view. (it did for me) The internal energy is quite evident! The connection to "Chan" is very clear. I cannot get enough of it. But don't take my word for it. If you get a chance experience it for yourself. Sifu Hoffman is true gentleman and is very open. He really takes the extra steps to make sure each student understands the information. You will find your self stimulated physically,mentally and those that apply Chi Sim to life spiritually as well. The 10 wisdoms transend to everday life. We as martial artist experience these wisdoms every day!:cool:

Geezer

08-07-2002, 05:17 AM

Next year we start the first instructor programm for chi sim weng chun in USA and we are looking for people who like to learn this old style from the weng chun tong.

COOL :)

yuanfen

08-07-2002, 07:16 AM

So it is said:Actually, I would advise to check out all the schools. Even Sunkuens We all know how to get there now!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's the password at the door..."Open Sesame"? or will
"Wallah" do.?

Alpha Dog

08-07-2002, 07:33 AM

Originally posted by sunkuen
I'll repost the direction's to my club in case you decide you wanna come up here and show me what it's all about. I originally put these up for chris99 and co.

Now, when you come here, you cross into Canada at the Windsor/Detroit border crossing and go east on the 401 to toronto. Go south on the Don Valley Parkway Till you get to Lakeshore Blvd. Go east on Lakeshore Blvd till you get to Carlaw Ave. Turn left onto Carlaw Ave (north) and the first set of lights is Eastern ave. Go left about two blocks and we're at the corner of Eastern and Logan Ave. It's actually the third building in , on the northeast corner (there is no number on the building) There is a big brick wall in front of the door. Just bang on the door loud so we can hear you, and we'll show you our friendly chi sao. We're very hospitable.

see you soon

Sunkuen

Hey, I know this neighborhood! I will have to check it out.

commitment

08-07-2002, 07:49 AM

August 25th, 2002
Hung Fa Yi 6th Public Workshop

Topic: The Progression from Kiu Sau to Chi Sau to San Da

Everyone is going to be given the chance to learn and experience direct from the source, Grand Master Garrett Gee. You will understand the evolution in the Southern Shaolin Temple from Kiu Sau to Chi Sau and how these exercises connect to realistic fighting from an historical, principle, energy, and application point-of-view.

Time: 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

Cost: $100

Space is limited
Preregistration is required by 8/23/02

For more information contact :
Hung Fa Kwoon
219 Monterey Blvd.
San Francisco, CA 94131
(415) 587-2898

passing_through

08-07-2002, 09:15 AM

Brian,

On students

"A student is one who makes study of something" in an incomplete definition for me. To my mind it begs two question: what does it mean to study; are all people, at all times, students?

With your addition that students are of different desire, intenct and action, you are getting towards the same point I was making: Students vary in quality/focus and someone can learn but not be a student. In my definition I added "quests after" in the sense that continuous action is required. Perhaps using the definion of a student as "one who makes a study" and adding the caveat that as the desire, intent, and action approach zero the student moves closer to becoming a non-student would gel with my thoughts.

I disagree with you that a student could learn what is false and illusion as the focus of their study. To know what is false and illusion, there is a presuppostion of knowing what is real and true. Truth exists on it's own. False can only ever attempt to distort what is true. Therefore, any study, even looking for false information and illusions requires that I also study what is real and true. However, I think this discussion would very quickly move beyond Wing Chun and, while very interesting to me personally, may not be appropriate for this forum.

In regards to the dictionary definition you offered for defining student, that's also an opinion - just not yours. ;)

Overall, I agree most of what you stated. The only other point for contention is this:

when you say "all experience will lead one to what is real and true given time and the desire to look for it" ---so by this i could draw the conclusion that even "less"complete" or less authentic WC will lead to the same place as a "more complete" WC will....so if they both evail the same truth, than why would you worry, about having to discern, what is less complete or more complete or real and unreal....a waist of energy(imo) in the context of your statement...when i can just maintain my cource and sooner or later arive at the distination

To my mind, this becomes an issue of time, space and energy. Do you have the necessary
time - considering job, family, and personal responsibilities, etc.;
space - meaning opportunity to access teaching, place to train, etc.; and
energy - meaning desire, money to afford training, etc?

If you feel you have the necesssary requirements, train as you like. Can you take that risk? That is a personal decision.

One other thought that occurs to me is that people often fail to see what their experience confirms. They discredit their own experience rather than challenge their teaching. With this in mind, to some degree a student is limited by what is taught. If a teacher intentionally, knowingly or unknowingly, contradicts what is real and true in his/her teaching, the time required for the student to realize the teaching was false may be longer than the student has available to him/her.

Thank you for the rational thought and continued discussion in this thread. I'll have some more replies for you later in the week.

Jeremy R.

FIRE HAWK

08-07-2002, 09:27 AM

So far I have talked to Sifu Meng at the VingTsun Museum and he showed me somethings and i learned somethings from articles and on this thread on Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun.

FIRE HAWK

08-07-2002, 09:37 AM

I really like your Jee Shim Wing Chun Sifu Meng told me some about it when i talked to him and i read the article on it and whats in the book Complete Wing Chun on Jee Shim Wing Chun and have been to your website many times . It seems very interesting I hope in the future i get to see more of jee Shim Wing Chun and the Hung Fa Yi wing Chun .

Rolling_Hand

08-07-2002, 01:00 PM

Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sui- you may wish to follow rolling hand's gibberish at the VTAA
list. Both of you can then throw your simulated pearls before some genuine swine. You could hold up his mirror for him as he
gasps--where is the dummy, where is the dummy? Watch out though red 5 may soon be holding forth on the dummy, Gotta go do some wing chun.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sui - I don't have a fortune to buy you pretty things, but I can show you morning on the top of wing chun mountain.

Yuanfen - I don't have a horse for you to ride, but you can fellow Augustine Fong's blue moon to find your way up to the mountain!

sunkuen

08-07-2002, 01:02 PM

Thanks for your input Sifu Andreas Hoffman. Is there going to be anybody in Canada that will be able to teach the Chi Sim Weng Chun Kuen? :)

Rolling_Hand

08-07-2002, 01:26 PM

Sunkune - Where did you get your hair cut?

Do you think Yuanfen needs a new hair-do?

passing_through

08-07-2002, 01:43 PM

Joy Chaudhuri,

Only if you dont know what you are doing!!!

Am I to understand from this comment that your approach to training is dependant on "knowing what you are doing" meaning only through experience? Are you saying that the only way to use taan sau is through experience? I must disagree with this assertion to a certain extent. While it is true that experience is the only way to learn (even a lecture can be experience), a teacher exists to help save the student time. The teacher should be able to explain the hows and whys of an exercise or technique to help the student realize the goal of training. Part of this thread is discussing the most efficient position of taan sau. Do you have something productive to add beyond generalizations to this thread? So far all I have seen is attempts to sideline the thread by personal comments about the people posting. Simply stating you have to know what you are doing to know the most efficient way to use taan sau is, I trust, self-evident and did not need to be stated. How would you perform a taan sau in the first place if you did not know what you are doing? Your statement is nonsense.

When teaching, there must be some idea of a best way to perform an action. "Tan with proper structure and timing can be used inside or outside the other fella's hand position when the line is there." Could you please elaborate on this general statement that you made earlier in this thread? I was awaiting a more detailed, developed discussion but you seem to have decided to divert your attention to the people in the thread rather than the comments themselves. To assist you in your reply, what do you define as proper structure? How do you know proper timing? What is the line for inside or outide the "other fella's" hand position? What, if any, differences exist between the line for inside and the line for outside?

As for making a straw man argument, would you please elaborate on this as well. I don't see how my discussion of the height of taan sau as a criteria for maximum efficiency is a straw man argument. In my view, this is a part of discussing structure.

Wingchunalex asserted "I also do not subscribe to the use of tan sau at head level because it leaves the lower gate too open, especially if the opponent feints." I took this as a discussion of structure in regards to height. I replied to the effect that ignoring the height leaves you open for further attack along the head. Using the taan sau at the height of the head, given the correct range and depth (alluded to through the statement right time and space), you cover a greater amount of space than utilizing taan sau at the height of your chest. In what way have I committed a straw man?

Jeremy R.

Alpha Dog

08-07-2002, 01:50 PM

Which is more effective at head level? I am confused.

passing_through

08-07-2002, 02:01 PM

Alex,

I am sorry to hear about your wisdom teeth. I had mine removed a number of years ago but I can still remember it quite vividly. The meeting for tea sounds like a good idea. I have plans for this weekend already but maybe we could meet in the middle of the week. Let's continue this conversation off-line.

As for your suggestion of having a competition between Bey's and Meng's, I'll have to discuss this with Sifu Meng.

The VTM has provided many opportunities for interaction in the Wing Chun community - from hosting nearly all the Friendship Seminars, to inviting Grand Masters from several families of Wing Chun to conduct workshops, to participation in tournaments. This past year, a Wing Chun Grand Champion category was added to several competitions for people competing in all four divisions of Chi Sau, Forms, Wooden Dummy, and Sparring (light contact to full contact). One of the corner stones of the VTM is creating opportunities, and supporting opportunities organized by others, to interact personally and share information. Talk is cheap; actions speak louder than words. Regrettably, I have not seen many members of your school participate. Hopefully this will change in the future.

Jeremy R.

wingchunalex

08-07-2002, 03:06 PM

hi jeremy. just to let you know our school has participated in many tornaments. most recently the great lakes kung fu championships put on by a wing lam school. we participated in and won events in the chi sau competion. we also participated in the coninuous sparring in which non of our participants got below second place in sparring. as a school we have went to that tornament the past 2 years, the past 3 years we've had more representatives than just myself there from my school. I've been going to that tornament the last 4 or 5 years. we haven't been to any of the big tournaments on the east coast or in chicago due to the cost of tournaments. so I guess our schools have just missed eachother at tournaments. I hope that we can make it to some of the other tournaments in the future. we did miss the arnold shwarzenegger tournament. we did have one person there that went to judge. He mentioned he saw you guys there. :) . But yeah, we get out every once in a while.:p . I do remeber seeing you guys at the first great lakes tournament like the second year they had chi sau. (i didn't even know they had chi sau one year becuase it wasn't in the program. lol). we might be going to a tounament coming up in october in canton ohio, maybe we will see you there:cool:

Andreas Hoffman

08-08-2002, 12:57 AM

Sunkuen wrote: Is there going to be anybody in Canada that will be able to teach the Chi Sim Weng Chun Kuen ?

Yes, we have two "Yip Man Wing Chun Sifus" from Canada who joined all my seminars in the VTM. I think they will join the instructor programm next year.
You are also welcome to meet me next year in USA. If you like you can join a seminar or we can exchange our weng chun/wing chun.

Life is so short ! Let us keep training and making friendship !

Andreas Hoffmann

sunkuen

08-08-2002, 02:39 PM

So who is gonna be teaching the C.S.W.C.K. here in Canada? I'm interested in your system but my sifu i'm sure would be steamed to know i started learning from you...(sorta like Benny and Moy Yat)LOL!!!:D

FIRE HAWK

08-08-2002, 03:43 PM

Wing Chun Wing Chun its just around the corner from where i live the VingTsun Museum has Hung Fa Yi ,Jee Shim , Yip Man Moy Yat Wing Chun and i also here if i remember correctly Gu Lao Wing Chun and BeysMartail arts is a different kind of Wing Chun than the others too and they are not to far from me either . All this Wing Chun i can feel it in my Bones what an oppertunity for a person to learn Wing Chun or Weng Chun.

Chango

08-08-2002, 08:44 PM

sunkeun,
I think it is sad that your Sifu would feel threatened or would not have confidence in his teachings. But please do not compare him to Sigung Moy Yat. You have no Idea about what went on between Sifu Meng and Sigung Moy Yat. So do us all a favor by not speculating any further. your Sifu might feel that way this does not mean Sigung Moy Yat did. You seem to have some sort of unhealthy focus on politics. Do you have anything real to offer this dicussion? or will you just continue to set on the side flaming? It does not reflect well on you. I mean this thread has tried several times to move forward please let it.

Chango (SGS)

Train

08-09-2002, 02:23 AM

Holy Sh!T!! This thread is beginning to look informative!! Poeple in here are actually getting along?? this can't be!! Wow i'm impressed!!

wingchunalex

08-11-2002, 08:31 PM

Jeremy and I had tea sunday evening. It went well. I feel like I understand more were hung fa yi is comming from on their approach to wing chun. I learned from the experience to be more humble, though I still stand by my oppinions. I appologise If I have personally offended anyone. I would like to thank Jeremy again for inviting me for tea.

Rolling_Hand

08-11-2002, 10:32 PM

Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy and I had tea sunday evening. It went well. I feel like I understand more were hung fa yi is comming from on their approach to wing chun--Alex
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Care to explain a little more?

wingchunalex

08-12-2002, 03:23 PM

jeremy and I talked more about some hung fa yi approches to wing chun moves, what different things can be used to define a complete system, different styles of wing chun, kung fu developement in china, among other things. Thats really all I care to say on the subject, sorry. It was a interesting converstation, thats about all I'm going to say. Sorry if I seem to be being difficult on the subject but I want to keep it short and sweet.

passing_through

08-12-2002, 06:14 PM

Wingchunalex,

Thank you for meeting with me for tea. I think we went through two pots and 4 glasses of water each. :) At least we each have the sincerity in our desire to learn Wing Chun to put aside our differences and discuss like two human beings. Thank you for that. Hopefully when you come back from college we can discuss a little more and touch hands to examine a few things in more detail. Now we each have an experience of each other in person. And both our kung fu will grow for the effort.

To everyone else, we discussed some of the HFY approach to Wing Chun, some on etiquette, some on theories about history and on-line trolls. I'll post the points I raised about taan sau for the forum later this week.

Jeremy R.

FIRE HAWK

08-13-2002, 07:27 PM

Well at least this topic on Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun turned out pretty good in the end .

Rolling_Hand

08-13-2002, 08:14 PM

Fire Hawk, Alex and Jeremy,

Many of us enjoy reading your input on Hung Fa Yi, and I personally like to learn more about HFY. Thank you!

passing_through

08-15-2002, 06:07 PM

What is the purpose of the Siu Nim Tau (SNT) form, the "little idea in the beginning"? What is the concept that is being expressed? Why does this form exist? When I've asked this question to students, masters, and instructors of Wing Chun I hear many different responses: SNT gives you a little idea about combat, SNT is a lesson in humility, SNT teaches you how to learn, SNT expresses small, efficient motions, SNT is a first step to further training, and more. Each answer is at least as valid as each other answer I've been given. However, I've never felt that I could say exactly what the Little Idea in the Beginning is all about. I didn't know what the little idea actually is. For a thing to exist, it must exist for a purpose - it must have a unique nature.

