Southern Praying Mantis vs. Wing Chun

[toddbringewatt]

Which style if mastered yeilds the most effective self-defense system? Why?

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

As someone who has trained both extensively, and as someone who has used both in a law enforcement environment, I'd say Mantis, provided that the practitioner is widely experienced in real world no BS fighting, and, that he can de-code his system effectively, so that it translates into a living, fighting hand.

Wing-Chun is easier to grasp, and, it promises an awful lot - in its initial stages. siu-Lim-Tao (the Little Idea) is a 'good idea', it teaches people how to move bothe hands/arms/bridges in a co-ordinated way. you an make yourself 'safe' with Wing-chun very easily against unsophisticated or not too aggressive attackers.
That is my experience of it in the real world.

Mantis CAN be far too abstract, rigid and mechanical, if it is not understood. the learning and progress curve for a Wing-chun practitioner is steeper initially but, if the Mantis man persists and is taught properly (as well as LEARNS properly), then the Wing-Chun curve peaks earlier and actually falls away.

In my personal experience which is by no means in any way universally applicable: Wing-Chun starts out as a good idea but then gets somewhat carried away with itself, and so becomes too abstract and fails ultimately to deliver. Mantis starts out where Wing-Chun ends - abstract and somewhat unreal, but, as I've said if persisted with under the right conditions becomes a very high and refined skill.

There are two elementary ways to compare in martial arts, you can compare between the 'men' involved, and you can compare between the techical spects of the systems. A good man in a technically inferior system is still a good man and may win over a poorer man in a better style.
However, if the comparision is 'technical' then the systems themselves are tested.

again, in my personal and therefore subjective experience, Wing-Chun will 'technically' better Mantis 9 out of 10 times in average practitioners.
With advanced exponenets however the ratio is reversed.

That is one reason why I am a Mantis man rather than a Wing-chun man. I've had equal exposure to both at equivalent levels. My Wing-Chun for example started nearly 30 years ago and I've tested it for real. My Mantis is as a disciple of Lee-Yin-Sing Pai Grandmaster Lee-Sun-Wah (Lee-Lien-Ah-Gore). I've also tested the Mantis for real and against each other at the highest levels.

No doubt some unreflective people will wonder how I can say that the average Wing-Chun man will be better than the average Mantis man 9 out of 10 times? well, as I've said that is my experience, if you want to be average then so be it expect to be bested. if you want to work exceptionally hard and master SPM then you can reasonably expect to reverse the equation.

Wing-Chun is not a ****genous system, there are very marked variations just as there are between its practitioners. Its the same in SPM of course.
The 'pulp' versions of the two systems both have their exploitable weaknesses. It is interesting to learn what they are, not only about the one but about both.

If you don't know your systems weaknesses, then you'll be very suprised when you opponent demonstrates that he does.

The biggest weakness of all is BS and dogma. That should our first battlefield.

[David]

"If you don't know your systems weaknesses, then you'll be very suprised when you opponent demonstrates that he does."

Good words.

There is a story - though I can't find the reference - about a challenge match between Chow Gar GM Ip Shui and a top Wing Chun master. All I can remember is that they fought for one hour, neither able to gain advantage, before agreeing to call it a draw. This is some testament to both men's skill and stamina.

The powers of Kung Fu never fail!
-- Hong Kong Phooey

[toddbringewatt]

Lee Yin,

Thank you for the appropriately copius and convincingly intuitive reply. I always appreciate the opinions of articulate and well-experienced individuals. Very helpful.

Do you recommend Henry Poo Yee's Pai?

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi,

Many thanks for your kind words.
'Grandmaster' Poo-Yee - note please that I use the term of him in great respect, is someone to be highly recommended. His Pai and techniques/skills are different to most other branches of Lam-Sang's art - from my understanding. Bruce Campbell is an excellent fellow and I recommend that you mail him for further information, but yes I would highly recommend him and of course Bruce too.

'Grandmaster Mark Foon' (term as above)and his Pai are equally well worth studying with, Scott Eng and Richard Hodson are the best contacts that I'm aware of.

Then, if you want a look at Lee-Yin-Sing's Pai in the USA you could always approach John F. Springer, Grandmaster Lee's appointed USA rep.

Kindest Regards,

Steve Richards.

[B.P.Campbell]

You wrote me a week ago and you wanted to know of a school on the left coast and I sent you an address. You wrote back saying you have already contacted the school and you were well aware of it. This school I wrote you about, is the only one I no of in your area. My point is, you will first have to sample a branch to get an idea of what you are looking for. Asking loaded questions will get you no where. Like WC against SPM? These are questions that mostly cause hard feelings when answered and serve no other purpose. Steve done a good job at answering the question, but by doing so, has most likely made some upset. Although he didnt try, only gave his opinion. I have trained most of my life, and found, one has to go with what you think.

If you want to know if Sifu Yee can teach his system, go spend sometime with him and see if you like it. You no the saying about opinions? Right? Everybody has one. Sifu Yee is a great person, and a teacher, this is my opinion. I only hope these stupid questions of yours, dont start the controversy between branches again. This is the internet and people will be brave. I feel your question was a shot at my teacher. If you would have ask about other teachers, I wouldnt think so. And if you werent trying to start trouble? You should have ask it off line. Now! If you want to train with our branch, Steve has givin you his opinion. Go train!


B.P.Campbell

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Bruce,

You raise an imporatnt point re potentially upsetting some people.

I should make it very clear here and now that my comments are my own based on my training in both systems over many years and pressure testing them in a real world law enforcement environment.

That does not imply a universal truth for my subjective experiences of course.

Andy Liu-Kin-Ming, my Mantis brother, trains Wing-Chun and Mantis at the same time - and this no doubt suits his life and his learning.

My main interest at this time of my life is if TCMA really do deliver, and by what standards should systems and style sbe judged upon.

There are plenty of critics of TCMA - many of them 'real world' street fighters, bouncers, bodyguards, military men etc. who say that TCMA rely on too complex movements and simply fail under any real pressure. These people often quote the near legendary Fairburn and Sykes, who developed the British SOE and USA OSS Close Quarter Combat and Close Quarter Battle systems (CQC/CQB). these men where ex Shanghai Policemen and had acres of real experience as well as training in Japanese and TCMA systems.

In my view the best TCMA teachers can deliver both on an 'art' and a 'practical' level. However, the proof for such ability is often nothing more than hearsay, or sadly even BS supported thru a network of mutual psychological needs between teacher and students. This is not unusual any anthropologist worth their salt could point it out and not just in martial arts cultures and sub-cultures.

The best Wing-Chun men are as good as the best in any Pai, but then the 'best' of all Pai tend to even out amongst themselves.

There are hard questions to ask about what we want from TCMA. it is quite possible to build an elaborate comfort zone quite divorced from reality and yet for it to be supported through all sorts of off the wall dogmatic, cultish and nonsensical beliefs. That is how the critics of TCMA can get away with their comments - there is SOME truth SOME of the time to them.

It can take a long time to sort out the real deal from the fantasy and at first few people have anything to go on that could help them guide themselves through it all.

If you go to a Wing-Vhun line that is REAL in the sense that it has a good fighting tradition and teachers who REALLY know what they are talking about then you will have a great FIGHTING art that is second to none. Same is true for SPM.

As my Hop-Gar teacher used to say:

'There is no number one in literature and no number two in Kung-Fu!'

Grandmaster Henry Poo-Yee is a graet and VERy reliable source for the SPM art, and Bruce Campbell is one of the very finest practitioners of TCMA in the USA.

It would be great if they could come to the UK and offer a seminar here. VERY many people would benefit.

Best of luck Todd...

[Hungmei]

Todd - Since Bruce has all ready provided you with a school location the answers to your questions are for you to resolve. You’re ****ed fortunate Bruce actually took the time to respond. I would have blown you off as you come across as some "window shopper" rather than a person serious about pursuing the TCMA path.

Bruce - The various problems of old you alluded to aren't going to arise again. If nothing else, the short lived federation put an end to that crap.

As for ****ing off WC players I for one couldn't care less. A large majority of them are so wrapped up in their “sacred geometry” BS that they're unmindful of reality.

The ones who can make WC work as intended won't take exception to Steve's comments as they will understand his statements in the proper context.

Not to say the “good ones” will necessarily agree with Steve, but they will acknowledge that WC has some “holes” in its overall technical structure.

Ultimately, it all comes down to the man as not a single system in any medium anywhere in the world has ever been in a fight. John

[Steven T. Richards]

Well said Jack.

I know that those who 'know' will understand the sublime truth in your words.

Steve.