In the HFY lineage, SNT expresses a specific concept. There is an actual idea rather than a generalization about life, learning, fighting or training. In HFY, the SNT form expresses the Time and Space Concept (TSC) through the Wing Chun Formula (WCF). This is quite a radical piece of information. We live in a four dimensional world – three dimensions of space and a fourth dimension of time. This information should not come as a surprise to most readers. However, how many martial arts make a practitioner consciously aware of three dimensional space? Without a conscious awareness of three-dimensional space, a practitioner will never have complete, conscious control over a combat situation. Gravity has always existed but what changes in reality were possible once gravity had been worked out as a mathematical certainty? Gravity, and its connections to calculus, serves as a fundamental awareness of our modern world. The TSC is unique to the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun lineage.

In order to ascertain the position of an object, it must be triangulated. This is true for map making, construction, and combat. In human combat, this triangulation is possible in the HFY system through use of the WCF to create the Six Gates (SG). The human body is broken into 6 zones and the most efficient structure to occupy that space is identified and expressed through the SNT form. This paradigm, matching the human structure to three-dimensional space, is the foundation of HFY.

The idea of Time and Space and its relationship to combat was discovered in the origins of HFY. It is only in the last 100 years that military technology has caught up to a similar level of pinpoint accuracy.

One of the theories in relation to the large number of casualties during the American Civil War was due to the misapplication of Napoleonic strategy and tactics to a new technology. Raised and trained in the tradition of Napoleon, most Civil War commanders sought a Napoleonic victory – complete destruction of an enemy's ability to wage war in just one battle. 60 years after Marengo and Austerlitz, warfare had so changed that victory in the Civil War would come through a new set of strategy and tactics based on a new weapon system.

Napoleon fought his wars using the smooth bore cannon and musket. During the American Civil War the new weapon that was introduced to modern combat was the long-barreled shoulder arms, rifles, shoulder guns with spiral grooves cut into the inner surface of the barrel and carbines, short-barreled rifles. The introduction of these rifled pieces compelled a radical change in infantry tactics, which had been based on the use of the shorter range, less accurate smoothbore musket until the Civil War. Using smoothbore muskets, firing lines even 100 yards apart could not inflict much damage upon each other. For an attack to be successful, then, soldiers were forced to mass together and run directly into their enemies. The Civil War rifled musket, with its greater accuracy and longer range, was able to kill at a distance of over a half-mile, making a direct, frontal assault a particularly deadly affair.

(continued)

passing_through

08-15-2002, 06:11 PM

From the above example, the principles of military science had to be re-applied in light of changing technology. In hot combat (meaning combat with firepower), new technology calls for a new application of existing principles. In cold combat (meaning combat not involving firepower) the human body has not evolved or recently changed in the recent history of the species. This means that both the weapon system and the essential combat terrain have not changed or evolved since human beings came into existence (by whatever methodology). Therefore, the application of combat science principles to the human body has not changed. The human space has always been the human space. Human beings are by and large extremely similar. By recent estimates, our genetic code is only 0.1% different from the man or woman standing next to us. We are built the same, with basically the same proportions relative to our own bodies of our limbs, etc. We have basically the same range of motion (although certainly exercise and training does affect this), and basically the same potential (from a purely physiological standpoint). Bearing in mind that discovering the most efficient way to fight requires time, effort, and information, any lack of effort or information will naturally cause the most efficient to become something other than most efficient. The SG use the same references based on the WCF. These two concepts describe the most efficient positions for human hand-to-hand combat.

The proof of HFY as a science is contained in the concepts and WCF. Science is concerned with the study of general truths and the operation of general laws, concerned with the physical world and its phenomena, based on reality, and involves repeatable observations and conjectures. One of the components of reality is three-dimensional space. One of the things that makes United Sates military technology superior to other existing militaries is the ability to triangulate missiles for pinpoint accuracy. Imagine a war between a force capable of pinpoint cruise missile accuracy with global satellite system technology against an opponent only capable of delivering 3 to 4 bombs per target.

HFY uses similar logic; every motion must be based on three references. If I throw punch, kick, or block and only consciously reference one or two of the three dimensions I will not able to find the most efficient application for a motion because I am not using total reality as my foundation. The WCF is based on three-dimensional space for human structure in time, space, and energy. This foundation never changes; for an individual a longer distance is a longer time.

A technique by itself, in isolation, is meaningless. Once placed into the context of time and space, where exists an outside influence, a technique becomes meaningful and structure is of the utmost importance. (Think of “Wax on, wax off” from the Karate Kid movie). Furthermore, there can only be one most efficient use for the technique. This does not say that a less efficient utilization cannot be effective. Given the above discussion, there can only ever be one most efficient way to express a technique when taking time and three-dimensional space into consideration. This does not preclude other methodologies from getting results. Using a position other than the most efficient leaves open the possibility for challenge. Human combat will always revolve around two (or more) people in opposition. For success, it is not required that each motion be the most efficient for the human body; it is required that the winner is more efficient with his time, space and energy than his opponent. A focus on being "more efficient than the opponent" does not preclude the existence of a most efficient position. Taking into consideration the degeneration of skills in a high-stress environment such as a fight, the closer to most efficient a technique can be trained, the more efficient the technique will be expressed under stress. Therefore, it is in the combatant's best interest to train the most efficient technique possible to minimize technical degradation in application.

Based on the above discussion, what are the proper range (depth/length), height, and width for Taan Sau?

Should Taan Sau be used from the front hand or the back hand? (range/depth/length)

- Firstly, if you engage with the front hand, at the moment of contact the back hand is out of range to apply an immediate attack. In order to bring the back hand into an effective range, you must rotate. The time required to re-adjust your position (space distortion) allows your opponent time to react to your movement (time distortion). When in motion, space is time.

- Secondly, if you engage with the front hand, your opponent has information about your structure and energy. With information as to your position, your opponent has the potential to influence your structure.

You must assume that your opponent is larger, stronger, faster and more sensitive than are you. At the moment you engage your opponent's attack you should be either a) hitting him, b) intercepting/redirecting him to the extent that he cannot offer an immediate threat. When you opponent is at a distance where he can touch your back hand, you can touch him with your front hand. This allows you to attack with your front hand while the back hand is addressing the threat. This is the most efficient range at which to engage your opponent. This is also more dangerous than utilizing your front hand as your opponent is closer to your body; this range requires that you totally dominate your opponent's space, as discussed below. In regards to feints, should a feint occur at the distance that your opponent could engage your back hand, other measures should be employed to preclude your opponent's penetration of your space in the first place. Should a feint occur at a distance that your opponent couldn’t touch your back hand, other measures should be employed.

Should Taan Sau be used from a lower position or a higher position in reference to an attack? (height)

- Firstly, if the attack is directed at your head (upper gate), you must cover the space, as two objects cannot occupy the same space and time.

- Secondly, leverage is maximized when your hand is higher than your opponent's strike, within the limit of the high reference point. Upon contact you can make necessary adjustments to destroy your opponent's structure. If your hands are low, you have no leverage to destroy your opponent's attack.

Given that the most effective distance is when your opponent can touch your back hand, moving to cover the high gate before engaging the attack allows your opponent the time to enter your space to the proper distance. Once you have engaged, you have the leverage to adjust angles to destroy the attack while simultaneously delivering your own attack.

Should Taan Sau be used on the inside of an attacking arm or on the outside of an attacking arm? (width)

- If you engage to the outside of your opponent's attack, he can potentially recover by raising his elbow or ducking his head under his own attacking arm to remove a target. Should you attempt to apply Taan Sau high while striking the body, you risk a continued attack from your opponent's elbow, as you have not completely removed this threat.

- The Taan Sau must be applied to the inside of your opponent's attack. For simultaneous attack and defense, you must have a clear line for your attack. This application also places you in a position to immediately attack with your Taan Sau hand to your opponent's body with no adjustment of your own body (no time loss).

For purposes of structure, your elbow should be 1/2 way between your shoulder and your centerline. This position allows you the maximum structure and leverage. This concept is called the Triangular Theory in HFY.

The above discussion is an example of just one technique in the HFY system. Each technique is supported by a similar logic flow and tested under the reality of space, time and energy. To be efficient in time, space, and energy, you must first be aware of the human structure. In today’s US military, one smart bomb can delivery a payload with pinpoint accuracy. This is an example of efficiency in space, time, and energy. By using one weapon the US saves time, effort, energy and cost compared to using 50 free-fall bombs. Similarly, in the HFY system, one technique such as Taan Sau, can be used to express maximum efficiency in space, time and energy.

In the study of human combat, reality must be the foundation for all training and awareness. The reality of the world is that we are energy, exiting in a three dimensional space, contained in a fourth dimension of time. Without recognizing this reality, martial arts training will only ever be generally accurate in terms of structures for fighting. Each technique used in human combat must be referenced to three-dimensional space to find the most efficient position and structure of the human body. In HFY, the WCF and the TSC, trained in the SNT form are used to identify the most efficient structures for human combat. These ideas are uniquely HFY in origin.

Jeremy R.

(I'll be out of town until the 27th so I won't see any replies to this post until then)

reneritchie

08-16-2002, 04:49 AM

Jeremy,

Quite possibly the most clearly explained piece I've read. Thank you very much. While I think it does answer many old questions, I'm still curious as to what you see showing this material had to be in place from inception, rather than developed over generations?

RR

saulauchung

08-16-2002, 05:35 AM

Jeremy,

Jesus, so much talk! I hate to have to say this, but show us all this superior theory in actual application! Has there been any proven practitioner from your lineage? Have you any material to show all this 'WCF' and 'SG' put into use? Taarn this and taarn that, but where is proof, man?

I've nothing against HFY (because I've never heard of it!) but please don't just theorize about it. Either show us something or shut the fahk up.

You are using the Internet to write how great something is, why not use it SHOW how great it is? And this goes to all the so-called sifus/instructors/masters out there. (I have nothing great to show therefore I have nothing great to say)

I apologise for my rudeness...

BeiKongHui

08-16-2002, 07:11 AM

However, how many martial arts make a practitioner consciously aware of three dimensional space?

All martial arts do this if taught correctly. Even to a casual observer this can be seen in boxing or in an NHB match. In fact it's pretty rare for a being living in a 3d world to move in 2d's only. Even the act of reclining in my chair requires the use of 3 dimensions...it's just part of our reality. So maybe it's not explicit in the systems you've seen but implicit. I'm sorry I just don't see anything groundbreaking or really even new in any of the evidence of HFY superiority in fact it looks to me as if someone is trying to distill the movements of the body, WCK and combat into something that can be categorized, written down and packaged. Which in itself is limiting.

I would also like to ask (since no one else has yet) why HFY looks so much like William Cheung's TWC?
And since you claim to teach in all ranges of combat could you give us an example of HFY's groundfighting?

Thanks

yuanfen

08-16-2002, 07:48 AM

Firstly, thanks for your post and sharing HFY assumptions.
Secondly, I have no problem with whoever wants to do some other style of martial arts including HFY.
Thirdly: Some comments.
1. the discussion of science is a contemporary overlay because
dropping the magic word "science" is a common contemporary search for legitimizing different kinds of marketing claims for toothbrushes to gadgets.
2. dimensions of time and space depending on context are challenges to any disciplined martial activity and is not unique to HFY. Asserting it repeatedly does not make it so.
3. Discussions of the napoleonic wars and the Civil war was not shown to be germane to empty hand martial arts. There are battlefield arts involving group disciplines and there are martial arts born out of unconventional actions and the evolution of the individual "warrior" in fairly close encounters.. From the development of the gun onwards all martial arts have become relatively obsolete in the face of a competent user of a working loaded gun.
4. Operationally, the discussion of the tan sao is not really insightful. I dont know the mysteries of the HFY tan sao,,,but from
a good Ip man wing chun structure, motion and timing---a proper tan sao can be used going in from the inside or the outside when needed. Of course the tan sao is not the only option. Ip man wing chun has a plethora of fluid hand motions
and footwork.
I remain skeptical of the structural stability of HFY and its effectiveness in very very close empty hand encounters.

passing_through

08-17-2002, 01:08 AM

Rene,

I'm still curious as to what you see showing this material had to be in place from inception, rather than developed over generations?

First, let us assume that the time and space concept was at inception. This would give Wing Chun a unique identity - one that is based on a key concept. If this concept was not communicated to succeeding generations, the nature of the system would change continuously - as is the case now.

Second, let us now assume that the time and space concept was a newly developed concept. If this was the case, would it be reasonable to expect that more than one group would arrive at the same conclusions given the same (or similar) fundemental paradigms? While some lineages are now adding/mixing/changing their curriculums due to contact, only time will tell if this will lead to the same conclusions.

Personally, it doesn't make sense to me that Wing Chun would consist of Saan Sau and then become a Hai Tung (a system). It seems more reasonable to me that Wing Chun was a system, as evidenced by Chi Sim and HFY, that later (for whatever reasons) changed to a sometimes collection of Saan Sau and a sometimes system approach. Given that Wing Chun in an information based system, leaving out critical knowledge paths has a sever, negative impact on future generations. If I had never come across Chi Sim or HFY, I might also think Wing Chun evolved from Saan Sau to something more complex. However, I think the opposite is the case.

Jeremy R.

(As for the other replies, thank you for the thoughts but I won't be able to address them until I get back home on the 26th.)

FIRE HAWK

08-17-2002, 10:51 AM

Is it possiable that Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun has Wing Chun that was passed down by Jee Shim and Ng Mui in it in other words both versions of Wing chun that they passed on down to the present . but Jee Shim and Ng Mui are supposed to be fictional not real .I mean Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun has somethings that are like Jee Shim Wing Chun and has things that are like the things Ng Mui passed down in her versions of Wing Chun like the three main forms Sui Nam Tao, Chum Kui , Bil Jee . Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun has these in it plus things like in Jee Shim Weng Chun
Aleast I am learning some about Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun what about the Sam Mui Kui article that is interesting does Jee Shim Weng Chun use the Sam Mui Kui ?

FIRE HAWK

08-17-2002, 11:01 AM

Are You Training a Martial Arts Style or System
by Benny Meng and Richard Loewenhagen

Current discussions and written treatises on martial arts training often treat the terms "Style" and "System" as interchangeable, yet they are not at all synonymous. A style is a form that is distinctive and identifiable as an artistic expression with characteristics particular to the artist. In contrast, a system is a combination of intricately related elements organized into a complex whole that produces results far greater than the mathematical sum of its individual parts. A style could also be a system, but most are not. They reflect some of the attributes of a system, but are not complete.

A complete system is one that at all times adheres to a consistent philosophy yielding practical combat applications, practical training methodologies, and a complete science with principles, concepts, strategies, and tactics that do not allow the outcome of an engagement to be determined by luck. Every aspect of a complete system must be consistent with every other part. A system's philosophy is what drives that consistency. Most martial arts studied today lack an overriding philosophy that guarantees consistency throughout training and application. They are best classified as styles rather than as systems.

Even modern day Wing Chun, which prides itself on its systematic attributes, may require closer scrutiny. As you are training it today, are you guided by an overriding philosophy that is consistent with every aspect of your training? Are your training methodologies completely consistent with your combat applications? For example, many "looping" exercises are employed to train muscle memory, but this looping would never be attempted or allowed in actual combat application. A consistent philosophy would dictate methodologies aligned directly with combat application, negating the need for deprogramming the looping from the practitioner's instinctive reactions before sending him off to battle. Does your training involve looping exercises? Are there so-called "transitional" movements in your forms that are not directly tied to combat applications? If so, your forms, philosophy, methodologies, and applications are not consistent with one another.

Shaolin Temple Wing Chun, as trained by today's Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun practitioners, is an example of a complete martial arts system. It has an overriding philosophy that keeps applications, methodologies, and employment of science consistent throughout training. Hung Fa Yi practitioners train every move at every level in exactly the same manner as they would use them on the battlefield. As a science, Wing Chun's logic flow is crucial to maintaining its integrity. The sequence of learning must follow this logic flow closely. The philosophy that guides this sequence is called "Saam Mouh Kiu" and it is deeply rooted in Shaolin tradition.

Within the Southern Shaolin Wing Chun Tong was a place used to train called the Saam Mouh Dei meaning "Three Connecting Grounds." There is a direct connection between this name and the three levels of reality practiced in Zen philosophy called Saam Mouh Kiu. These same three levels of Zen reality gave rise to Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun's way of viewing combat in the framework of three connecting bridges, also called Saam Mouh Kiu. The key to unlocking Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun as a combat system is the Wing Chun Formula, and the key to understanding the formula is the concept of time and space. The key to properly approaching the concept of time and space is embracing the philosophy of Saam Mouh Kiu.

When a Wing Chun fighter is in combat he goes through a progression of Ng Jun Chew Ming Joi Ying (5 Stages of combat). Within every stage of combat the fighter must recognize Saam Mouh Kiu at that particular moment in time. Saam Mouh Kiu as used in Wing Chun refers to three specific time frames. Sam Mouh Kiu is employed by a properly trained Wing Chun fighter to identify his opponent's knowledge of time and space, and from that determine which strategies and tactics to employ to ensure the enemy's self-destruction.

Saam Mouh Kiu is used in conjunction with the Wing Chun Formula and is supported by scientific principles and concepts. Together, they enable the Wing Chun fighter to completely understand both his and his opponent's strengths and weaknesses within the space and time of the confrontation. Saam Mouh Kiu as a Wing Chun concept posits that there are only three types of bridges, employing "time-frame" as the guide to which bridge is in play. This allows the Wing Chun practitioner to determine the time frame used in combat and to understand the true nature of that combat. Once the Wing Chun practitioner reaches a level of understanding Nature itself, this concept is no longer concerned with just techniques. It extends to his total interaction with the world around him. The Three connecting bridges of Saam Mouh Kiu are as follows:

Fao Kiu - "Floating Bridge"
Another frequently used expression of this same concept is "Hoi Fao" meaning "Illusion, cloudy, or unclear." Philosophically, the Fao Kiu stage is the stage of "Wandering." The level of one's existence is primarily at the basic subsistence level of Maslow's famous Hierarchy of Needs. There is no time for higher-level development or life. In terms of combat, Fao Kiu represents "Lucky Strike" time. At this stage the practitioner is violating the Wing Chun time frame. He possesses no realized comprehension of space or time. In a physical confrontation it would be the same as standing right in front of the guy and trading blows with him. This means the practitioner and his opponent can hit or kick each other as chance dictates. Fate will select the winner. Philosophically, they represent a stage where both combatants are unclear of their path or reason for existence. They exist in an illusion. As martial artists, they are unaware of the basics of time and space and have failed to recognize any higher level of knowledge.
San Kiu - "Separate Bridge"
This is also referred to as the "Awareness Stage." This stage represents partial nature and/or understanding of the "True Time Frame," but they have no concrete ability to identify and deal with the intricacies of the interactions between time and space. They cannot express both together in harmony. At any moment, they may be able express one or the other in their kung fu, but not both simultaneously. Philosophically, at this level practitioners are beyond the basic level of subsistence. They have the capacity and the time to engage in incomplete considerations of religion, and philosophy.
Wing Kiu - "Everlasting Bridge"
It is important to note the character for "Wing" is the exact same character employed in the original name of the Wing Chun System. It represents the everlasting nature of the real science upon which it is based. Wing Kiu is also referred to as the "Focus Stage." Another phrase used on the journey to this stage is "Hoi Gong" meaning "open light" or enlightenment. It is used in the Siu Nim Tau level of training to represent that the practitioner has been exposed to this idea (Nim) - he is aware of Saam Mouh Kiu, space and time, and the Wing Chun Formula and the relationships between each of them. Philosophically, the Wing Kiu stage reflects the practitioner's comprehension of the true reason for his own existence. He is approaching real enlightenment in terms of the universe surrounding him. His perceptions of his universe are in harmony with reality. In a physical confrontation, the practitioner's every motion is in harmony with space and time with no distortion of either. This is the highest level of combat skill. Harmony with reality replaces struggle. The opponent's own distortions defeat him while the practitioner maintains harmony with the realities of space and time.

As a martial artist are you training a "Style" or a "System"? Which bridge are you at now and where are you headed? Is your system complete enough to get you where you want to go? You will need to do some serious philosophical investigation to answer these questions. Hung Fay Yi's "Saam Mouh Kiu" gives you one framework for beginning that investigation.

yuanfen

08-17-2002, 11:33 AM

Pretty vague theory( but plain marketing)---now how about that tan sao question I asked(rather than reprinting articles).

4. Operationally, the discussion of the tan sao is not really insightful. I dont know the mysteries of the HFY tan sao,,,but from
a good Ip man wing chun structure, motion and timing---a proper tan sao can be used going in from the inside or the outside when needed. Of course the tan sao is not the only option. Ip man wing chun has a plethora of fluid hand motions
and footwork.
I remain skeptical of the structural stability of HFY and its effectiveness in very very close empty hand encounters.

So tell us again how the Garret Gee tan sao differs from Ip man's tan sao...even take the picture of Ip man's tan sao even when old just before he died as a reference point and compare the two in plain English!!!

planetwc

08-17-2002, 02:26 PM

Interesting post Jeremy.

I guess my questions would be more centered around the fact that the explanations of Hung Fa Yi as a system seem grounded in 20th century science and technology and from a pseudo scientific perspective.

That is all well and good to present this from the prism of today's available knowledge. However, as this is presented as deriving from the triad/underground organizations let's give THAT a think for a moment.

If one studies the available information around the secret societies, one finds that they were not populated with the literate class, but were the province of the low castes of Chinese society. The criminal grifter element the rogues and villains of society. They cloaked themselves in the mantle of anti-ching sentiment for respectability.

Their mainstays were running scams, pyramid schemes, extortion and the like. It is highly unlikely in my estimation that the uneducated criminal class had any concept of 4 dimensional science or a perspective of technology or even basic mathematics.

It is not until the early to mid 20th century that membership in tongs would have been something that was considered by anyone above those classes.

Rather that would appear to me to be something that would have been layered on in the present day by either Gee Sifu or his teacher.

If you read some of the information such as the books on the tiandihui it becomes evident that the kind of synergy or synchronicity you are applying to the core practitioners of this art to 19th, 20th and 21st century military is not realistic. It does make for great marketing. And it implies further that this is a projection of modern day mathematics upon a tong based fighting art.

Finally, all systems of Wing Chun Kuen that still have Wing Chun at their core have the notion of time and space at their core.

"The shortest distance between two points."
"Chum Kiu, among used to develop circular (rotational) energy."

The centerline, positioning, sensitivity and control are all key concepts and hallmarks of Wing Chun. The concepts are basic.

While they can be extrapolated to 4 dimensional space--I think that is "over-engineering". You don't NEED formulas and college level mathematcis to gussie things up.

The whole point to Wing Chun is that the "elegance" is in it's simplicity!

My teacher has sometimes used the description "tangent to the cirlce" in describing a particular Wing Chun technique. Can you guess which one?

It makes sense to the engineering types within our classes, but that description is certainly not something that Leung Sheung, Yip Man, or Leung Jan used in explaining things to their students.

And as this was not the intellectual class that was building and using this art it is highly unlikely this was at it's core for them in the timeframes that Wing Chun Kuen or even Hung Fa Yi would have developed. The membership in the triad/societies would not have had the conceptual framework for the way in which you are describing things.

At most you would have the equivalent of the kuen kuits, the forms and the training drills. I would hazard that I could come up with some guesses about the initiation "drills" one might go through if you Bai-sied or joined the Hung Fa Yi Tong. I tend to doubt they are centered around euclidian geometry, physics or calculus.

More likely they involve crawling under raised blades and shields, references to blood oathes, and retribution from above if the secrets of the Tong are revealed, etc.

In summation, my thoughts are that the descriptions of Hung Fa Yi in terms of mathmatical formulae, dimensional space and time are MODERN DAY affectations. Given the class of people that would have been training and doing this system it is an UNLIKELY and overengineered approach to attempting to give this system primacy or legitimacy--just as the tongs used to attempt to tie their origins to the Shao-lin temple for legitimacy.

The real questions then are as follows:

Strip away the veneer of comparisions to european and US military techniques, strip away the 4 dimensional space, binary math and "formulas"...

What is left that makes the Hung Fa Yi substyle of Wing Chun any different IN it's application and structure?

:confused:

regards,

David Williams

yuanfen

08-17-2002, 03:13 PM

David Williams asks:
What is left that makes the Hung Fa Yi substyle of Wing Chun any different IN it's application and structure?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
An interesting marketing plan.? You can contract for Ip man WC but then for another contract graduate to HFY.!!!

Rolling_Hand

08-17-2002, 07:44 PM

"An interesting marketing plan.?--Yuanfen"

Can you tell us that for how long Augustine Fong's been marketing his authentic Wing Chun videos in public?

huh...some lips...some marketing!!!

Rolling_Hand

08-17-2002, 08:06 PM

"Pretty vague theory( but plain marketing)---Yuanfen"

What's the theory of Augustine Fong's wooden dummy?

Where's that low hook kick coming from, Fong's mountain?

Is that vague therory or plain marketing?

Some lips, some vague theory!!!

planetwc

08-17-2002, 09:52 PM

Rolling Hand,

Why not just email Fong Sifu directly?
He responds to email sent to his website and is very forthcoming.

Everyone does marketing of one sort or another.

From Moy Yat's lineage with the "Kung Fu life", to Leung Ting with WT, to Cheung with TWC and "Cheung's better life" to the master of marketing himself, Keith Kernspetch.

That said, Fong doesn't claim any monopoly on the truth or the "one true path" to WCK. And Joy has addressed the "low kick" question before on this very forum.

Perhaps you can arrange a seminar for Fong and HIS sifu, Ho Kam Ming to give at your own kwoon and see what they both say to your face. I've heard they've paid visits together to others who've had those sort of questions. Ho was what, Yip Man's nephew right?

Originally posted by Rolling_Hand
"Pretty vague theory( but plain marketing)---Yuanfen"

What's the theory of Augustine Fong's wooden dummy?

Where's that low hook kick coming from, Fong's mountain?

Is that vague therory or plain marketing?

Some lips, some vague theory!!!

yuanfen

08-17-2002, 11:57 PM

David, I quit paying attention to anonymous trolls'(RH, Sui and others)
same old same old digs a while back.. Fong's comments on his forms are up on my site. And he answers all questions at his seminars. He will be in Chicago in November.And- his school in Tucson is not hard to find. My sigung Ho was as close to Ip man as anyone. He has his own individualities in his forms as Ip man did before him and as Fong has his. Each have reasons for doing what they did or do. Sigung Ho is semi retired now. Fong was an early Ho student long before
Buddy Wu and others and regularly studied with him for 8 years
and taught for him before branching out with Ho's blessing.. Master Ho is quite proud of master Fong and I have talked with both about the relationships involved.I have been on my own long enough to know that my wing chun in part is my wing chun.If you are schooled enough you have your individuality and you know where you came from. Thats what sifu, sigung relationships are about .While there are lots of pictures of Ip man with his students...there are very few of him witha student and his student;s students. Check out the picture
of Yip Man with Ho kam Ming and his students including Fong Chi Wing(Augustine Fong). That pic has been in many mags.

Rolling_Hand

08-18-2002, 12:21 AM

Stand by what you believe is right.

Some lips, some marketing from a low hook kick mountain and only the four legs pets can catch.... some yawn!!!

Rolling_Hand

08-18-2002, 04:00 AM

PlantWC,

"Why not just email Fong Sifu directly?
He responds to email sent to his website and is very forthcoming.--PWC"

Are you a guide-book?

"Everyone does marketing of one sort or another.--PWC"

Are you also speaking to Yuanfen?

"From Moy Yat's lineage with the "Kung Fu life", to Leung Ting with WT, to Cheung with TWC and "Cheung's better life" to the master of marketing himself, Keith Kernspetch.--PWC"

So, it's all water under the bridge. Thanks for telling us!!!

"That said, Fong doesn't claim any monopoly on the truth or the "one true path" to WCK. And Joy has addressed the "low kick" question before on this very forum.--PWC"

It's wonderful that you and a potential partner agree on so many things! Isn't it?

"Perhaps you can arrange a seminar for Fong and HIS sifu, Ho Kam Ming to give at your own kwoon and see what they both say to your face. I've heard they've paid visits together to others who've had those sort of questions. Ho was what, Yip Man's nephew right?--PWC"

So, you've found your way out to the seas.
Have you seen any big fish nearby?
Please don't tell me....
Let me guess!