[B.P.Campbell]

Thanks Jack

I just didnt want to see the same old same old starting again. The best way to see if Sifu Yee can teach his system is experience his teaching. Dont take others word, Good or bad. He is very open with his teaching, and can be found teaching at any number of locations across the U.S. in a years time. Locations and times are always posted in advance. Nothing is kept secrete. I believe something can be said for that.We welcome others to join us.

B.P. Campbell

[toddbringewatt]

Dear Bruce,

Thank you once again for your previous help on the subject of Jook Lum. I don't understand your recent reply, however, to my questions posted on the Kung Fu Online forum.

Namely:
1) Southern Praying Mantis vs. Wing Chun: Which style if mastered yeilds the most effective system of self-defense? Why?

and

2) (addressed to Steve Richards) Do you recommend Henry Poo Yee's Pai?

You wrote of my above post the following:

"My point is, you will first have to sample a branch to get an idea of what you are looking for."

Agreed. But choosing a branch to sample includes consulting the experiences of others. I included you as such an authority in addition to Steve Richards because I was impressed with your writing and reputation on the subject of Jook Lum.

"Asking loaded questions will get you no where."

You are making assumptions here. I asked the above questions for a single purpose, i.e. academic answers -- such as the response Mr. Richards so willingly gave.

"Like WC against SPM? These are questions that mostly cause hard feelings when answered..."

If my questions cause hard feelings it is because of the insecurity of others, not because I harbor ill intentions.

"...and serve no other purpose."

I do not believe that all systems are equal and I want to know which ones are better than others. This is my purpose.

So far, by my own limited research, I am most impressed with WC and SPM. I want to know which is better and why? Maybe they're equal. I don't know. That is why I am asking.

"Steve done a good job at answering the question..."

Yes, he did.

"...but by doing so, has most likely made some upset."

Steve was merely attempting to honestly answer an honest question. All he was trying to do was help. If this is upsetting to someone, so be it. Someone so easily upset is not worth worrying about in the first place.

"Although he didnt try, only gave his opinion."

I agree. He (Steve Richards) didn't try (to upset anyone). Yes, he gave his opinion and I am glad he did. It sold me even further on SPM.

"I have trained most of my life, and found, one has to go with what you think."

I agree. That is all I am trying to do here. Gathering data from others simply helps me to have something to think WITH. This includes all the data I've gotten from you.

"If you want to know if Sifu Yee can teach his system, go spend sometime with him and see if you like it."

I didn't ask if Sifu Yee can teach his system. I've no doubt he can -- and ably at that. I merely asked if Steve Richards recommends his Pai.

I know Mercedes makes a great car but I still might ask a car expert if he would recommend Mercedes before I went about purchasing one.

As for spending time with Sifu Yee, I certainly hope to do so in the near future. It would be an honor.

"You no the saying about opinions? Right? Everybody has one."

Yes, everybody has opinions but some are more valuable than others.

I asked for Mr. Richard's opinion because he is a seemingly competent and obviously valued SPM practitioner and teacher. Same reason I've consulted with you in the recent past.

As it turns out, Steve gave a glowing review of your teacher and sold me further on studying with your Pai.

"Sifu Yee is a great person, and a teacher, this is my opinion."

I'm certain of it and value your opinion.

"I only hope these stupid questions of yours, dont start the controversy between branches again."

Was this your intent to insult me? It worked.

"This is the internet and people will be brave."

Understood. But perhaps "childish" is a better word than "brave". If they were brave they wouldn't have to hide on the internet to "be brave."

"I feel your question was a shot at my teacher."

I'm sorry you feel that way. It would have been respectful of you to have simply asked me about this issue rather than making assumptions and anouncing your conclusion in a public forum (same with calling my questions "stupid"). Very classless.

As is the actual case, no, my question was not a shot at Mr. Yee. The truth is I have a deep respect for your teacher, largely due to your own writings on the subject.

But it should be alright for me to ask others if they recommend his Pai. So far everyone I've asked has said yes -- a big reason I'm interested in studying your system.

"If you would have ask about other teachers, I wouldnt think so."

I asked about Mr. Yee (and not others) because I currently have the opportunity to study with one of his Pai.

Why did you think I was attacking him? Could it be that like any other consumer I am merely gathering as much data from as many sources as possible to make an informed decision before being closed on the subject?

"And if you werent trying to start trouble?"

If you weren't certain I was trying to start trouble why were you willing to respond as if I were? Why not ask me?

"You should have ask it off line."

Why? What's wrong with asking if Mr. Richards recommends Mr. Yee in public? What trouble could come of that? I am merely asking for a man's opinion. If it happened to run counter to another's opinion so what? We're all adults at Kung Fu Online and capable of communicating civilly.

As it turns out, Mr. Richards loves your Sifu. My question resulted only in free PR for you and your teacher. You should be happy I asked. Your defensive stance makes it look like you have something to hide (though I believe you do not).

Also, asking a question like that in public invites response from others who wish to respond. I want response. I find it helpful when I am not 100% closed on a course of action.

Now, of course, troublemakers do abound. But they're easy to spot and even easier to ignore. So why worry about them? I don't shrink from public discussion just because there are bullys in the world who may get involved.

"Now! If you want to train with our branch, Steve has givin you his opinion. Go train!"

What's with the exclamation marks? Seems rather patronizing. Are you angry? What is this?

Also, it's rather arrogant of you to tell me, "Go train!" Commands are for dogs. Maybe I'm not done asking questions. Maybe I'd like to ask other individuals than only you and Mr. Richards.

I had planned to study with your branch. And in spite of your recent reactionary, unfair and quite frankly, very rude response to my post, I would still love to do so.

I would also love to come to some sort of understanding with you on this matter, as you seem to me a man of integrity and honor despite your recent treatment of my communication.

It is my hope that your response was born out of simple misunderstanding or perhaps even the stress of dealing with those less honorable than I in the past.

In any case I wish you well and look forward to the opportunity of studying the rare and beautiful art of Kwong Sai Jook Lum Gee Tong Long Pai very soon.


Most sincerely,

Todd Bringewatt

:confused:

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

Dear Hungmei,

"Todd - Since Bruce has all ready provided you with a school location the answers to your questions are for you to resolve."

And I'm not allowed to resolve my questions by asking people their opinions on the subject? Ludicrous.

"You’re ****ed fortunate Bruce actually took the time to respond."

I agree.

"I would have blown you off as you come across as some "window shopper" rather than a person serious about pursuing the TCMA path."

Then I'm glad I didn't ask you.

You're calling me a "window shopper"? Might as well call me a dilettant while you're at it. Do you really know me this well? I didn't ask how I came off to you. How rude.

I'm NOT serious about pursuing the TCMA path. I'm serious about becoming a competent fighter. It just so happens that Wing Chun or Southern Praying Mantis seems to be the route to go.

I'm trying to gather as much data on this as possible before visiting schools. That way I can visit a handful and make my decision rather than visit two hundred because someone advised me not to ask anyone's opinion about anything but ONLY look directly and see for myself.

If I could rely ONLY on my own personal observation I would, but it's not very practical. Even Einstein admitted to standing on the shoulders of giants. I came to this forum hoping to find some giants (like B.P. Campbell and Steve Richards). Why do you object to my asking them -- or any potential others for that matter?

"Bruce - The various problems of old you alluded to aren't going to arise again. If nothing else, the short lived federation put an end to that crap."

Happy to hear it.

"As for ****ing off WC players I for one couldn't care less. A large majority of them are so wrapped up in their “sacred geometry” BS that they're unmindful of reality."

Couldn't care less? Large majority...wrapped up in their...BS...unmindful of reality? You don't exhibit much common courtesy or prudence of speech here.

"The ones who can make WC work as intended won't take exception to Steve's comments as they will understand his statements in the proper context."

Good to know.

"Not to say the “good ones” will necessarily agree with Steve, but they will acknowledge that WC has some “holes” in its overall technical structure."

Interesting viewpoint.

"Ultimately, it all comes down to the man as not a single system in any medium anywhere in the world has ever been in a fight."

Well put. I couldn't agree more.

You sound like a decent fellow. Please respond to my post and let me know your viewpoint on my response to your response.

I hope to create a better foot to start out on.

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

As an interesting side note:

I posted the same "which is better"-type question in the Wing Chun forum and no one objected in the slightest. Many responses, some humorous, many highly informative. Worth checking out. Lots of praise of SPM by WC practitioners. Pretty interesting. Actually sold me even more on SPM.

may the force be with you

[B.P.Campbell]

Yes, I read the WC site and agree with you. The problem I had with was you asking about Sifu Yee. As you well no, there was much about the different branches written on this site in the pass. Questions such as yours about my teacher could get them started again and this is what I dont want. Questions such as which? SMP or WC? could start problems, and I cant see what else you could have expected? Todd; if you meant nothing by it, fine. And if you are going to follow the advice of the answers, and are sincere about my teacher? Then I should expect you to in roll sometime in the near future in one of his branches. If not? Then I think we all no the answer.