Geezer

08-18-2002, 06:33 AM

Why not just email Fong Sifu directly?
He responds to email sent to his website and is very forthcoming.

I think this has been said of Sifu Gee and Sifu Meng in the past,so why not just contact them directly if you're not happy with the answers your getting here.?:confused:

yuanfen

08-18-2002, 01:09 PM

A possibilty depending on the level of interest.
I pass.
For me not a matter of unhappines but the inadequacy of the answers. Apart from the claims of unique awareness of time and space and 4 dimensions and claims of "science", Shaolin and historic secrecy- still waiting for open and serious discussion/elaboration of the claims of the superiority of the HFY tan sao from the HFY forum members..

desertwingchun2

08-18-2002, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
A possibilty depending on the level of interest.
I pass.
For me not a matter of unhappines but the inadequacy of the answers. Apart from the claims of unique awareness of time and space and 4 dimensions and claims of "science", Shaolin and historic secrecy- still waiting for open and serious discussion/elaboration of the claims of the superiority of the HFY tan sao from the HFY forum members..

Yuanfen - why do you wait for answers on the internet forums. Unlike many you are in an unique position where you able to actually visit the HFY western regional headquarters. Many times throught the year GM Gee and Master Meng visit our school and hold seminars open to everyone. To date I havent seen you at any. You have even been invited by my sifu to hold discussions over a cup of coffee. If you were truly interested in seeking truth surely you would attened a seminar or meet for "open and serious discussion/elaboration" regarding any aspects of HFY. But honestly, it appears you are not interested the HFY system but only internet banter. Posting on forum boards is not walking the string.
- David

planetwc

08-18-2002, 03:08 PM

Actually I have spoken with Meng Sifu via email already.

At this point, we'll see what Jeremy has to say after the 27th.
I've also spoken with several others who attended the first friendship seminar at the VTM when Meng Sifu presented Hung Fa Yi, with Gee Sifu in attendance.

I think the point here is, that "rolling hand" didn't offer anything to the conversation at hand other than a jibe at Joy's sifu, Augustine Fong. Not quite sure what that has to do with Hung Fa Yi, but so be it.

Originally posted by Geezer

I think this has been said of Sifu Gee and Sifu Meng in the past,so why not just contact them directly if you're not happy with the answers your getting here.?:confused:

planetwc

08-18-2002, 03:34 PM

How inscrutable you are "Rolling Hand".

:rolleyes:

Why speak in code my good man, come out and say what you mean.

The students within the Hung Fa Yi lineage are speaking their minds and offering information about their system. Somehow engaging in a level of academic debate, and engaging in rigorous questioning results in personal attacks from you. Why is that?

I have made no personal attacks against Jeremy R, Benny M or Garrett Gee.

I HAVE questioned the suppositions Jeremy has made regarding the mathematics and comparisions to modern military science given the known published scholarly research based on the tongs and secret societies. They are at odds with what is presented here.

What have YOU added to this conversation other than thinly vieled off topic attacks?

Each lineage indeed has it's own version of marketing, including mine, Yip Man's, Sum Nung's, Koo Lo's etc. etc.

I would hope we are attempting to peer beyond the marketing to the reality of the claims buried within. Benny and Richard Lowenhagen in their published articles both in Kung Fu Qigong and on the VTM website have made some bold claims regarding the Hung Fa Yi system.

Jeremy has been very forthcoming in his initial 2 posts here on the subject, and I'm pressing for more details and asking him to consider my points and respond in turn.

Again I ask, what is your contribution to this discussion?

Aside from Ad Hominem attacks and caviling on your part?

Originally posted by Rolling_Hand
PlantWC,

"Why not just email Fong Sifu directly?
He responds to email sent to his website and is very forthcoming.--PWC"

Are you a guide-book?

"Everyone does marketing of one sort or another.--PWC"

Are you also speaking to Yuanfen?

"From Moy Yat's lineage with the "Kung Fu life", to Leung Ting with WT, to Cheung with TWC and "Cheung's better life" to the master of marketing himself, Keith Kernspetch.--PWC"

So, it's all water under the bridge. Thanks for telling us!!!

"That said, Fong doesn't claim any monopoly on the truth or the "one true path" to WCK. And Joy has addressed the "low kick" question before on this very forum.--PWC"

It's wonderful that you and a potential partner agree on so many things! Isn't it?

"Perhaps you can arrange a seminar for Fong and HIS sifu, Ho Kam Ming to give at your own kwoon and see what they both say to your face. I've heard they've paid visits together to others who've had those sort of questions. Ho was what, Yip Man's nephew right?--PWC"

So, you've found your way out to the seas.
Have you seen any big fish nearby?
Please don't tell me....
Let me guess!

yuanfen

08-18-2002, 05:49 PM

My (yuanfen)comments are in brackets:
Yuanfen - why do you wait for answers on the internet forums.

((Why not? Iwould like to think that forums can generate two way substantial discussions accross lineages. It was not possible a few years ago. if properly used the medium can make a contribution. I would be happy to discuss ina civil fashion any position that I have advanced))

Many times throught the year GM Gee and Master Meng visit our school and hold seminars open to everyone. To date I havent seen you at any.
((So? i dont follow the logic of your question. I have not seen any substantial discussions on HFY- stance, tan sao etc-aside from the hype on science etc- to strike my interest. If it does I might come to see Garret Gee. Does he have a tape of any kind? As far as benny meng, I respect him but I dont need to come to a seminar by him. I have been in wing chun longer than he has.
I met him once when he was fairly new to wing chun.))

You have even been invited by my sifu to hold discussions over a cup of coffee.
((Might some day if the substance of HFY sounds interesting.
It does not yet.))

If you were truly interested in seeking truth surely you would attened a seminar or meet for "open and serious discussion/elaboration" regarding any aspects of HFY.

((C'mon thats not a very veiled claim that I am seeking less than
truth about things that I am interested in.))

But honestly, it appears you are not interested the HFY system but only internet banter.

((HFY- not yet. Only internet banter? Youve got it wrong))

Posting on forum boards is not walking the string.

((Corny.I actually do wing chun. So wrong again. Sincerely, yuanfen))
- David

Rolling_Hand

08-18-2002, 06:09 PM

PlanetWC,

"I think the point here is, that "rolling hand" didn't offer anything to the conversation at hand other than a jibe at Joy's sifu, Augustine Fong. Not quite sure what that has to do with Hung Fa Yi, but so be it. --from PWC"

You have to jump to attention as you are back in your cage. Do you think you look pretty with a (xyz) in your mouth? Is a jibe or something else you like to be more fulfilling??? You seriously underestimated Geezer's advice was given to you!!!
On the other hand, you prefer your lips better than others, that's prefectly OK with me! So Lips is what you know, philosophy is what you don't know. Here is the begining of philosophy: a recognition of the conflicts between men, a search for their cause, a condemnation of mere opinion...and the discovery of standard of judgment. And I prefer Frank Sinatra's "My Way" than Yuanfen's "His Way", now, what else in your guide-book can offer to me or Geezer or Alpha Dog?

"Again I ask, what is your contribution to this discussion? --from PWC"

My friend, I may not have a fortune to buy you pretty things, not even a cup of tea, because I only like to spend my fortune to please my babe and you aren't the one!!!

anerlich

08-18-2002, 06:42 PM

philosophy is what you don't know

My dad is a retired professor of philosophy. In my experience of philosophers, they are no better than anyone else in dealing with the vicissitudes of daily life, and still lose their temper in arguments. Arguably there are more lunatics amongst "philosophical" scholars than elsewhere. That argument IMO is supported by some of the posts on this subject.

Rolling_Hand

08-18-2002, 06:45 PM

"As far as benny meng, I respect him but I dont need to come to a seminar by him. I have been in wing chun longer than he has.
I met him once when he was fairly new to wing chun.--Yuanfen"

Wallah...Yuanfen has been in wing chun longer than Sifu Benny Meng and don't need to come to a seminar by him!!!

Is that because Sifu Benny Meng can't offer Yuanfen any low kick dummy from the real Yip Man wing chun family???

FIRE HAWK

08-18-2002, 08:00 PM

When i talked to Sifu Benny Meng he showed me and was talking to me about the Hung Fa Yi Taun Sao . Now if i can remember this right wich this might not be correct if i can remember what he showed me and told me about the Hung Fa Yi Taun Sao . The Hung Fa Ya Wing Chun Taun Sao they use one type of Taun Sao to cover all there directions useing Space time Factor the three Demisional therory all the Wing Chun Gates and apply there princepals and concepts to this and have there varrations of this one Taun Sao . In other Wing Chun versions you have 3 or 6 types of Taun Sao plus all there variations to Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun this is a wast of time to many Taun Sao that 1 Taun Sao could do instead of having 3 , 6 , or 20 types Taun Sao s you have 1 taun Sao that covers all this Hung Fa Yi will also use this one type of Taun Sao with its footwork and stances and the other things i listed above . Now i am sure that i left somethings out as i cant remember everything he said so this might not be completely correct but i think it is . Let me think more about what Sifu Meng showed me and told me so i can remember .

FIRE HAWK

08-18-2002, 09:19 PM

Hung FA YI WingChun Punch

The Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Punch

The punch is so named to give credit to the secret society (the Hung Fa Yi) responsible for passing the monks' complete system on to secret revolutionary fighting cells and, ultimately, to today's Wing Chun practitioners. This single technique clearly illustrates the principles of simplicity, efficiency, and directness. To fully understand this illustration, we will examine the following underlying concepts of the Wing Chun system: body structure/unity, the Five-Line Concept, stance mobility and footwork, the Triangle Theory, and the Gate Concept.

The Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun punch is considered by most experts to be the most effective hand to hand combat punch because it is the most direct (travels the shortest distance) and is supported by the entire body structure rather than just the arm and shoulder. In much the same way that a building is supported by a strong foundation, the body structure specified by the Wing Chun system provides the punch its maximal effectiveness. For this reason, prior to training for the development of speed, power, and sensitivity, Wing Chun practitioners first emphasize and train body structure and unity.

In forming the Wing Chun punch, the wrist is never bent. It is held straight such that the bones on the back of the hand are aligned with those of the wrist and forearm allowing for the strongest shock impact supported by the rest of the arm, body, and root. In contrast, a bent wrist engenders two major problems for a combat fighter: the risk of self-injury, and the unintended dissipation of shock energy. The bent wrist is prone to impact-induced injury associated with the wrist bending back violently. Unintended dissipation of shock energy occurs when the bones are not fully aligned; upon impact, the energy from the punch travels two different directions (one forward and one sideward). To further comprehend proper body structure and unity for supporting the punch, the practitioner must fully understand the Five-Line Concept of Wing Chun. It is crucial to the execution of the punch

FIRE HAWK

08-18-2002, 09:31 PM

The Five-Line Concept

The Five-Line Concept is based on reference lines that extend from specific points on the body to specific points in front of the body. The included drawing depicts these lines and their relationship to the upper and middle reference points and the upper gate. The lines themselves can be categorized as three Yang lines and two Yin lines. Two of the three Yang lines, also referred to as "Zero" lines, are located at the borders of the body at the tips of the shoulders. The third Yang line is called the "One" line or "Centerline" and divides the body in half vertically. This line is considered the one true line of the body and covers many vulnerable vital points of human anatomy. The two Yin lines are located midway between the Yang lines and are sometimes referred to as the "Nipple" lines.

The Hung Fa Yi introduce the Five-Line Concept in the opening of Wing Chun's first form, Siu Nim Tao. The arms are raised, fingers to eye level, palms down, straight up along the Yang borderlines. This motion identifies the border of the body which must be protected. Then, in a single motion, the fists are clenched, turned at a 45 degree angle while aligning the elbow along the Yin line, and the knuckles are lowered to the throat level. The elbows, pointing down, are kept one fist distance from the body and lined up with the Yin lines. When retracting the punch, "Jang Dai Lik," or elbow power, is developed by drawing the elbows back and out to the sides of the body, while never bringing the elbows closer than one fist distance from the body.

Stance mobility and footwork are emphasized next in developing punch comprehension. The footwork of Wing Chun never advances in a straight line. Advancing straight forward gives the opponent an equal opportunity to attack and oppose force with force, thereby creating a head-on collision of speed and power. For example, if the opponent extends both hands from his body to the centerline, his arms inscribe a triangle surrounding his center space. Advancing straight forward would bring an opponent directly into the tip of that triangle, the point of its greatest strength. Rather than take this approach, the footwork of the Wing Chun system advances through angulation. Closing on an opponent at an angle gives the practitioner control over his own timing and his opponent's five lines. At an angle the opponent's five lines are facing away from the practitioner. To provide the needed mobility, the practitioner maintains an equal weight distribution in his stance throughout his stepping and bracing to effectuate the angulation and subsequent advancement.

FIRE HAWK

08-18-2002, 09:34 PM

The Triangle Theory

The Triangle Theory

The next important facet of Wing Chun punch comprehension is training utilization of the triangle theory for maximum effectiveness. Maximum power and support are generated via the alignment of body components in these inherently solid triangular formations. Multiple triangles are created in the opening movements of Siu Nim Tao. The first triangle is identified in the accompanying drawing. The points of this triangle extend from the tip of the shoulder to the elbow (on the Yin line) to the center (on the "One" line). The elbow must line up exactly between the tip of the shoulder and the One line.

By bringing the fists down and back along the Centerline so that the knuckles line up at throat level, another triangle is created between the upper reference point and the middle reference point. The upper reference point is located between the nose and the upper lip. The middle reference point is located in front of the sternum. A third triangle is formed with the elbow, tailbone, and the knee. Combined, these three triangles describe a properly held fist. When a force is applied to such a fist, the elbow, hip, and root support it.

The Siu Nim Tao form teaches the practitioner to keep the tailbone tucked in while punching so as to avoid leaning into the punch. The second point of support is the knee. The hip on the punching side is tucked in and the toes of the same side foot point to the target, the opponent's center. The toes of this foot must point to the target so that the knee bends in such a way as to have the most effective support from the heel.

FIRE HAWK

08-18-2002, 09:44 PM

Structure , Time and Space Executed properly, the Wing Chun punch allows even the small practitioner maximum punching effectiveness, because it is supported by his entire body structure. The structure of the punch gives the opponent difficulty in countering with such common techniques as Biu Sao (thrusting fingers) or Pak Sao (slapping hand). If the opponent applies Biu Sau, he would have to uplift the practitioner's entire body weight to effectively break his structure.

From the initial emphasis on body structure, the Wing Chun practitioner advances into concepts dealing with time and space factors. With an understanding of time and space factors, speed and power become secondary considerations.

In traditional Wing Chun, as practiced and passed on to us by the Hung Fa Yi, techniques become an expression of the application of the art's concepts, principles, and theories. The precision of that expression is constantly evaluated using the sciences of physics and physiology in conjunction with body structure, and ultimately weighed against the all encompassing principles of simplicity, efficiency, and directness. Thus we come full circle back to where we started. Such is the nature of any journey through a true system or any of its properly functioning subsystems. Wing Chun Kung Fu is based on the science of fighting and the absolute sciences of physics, physiology and kinesthetics. It is supported by a highly structured training methodology that ensures the student/practitioner derives maximum attributal development from these sciences. Properly adhered to, the Wing Chun system can replicate elite fighters who can readily demonstrate that the Wing Chun punch has the entire system behind it!

saulauchung

08-18-2002, 10:05 PM

Fire Hawk and others, I hasten to voice my suspicion: maybe you're students of Mr. Garret Gee or Garret Gee himself. I can imagine him right now sitting in front of his computer at home or in his kwoon and enjoying all this attention he's been getting. Enjoy it while it last as the bubble will burst one day!

Please don't take us for fools, even though you might be.

planetwc

08-18-2002, 10:57 PM

"Back in my cage?"
"(xyz) in my mouth?"

Nothing but ad hominem from Rolling Hand.
This comes off as mere trolling from you.

As to my knowing philosophy or not, you guessed wrong.
Try a bit more transparency in your childish insults--you study Wing Chun or do you just hang here and troll people with insults?

I may very well be meeting some Hung Fa Yi folks shortly.
Till then, there is the discussion going on, which you in your bid for attention and disruption are wasting everyone's time.

So are you, geezer and Alpha Dog the holy trinity here on this forum? Why drag them into your tantrum? Appeal to "authority"?

I've spoken via email with Benny Meng and even bought videos from him.

What have you done for me or anyone else here lately than play not so clever word games and posture?

What is fulfilling is intelligent conversation and not obtuse puerile wordplay from some anonymous troll. You're on about strike 3 as far as meaningfull conversation goes here, but apparently you're too busy being the only one laughing at your crass attempts at being clever to notice.

Originally posted by Rolling_Hand
PlanetWC,

"I think the point here is, that "rolling hand" didn't offer anything to the conversation at hand other than a jibe at Joy's sifu, Augustine Fong. Not quite sure what that has to do with Hung Fa Yi, but so be it. --from PWC"

You have to jump to attention as you are back in your cage. Do you think you look pretty with a (xyz) in your mouth? Is a jibe or something else you like to be more fulfilling??? You seriously underestimated Geezer's advice was given to you!!!
On the other hand, you prefer your lips better than others, that's prefectly OK with me! So Lips is what you know, philosophy is what you don't know. Here is the begining of philosophy: a recognition of the conflicts between men, a search for their cause, a condemnation of mere opinion...and the discovery of standard of judgment. And I prefer Frank Sinatra's "My Way" than Yuanfen's "His Way", now, what else in your guide-book can offer to me or Geezer or Alpha Dog?

"Again I ask, what is your contribution to this discussion? --from PWC"

My friend, I may not have a fortune to buy you pretty things, not even a cup of tea, because I only like to spend my fortune to please my babe and you aren't the one!!!

Rolling_Hand

08-19-2002, 12:36 AM

Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------
What is fulfilling is intelligent conversation and not obtuse puerile wordplay from some anonymous troll. You're on about strike 3 as far as meaningfull conversation goes here, but apparently you're too busy being the only one laughing at your crass attempts at being clever to notice. --PWC
-------------------------------------------------------------------

A man talks most who has the least to say!!!

humm.......

Tom Kagan

08-19-2002, 12:46 AM

passing_though, Firehawk: Perhaps reposting articles from old magazines and the rough drafts of future potential articles should be curtailed? Just post the link or, at least, start a new thread or something.

Jeremy,

Finding a "better" does not indicate the existence of a "best." If you review your tapes, you'll discover a story told by Moy Yat about the differing arm swing methods the Eastern Armies and Western Armies use to help balance themselves while marching in formation in full gear. Which is best? Both and neither -- the differences are meaningless because both arm swing methods work perfectly for their intended purpose (unfortunately, the real reason for the arm swings in formation marching is not discussed on that tape - a far more engaging discussion, in my opinion). And while there exists an even better way for a human to carry a load, centuries of study have yet to solve its disadvantages for military use. (A main one: You need to be a woman practising the method since the time you learned to walk).

Additionally, the only way to prove that a particular execution of a technique such as TanSao is superior is to attempt every possible combination of positioning, energistics, balance, etc. against all possible opponents' individual characteristics and in all possible physical scenarios (unless there is a mathematical proof for this seemingly infinite variable equation). Otherwise, a practitioner is left to rely on the trust of his method of learning and in his sifu's ability to adhere to the purity of his or her teachings. That faith of the student is the only possible way to allow a sifu to save the time and effort.

Firehawk,

While my SiHing has what seems to be an enviable and boundless enthusiasm for kung fu discussion (sadly, not when he's in NYC), I am a bit perplexed at your conclusion that Benny was discussing the TanSao relation to time and space as unique to the Hung Fa Yi method (though I am sure Jeremy will disagree. :) ) As proof I will tell you I learned TanSao (and all the techniques, really) similarly: Occupy the space (i.e: the center) at the right time (Simple to understand; hard to experience -- that's ch'an ;) ). Perhaps his discussion was only framed from that perspective so as to lead you to some other aspect?

As I read the previous posts, I suppose a lot of what is being said of a given technique's relation to time and space can be summed up as: "Ying Dar/Chak Dar/Pat Ying Dar/Pat Ho Dar/Mo Keung Dar/Mat Luen Dar" (--- hmm... deja vu :) )

The only significant difference as I see it (thus far) is the attempt to describe the essence of the Ving Tsun system via the technique of TanSao instead of describing its essence by blasting you with Yat Ye Chung Choi. :)

Rolling_Hand

08-19-2002, 12:57 AM

Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Please don't take us for fools, even though you might be--Saulauchung
------------------------------------------------------------------

We are all born mad. Some remain so.

Fire Hawk, you've something to explain to this dude!

FIRE HAWK

08-19-2002, 01:50 AM

I could be wrong on some of the things Sifu Meng told me about the Hung Fa Yi Taun Sao I said that what i posted about the Hung Fa Yi Taun Sao that he told me i might not have it right i cant remember everything he told me and showed me . So i could be wrong lets wait and see what Jeremy says about it Im not sure i cant remember . By the way do you know where i can get the Moy Yat book that Moy yat put out on the Six and a half pole ?

FIRE HAWK

08-19-2002, 01:54 AM

Saulauchung Found out my Secret I am Certified Crazy Crazy.

Geezer

08-19-2002, 05:38 AM

Many times throught the year GM Gee and Master Meng visit our school and hold seminars open to everyone. To date I havent seen you at any.
((So? i dont follow the logic of your question. I have not seen any substantial discussions on HFY- stance, tan sao etc-aside from the hype on science etc- to strike my interest. If it does I might come to see Garret Gee. Does he have a tape of any kind? As far as benny meng, I respect him but I dont need to come to a seminar by him. I have been in wing chun longer than he has.
I met him once when he was fairly new to wing chun.))

Yuanfen,this sounds like something I used to say at school when I was 5,"My Dad is Bigger Than Your Dad".:confused:
Just because you've been in WCK longer than he has doesn't make you any more of an authority.:confused:
It seems like you don't have any real interest in what is being said here,only to add banter to this thread.

When wingchunalex spoke of his school,I paid a visit,it's not that hard to just get in your car and take a road trip,just picture Chevy Chase in Vacation.;)
You're just down the road from Menz Martial Arts in Az aren't you.?

yuanfen

08-19-2002, 06:25 AM

FWIW: I read Firehawk's post describing the principles of HFY.
For discussions sake-
Wing chun is now a big world with different lineages doing different things. I found much of the HFY "principles" to be rearranging the deck chairs of different wing chun perspectives,
to wit:
1. Many wing chun folks do NOT really bend the wrist and maintain a bone alignment in their basic punch.
2. Several lineages have pretty elaborate explanations of lines other than the center line.
3. Various conceptions of gates and triangles and shapes
4. Good martial arts take into account time space relationships.Yuanfen

reneritchie

08-19-2002, 07:15 AM

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks much for the response. I see what you're saying about the "unique" identity. FWIW, I'm not referring to "time and space" as such, but to the very detailed way HFY classifies and expresses it in its teaching/application method. Does the "unique" identity have to be bound to "time and space" or could it be found in something else, for example, its method of "generating force" or perhaps its understanding of operating under stress?

And, of course, you know I personally do believe all the branches have been evolving over the generations (I've personally seen a few different interpretations of Chi Sim as well).

On the second point, I'm not sure I can assume a zeitgeist, or even if I could, whether the HFY approach would be universally seen as beneficial (others may have had different ideas as to what is or isn't ideal, even as individuals have them now). If it was, wouldn't every system, northern and southern, have come to that similar place of development (as almost all web browers are the same).

Since, IMHO, WCK has to be seen in the context of all Chinese martial development, and it seems most Chinese MA did evolve in complexity as time went on (even the legendary Lohan grew and was not created whole in 108). I haven't had the chance yet to see branches of HFY other than Gee sifu's, so perhaps my opinions also wil change with more information, but having seen the rest, including Chi Sim, grow and develop and now thrive under many great masters, I still wonder about the "creationism" theory.

Thanks again, its really enjoyable to have actual discourse WCK around here.

RR

yuanfen

08-19-2002, 07:32 AM

Geezer sez:Just because you've been in WCK longer than he has doesn't make you any more of an authority.

((Not necessarily so, but being there longer is not a disqualification either Geezer))

It seems like you don't have any real interest in what is being said here,only to add banter to this thread.

((Banter is in the eyes of the beholder. My comments on the HFY posts are quite serious. Nit banter- I have commented on the HFY fist, the lines, time space and tan sao))))

just get in your car and take a road trip,just picture Chevy Chase in Vacation.
((you must have time. i dont watch Chevy chase))

You're just down the road from Menz Martial Arts in Az aren't you.?

((So? A little further down in tucson is superb wing chun.
BTW, I dont advertise but I have made it a point to find out
about other schools and lineages over the years. And- very good friends of mine were at the Gee seminar in the museum))

PS Firehawk---on tan sao-s-how you count depends on what the key variable is... In some Ip man lines also--- there is one tan sao and different manifestations of it))

yuanfen

08-19-2002, 08:14 AM

Rolling_Hand

08-19-2002, 08:53 AM

Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Yuanfen,this sounds like something I used to say at school when I was 5,"My Dad is Bigger Than Your Dad".
Just because you've been in WCK longer than he has doesn't make you any more of an authority.
It seems like you don't have any real interest in what is being said here,only to add banter to this thread.

When wingchunalex spoke of his school,I paid a visit,it's not that hard to just get in your car and take a road trip,just picture Chevy Chase in Vacation.
You're just down the road from Menz Martial Arts in Az aren't you.? --From Geezer
------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Geezer,

Some people are very content in their own arragent, ignorant world. If they don't have any interest in HFY, we don't need to contiune with this discussion.

In reality, the exercise of courtesy and respect is a demonstration of true MA skill. Two years ago, I had a great pleasure of meeting Sifu Garrett Gee at the Bruce Lee's birthday party in Chinatown. From my small experience with HFY, at the party many people were following him around and discussing kung fu with him, Sifu Gee was so effective in communicating exactly what he wanted in front of all these big names...people were gathering in a big circle while Sifu Gee was doing Chi Sau with one of their JKD leaders at the party. It's amusing to see these people's reaction on their faces as Sifu Gee extented his hands to help his oppt to get back up from the ground... Sifu Gee's a fighter as well as a gentleman!

rgds

Roger

Geezer

08-19-2002, 09:55 AM

Some people are very content in their own arragent, ignorant world. If they don't have any interest in HFY,we don't need to contiune with this discussion.

Some people may not recognize what they see, when it's staring them in the face.:confused: IMHO

Sheldon:)

saulauchung

08-19-2002, 10:01 AM

Fire Hawk and close associates of Mr. Gee,

I said fool not crazy, but if you want to add the latter to your list of descriptions, I have no objections. I do object, however, if you want to replace fool by crazy.

You have not attempted to dispute my suspicion, can I then assume it is correct?

BTW, is there a web site about this fabulous HFY Wing Chun?

First I was sceptical, now I am totally unconvinced about all this jive. Can't wait when HFY reaches UK, or maybe it has?

reneritchie

08-19-2002, 10:32 AM

Sheldon,

Does everyone have to believe the same thing or prefer the same thing? Just as different people like different kinds of foods, different modes of transportation, different types of people, etc. individuals will also have individual preferences wrt martial arts. Some may think HFY is the bee's knees while others prefer Yip Man's system. Some may not even like any WCK and prefer Xingyi or Aikido or Escrima, or may not even like MA at all.

For my part, I think we're lucky to live in a time when we have some degree of choice, and have a chance to find expert instruction in whatever it is we do like.

Some people may never have seen HFY, but then many have never seen Gulao or YKS/SN, or even (hard as it may seem to believe) Yip Man, and some may have no interest to. Some may have seen those and more and still prefer something else.

To each their own. No one's kwoon is big enough to fit everyone anyway ;)

RR

Rolling_Hand

08-19-2002, 10:40 AM

Yoda Yoda,

What's for lunch to-day?

I think Geezer is a white meat eater, any suggestion from Yoda's kitchen?

planetwc

08-19-2002, 10:41 AM

Other than Jeremy's post in his own words, what details are being offered by rollign hand, geezer et al?

Firehawk is at least reposting articles on the subject.

This is, the last time I checked a discussion forum. So a little more conversation and a little less assumption and insult might help things here.

The sense here is almost as if, someone writes how great HFY is, and because the rest of the forum members don't fall to the ground in wonder, you want to take your ball and go home.

Instead, stop making assumptions about us, since you REALLY don't know our INTENT and just try to discuss.

Otherwise, WHY are you on this forum?
If it's to troll, save us all some time and be honest about that.