B.P.Campbell

[Self-Thinking Follower]

As someone who has a less than perfect character, as pointed out on this board, I ask you to continue to take notice of the character of those who answer your posts as they reveal themselves not too far from the rest of us. One thing is important in studying any art, and that's resonating with the teacher! You must bond together regardless of differences. When you find someone like this in either Mantis or Wing Chun, you will learn much. Studying a fighting art should not depend on political affiliations but instead on personal interaction.

Electronic Uncle STF

[Steven T. Richards]

Personal interaction on a web forum is a little limited in scope.

Todd, for what it's worth, Bruce and Jack are amongst the most senior people to actually post on this forum, and, they are certainly amomgst the most senior members of their generation of martial artists.

It's precisely because the internet is so impersonal that problems can occur. I know that personally I've misjudeged people on this and other forums - both positively and negatively.

It is far from easy to tell if people are genuine, particularly if they utilise their right to anonymity. Those people who are open take extra risks, as web forums can provide a soap box for troublemakers and frank non-entities to stir up trouble and compensate for their lack of achievement.

It (the forum)can of course also provide the first steps towards real friendships and a lot of real learning between people.

Sometimes it takes time to sort out just who is who and what is really going on.

I answered your question as honestly as I could, given my personal experience. Also, given that experience, I can unhestitatingly recommend Grandmaster Yee and his disciple Si-Fu Bruce Campbell. GM Yee has other disciples of course but they are not known to me personally - so that define sthe reasonable limnitations of any 'personal recommendation' that I could make.
As for Scott Eng and richard Hodson, they are the people who I know and trust from GM Marks' Pai.
Jack is from my own pai and my Brother under GM Lee.

If politics were an issue then these three branches of Jook-Lum wouldn't even communicate with one another.

I enjoy friendly and open relations with many, many other Pai not just in SPm and its various branches (including non-Jook--Lum) but also in arts as diverse as Tibetan Kung-Fu and Wing-Chun.

I try my best to be direct and open.

If openess is absent between Pai it is THEN that politics intervene in my belief. On an internet forum, anonymity although protective for some for very good reasons, also can allow a lot of troublemaking and, political strife.

Your call friend, and the best of luck.

Kindest Regards,

Steve Richards.

[fukien]

Hungie and Steve show thier obvious superiority again! :D

[Self-Thinking Follower]

a quote from above: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Todd, for what it's worth, Bruce and Jack are amongst the most senior people to actually post on this forum, and, they are certainly amomgst the most senior members of their generation of martial artists.[/quote]

Fukien, let it be, they are all knowing.... :(
all senior to everybody around...MY GUESS- six months plus under their new grandmaster after an unsuccessfull atempt to secure the magic of previous branches they studied. It shows in their announcements and their political attempt to remain in communication with other branches, for what?, friendly comparison?, future proof of superiority? or BORG assimilation?

You should talk to your Sifu about this before it becomes the next SPM fiasco.

[Hiram]

Self-Thinking Follower = fukien

fukien = Self-Thinking Follower

One and the same person. (this is too easy :p )

[Hungmei]

Steve & Bruce:

Checking out some of the other forums it is apparent they're still arguing over the relative merits of one individual line over another in the same Pai.

It's also apparent there a few trolls who post nothing of substance because they know nothing and engage in goading tactics from afar (Squat to pee wussy boys :)).

I'm all for simply ignoring the little gutless *******s and responding to those who express a genuine interest in our systems, e.g., want to find a teacher in their location in order to learn, not engage in semantics gamesmanship.

Since we are such a rare system, and pretty much know the people in SPM through one medium or another, we have been able to resolve any previously existing conflicts. The simple and pure act of mutual respect forever laid to rest any bad feelings.

This forum can serve the useful purpose of being a resource for those who truly desire to learn SPM as we are somewhat difficult to find and there aren’t a hell of a lot of us around.

IMO, there is no sense in even acknowledging the existence of the idiotic trolls. They labor in ignorance and that's a good fate for them :) John

[Self-Thinking Follower]

I am a little better looking than Fukien, despite my older age and you need some better computer hacking lessons since you're way off.

Now please be done with your fence sitting and add to the mess. After all, we can see you leaning onto one side. Jump down Hiram and tell us your a senior martial artist and less than a year representative also.

[Self-Thinking Follower]

I DONT know "PRETTY MUCH" everybody in Southern Praying Mantis, especially since some dont get involved in any mediums privately or publicly.

PEE WUSSY ELECTRONIC UNCLE STF

[fukien]

Step right up...get yer new GM here!
No Tradition or Protocol!
"Represent" any style as you want...and only in six short months!!!

[ taboo reference deleted ]

[This message was edited by KFO Admin on 09-03-01 at 07:39 AM.]

[fgxpanzerz]

But you have to be able to take advantage of them, otherwise, there's no point in knowing the weaknesses! And this argument about Wing CHun vs. Southern Praying Mantis:
The two systems are similar accept for the fact that SPM guys only let project their power forward and are strong in the center. In Wing Chun, they prefer being at a 45 degree angle as opposed to facing the opponent center line to center line. It doesnt matter which system iz better. Whoever iz better at what they do will win the fight. :rolleyes:

[toddbringewatt]

Hungmei,

Did your read my reply to your post concerning my "window shopping"? If not, please do. It's the 12th post down in this topic.

I am, by the way, terribly and genuinely interested in SPM. That is why I have been asking questions about it.

I do not understand why my simple questions have stirred up so much touchiness on this forum.

Read my above post (addressed to you/no. 12) before jumping to any futher conclusions please. My post to Bruce Campbell written above that may also be useful to you in understanding my actual point of view.

I am simply not the "troll" you may think I am.

I wish you the best.


Sincerely,

Todd Bringewatt

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

I just read a post Hungmei printed about me on the Wing Chun board under the topic I started there entitled: "Wing Chun vs. Southern Praying Mantis."

Hungmei's post is the filthiest piece of classless garbage I have ever cared to read -- in a piece of writing regarding me as a person. Unbelievable. Talk about internet bravery.

Here it is:

"To WC Brothers from SPM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The guy who goes by the name "toddbringewatt" is a total waste product loser. He tried the same inflammatory bull**** on the SPM page and got shut down.

This clown is part of a group of 'Trekkie Trolls' who never make a post that contributes anything other than discord.

Fukien, and his electronically created alter ego 'Uncle' 'Still Thinking Follower' are two other kiddies playing at pulling strings.

'Totalbraindeadboy's' question about what system is superior should read you guys onto the fact that he's an absolute idiot who squats to pee and is looking to provoke a dispute.

As for Fukien and his ‘Uncle’ they can’t even cite to their Sifu or lineage since it seems that ‘video tape correspondence students’ have a hard time getting answers from their television screens . John"

------------------------------------------------

No one on the Wing Chun board has treated me with this sort of disrespect. To the contrary, they have been nothing but perfectly helpful, intelligent gentlemen and have responded to the exact same post as I placed here with nothing but interest and information. If this is any reflection on their art I'm beginning to think of studying Wing Chun.

If the treatment I have recieved on this board by its members is any reflection of SPM as an art I feel like running for the hills screaming. I am certain this is not the case however.

Apparently I touched a sore spot that rekindled some old politics unintentionally. I am sorry to have created this effect. But come on, people! I am not your enemy. I am actually a potential student of yours who wishes to learn more about your seemingly valuable art.

Hats off and praise to Steve Richards for handling himself in a manner consistent with the wisdom and legacy of Kung Fu. Well done, Steve! And good tidings.

I urge the members of SPM here to take some responsibility for the loose cannons and hot collars which dare to speak in the name of SPM (an art of balance, tolerance, wisdom and peace) and in doing so endanger the future survival of a great tradition.

The treatment I have recieved here is shameful!


Sincerely,

Todd Bringewatt

may the force be with you

[fukien]

"This clown is part of a group of 'Trekkie Trolls' who never make a post that contributes anything other than discord."

I am not the one who posts "announcements" and then gets his knickers in a twist because everyone did not immediately bow and say "Yes Si-Fu".

BTW, you were not able to point out any lies in my posts, eh?

"The guy who goes by the name "toddbringewatt" is a total waste product loser."
That was very gentlemanly of you, are you going to threaten him like you did to me?????