If it is to engage in discussion, then do so. That's all we are really going to get on this forum IF we are lucky. When we aren't we'll get trolling of the likes of "rolling hand"...obscurity, insult and nothing of substance beyond bad english.

Originally posted by Geezer

Some people may not recognize what they see, when it's staring them in the face.:confused: IMHO

Sheldon:)

Geezer

08-19-2002, 10:58 AM

Does everyone have to believe the same thing or prefer the same thing? Just as different people like different kinds of foods, different modes of transportation, different types of people, etc. individuals will also have individual preferences wrt martial arts. Some may think HFY is the bee's knees while others prefer Yip Man's system. Some may not even like any WCK and prefer Xingyi or Aikido or Escrima, or may not even like MA at all.

No not at all,different strokes for different folks.But if someone is so sure that what they are doing is right why waste you're time and energy disputing everything else.:confused:

Sheldon:)

yuanfen

08-19-2002, 11:10 AM

Geezer- there is a fundamental difference between the following
two situations.
1. Someone with considerable confidence in what they are doing
who tries to understand an alternative perspective and asks detailed questions about things that are unclear or do not sound
persuasive enough.

2. Someone who is completely closed minded because they regard what they do as "religion", i.e, the chemistry of a true believer.

There are many including me who fall into category 1. Same shoe #2 does not fit all.

reneritchie

08-19-2002, 11:28 AM

Hey Sheldon,

> But if someone is so sure that what they are doing is right why waste you're time and energy disputing everything else.

Probably the same reflex that gets people to post assertions on how awesome (in their opinion) what they do is to begin with. Action and reaction. Humans are remarkably "us vs. them" and when you get down to it, "me vs. you", so I suppose it stands to reason.

Now, the serious question - Orange Pekoe (sp?), Earl Grey, or some sort of Herbal?

RR

anerlich

08-19-2002, 02:13 PM

Just because you've been in WCK longer than he has doesn't make you any more of an authority.

I guess that would be red5angel's argument, and that in itself provides a pretty good counterexample to the veracity of your assertion.

anerlich

08-19-2002, 02:17 PM

Some people are very content in their own arragent, ignorant world.

That cuts both ways. Studentship of HFY or any other lineage does not make one immune to insularity or arrogance, an argument supported by a number of posts on this and the Chan thread.

Rolling_Hand

08-19-2002, 02:35 PM

Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Probably the same reflex that gets people to post assertions on how awesome (in their opinion) what they do is to begin with. Action and reaction. Humans are remarkably "us vs. them" and when you get down to it, "me vs. you", so I suppose it stands to reason.

Now, the serious question - Orange Pekoe (sp?), Earl Grey, or some sort of Herbal? ---RR
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Fire Hawk - Can you please start another topic *I want to know everything I can about YKS wing chun* to cool somebody down?

Rolling_Hand

08-19-2002, 03:18 PM

Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
That cuts both ways. Studentship of HFY or any other lineage does not make one immune to insularity or arrogance, an argument supported by a number of posts on this and the Chan thread.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Heartbreak City....I can find some friends around here!

Love is blind, but marriage is a real eye-opener!!!

FIRE HAWK

08-21-2002, 01:05 AM

Rolling_Hand

08-21-2002, 09:49 AM

If Rene = Yuan Kay San?

Then Madonna must be a man and you must be a fire bird!!!

Dave Farmer

08-21-2002, 11:15 AM

Hi all.

I've absolutely no undertstanding of Chan, a limited knowledge of Wing Chun and trying to get through the rest of life's little trials on a daily basis.

I think we all have the guilt of 'Pride' in our own lineages and will 'protect' subconciously or otherwise but how can any one person have the answer to absolutely everything??

All our respective lineages have both conflicting and agreeing view points on certain aspects and all this 'mines better than yours' makes us no better than kids.

I hear less bickering from my own kids and they're only 4 and 6.

I'm not suggesting we have to agree to everything, but can't we disagree with at least a little mutual respect instead of all these thinly veiled personal digs, get on with learning from whoever we chose and try to move on?

We've more than enough of the BS on the VTAA 'Forum', a fantastic advert for the wing chun system.

all the best.

Be happy

Dave F

Geezer

08-21-2002, 11:15 AM

Why would I want to start a topic on Yuen Kay San Wing Chun When we have Rene . He wrote a book on Yuen Kay Sans Wing Chun that is good enough for me on the Yuen Kay San Wing Chun maybe Rene will write another book I know that Robert Chu is writeing three books on Wing Chun that comes from different types of Wing Chun that he knows I wonder when these books will come out on the market to buy .

This doesn't make any sense to me,you live in Dayton the VTM is close by, and you've spoken in person to Sifu Meng.:confused:
but when asked to start a thread about "Wanting To Know Everything YKS" you say "why" we have Rene and you have his books.:confused:

Does that mean you've learnt everything you can from books or you have no interest in YKS.:confused:

Going back over you're list of threads it seems you nearly always start one about HFY:confused:

Is this a geniune interest or are you just starting a Fire.?

FIRE HAWK

08-21-2002, 01:35 PM

I have a very big interest in learning Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun and i want to know as much as i can about it thats why I started this topic . Before I can start takeing Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun I have to have about four medical type surgerys they arent nice surgerys either this is why I am not at the Ving Tsun Museum learning Hung Fa Yi at this time i have to wait till my body heals from these surgerys that i have to have when I have the surgerys i also dont have a car yet and my brother will only take me to the Ving Tsun Museum every now and then . so I am very limited on what I can do at this time .I have asked Rene about Yuan Kay San Wing Chun in the past and I dont want to bother him about it he has answered my questions many times in the past . But i am not trying to start a flame war I just wanted to know about Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun I like all the Wing Chun systems. its not my fault that this topic turned out the way it did .

joy chaudhuri

08-21-2002, 01:42 PM

Geezer asks Firehawk:This doesn't make any sense to me,you live in Dayton the VTM is close by, and you've spoken in person to Sifu Meng.
but when asked to start a thread about "Wanting To Know Everything YKS" you say "why" we have Rene and you have his books
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on- be reasonable. A resident troll asks Firehawk to start a thread and Firehawk declines. There is no need to ride Firehawk
if he declines. What's the big deal?

Geezer

08-21-2002, 02:14 PM

Before I can start takeing Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun I have to have about four medical type surgerys they arent nice surgerys either this is why I am not at the Ving Tsun Museum learning Hung Fa Yi at this time i have to wait till my body heals from these surgerys that i have to have when I have the surgerys i also dont have a car yet and my brother will only take me to the Ving Tsun Museum every now and then .

Hopefully everything will go ok for you,I remember reading where you said you had major bowle(not sure if this is right)surgery.
You need to tell your brother that your Dr prescribes KF and you need to get there:D .

I have a very big interest in learning Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun and i want to know as much as i can about it thats why I started this topic .

I guess, I'm of the thinking that it's always better to go direct to the source;)

Sheldon:)

FIRE HAWK

08-21-2002, 04:26 PM

Yes I had major reconstructive bowl surgery back late 1998 it was a terriable surgery I didnt leave my house for 4 months only to see the Doctor now a bunch of scare tissue has built up in me and they have to remove it i also got a broken bone in my foot that has to be fixed and two other things that i will have to have surgery for . It really gets boring when all you can do is read books on Martial arts and watch videos on martial arts and not get to practice martial arts . I might not get to start takeing Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun for 7 or 8 months because of these surgerys .

dezhen2001

08-21-2002, 05:22 PM

i hope everything goes well for u Fire Hawk and u can be back to training very soon :)

take it easy,

david

FIRE HAWK

08-21-2002, 08:15 PM

Thanks .

John Weiland

08-21-2002, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by FIRE HAWK
I might not get to start takeing Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun for 7 or 8 months because of these surgerys . Hi Firehawk,

I'm sorry to hear about your health problems. I'll keep you in my thoughts and pray for your complete and rapid recovery.

Regards,

FIRE HAWK

08-21-2002, 11:16 PM

Thanks .

anerlich

08-22-2002, 12:48 AM

Best wishes for a speedy and full recovery from your health probs.

FIRE HAWK

08-22-2002, 08:16 PM

Thanks .

wingchunalex

08-26-2002, 02:48 PM

hi firehawk, i'm sorry to hear about your multiple physical problems. good luck with hung fa yi, i truely hope it works out for you. best wishes, - alex wall

wingchunalex

08-26-2002, 02:49 PM

geezer would your name happen to be scott? you mentioned you visited my school.

FIRE HAWK

08-28-2002, 11:43 AM

Thanks i still want to check out Beys Shaolin Martial arts too.

FIRE HAWK

08-28-2002, 11:44 AM

Thanks i still want to check out Beys Shaolin Martial arts too.

Geezer

08-29-2002, 01:14 PM

Wingchunalex asks
geezer would your name happen to be scott? you mentioned you visited my school.

No my name is Sheldon,and I'm a Brit.:D

Why do you ask.?

Rolling_Hand

08-29-2002, 07:21 PM

Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy R.

(I'll be out of town until the 27th so I won't see any replies to this post until then)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Jeremy,

Can you share some information with us about Sifu Garrett Gee's last HFY seminar?

Rgds

Roger

passing_through

09-05-2002, 10:05 AM

This is my initial reaction to the recent HFY seminar in San Francisco. I'm still working through my actual notes to make them intelligible to people other than me and I hope to have something postable in the near future. I've just finished reading through all the posts in the last 2 weeks and I'll be working on some replies for this weekend.

First, I would like to thank Sigung Gee for the opportunity to learn and experience kung fu last weekend. I feel I learned quite a bit and deepened my own understanding of HFY and the martial arts world. Also I would like to thank Sifu Meng for the chances he has given to me to learn and experience as much as I wish in the martial arts world.

The whole weekend was quite extraordinary - from (almost) all night training sessions to numerous Masters' demonstrations at the Kung Fu-Qigong Magazine's 10 Anniversary Banquet to awards for Sifu Meng and Sifu Loewenhagen (and a oversight in missing an award for Sigung Gee and the HFY Headquarters, too!) to a HFY Seminar to a Baai Si ceremony for JK Walz, 1st 11th generation Master Club member (congratulations!). Truly an incredible series of events. It was great to see many people in one place - from the HFY Headquarters, Meng's of Az, and of course Meng's Martial Arts (of Ohio). It was unfortunate that no one from the Bay Area outside the HFY members attended the workshop.

Having covered the material in three separate sessions with Sigung and watching the way in which he introduced the information during the workshop, the biggest impact for me personally was that I am beginning to see more of the progression training in HFY. Before I talk about this too much, let me give you some context:

In LA, Sifu Meng and I took part in extensive Saan Kiu training. The material ranged from basic striking (hook/uppercut) to ground fighting (escaping a mounted position). Part of the experience also included progressive methods of teaching to help students grasp/develop physical skills. One of the main points I took away from the week was a focus progressive training.

For example, when an exercise was first introduced, only enough information was given to get people up and working immediately. Context was given only in the sense of a situation that might call for the technique and mechanics were covered to prevent injury in the initial training. As we got comfortable with the basic motions, we were given more detail about how to throw the technique, range, timing, etc. Every few minutes we were given more information, more detail. If all of this information was explained upfront, we might have gotten lost in the technical details instead of getting our bodies into motion and learning. Instead of training, we'd be thinking about what we're doing to see if we're doing it right.

With this experience from the previous week, watching Sigung introduce information on HFY three times gave me an insight into the teaching of HFY - and how similar Sigung's teaching method matches to my experience in LA. Many of the exercises we have been taught to date in HFY have been further developed over time. The curriculum continues to develop but only because the levels of the students are improving and they are ready for more material. This is why so many exercises have "phases" in them. The teacher has to know the phases and what skill they wish to illicit from the student. As Sigung said several times over the weekend, "Teaching Saan Sau Wing Chun is easy. Teaching the system is not so easy." This isn't because the system itself is hard - it is because the standards are very high and a lot of information is required to perform correctly - and people get attached too quickly to an understanding before they've seen the whole progression. Before you can say you truly know an exercise, you have to experience in from a Saam Mo Kiu point of view, a system point of view, and a strategy/tactic point of view. Only after gaining experience in all three areas can you say that you have an understanding of something. Knowing the progression and when to move the students forward is what makes a good teacher but also makes the teaching more complicated. If you just wanted to experience HFY from one point of view, it would become Saan Sau instead of a system, making it easier to teach/learn/train but increasing the risk of changes due to personal opinion.

Another insight for me was that I have to avoid trying to put too much of my own understanding into HFY before I'm ready. When Sigung first introduced the Flow, Body Mechanics, Skill idea for Kiu Sau training, I asked him if making the following analogy would be correct:
Flow - Siu Nim Tau
Body Mechanics - Chum Kiu
Skill - Biu Ji

Sigung replied that I should avoid trying to guess at what comes next. Chum Kiu is a different experience and trying to link the system logic flow to an exercise logic flow is my own idea, not an idea in HFY. This analogy might be useful for me personally but I shouldn't use this when teaching, I shouldn't discuss it with other students, nor should I hold on to this idea when I start to learn more about Chum Kiu.

Also during the weekend Sigung covered Footwork (Yi Ji Kim Yeung Ma, Leung Yi Ma, and Bun Yuet Ma) and the Jan/strategy concept. When you start to discuss the tactics and strategy for footwork, the two ideas of Ji Ng Ma and Bin Ma come into play. Ji Ng Ma looks like a cross/closed stance between you and your opponent. Bin Ma looks like a parallel/open stance between you and your opponent. When we first covered this material on Saturday morning, there was much discussion on the difference between YJKYM/LYM/BYM vs. JNM/BM. Are YJKYM, LYM and BYM specific stances? Are JNM and BM two new stances?

As Sigung was explaining Saturday morning, he stated, "Footwork is footwork, Baai Jong is Baai Jong". At that moment, I broke out into a huge smile. I was trying to understand the footwork vs. setting up and made a connection with Sigung's statement. I still can't quite express clearly in words what I realized but, basically, the difference between training stances, with its own flow of Fau to Saan to Wing, and training Baai Jong, also with its own flow from Fau to Saan to Wing, are different levels of reality. To discuss the Jan/strategy level of information is wasted unless you have an awareness of footwork as a pre-requisite. Baai Jong and footwork are intimately related but, as Sigung stated, footwork is footwork and Baai Jong is Baai Jong. When you learn footwork and train it, don't go looking too hard for the application - you might get the wrong ideas about application. If you tie yourself to your own ideas about application, when you are taught the next level of information you'll have a difficult time absorbing new information because it might contradict your own deductions/conclusions/ideas.