"He tried the same inflammatory bull**** on the SPM page and got shut down."
Inflammitory only to you it seems, and BTW....this (and other) threads are still going on and have NOT been "shut down". Seems that in addition to having some very thin skin, you are a LIAR.

So much for the issue of character. <sigh>
:D

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Todd,

Bruce is protecting his Pai and his Si-Fu which is right and proper given his position, and given the unwarranted, ignorant and misinformed attacks that have been made upon GM Yee in the past.
Jack, likewise, is defending his Pai.

The actions of some posters on this forum illustrates why such things happen. There are for example a continuity of attacks against me from annonymous posters - who don't in many peoples estimation deserve to be treated with anything other than contempt.

I'm sure that if you were to meet with Bruce or Jack in person then any misunderstandings could be resolved.

As for Fukien and Self-thinking... Bruce and Jack are amongst the most senior posters on this forum and they are amomgst the the best of their generation of martial artists. If you doubt it then take it up with them face to face or perhaps visit with their respective Grandmasters to question their choice of disciples and representatives. You are quite free to do that.

Regarding the 'lies...etc' I have pointed out that Fukien is either misinformed, ignorant or malicious in posting deletions, distortions half truths etc.

[reference deleted]
The reasons for those things coming to an end where in the public domain at the time.

If Fukien and his friend are genuine then that could be easily demonstrated. They could end their anonymity, reveal their background (if any)
and join in a constructive debate. If they are unwilling to do that then they reveal themselves sadly to be precisely what they appear by their posts to be.

Todd, please call on Bruce and/or Jack, and if you want to visit the UK call on me. Of course you are quite free to search around elsewhere and whatever your choice I wish you the very best of luck and success.

Steve.

[This message was edited by KFO Admin on 09-03-01 at 07:40 AM.]

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello fgxpanzer,

SPM does utilise 45 degree entry and bridge work.
It depends on what you've seen and at what level with what teacher.

The real differences and similarities betwen the systems are interesting, but they are not uniformally present. Different WC people emphasise different techniques, energies etc. Which WC? Is it Yip-Man, mainland China etc...?
It's the same with SPM.

A useful starting point for a debate would be an example from say WC or SPM and then some contributions from posters on the basis of their knowledge and experience to fill in any gaps.

Like anyone else I have my own experince which as I've said is limited, personal and therefore incomplete.

What do you think Todd?

Steve.

[toddbringewatt]

Dear Steve,

Thank you for your replies.

You mention Bruce and Jack defending their Pai? Who's attacking?

In your last post you asked me what I think. I'm sorry; what do I think about what? I missed it.


Best regards,

Todd

P.S. Thank you for your invitation to the UK. Much obliged. Sounds fun.

And thanks again, Steve, for your candor, manners and willingness to communicate.

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Todd,

Bruce & Jack are time served real-deal martial artists who have seen some generations of people come and go in these arts. Amongst the good people to be thus found have and are - sadly a number of troublemakers. This internet medium allows them to thrive and to get away with things that they could never dare to do in the usual face-to-face way. Some of these people hav eposted very recently.

Bruce ion particular has had to defend GM Yee - although he needs no real defence his 'eyes are very high'. Jack has seen a lot of attacks by no-mark anonymous cowards and likewise defends his pai against them.

About 'What do you think' I meant in the context of your original question about WC and SPM. Also, maybe a contribution along the lines that I suggested about a 'prompt' for further constructive debate.

I could certainly offer something but that contribution would have to be a very qualified one based upon my personal and therefore limited experience.

There is also the probablity of course that certain people would attempt to corrupt the thread
by causing or attempting to cause trouble. If they could be ignorred then maybe we could all progress?

You are very welcome here in the UK.

Kindest Regards,

Steve Richards.

[B.P.Campbell]

I have written Todd off line and have explained my position on this subject. I did not mean to offend him, but after reading his letter I recieved from him, I suppose I did. I am sorry for that. I do come across this way sometimes and is a flaw in my charactor. As far as superiorty? I dont feel Im superior to anyone on this board. I have trained with Sifu Yee for quite a long time and I am quick to come to his defense. I have appointed myself as keeper of his gate, on this board. Sifu Yee dont read it and has no idea of what is being said. If he does it certainly is not from me. I am not his number one student, and have never been. There are many who are much higher level then myself in his system. Steve is very kind by calling me a senior, and Im sure he is refering to years spent and age, not skill level.I dont usally respond to questions on this page unless they are about my teacher, or our branch.I leave the other questions answered by people who have much more knowledge on the subject. In person I will try to answer any question I can demonstrate, and dont talk about things I cant do. I feel Im an honest and open person. I am thin skinned about questions of my teacher. In the past there has been some who made statements that were far from the truth. After reading Todds letter to me, I dont feel he was trying to make trouble, he was only asking for opinions. I hope he finds what he is looking for and we welcome him into our circle, if he chooses to join.

Thank You
B.P.Campbell

[Steven T. Richards]

There speaks a good, honest and open man. I'm proud to be his friend.

Steve.

[KFO Admin]

REMINDER to please keep SPM politics out of this and all threads to avoid having good threads wiped out with a mass deletion. There's too many GREAT things about the Southern Chinese arts for system in-fighting to spoil. Keep to the objective, stay away from the out-of-bounds topics, and enjoy.

As always, thank you for your cooperation.

[toddbringewatt]

Dear all,

Bruce P. Campbell rules! I would like to highly commend Bruce for his forthcomingness and generosity to me in apologizing for his remarks (responding to my first couple of posts here in this topic).

I have not seen this kind of immediate and overwhelming demonstration of character in a LONG LONG TIME! What a man!

Thank you, thank you, thank you, once again, Bruce. And I would be honored to be considered worthy enough to join your circle.

You are truly someone to admire. My best wishes to you and yours.

Todd Bringewatt :)


P.S. Steve, got your clarification of last post and your praise of Bruce in the post directly above. Amen!

may the force be with you

[Hungmei]

Since both Steve and Bruce have determined that you are not in fact some Internet surfing Troll I defer to their judgement in this matter and extend an apology for my response to you as well, Todd. John

[toddbringewatt]

So Steve, in response to your question, "What do you think, Todd?" I think both arts are fascinating and incredibly valuable. I am left with another question for you (or anyone who would like to respond).

Would you consider the study of Wing Chun as a valuable platform for the study of Jook Lum or more of a hinderance if one intends to dedicate the years and master JL?

It seems one may develop necessary, immediately applicable and effective skills for the street with some speed in WC whereas with JL it may take some time, but perhaps be more effective. Therefore the study of WC might prepare one for the street quickly so he is not left vulnerable then provide a jumping-ground if you will into JL where combat skill is refined to a higher level of efficiency.

This seems somewhat true (of course with no experience in either art, simply study of theory -- I understand how limited this is).

What do you think?


Todd

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Todd,

I'll give you a quick initial response: Wing-Chun was the platform upon which I tested Jook-Lum and the standard of effectiveness against which I judged it in a reality forum.

Wing-Chun is a part of my history and it served me well.

Jook-Lum took me years to grasp but when I did understand it was a quantum leap for me.

Again, purely subjectively, I ended up prefering J-L to Wing-Chun as a broadly short hand art, and Hop-Gar (Tibetan Lion's Roar Lama) to Hung-Gar a s a nominally long-hand art. The reasons were empirical but subjective nevertheless.

Wing-Chun CAN be so good that if an art can beat it on its own turf then that art must be VERY good. It all boils down to subjective empiricism - or for some people sadly, unreflective bigotry.

I'm glad that I did Wing-Chun, it may even have saved my life on a number of occassions.

[toddbringewatt]

Dear Hungmei,

I just read your above post. Apology accepted. I would hope you might see on your own that my intentions are indeed honorable and not rely simply on the good judgement of Steve and Bruce.

However, your humility on this matter is observed and I appreciate it.


In friendship,

Todd Bringewatt


P.S. See the Wing Chun board for my announcement of your retraction of your words regarding my character there.

may the force be with you

[Cincinnatus]

I think may be the semantics of the questions, "SPM VERSUS WC" may have given off a bad vibe. Perhpas the question should be better phrased as what are the differences and similarities between SPM and WC? Otherwise there can be too much room for misinterpretation for polticial leanings to creep in. Also, I think anything that is phrased "A vs. B" rings too much of a troll-ish flavor and there are very many people on this board who have used up way too many hours of their lives they can't get back on such threads and thus have a low tolerance of such things.

So leaving aside who and where and when and wuch, let us get back to the question at hand.

For example, interms of tactics and strategy, training methodlogy, applications of techniques given a particular situation (otherwise things get too vague), development of power/energy, etc. For example, in my oh so limited experience in both, both WC and SPM utilize similar conceptual tools as the centerlines and protecting/controlling it, using the bridge hands as a means of tactile "antenna" as well as controlling the opponents limbs and center once contact is made, etc. In terms of expression of techniques, I've noticed that WC relies more on correct angular placement to minimize force-on-force and SPM utilizes a more coiling action to "sweep" the opposing forces aside. Of course both arts use both angular and coiling but I am speaking in terms of a general preference. I could be way off base here, so would anyone like to contribute their PERSONAL OBSERVSNCES and OPINONS in a similar manner?

What we do in life, echoes in eternity
--Maximus Decimus Meridius, General of the Army of the North, Commander of the Felix Legions

[toddbringewatt]

Dear Cincinnatus,

All very well put. All very helpful -- both on the technical commentary and also on the enlightenment regarding board ettiquette/PR and your advice on handling this in the future.

Thank you!

Sincerely,

Todd Bringewatt :)

may the force be with you

[Cincinnatus]

Tood, no problem. I all honesty, as a third party, all the poilitical pickering from the various sides on whatever teh issue is simultaenous, diesheartening, shameful, yet amusing. But all in all I think it's a collosal waste of time - and I hate waste. If you consider all the time we spend on forums like this, it's a hefty chunk of our lives that we could be doing something else. The least we should get out of it something useful and educational. My personal opinion is that there will always be trollers. And different people define trolling differently, although there is a general consensus on what a troll's typical characteristics are. So, for those of us who would rather spend time training ot hanging with friends/family or even sleeping instead of hours on the net flaming back and forth, I think it best to simply ignore the troll. It's a like an annoying spoiled litle child - what are you going to do really, yell at it forever or just ignore it, right?

Anyway, back to the subject at hand. Sim/Diff between WC and SPM. Let's take three topics and maybe the discussion, if we stick to these topics, can be moref fruitful.

a. training drills: I've noticed that WC places a great deal of time on chi-sao-like drills. That is, not full blown chi-sao but simple, individual drills that teach a limited number of linked isolated motions - i.e. tan sao, bong sao, fook sao, etc, - that gets more complex as one advances. This is in addition to any real chi-sao that is done. SPM I've noticed has chi-sao, but is less strctured in the sense of WC, and more time is spent on working on power drills - I think I read somewhere they are called "gongs" (sp?) that focus on developing more geng power than the isolated drills that WC has. Again, feel free to correct me as you see fit.

b. power development. I'm not sure if this falls under training methodology or stylistuc principle, but WC seems to develop a power that is like a hydraulic (or pneumatic) piston where as SPM seems to develop a power that is more like a piece of metal that has been bowed and then allowed to snap back in place - hope that makes sense.

c. tactics/straegy: Maybe these two should be separated but again, my knowledge is only so much so I will defer that to more experienced persons. But here goes anyway - I think here the two arts are very similar. The main effort is in brdiging the gap and making contact with the opponent. Once contact is made, there is a preponderence for controlling the other guy's center - either center of gravity or more liekly the centerline. there is a slight tactical difference in terms of offensive techniques in that once this "control" is established SPM seems to pick out certain vulnerable spots - like accupoints, and hit these preferentially witht he phoenix eye. WC i don't think has such a preference but seems to simply overwhelm the opponent with continuous barages - a-la the famous chain punch.

OK, there are bound to be more topics and opinions. For exmaple, what about the type of kicks that the two arts use? And grappling - I think both are more striking than grappling arts although they do posess such techniques and use grappling as a means of setting up for unbalancing or hitting? Over to you gentlemen.

What we do in life, echoes in eternity
--Maximus Decimus Meridius, General of the Army of the North, Commander of the Felix Legions

[Hungmei]

>I just read your above post. Apology accepted.

Sounds good.

>I would hope you might see on your own that my intentions are indeed honorable and not rely simply on the good judgement of Steve and Bruce.

I accept the positions of certain people in specific matters as being more accurate than mine.

I can 'see' nothing in this written format. I come from 'old school' and that is where I live.
Students didn't 'talk' as they were too busy sweating. A perspective student's intentions were accurately conveyed & understood through the medium of effort over time.

It is with great reluctance that I even involve myself in forums. As it has been pointed out to me in the past, the alternative is to leave newbies to maggot crap like Fukien and his bogus uncle.

That's unacceptable so I go forward and always with a sounding board I trust.

If you ever plan on being in the Maryland area let me know. One of my students will provide you with free room & board and you are welcome to train with us. John

[toddbringewatt]

John,

I can certainly appreciate your point of view on all of the above points you made. I truly understand.

As to the invitation to come train with you? Wow! That is the coolest thing ever. I would love to. Do not be surprised if I take you up on that in the near future.

What is your fee for training?


All the best,

Todd Bringewatt

P.S. What does "Hungmei" mean?

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

Cincinnatus,

Great data! You truly are a scholar. Very helpful. Very enlightening.

I'm in an email discussion right now with Eric Oram of Traditional Wing Chun fame about this very issue. Your thoughts may indeed come in rather handy. Excellent specifics for him to comment on.

Thank you. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Todd Bringewatt

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Todd and Cinncinatus,

I'm afraid that my intended contribution probably won't fit with your framework, but some may find it a useful aside.

With beginning students, in this context people with NO previous TCMA training at all, either as complete novices or say coming from a Taekwondo or Judo background (to give two recent examples from my own school)I ALWAYS start them off with Wing-Chun. Yep, Wing-Chun in a SPM school.

Why?

Well, Wing-Chun's structure and geometry are unsurpassed in my opinion for teaching (quickly)novices or people with no Chinese based training how to move in a co-ordinated way on both sides of the body.

They are taught Wing-Chun theory and practical applications from within a system-friendly (WC) framework. Then, they are asked to pressure test it against 'real-world' like pressure - against attacks not fitting in with orthodox WC geometry or favoured positions - in other words a hard pressing clubbing bitting, gouging style street attack. Naturally this is a graduated progression as the aim is not to injure people beyond a safe tollerance point.

What this achieves is usually a severe shock as it doesn't take much for their confidence to be obliterated at the apparent failure of the very tight WC theory and techniques.

At this point they start to learn Mantis and are then encouraged to undergo the same kind of pressure test - not gainst Mantis friendly structures with compliance and asociated factors, but against the 'form' of a human being who will hit if not stopped.

Naturally, the Mantis, having achieved what Wing-Chun apprently didn't seems the better art. However, the students are then encouraged to look again at WC and see if it can be applied real-time
by loosening the structures. This usually works.

The students are then encouraged to see how all arts (including Mantis) need to be pressure tested
and that then becomes the criteria for selection
of a favoured system, pressure test to failure point without bigotry or dogma but as a n experimental combat science. This means that WC is not 'put-down' as a system but neither is it 'deified' either. An appropriate level of respect and understanding follows.

Not all mantis systems are the same, just as the various WC systems and practitioners vary markedly. That accepted, it then becomes less of an issue of style and more one of functionality.

My particular Pai within Mantis was founded on the principle of pressure testing together with the dispensing with of dogma. Principles lead techniues rather than the other way around. Technique led systems work well in friendly compliant environments.

I have found that students progress with their Mantis much better with a basis in WC. Testing the two approaches out against hard non-compliant non style based attacks is a kind of physical dialectic with the student learning from direct and very personal experience.

Of course this is just my experience and as I've said it is therefore subjective, albeit an empirically based subjectivism.

Unfortunately, there is no way of comparing without also contrasting, and provided the intent is honest and open I can see no grounds for taking issue with anothers experience, each persons is as valid as the next.

[Cincinnatus]

Steve, Todd, et al.,

Cool input. In terms of WC being easier to "grasp" for beginners, it kinda makes sense if you look at it from a historical perspective. Aftrerall, all the legends nonewithstanding WC was taught as a revolutionary art - that is an art/system intended to promote political revolution against the authority of the time. Thaty being said, it would make sense that the system would be structured (and the subsequent teaching methodologies, techniques, etc) so that a Joe Blo could come off the street, sign up for the XYZ Brotherhood Against the Ching and be a _competent_ fighter in a short time. Note I said competnent and not a master. If anyone stuck around long enough (either becasue of perseference or they simply survived that long) then they could get to some higher elements that are not so obvious in WC. I think that it is a good idea to start them off with WC and transisiton to SPM.