At a foundational level, students often think that YJKYM, LYM and BYM are stances. Actually, these terms describe the motion of your movement. So the terms do not refer to stances, they are concepts that are expressed using certain body mechanics. JNM and BM refer to a tactical situation. You could be in a "front stance" or a "side stance" and still discuss JNM and BM. So, footwork is footwork and Baai Jong is Baai Jong. It's so obvious and simple but it takes some struggle to see it clearly. I feel I've seen something in a refreshing, new way and I'm amazed by the system and by Sigung Gee. I look forward to many more new, refreshing experiences.

Through these experiences, teaching progressions and trying to use my own ideas, I also see how the process of learning the system is a Chan experience. If I hold on to my ideas about stances, or exercises, or training progressions, I cause myself suffering. I'll get mad or upset because it will seem that everything keeps changing. Until I learn the whole system, everything will continue to change because of the interaction of the three approaches to teaching (Saam Mo Kiu, Kiu Sau/Chi Sau/Saan Da, Five Methods of Combat).

Combat is all about live elements acting and reacting to each other. In order to learn about live elements, the teaching methods must also be alive. Training progressions will change as you learn and progress through the system. A curriculum is a guide to training but it is not THE LAW of HFY. One thing we have to avoid is getting trapped by our understanding of the methodology or getting attached to particular exercises. Just like the story of the finger pointing to the Moon, don't get stuck on the finger and miss the Moon.

Jeremy R.

reneritchie

09-05-2002, 12:38 PM

Hey Jeremy,

Welcome back. Sounds like you had an enriching experience. Thanks much for sharing.

RR

Rolling_Hand

09-05-2002, 04:54 PM

Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Sigung said several times over the weekend, "Teaching Saan Sau Wing Chun is easy. Teaching the system is not so easy." This isn't because the system itself is hard - it is because the standards are very high and a lot of information is required to perform correctly - and people get attached too quickly to an understanding before they've seen the whole progression. Before you can say you truly know an exercise, you have to experience in from a Saam Mo Kiu point of view, a system point of view, and a strategy/tactic point of view. Only after gaining experience in all three areas can you say that you have an understanding of something. Knowing the progression and when to move the students forward is what makes a good teacher but also makes the teaching more complicated. If you just wanted to experience HFY from one point of view, it would become Saan Sau instead of a system, making it easier to teach/learn/train but increasing the risk of changes due to personal opinion.>>Jeremy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good stuff......my cup is only half full!

Jeremy....more tea!?!?

Nothing can take the place of practical experience out in the world.

Thanks

Roger

Grendel

09-05-2002, 05:15 PM

Hi Jeremy,

Originally posted by passing_through
A curriculum is a guide to training but it is not THE LAW of HFY. One thing we have to avoid is getting trapped by our understanding of the methodology or getting attached to particular exercises. Just like the story of the finger pointing to the Moon, don't get stuck on the finger and miss the Moon.

It sounds like HFY has invented a new vocabulary for Wing Chun. Still, only if the Wing Chun is sound will any of it make sense. Words and marketing don't win fights.

Too bad those attending the HFY seminar missed the Bay Area Wing Chun picnic the day before. It would have been a good way to demonstrate what you're alluding to.

I hope that it would be possible to get together for a friendly exchange of views in the future.

Regards,

passing_through

09-16-2002, 02:33 PM

Grendel, Rene, et al.

I see what you're saying about the "unique" identity. FWIW, I'm not referring to "time and space" as such, but to the very detailed way HFY classifies and expresses it in its teaching/application method. Does the "unique" identity have to be bound to "time and space" or could it be found in something else, for example, its method of "generating force" or perhaps its understanding of operating under stress?

It sounds like HFY has invented a new vocabulary for Wing Chun. Still, only if the Wing Chun is sound will any of it make sense. Words and marketing don't win fights.

If you approach HFY without an understanding of Time and Space, everything else in the system will appear to you as just technique - no different than any other system or style - something I've realized from this thread.

Several people have commented on HFY being a different way to classify martial arts. In a general sense that's true. However, with an understanding and experience of the Time and Space Concept, I see HFY in a different light, as a different creature, than other styles/systems/arts. Without this direct experience of the Time and Space concept, discussing technique is a waste of time as the total impact of the discussion is lost on them.

I tried using Taan Sau as a bridge for discussion but people don't seem to understand the idea - lost in the finger and missing the moon. I showed a classmate of mine who's been away for a few years and he saw the potential when we discussed Time and Space using Taan Sau as an example. I can't say for certain things 'clicked' for him yet, tho'.

Rene, as for your comments about evolution and different interpretations, in particular his comment about Chi Sim... I start to wonder who's more qualifed to talk about Chi Sim - you or Sifu Hoffmann... As long as there are different students learning the same thing, expressions will look different. Standing on the outside, those differences will lead to confusion. Standing on the inside, the differences are understood. I had a simui ask me about Chi Sau in the Yip Man system a few years ago. She had asked the same question of 6 people and asked me which one was right. From my understanding at that time, I could see that they all were right. Each was commenting on different points of view, different moments in time. Because she didn't have the framework to understand each point of view, she was confused. Until you have studied Chi Sim, maybe you should be careful about what conclusions you share with the general public. Without a clear understanding, are you spreading clarity or confusion? This is one of the reasons I don't talk about things with which I am not familiar.

Too bad those attending the HFY seminar missed the Bay Area Wing Chun picnic the day before. It would have been a good way to demonstrate what you're alluding to.

I could say the same for those at the picnic that missed the HFY seminar. Time is a scarce commodity for us all.

From these and other comments, I'm reminded of something that General Patton's wife said about him, "George would rather know a man by his own words than from the words of others." For those reading that are interested in seeing for themselves, welcome. For those that would have the world delivered to their feet, don't catch cold waiting.

Jeremy R.

yuanfen

09-16-2002, 03:24 PM

I really dont think that concepts of time and space being more important than technique is unique to any one kind of wing chun.
yuanfen

passing_through

09-16-2002, 03:42 PM

I really dont think that concepts of time and space being more important than technique is unique to any one kind of wing chun.

I have to disagree with you. I haven't seen any other branch of Wing Chun consciously take Time and Space into consideration. All training is attributal at best with only a rudimentary understanding and expression of time and space.

You don't know the time and space concept so discussing anything of a technical bent is moot. I'll attempt to express what what I mean in a few days, ok?

Jeremy R.

yuanfen

09-16-2002, 03:56 PM

Jeremy sez:I have to disagree with you.

((Jeremy-I dont have a problem with disagreements. I deal with differences in perpectives ona daily basis))))

I haven't seen any other branch of Wing Chun consciously take Time and Space into consideration.
(( I dont know what you have seen... apprently not all of Ip man wing chun- atleast based on your comment))

All training is attributal at best with only a rudimentary understanding and expression of time and space.

((I am not sure what you mean.. most reasoned conclusions have a tentative character to them...evn the clearest of ideas))

You don't know the time and space concept

((presumptuous- perhaps you mean your concept or Garret Gee's concept- arent time and space public concepts?))))

so discussing anything of a technical bent is moot.

((Moot? So why bring up the opening of Garret Gee's art??
Or the tan sao?))

I'll attempt to express what what I mean in a few days, ok?

((No problem...))

R Loewenhagen

09-16-2002, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Jeremy sez:I have to disagree with you.

((Jeremy-I dont have a problem with disagreements. I deal with differences in perpectives ona daily basis))))

I haven't seen any other branch of Wing Chun consciously take Time and Space into consideration.
(( I dont know what you have seen... apprently not all of Ip man wing chun- atleast based on your comment))

All training is attributal at best with only a rudimentary understanding and expression of time and space.

((I am not sure what you mean.. most reasoned conclusions have a tentative character to them...evn the clearest of ideas))

You don't know the time and space concept

((presumptuous- perhaps you mean your concept or Garret Gee's concept- arent time and space public concepts?))))

so discussing anything of a technical bent is moot.

((Moot? So why bring up the opening of Garret Gee's art??
Or the tan sao?))

I'll attempt to express what what I mean in a few days, ok?

((No problem...))

Yuanfen,

I must disagree with you. Jeremy and a number of other Museum staff members have all witnessed first-hand what is taught in your lineage of the Yip Man family. Some of us have done so on multiple occasions. We've seen nothing significantly different from what is taught by other excellent Masters and Sifus in the Yip Man lineage. In addition, I have over a dozen students who trained more than 4 years under your Sifu. I am quite familiar with with their skills and their understanding of "Time and Space"... it is, indeed, as Jeremy says. They see Time and Space as "Timing" and "Distance Awareness"... these are two crucial attributes to be developed in Kung Fu and your lineage does it as well as anyone... however, that is not Time and Space control as known and trained in Hung Fa Yi.... I must concur with Jeremy, you haven't afforded yourself of the opportunity to actually experience HFY and simply cannot understand the explanation without the experience. Three dimensional motion, coupled with the fourth dimension of time, both giving rise to proper energetics and all guided by specific strategies, simply can't be discussed in a two-dimensional medium, unless all participants have first 'experienced' the concept. I'll give you another opportunity for the experience. Benny Meng will be here in Arizona this weekend to present a seminar on Saturday regarding Hung Fa Yi gate theory and combat concepts. You are more tha welcome to attend. I think you will find us most hospitable. Its a trademark of Hung Fa Yi members.

Regards

Richard

yuanfen

09-16-2002, 07:15 PM

Come on Richard- one can make practically any kind of comment on any line by selective exposure to some students you have met.
I have met students from Moy yat line and people i know have seen Garret gee show and explain some things about his system.
Each school I am sure has some unique features and has varying levels of students.
So what- one can say they dont have this or that- but that is not really a conversation about the advantage of one system over another which you folks are apparently attempting to advance...
If you have a theory of time and space and you suggest that your system is "scientific" you should be able to express the essential time space conception in writing.
The concepts have to be first fascinating enough to spend time on the application- at least for me. I dont think that the HFY folks have made their case yet on the depth of their conceptualization.
We have had non conceptual defensive posts upto now from Chango, jeremy and now you.. You refer to timing and distancing in a critical way... you cant have timing and distancing without some conceptions of time and space.

R Loewenhagen

09-16-2002, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Come on Richard- one can make practically any kind of comment on any line by selective exposure to some students you have met.
I have met students from Moy yat line and people i know have seen Garret gee show and explain some things about his system.
Each school I am sure has some unique features and has varying levels of students.
So what- one can say they dont have this or that- but that is not really a conversation about the advantage of one system over another which you folks are apparently attempting to advance...
If you have a theory of time and space and you suggest that your system is "scientific" you should be able to express the essential time space conception in writing.
The concepts have to be first fascinating enough to spend time on the application- at least for me. I dont think that the HFY folks have made their case yet on the depth of their conceptualization.
We have had non conceptual defensive posts upto now from Chango, jeremy and now you.. You refer to timing and distancing in a critical way... you cant have timing and distancing without some conceptions of time and space.

I repeat... you lack the 'experience' and cannot understand the answers that have been given. Since you have been given the opportunity for the experience and chosen not to 'realize' it, there can be no basis for communication. That, my friend, is Chan.

Regards

Richard

yuanfen

09-16-2002, 08:17 PM

Thanks, one's loss can be one's gain. joy

Rolling_Hand

09-16-2002, 08:27 PM

Words spoken now are never from the heart.

passing_through

09-17-2002, 06:05 AM

Joy,

I dont know what you have seen... apprently not all of Ip man wing chun- atleast based on your comment
Direct experience with 1st Generation Students - Moy Yat, Yip Ching, Yip Chun, Chu Shong Tin, Ho Kam Ming, William Cheung, and Hawkins Cheung. What about you?

All training is attributal at best with only a rudimentary understanding and expression of time and space.
I am not sure what you mean.. most reasoned conclusions have a tentative character to them...evn the clearest of ideas
I didn't follow you here, are you saying that you didn't understand my assertion above? Might be a language issue.

Attributes (litterally inherent characteristics) are the developed physical, mental, and emotional characteristics and abilities needed to make a technique successful. For example, relaxation is both a physical and mental attribute required to skillfully release a punch with force and effectiveness.

Rudimentary - here meaning "very imperfectly developed or represented only by a vestige"

I think redimentary is most appropriate here. You have an implicit awareness of time and space, I'm sure. That's a Saan Kiu level of reality. Timing and distace awareness are not the same as Time and Space. Timing and distance awareness are ways an individual intereacts with Time and Space but are also personal characteristics. Can your students use your timing or distance awareness when they train? If they cannot, what do you teach them? A better place to start (space discussion), a shorter distance, perhaps? If you give them a better place to start, is there a best place (meaning most efficient)? what about time? How is that covered? What is time?

Without an understanding of time and space (and at least a shared understanding), communication will continue to be the biggest hurdle. As Richard stated, there needs to be a common experience first. You have taan, I have taan... all Wing chun has taan - is it the same experience? If not, language becomes a barrier to communication. This is why direct, personal interaction is critical.

presumptuous- perhaps you mean your concept or Garret Gee's concept- arent time and space public concepts?

If time and space are public concepts, I assume you can a) explain time and space more clearly that you feel I have not done b) explain where it was introduced in your training and c) explain where the idea originated. While I work on my presentation, why not post what you understand of time and space? Again I ask you, is there a best place for Taan Sau? Or do you continue to state that "taan can be used inside or outside" (which doesn't answer the question I asked you - "is there a most efficient usage" not "how many ways can you apply a taan sau").

Moot?

I truly realized the mootness (is that a word?) of technical discussion without understanding time and space only recently - mainly through this thread.

So why bring up the opening of Garret Gee's art?? Or the tan sao?

Simply put, I believe comminucation is worth the effort. I don't consider it a waste of energy to talk to people and attempt to help them understand what I understand. You are an intelligent guy, obviously care about Wing Chun and take pride in your lineage. However, I feel you do a disservice to HFY when you dismiss what you do not understand. I'm making the effort to communicate so that you might understand. Richard has also offered to discuss this matter with you. Since this is the approach you desire, I'm doing my best. Until I've given it a fair attempt, I can't simply wash my hands and walk away. I think this is a two-way street. You've asked questions and I'm working to put answers in a way you might understand. Until you decide to see for your self, instead of relying on the words of others, this is the best I, or anyone, can do for you.

Again, please post your understanding of time and space, where it was introduced in your training, and where the idea originated.