Incidentally, do you find the actual techniques to be similar but with different tactics and power generations emphscized between the two, or do the actual techbniques differ? If you're not sure what I mean, let me know and I will try to clarify my questions. Also, when you say pressure test, how do you do that? Do you mean trying to use _(insert system)_'s techniques against opposing techniques not typically found in everyday training, or do you mean putting on something like a Redman suit and having a person REALLY defend himself? I ask becasue I agree with the pressure-testing concept but have not been very clear on how to actually implement it. Thanks.

What we do in life, echoes in eternity
--Maximus Decimus Meridius, General of the Army of the North, Commander of the Felix Legions

[Hungmei]

>I can certainly appreciate your point of view on all of the above points you made. I truly understand.

Good, thanks.

>As to the invitation to come train with you? Wow! That is the coolest thing ever. I would love to. Do not be surprised if I take you up on that in the near future.

My offer to come train with us was not rhetorical, it was an honest offer.

>What is your fee for training?

Same as always, -0- dollars.

Hungmei in this context translates as 'Red Eyebrow'. John

[toddbringewatt]

John,

I in no way assumed your offer was rhetorical. I am very excited to have such an opportunity and am blown away by your generosity.

Thank you once again.


Most sincerely,

Todd Bringewatt

P.S. Also, thanks for the "Red Eyebrow" definition. Cool.

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

Steve,

Wonderful insight on the usefulness of WC as a platform and dialectic training method.

Amen on the pressure test.

Cheers on empirical subjectivism. Only way to go -- without spending years PROOVING something that one could just as easily have discerned (with insanely high probability) by simply observing and using a little old-fashioned judgement to draw a workable conclusion.

Keep up the good work. I look forward to hearing more results from your experiments.

Do you find you need Tibetan Lion's Roar in addition to JL? Or does JL stand on its own as a complete system of combat for you?

--Todd

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

I like your revolution/WC theory. Very cool. Certainly sounds plausible.

-- Todd

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Todd & Cinncinatus,

No, we don't use Redman suits. The pressure is graduated as I'm no sadist. The two examples I mentioned TKD and Judo - the lads involved both claimed to be happy with hard body contact, but, when it came down to it where stunned by how easily things fall apart with a determined attacker who doesn't oblige by attacking 'in style' or allow the system in question to work at its preset range.

The Mantis (LYS) close quarter control and human form modelling, coupled with clean and simple pressure point hits stopped not only the attack, but, also stopped the students when they were encouraged themselves to fight raw and mean.

In the UK there is currently a popular thing called 'Animal Day' where people get together to test out their respective systems. It's OK but it is still too controlled in the sense that the major premise is that no style works only a few simple techniques taken from Fairbairn and Sykes Close Quarter Combat/ Millitary Close Quarter Battle methods.

My approach is independent of this, and builds on using the styles leading principles against not another 'Mantis' but against the simple 'form' of an attacking human being. The 'model' if you like was developed in my Police Service and its development is covered in my autobiography.

My LYS lineage has always taught like that so it was a natural progression to test it in a living human laboratory (Law Enforcement) and to apply same techniques to teaching the TCMA.

I see it as an appropriate answer to the 'Animal Day' types - the leading proponent of which in the UK Geoff Thompson, is actually a good friend of mine. Otherwise, the logical conclusion which 'follows' necessarily from the initial Animal Day premise is that no TCMA works under real pressure and simply falls apart into desicated attempts at producing complex motor skills. The Post-Modern Martial Artist's surest belief.

Todd,

The J-L can certainly hold on its own. It's just that for me I like the Tibetan Lion's Roar so much and being 'apparently' opposite they dovetail very well too. I've teated that in the Police too and it stands up very well.

Best Regards,

Steve.

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Cinncinatus,

I'll answer in more detail soon, but to answer what I think I missed (briefly) from your post, WC's staples Tan, Bong, Fook, even Pak fail under real mean heavy punching hits. The reason - fundamentally - I believe, is that they engage mainly (not exclusively) but mainlt on the forearms, wrists etc - by which time its often too late. Good hook punches fold Tan Sau, Bong is asking to get your shoulder dislocated or elbow shattered by a mean SOAB grappler who might just be biting your carotid at the same time as he hands you the blooded stub of your arm back.

Wing-Chun works best against Wing-Chun - which is most styles of course.

LYS's J-L gets right in close - on the ragged edge
and engages at multi heights simultaneouusly - against upper body, legs, pressure points - going in to take out movements at their source. It's risky, but sometimes its better than walking backwards and into the extending range of incoming hits.

Wing-Chun can work, but in my very, very limited personal, subjective and therefore not by any means universal experience, you may have to tweak its basic assumptions a bit about what it can do against a determined attack.

No doubt some will be upset with the above...

Ah well, he who tries to please everybody pleases noboby.. at least according to that ancient Greek Smart Ass Aesop.

[fiercest tiger]

i myself would study spm before wingchun, its more indepth and more complete in my books. although they are both good fighting arts just the same!

come & visit us!
http://home.iprimus.com.au/ykm
yaukungmun@hotmail.com

[fiercest tiger]

watch out for the gau choy....whooosh!

come & visit us!
http://home.iprimus.com.au/ykm
yaukungmun@hotmail.com

[Hungmei]

>I in no way assumed your offer was rhetorical.

Okay, give me a week lead time when you want to come visit-train and we'll make arrangements.

>I am very excited to have such an opportunity and am blown away by your generosity.

Not an uncommon offer from the TCMA side of the house.

Generally, people come into town on a Friday night, train Saturday and then return home. I've adopted the practice of video taping all training and giving the cassette to the person. All raw footage and it seems to help them fill in some of the gaps that normally arise. John

[Steven T. Richards]

If you are in Aus, then maybe call on Aussie John (AJ)he is very knowledgeable about the different SPM branches including Lee-Yin-Sing's Pai.

Best Regards,

Steve.

[toddbringewatt]

Thanks agian. Sounds great!

I'll definitely let you know.

Take care,

Todd

P.S. A common offer in the TCMA community? That's pretty amazing. Certainly uncommon in too many other communities these days.

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

Thanks for your, as always, excellent treatment of my questions. Loads of help.

Take care,

Todd

P.S. Oh, how does one go about contacting you, your pai's other teachers and also the students of Mark you mentioned: Scott Eng and that other fellow?

may the force be with you

[fiercest tiger]

im gonna hook up with aussie john soon a s i email him. his father was a friend of my late sifu master leung cheung.

its always good to be friends with people and talk about kung fu on a mature level!

thanks matey

come & visit us!
http://home.iprimus.com.au/ykm
yaukungmun@hotmail.com

[Cincinnatus]

Hi Steve,

Thank you for your reply. I am going to restate what I think you meant by the pressure testing to see if I understood it correctly - correct me where I am off please:

OK, so by Pressure Testing it's not that the players where "armor" and whack each other hard. I take it that it's more along the lines of trying to use the techniques of the art in question by responding to "an attck" by an aggressor that is simply not choreographed and not necessarily using any particular technique from the same art or any art for that matter (and especially not something that is usually covered in class during practices). For example, WC (I hate to sound like I'm picking on WC cuase I do like it as an art, but let's just take it as an example again for sake of conveneience) uses training techniques where a lot of the attacks are straight line punches - just like what WC guys do. But in the Pressure Testing scenario, the attacks would also consist of many other things like hooks, roundhouses, upper cuts, grabs, tackles, etc and the student would seek to defend against these using the tools of the art (again, in this example, WC). Is this right?

Then may I ask a couple of questions on how you structure the training session? And by the way, anyone else reading this who does something similar - please jump in and contribute wherever you see fit. I am very much in favor of the pressure testing idea but have never been able to figure out a good way to do it within margins of safety and realism - they seem to be somewhat mutually exclusive unless you're really good or clever about it. OK, back to my questions.

1. LEt's say we have Attacker and Defender (A and D). Is A simply asked to attack D without any direction of how, I guess pretending the encounter is in some kind of unpredicted street environment (like a bar?). Does A attack pretending to be just a ****ed off Joe Blo with one goa in mind - harm D - or does he actually prtend to use some somrt of fighting skill?

2. You mentioned that TKD guys not doing so well when attacked with moves outside their experience. SO which type of attacks are considered non-standard SPM or WC moves that they may be expected to deal with under pressure? I guess my question here refers to the techniques that are favored by close-in arts like SPM and WC versus slightly longer range arts like Hung and CLF. Just my experience but I found the close-range arts do prefer shorter explosive moves like the straight in punch over slightly rounder strikes like in Hung and CLF (makes sense-not too much room to maneuver). So is the goal then to close the gap quickly to be able to deliver the close range techniques or are there techniques in SPM and WC that can inflict harm at a greater distance (note the question is not can they DEAL with longer range attacks but can they themselves inflict damage at longer ranges).