Jeremy R.

reneritchie

09-17-2002, 06:51 AM

Hey Jeremy,

Nice to see you back. Hope your trip went well.

Does HFY have/use the idiom "maximum results through minimum effort", and either way, do you see the Time/Space concept you're referring to as a subset of that, or vice versa? (Could your question to Joy wrt Tan Sao be rephrased under the "maximum results through minimum effort" idiom?)

Rgds,

RR

yuanfen

09-17-2002, 07:48 AM

Jremy- on the run to the workaday world- some brief bullets.

1.the burden is on whatever new game on the block which claims in a public forum that their style is more "scientific" than other wing chun. We can all say come and see it- touch hands, my tea is better than your tea etc.

2. I dont think that old TCMA masters used modern language to explain their art- but that through their extensive experimentation,
practice, reflection and application in varying degrees they dealt with the equivalence of issues of time, space and gravity and body shaping.... in different degrees. You have to come to terms with nature.

3. Conceptually, I have a decent enough layman's understanding of the evolution of comparative concepts of time and space. But decline givinga pointless summary of Augustine to Grunbaum.The 20th century conceptions of relativity and time-space continuum is good enough for me. But we dont need a hammer to swat a mosquito. The "maximum results from minimal effort" that Rene refers to is a good martial arts goal and Ip Man wing chun does pretty well at it.

4. We deal with space-time equivalencies all the time in modern life- good TCMA folks including good Ip man folks understood it too- incrementally through experience- and teach accordingly.

5. Is there a perfect tan sao in practice- no. In theory yes. Because adaptation is an important part of fighting. Learning good structure while learning to adapt is part of the dialectics of martial devlopment. Praxis.

With an unreformed beggar's hand (unparalyzed), Joy

reneritchie

09-17-2002, 08:17 AM

Joy - Perhaps that's why there's also the classic idiom "attack according to conditions." The optimal road to work (shortest in both absolute length and duration) may not always be the ideal road at any one moment due to patterns of traffic congestion, construction, accident, or the addition of a car-pool lane on an otherwise slightly less optimal road making it, at some times, the better option.

WRT your point on conceptual perfection vs. practical limitations, I think complex models/references of optimal mechanics may be broken down by humanity during stress (when f/f/f kicks in, when the limbs shake, when rational thinking is challenged by instinctive response, etc.) Masaad Ayoob did a nice job showing the classic 9-point firing alignment used in target shooting vs. his 3-point alignment (perhaps not coincidentally similar to core WCK structure) for stressfire in the book of the same name. The former was theoretically better but practically not as good. Again, I sometimes wonder if our WCK ancestors didn't stumble onto this seeming paradox centuries ago, and mould our art accordingly (making the lack of complexity perhaps a presentational weakness, but an applicable strength).

Sorry, mind's churning again...

RR

joy chaudhuri

09-17-2002, 09:10 AM

Rene: sez:(Joy in brackets before a work chore)

Joy - Perhaps that's why there's also the classic idiom "attack according to conditions." The optimal road to work (shortest in both absolute length and duration) may not always be the ideal road at any one moment due to patterns of traffic congestion, construction, accident, or the addition of a car-pool lane on an otherwise slightly less optimal road making it, at some times, the better option.

((Hi Rene-Absolutely, thats why wck has appropriate footwork and hand motions to circumvent congestion)

WRT your point on conceptual perfection vs. practical limitations, I think complex models/references of optimal mechanics may be broken down by humanity during stress (when f/f/f kicks in, when the limbs shake, when rational thinking is challenged by instinctive response, etc.)

((Absolutely- the more complex the theory- the more chances
of it breaking down))

Masaad Ayoob did a nice job showing the classic 9-point firing alignment used in target shooting vs. his 3-point alignment (perhaps not coincidentally similar to core WCK structure) for stressfire in the book of the same name. The former was theoretically better but practically not as good.

((Understood- I am not into guns...but I taught a combat shooting student of mine years ago- wing chun 3 point stancing and turning to go with his Weaver-Ayoob hand /shoulder alignment. He won a state combat shooting championship out of it in New Mexico))

Again, I sometimes wonder if our WCK ancestors didn't stumble onto this seeming paradox centuries ago, and mould our art accordingly (making the lack of complexity perhaps a presentational weakness, but an applicable strength).

((yes trial and error and a bit of Occam's razor- simplicity,elegance,
clarity etc))joy

Sorry, mind's churning again...

RR

passing_through

09-17-2002, 09:26 AM

Joy,

When I ask you to establish how you are equally clear in your concept of space and time, you dance around the issue by saying that I have to prove it. Fine. I have already posted enough on the concept, it's origins and an example. Now, you need to post your point of view as a reference - assuming you want an answer to your questions. From these two points of view, we can progress further. To date, you haven't posted anything germaine. I gave you specifics, you give me generalities.

The "maximum results from minimal effort" that Rene refers to is a good martial arts goal and Ip Man wing chun does pretty well at it.

maximum results from minimal effort begs too many questions...

what are the results?
Killing your opponent? Subuding your oppoent?
Where is the maximum?
Knocking out your opponent in one punch? Punching your opponent 10 feet?
What is minimum effort?
You only do what you're told to do? You have to recreate the wheel for yourself each geneation? You have to train a lifetime to develop a modest level of skill? You only have to train 10 minutes to fully express and grasp a concept?

Without a context, throwing out ideas is meaningless.

4. We deal with space-time equivalencies all the time in modern life- good TCMA folks including good Ip man folks understood it too- incrementally through experience- and teach accordingly.

You understand space-time equivalencies? Show me (or tell me, or write it) so that we can compare two points of view. Where is it taught in your training? When did Sifu Fong say, "Hey Joy, today I'm gonna show you about time and space"? Where does the concept, or even the awareness, originate? You can't answer these questions because you don't have an answer. You have a general awareness but nothing focused. As I said, this is a Saan Kiu awareness. Useful, no doubt. Real, no doubt. Made an impact on your life, no doubt. And general, separated, unconnected.

5. Is there a perfect tan sao in practice- no. In theory yes. Because adaptation is an important part of fighting. Learning good structure while learning to adapt is part of the dialectics of martial devlopment. Praxis.

I don't care about perfect, I'm asking you about most efficient. Even if you want to use perfect to mean most efficient, even if it exists only in theory - surely you can explain and demonstration where it would, theoretically, exists and why. Before you can adapt, you must have something to adapt in the first place and something to which it must adapt in the second place.

Jeremy R.

reneritchie

09-17-2002, 09:58 AM

Just a thought - Might be easier to look for comparison(s) if Chinese terms are used, since Western/English terms might vary by translation.

I agree that idioms like "maximum results through minimum effort" (Poon Si Pui Gong) can be open to a various depths of meaning, but I think this is part of the point. They are a very Chinese device, and reflect both that language and culture in ways Western terms, while perhaps more absolute or precise, don't.

RR

Rolling_Hand

09-17-2002, 10:34 AM

Quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------
4. We deal with space-time equivalencies all the time in modern life- good TCMA folks including good Ip man folks understood it too- incrementally through experience- and teach accordingly.--Joy

You understand space-time equivalencies? Show me (or tell me, or write it) so that we can compare two points of view. Where is it taught in your training? When did Sifu Fong say, "Hey Joy, today I'm gonna show you about time and space"? Where does the concept, or even the awareness, originate? You can't answer these questions because you don't have an answer. You have a general awareness but nothing focused. As I said, this is a Saan Kiu awareness. Useful, no doubt. Real, no doubt. Made an impact on your life, no doubt. And general, separated, unconnected.--Jeremy
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Men love to wonder, and that is the seed of science.

Is professor Joy a real wandering knight?

It seems like everyone but you has an idea of what you should be

doing. So what does that say? Try being more open-minded.

joy chaudhuri

09-17-2002, 12:10 PM

Bracketed brief responses to Jeremy and ignoring trolling hands.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joy,

When I ask you to establish how you are equally clear in your concept of space and time, you dance around the issue by saying that I have to prove it.
((Of course- you maintain that HFY has an unique and superior conception of time and space...so what is it?))

I have already posted enough on the concept, it's origins and an example.

((not really- you just have used words like time and space -tell us what you mean by these words and why/how theyare important and superior to the Ip Man wing chun that you tend to trivialize))

I gave you specifics, you give me generalities.

((What specifics?))

maximum results from minimal effort begs too many questions...

((Sure- context makes them clearer))

what are the results?
((self defense when and if needed))

Killing your opponent? Subuding your oppoent?
Where is the maximum?

((Context again-civil war, war, burglar, sporting event, friendly play- would vary dont you think?))))

Knocking out your opponent in one punch? Punching your opponent 10 feet?

((context again))

What is minimum effort?

((Efficient use and conservation of energy))

You only do what you're told to do?

((Huh? Where did you get that??))

You understand space-time equivalencies?

((Come on -see above- dealing with it--understanding nature varies with persons))

You have a general awareness but nothing focused. As I said, this is a Saan Kiu awareness. Useful, no doubt. Real, no doubt. Made an impact on your life, no doubt. And general, separated, unconnected.

((You are creating your own pigeon holes-but I aint your pigeon))

I don't care about perfect, I'm asking you about most efficient.

((Dont you think that in part that is an empircal question involving relative positioning between persons involved))

Even if you want to use perfect to mean most efficient, even if it exists only in theory - surely you can explain and demonstration where it would, theoretically, exists and why.

((Sure- if you are to my right-I am on the outside and you make a move- depending on efficiencies- a right tan sao and punch with my right and a controlling pak with my left with near simultaneity could be all that it takes))

Before you can adapt, you must have something to adapt in the first place and something to which it must adapt in the second place.

((I try to work on perfecting my tan sao in slt every day... then work on time space relationships in various forms of chi sao- the
apply it in gor sao. What's the big deal?))

Jeremy R.

Back to work-Joy

:D :D :D

Rolling_Hand

09-17-2002, 01:09 PM

--((Sure- if you are to my right-I am on the outside --Joy

**On the outside, then you're running away from the center!

--and you make a move- depending on efficiencies- a right tan sao and punch with my right and a controlling pak with my left with near simultaneity could be all that it takes))--Joy

**LOL, Don't you think a *Tan Da* is a better move than this?

passing_through

09-17-2002, 01:26 PM

not really- you just have used words like time and space -tell us what you mean by these words and why/how theyare important and superior to the Ip Man wing chun that you tend to trivialize

I trivialize nothing. I state what I see. Offer a counter argument rather than trying to talk about the way I talk. If you have such a great understanding, you should be able to cut me down like chaff, but you have yet to give me anything specific about your understanding of time and space and their relationship to combat. You've only given me a general answer - and that might be your understanding. I can't ask for what you don't have. Can you accept the possibility that I might know something you don't? That's the rub - your ego is on the line and you refuse to bend.

The Time and Space concept exists as a fundemental of reality. Space and Time are linked. More space means more time. More time means more space. The time it takes you to do something gives your opponent time. That's not a big deal.

How that information plugs into the rest of the system, and how that information impacts martial expression, that is the big deal.

For a technique to exist, it must serve a purpose - have a unique nature. That nature must also be in harmony with time and space - otherwise, just get a picture book of technqiues and experiment with what you see. As I said before rudimentary expression - meaning "very imperfectly developed or represented only by a vestige". If HFY is, indeed the origins of Wing Chun, represented only be a vestige is most appropriate. If HFY is not the origins, "very imperfectly developed or represented" still applies to everything you've written.

What specifics?

==========

In the HFY lineage, SNT expresses a specific concept. There is an actual idea rather than a generalization about life, learning, fighting or training. In HFY, the SNT form expresses the Time and Space Concept through the Wing Chun Formula. This is quite a radical piece of information. We live in a four dimensional world – three dimensions of space and a fourth dimension of time. ... Without a conscious awareness of three-dimensional space, a practitioner will never have complete, conscious control over a combat situation.

In order to ascertain the position of an object, it must be triangulated. This is true for map making, construction, and combat. In human combat, this triangulation is possible in the HFY system through use of the Wing Chun Formula to create the Six Gates. The human body is broken into 6 zones and the most efficient structure to occupy that space is identified and expressed through the SNT form. This paradigm, matching the human structure to three-dimensional space, is the foundation of HFY.

... If I throw punch, kick, or block and only consciously reference one or two of the three dimensions I will not able to find the most efficient application for a motion because I am not using total reality as my foundation. The Wing Chun Formula is based on three-dimensional space for human structure in time, space, and energy. This foundation never changes; for an individual a longer distance is a longer time.

A technique by itself, in isolation, is meaningless. Once placed into the context of time and space, where exists an outside influence, a technique becomes meaningful and structure is of the utmost importance. (Think of “Wax on, wax off” from the Karate Kid movie). Furthermore, there can only be one most efficient use for the technique. ... Given the above discussion, there can only ever be one most efficient way to express a technique when taking time and three-dimensional space into consideration. ... Using a position other than the most efficient leaves open the possibility for challenge.

Based on the above discussion, what are the proper range (depth/length), height, and width for Taan Sau?
(discussion about front or back, high or low, inside or outside is presented)
==========

maximum results from minimal effort begs too many questions...

From your examples of context, is the phrase maximum results from minimal effort a useful idea? You have to learn about at least 5 contexts that you listed, learning to be efficient in use and conservation of energy... how is that accomplished? Where is the "efficent" point? How do you know too much or not enough?

Sure- if you are to my right-I am on the outside and you make a move- depending on efficiencies- a right tan sao and punch with my right and a controlling pak with my left with near simultaneity could be all that it takes

too general... leaves too much open for question... I gave you a discussion in 3 dimensions. You give me generalities again. How can you perform a taan and punch and a paak simultaneously? That's two separate techniques (taan da, then paak sau/da). What assures you that you will hit me when you punch? What stops be from feeling and reacting? Why are you using two techniques to my one punch? You mention efficiencies - which efficiencies? What efficiencies? What is your gauge?

Ok, try this: in any possible, relative, positioning between persons involved (put 'em where you want 'em), is there an application of taan sau that is the most efficient, meaning uses the least energy, least effort, conserves the most energy? Why can't you give me a best case scenario?

I try to work on perfecting my tan sao in slt every day... then work on time space relationships in various forms of chi sao- the apply it in gor sao. What's the big deal?

The big deal is your incredible lack of clairty while still claiming that Wing Chun is so clear and easy to understand. When you work on time/space relationships in various forms of chi sau and gor sau... how do you know for what you are looking?

Jeremy R.