3. How far does D go in defending himself? Meaning that if safety equipment is not worn, then how does he pull off full pressure point strikes without injuring his attacker - presumable his training brother playing a role? This in my view has been one of the biggest difficulties I have encountered. I know oh so many techniques that when done FOR REAL would break limbs, tear ligmanets and such but when I practice them in controlled sparring-like environments, it's more of the honor system of "yeah, that would hurt - if it was done for real" but you never really know becasue it's your buddy your training with thus it was not done for real. The only other recourse I can think of is to go and FIGHT, but that's kind of frowned upon by the law enforcement community.

4. Do you think the importance in dealing with "pressure testing" situations is not necessarily on physical techniques but on mental attribute? Meaning that I believe SPM trains the fighter to be extremely aggrerssive when pushed to fight (not that other arts don't but SPM seems to have this sggrressivenss as a simple strategic given). So in your opinoin, is this aggressiveness a factor in the success of SPM under pressure testing or were the comparisons made on purely technical merits?

5. And last but not least, AFAIK, SPM and WC, although they contain chin na in their repertoir, are not known as grappling and throwing arts. In your pressure testing, were grappling and throwing techniques considered at all and if so how did they fair? What kind of chin-na/shaujiao maneuvers were effective and what were not? For example, I once tried to pull off a simple wrist lock on someone during sparring and had the devil of a time doing it - had to punch his shoulder to stun him first to pull it off. But I did once use a technique where I captured the offending arm between my forearms and just jerked it down - and then went in for some more punches - that kind of chin-na maneuver worked well under stress and speed. So what have you found (techniques or tactics -wise) worked best?

OK, thanks for any information.

What we do in life, echoes in eternity
--Maximus Decimus Meridius, General of the Army of the North, Commander of the Felix Legions

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Fiercest Tiger,

'AJ' is sound as is his brother Michael, he keeps in the background but is good stuff. Both great guys, thoroughly decent and love their art and their culture.

Maybe they can show you some of the Lee-Yin-Sing Jook-Lum.

Cheers,

Steve.

[toddbringewatt]

Just in case you missed it back on page 4:

Thanks for your, as always, excellent treatment of my questions. Loads of help.
Take care,

Todd

P.S. Oh, how does one go about contacting you, your pai's other teachers and also the students of Mark you mentioned: Scott Eng and that other fellow?

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Todd,

If you look on mantis.org.uk under the schools listing (I think its still there - its David Antwiss's site) there are some contact details posted.

Like Bruce for GM Yee, I am the public door to GM Lee and his family. Most of the Pai's teachers don't bother wth the net, it is in many ways still very much a traditional Hakka community - access will depend upon introductions.

Lee-Yin-Sing's teachings and methods are very different and the approach to learning his hand is unusual too. Most of the Chinese Masters are open and will directly answer respectfully worded and intelligent questions, but, their answers are often unorthodox and that is one of the tests. If an inquirer 'understands' then that is an indication that they may be suitable to learn this art.

These days, there is much less trouble between Pai than in the past and certainly people of my own generation are working towards friendship and mutual acceptance of difference (from a common root) within the broader Jook-Lum family.

The original Jook-Lum Heritage Foundation aimed to accept ALL legitimate lines and Pai of Jook-Lum as EQUAL, and to accept one anothers versions of the history of Jook-Lum as equally valid even if different from the others. That way, each Pai has its accepted origin story which is accepted by the others as one version handed down - all therefore being equally valid. That is one way to overcome the potential for internecine strife, to accept that we all have not only different 'hands' but different versions of history and yet all are accepted as 'true'.

In other words, all contemporary branches of the art are held to be legitimate and to have stood the test of time.

That really bothers some people...

The best way to contact Scott Eng or Richard Hodson is to mail the admin of GM Marks web sites, unless (I think Richard has...) they post here and leave a contact mail. I have mail addresses for them but without permission I can't release them.

Thanks for your kind remarks about my efforts at helping.

Best Regards,

Steve Richards.

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Cinncinatus,

Sorry if my reply lacked clarity. I use a graduated application of pressure testing that starts with what you have outlined and develops into something harder with much more impact. I do hit my students on non-lethal pressure points – with varying degrees of impact force and if the lads are ‘psychologically’ up for it, then harder blows of both orthodox and non-orthodox kinds follow.

It is in the Lee-Yin-Sing tradition to go in hard and pressure test the student to failure point – we all have one and it is varies according to many different factors – even within the same individual.

How the student deals with ‘failure’ is very important. A certain mind set will collapse very quickly – one that has entered the TCMA perhaps expecting to become some kind of occult wizard, or one who wishes to become adopted into a symbolic family (by which I mean in a western psychological sense of needing a ‘father’ and pseudo daddy relationship to care for them – and not the traditional Si-Fu disciple relationship – although the two can become confluenced). This can be a cultural issue too as disenfranchised westerners sometimes fall into the TCMA in order to avoid real life by wrapping themselves up in what they see as oriental mysticism.

Lee-Yin-Sing’s hand was always for combat. His teaching method was direct and Socratic (in the sense of drawing out the potential or lack of it in the student). He held nothing back, the only criteria was ‘Is the student capable of learning it?’ If not now, well maybe later, people were not gratuitously written off, but simply stretched as far as they could go and always encouraged to go that little bit further. In my experience, students who fail usually fail themselves and that failure is nearly always psychological rather than physical. They meet with a challenge to their fantasy beliefs and expectations and cannot take it. The physically challenged student who still nevertheless fights on and tries again and again, has the right combat attitude and will always be supported and helped to move on.

Lee-Yin-Sing would teach his hand to whoever could learn it – under pressure. That was the decisive factor. Character decided the informal ranking in his school – the outward manifestation of which was the students knowledge of the correct sequence of Lee-Yin-Sing’s ‘Main Frame' 13 Roads Form. He taught everyone who was capable of learning (physically and mentally) the full technique and application, but withheld the sequence of the set to his proven disciples.

Lee-Yin-Sing was ‘application Driven’ his hand is practical and a fighters art. His disciples and grandstudents carry on that tradition.

Lee-Yin-Sing was a Chu-Gar master who went to Cheung-Yiu-Cheung as a KF Brother of Wong-Yuk-Gong . Before Lam-Sang came along, LYS left Cheung and went back to the Kwangsi Temple with Monk Lee-Tik, and there learned a ‘different’ version of Jook-Lum to that which was handed down to Wong by Monk Lee-Siem. Lam-Sang would later study directly with Lee-Siem himself after starting with Wong under Cheung. Lam-Sang and LYS never met.

Wong had been a great friend of LYS but denounced him on his return – presumably because his status was under threat.

LYS taught in Hong-Kong, Singapore and Vietnam. In Singapore his art is known as Lee-Gar Tong-Long, and in Vietnam as ’13 Roads Tong-Long’ named after his long main frame form ‘Tong-Long Sup-Sam Sau Faht Kuen’.

GM Mark Foon has said that he knew that LYS went to the Kwangsi Temple and there learned a ‘different’ version of the art.

Lee-Yin-Sing’s art is different in a number of ways:

There is no Som-Bo-Gin. VERY controversially, LYS said that is was ‘nothing’ and not worth bothering with.

LYS regards Doi-Ching’s as basic and best put aside as the students real-time fighting skill gets up to speed.

Dip-Gwut exercises must be fully integrated with attacking skills and not trained abstractly in isolation.

Lee-Yin-Sing’s hand is principle led, not technique led. There is a big difference. LYS and his Pai hold that if the core SPM/Hakka principles of
The Gow-Mah horse – the body posture, sudden shock spring power, float, swallow, sink and spit are present, then, SPM is ‘present’ as made manifest in the practitioner at that moment. Additionally, LYS’s system
utilises a further set of principles designed to close down the opponent and strike in a fully integrated multi-level way. (it needs to be experienced).

LYS’s hand is NOT a WYSIWYG system. Its movements are natural
and reflexive. Form is NOT equal to function, although they can and do derive from one another.

At its higher levels the system becomes more ‘yin’ in terms of its energy.
The shoulders are used more so than in some arts that emphasise the elbow for Gin-Tan-Ging generation. There are other biomechanical differences too.

The systems Chinese Masters accept difference and variation between themselves as the 13 Roads set takes on the structure of the practitioner, rather than the practitioner taking on the structure of the form. Accordingly in LYS’s Pai the 13 Roads will appear different under each Master.

Pressure testing and real application are the goals.

There are many other defining aspects to the art, and the ones above could really do with a better exposition.

I hope though that it has helped to explain how pressure testing works in this Pai.

Best Regards,

Steve Richards.

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Cinncinatus,

I may have wandered off point above, I realised that I didn't reply re the round line and grappling aspects of your question.

Round lines are used in LYS J-L. Some 'lines' folow both curved and straight paths thru the arc of their execution. As an example to think about an engaement against a round line attack, might involve a bi-secting stop hit against a pressure point and then 'following the line of the arm' to the head and neck as a continuing movement. The head is ALWAYS at the end of the line of the arm, no matter how the arm is positioned or moving - this allows for accurate blind feel and 'fire and forget' reflex engagement.

About grappling, my ex Judo students have found LYS's anti-grappling and close whole body ging to be very effective in grappling/anti-grappling scenarios.

LYS's hits are not chambered artificially but oportunistically with angle being everything.

The use of Presure Points and Cum-Na skills work together fully integrated with leg manouvres, hand, arm and head attacks. It's as it (the situation) demands. That is an example of being led by principles and not techniques. Principle led actions are faster as they utilise reflex speed reactions which will always beat abstract chambering.

As for which technique works best, LYS's approach is to go all out with multiple hits (overkill) as this can produce a resigned trance like state of being overwhelmed in the opponent. The 'going for it' is not a flurry of empty stylised Bob Hope and Bing Crosby 'Pati-Cake' slapping that some people try, it is based on the close control impact and 'trained battle computer' responses that comes from what can best be described as a HUD 'Head Up Display' that forms the core of LYS Pai close range contact and control. You'd need to experience this directly, but the principle can be easily taught. It makes the practitioner FUNCTIONALLY faster without attempting to overgear his speed and therefore to lose actual impact and accuracy.

Hope this helps,

Best Regards,

Steve Richards.

[Gluteus Maximus]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> If you are in Aus, then maybe call on Aussie John (AJ)he is very knowledgeable about the different SPM branches including Lee-Yin-Sing's Pai. [/quote]

Hi Steve,

What city is "Aussie John" based in, Steve? Does he have a website?

Interesting thread. You SPM guys who've posted here are real gentlemen.

Cheers,

Max

Yooby Yoody

[Steven T. Richards]

Hi Glute, if I can call you that? Bit easier than its translation...

AJ is in Sydney. He does have a web site, mainly to do with his profession. He's posted his mail address on this board so I guess that I can copy it to here:

choicechem@hotmail.com

He has a colleague Les Williams who is also very very experienced and maybe AJ can put you onto him also.

Best of luck,

Steve.

[Gluteus Maximus]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Hi Glute, if I can call you that? Bit easier than its translation... [/quote]
LOL! By all means, Steve.

Thanks for the contact details.

Cheers,

Max

Yooby Yoody

[toddbringewatt]

Thank you for all of these posts, everyone. Extremely insightful stuff. Quite helpful.

:)

may the force be with you

[toddbringewatt]

Steve,

I read an interesting biography/interview with Tim Carmell on his web site: www.shenwu.com. (http://www.shenwu.com.) Click on "biography" to read.

If you get a chance to read it, I am curious as to your thoughts on how he defines "Internal" and also what you think of his commentary on the value of grappling arts. Also, what do you think of his viewpoint on the necessity to participate in full contact fights to become proficient as a fighter?

How might the practice of SPM monitor/qualify or align with these ideas?

Thanks,

Todd

:)

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Todd,

One of my best friends Brian McKinney is an exceptionally good practitioner of Loi-Gar 'Internal Family' martial arts: Tai-Vhi, Ba-Gwa and Hsing-Yi. He has around 35 years in the arts and studied in mainland China. He also does security and bodyguard work, is a trained Wrestler (Western) and an advanced dan grade in Japanese martial arts.

The explanations given for internal aspects of martial arts are best seen from within the framework of the system as that is the matrix of their practice and development. SPM has internal aspects too of course.

As for full contact tournaments they are one arena for a student to test himself/herself. There are others.

Grappling is a 'dimension' and not as commonly and eroneously stated a 'range' within martial arts. SPM has this dimension.

Hope this helps.

Steve.

[toddbringewatt]

Steve,

Thank you. Very insightful, certainly. Helpful, yes.

Would you say that the five classical forms of Tai Chi Chuan (including small frame Yang) have this dimension? Baguazhang? Hsing-Yi?

How do these arts fair up against a brutishly agressive, highly skilled, hulking grappler in your oppionion? How does SPM hold up by comparision (against such a grappler)? (Assuming one is looking at the highest levels of martial arts achievement in all the above scenarios -- on both sides of the melee).

What about the intermediate student of the "Internal arts"? The intermediate student of SPM?

I'm sorry for the barrage of endlessly evolving questions on this thread but I feel compelled to take advantage of your rather obvious acumen in the area while I still have the opportunity.

If you feel it appropriate, please don't hesitate to reply at anytime via my email address at: toddbringewatt@hotmail.com

Thank you once again for your most articulate assistance.

--Todd

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Todd,

I expect that your question re the internal arts should really be addressed to someone whose speciality that is. My friend Brian is a grappler and a co-operator with me in Combat Pankration. He specialises in all the main frame Tai Chi systems including Chen which is perhaps the closest to some variants of SPM. Brian also teaches Ba-Gwa and hsing-Yi. He admires LYS Jook-Lum and he and I have known each other as friends for more than 20 years.

I have seen Brian use Tai-Chi in friendly contest with Brazilian Ju-Jitsu practitioners who called on him to study Internal arts. Brian is one of the most complete martial artists that I have ever seen. Modest, real and very, very skilled.

SPM has excellent anti-grappling techniques - which my former Judo students will testify to.

Hope this is of use to you,

Steve.

[toddbringewatt]

It is. Thank you.

Final question: How have you found Jook Lum (with its excellent anti-grappling techiques) stands up against an all-out, brutish, grappling attack from an opponent much larger and much stronger than the Jook Lum exponent?

may the force be with you

[Steven T. Richards]

In my experience very well. I prefer to train against larger and stronger people as this gives you more impetus to fight. Also, in my law enforcement days, you could never pick the size of an attacker in advance it just happened.

Jack said somewhere on one of these threads that no system in the world has ever been really tested - and he's right, people, and situations are tested, systems are human abstractions: without a 'person' to make them manifest they don't 'exist' as such.

That is a fundamental point that is often overlooked when people make 'system', 'lineage', 'tradition' etc an issue.

I had hoped that some readers of this and related threads would pick up on the subjective factor in me and it's relatavism for THEM.

The ideas and principles behind some of my posts require not a little real-world experience and some reflexive capacity in order perhaps to fully appreciate them. I've lost plenty of 'real' fights. I've been hospitalised with head injuries, been jumped by gangs, fought bare-handed against knife attackers, faced the threat of firearms and been through a month of the worst urban riots in the UK's history.

That kind of 'pressure testing' wakes a person up to their failings, including any cherished delusions they may have about 'ultimate' martial arts of whatever kind.

Given what nature endowed me physically with, as a starting point, I'm a reasonably good 'clsssical' - performace martial artist, and given the same qualifications, a probably above average experienced street fighter. I've been 'done' though, plenty of people have 'passed my hands'and I've learned as well as I can by it.

I try to bring the whole of my life and learning to my study and teaching of the martial arts, and that leads me sometimes to question the certainty of other peoples beliefs, particularly if they are little more than dogam based upon third hand by-proxy fights other people have had.

Naturally enough, this means that I'm unpopular with bigots and dogmatists as well as with those who claim mystical authority through cultish beliefs, which they seek to impose on others in order to maintain their status.

That is why I have tried to be open and direct, and in my belief why some others would do all taht they can to stop me or otherwise discredit me.

Best of Luck Todd,

Steve Richards.

[toddbringewatt]

Bravo, Steve!
:)

may the force be with you

[Hungmei]

>Self-Thinking Follower = fukien
fukien = Self-Thinking Follower
One and the same person. (this is too easy)

Perfect read Hiram, "neither" can state who "their" Sifu is and starting out as a 1/2 brained idiot, dividing that meager resource makes "them" so very transparent :)

"They" are just some snotty nosed kid, with too much time on his hands, and no doubt in need of about a case of Oxy-10 :D John

[Self-Thinking Follower]

He knows all about Frank Yee's Hung Ga and S.L.Martin's White Crane or at least we're suppose to believe he does, with his insulting inuendo and posts.

What a typical Southern Mantis Bad Character. Its no wonder he became a representative. I guess Long Island Jook Lum did'nt ammount to much, that's why he Jumped to some Ole chap named Lee.

P.S. I'm not Fukien and I Dont give a "dukie" about who you represent!