Dave Lacey, please do the right thing.

[extrajoseph]

Master Dave Lacey had made it very clear from the beginning that using the internet as a convenient avenue to publicly argue the history on CLF is a disgraceful way for settling a dispute as it will not only bring disgrace to the Choy Lay Fut name but also to Chinese Martial Arts. But what does he cares? He has berately used his internet’s kung fu website to vent his frustrations and bruised egos – all in the name of PRIDE & PREJUDICE and to draw public attention and support for his pathetic cause (to discredit the martial arts legacy of Chan Heung and his Hung Sing CLF branch)!

We all know who the chief instigator is in this internet family feud that started in August 2001 which incited others with the same mentality to hurl insults at other so called “CLF brothers”. It’s not surprising that “the General” gets his kicks from watching his favorite TV show – “The Jerry Springer Show” for he and his cronies have done a good job at replicating it on the Kung Fu Forum and his website!! For what started as an open debate on the history of CLF turned into a bitter conflict that has become a “Black Chapter” in not only the CLF martial arts but also Chinese Martial Arts in general.

This conflict between the CLF clans is a private and “internal” matter within the family and not something for shameless people to drag onto the internet’s kung fu online e-mail forum and their own webpages for the audience of the world to see. It was not till the beginning of 2002 that Joseph and others responded to the ongoing conflicts. However, the perspicacity from it was too much for these self-righteous individuals to comprehend or take as it had bruised their egotistic pride and self-conscious minds.
ARE YOU AFRAID TO “FACE” THE TRUTH?

There is much truth to the history of CLF to be revealed but because of the sensitivity of it, the Hung Sing and Buck Sing elders have been reluctant to reveal it as it would do no good to make it public as it would only further fragment the already fragile relationship between the CLF clans. For this reason, the Hung Sing and Buck Sing elders insists on resolving such “internal” conflicts by meeting face to face with the representatives of the Chan Clan in private as they do not wish to have the feud between them made a public spectacle. It was never Master Lacey’s intention to bring this conflict out in the open as he, like his sifu and elders, believe in defending their honor in person and not over the internet or through other forms of correspondence.

But you know what, Master Dave Lacey never did what he said he would do. He never contacted any one from the Chen Family privately or publicly. The Kong Hing incidence was another of his urban myth, they don't know each other and they have never spoken to each other. Master Dave Lacey just kept on writing more pages of boring rubbish on his website attacking everyone who disagreed with him, so if Joseph really want to “seek the truth”, then being a "(5th generation) die hard Chan Clan elder" (so Dave says), he must be able to dispute the true historical facts behind CLF’s history with the Hung Sing and Buck Sing elders of the 5th generation by writing an open letter to Master Dave Lacey, who is suppose to be a representative of the Hung Sing and Buck and Hong Kong CLF Union, and expects an answer.

Joseph says he’s “not afraid of the truth” but it’s obvious Master Dave Lacey is, otherwise why wouldn’t he and his fellow clan elders jump at the chance to accept Joseph’s request to debate the issues with him openly to find out who has more credibility to their story and historical facts on the founding of Choy Lay Fut.

Some Chan Clan supporters have boldly bragged how they could make Master Dave Lacey look like an idiot (because he doesn’t buy their fabricated history on CLF) and they did! But Master Dave Lacey is afraid to face Joseph in writing for the fear of “losing face” despite all their talk of evidences, proofs and innuendo to prove that our CLF history is “distorted”! Is it because previous attempts have proved fruitless?!

Come on, Master Dave Lacey, have you rang or contacted Chan Wing-Fat, Wong Doc-Fai or Mak Hing-Fai yet? I am sure they are waiting for your explanations after you have insulted them so well on your website and elsewhere but refused to face your critics here. Even if you don't want to reply to Joseph's open letter, at least do the right thing and contact these people for a private discussion to resolve your differences. As you mentioned it over and over again, it is the only proper way to resolve the history of CLF contraversy. All of us are waiting and watching at how a respectful teacher like yourself would behave in this kind of situation.

Master Dave Lacey, please do the right thing and get this contraversy over and done with.

JosephX
(With apology for using your words in most of this long winded posting. :D)

[illusionfist]

Anybody can look back through the archives of posts and see that JoX was one of the main instigators in this whole mess and can see that he has gone on to display some sort of smear campaign against Dave Lacey. JoX your posturing and political intrigues are quite transparent in that you play the forum members as fools and think they can't remember as far back as last year.

Your words are very hollow considering that you are one of the key instigators in this whole mess. How do you expect people to honestly take in what you say when you post up stupid poems to Bean Curd that are blatant jabs at instigation. Why dont you actually attack some of the issues at hand? Why can't you actually address the historical issues that have been brought up (that you slyly avoided i might add) instead of attacking statements made towards the ability of a 90 yr old man (when actually the history goes further with the man reaching well into his hundreds if you buy the timeline). You didn't even address that, you only want to present a picture that benefits your shallow reasoning so that you can appear as if you are deducing and using common sense info. You tried to do the same thing earlier with the history of the Sei Yup area and its overall wealth (or your position was their lack thereof), but once BC mentioned the contrary, you did a runner and went personal (which is clearly your MO). You bring up topics to sound knowledgeable because you think most of the members are ignorant to the history of where their arts originated. Do you not think people see this? Solidly refute the arguments instead of grasping at straws. You attack semantics instead of history. How is that going to prove your point? What are YOU trying to achieve with this whole mess?


In your latest post you try to make it seem like you have laid out all of the info on the table for everyone to see when you have done the exact opposite with your circular arguments and OBVIOUS backpedaling in avoiding key issues. Instead of attacking what a person says and the manner in which they say it, why dont you actually address the ISSUES. If we just attacked the manner in which people say things, everybody could have just as easily written off everything you have said because you present it like an immature (and catatonic) child. Of course people dont do that because they want to give you the benefit of the doubt. Which is more than you have given in any instance.

It is clear that you never intended to have anything resolved and just wanted to posture from the safety of your computer. Your drastic changes in tone (and now even referring to yourself in a different person) affect your credibility because you cannot pick a stance on the issues. First you wanna bash Dave Lacey then you switch to the elders, then go back to Dave, etc. You wonder why people think you are actually not one person? I think your posts clearly show that you are either more than one person or you are severly schizophrenic and need to get on some medication. Or you can just be starting sh!t and your words are meant to incite, but these are clearly actions taken by a 5th generation player/elder........
:rolleyes:

Quit posturing that you are trying to do this for the benefit of CLF because your actions on this board show otherwise. You make out that this whole controversy started with Dave, but it was actually YOU who started the whole thing with your supposed historical investigation into the background of the Green Grass monk. Anybody can go to Dave's site and see that his very first response, back in May of this year, was actually responding to people that had contacted him about certain things. That was it. This whole situation would have been avoided had it not been for JoX posturing that he was an elder in CLF and making such bold claims. When you say things like that, people will judge you by the standard. With that in mind, it is clear that you DO NOT fit the standard in any sense. If you were a 5th generation player, you would have known what was going on since day one.

Bottom line.....

PUT UP OR SHUT UP! Your posturing is getting old. I just hope the CLF community on this forum sees it. I think the aforementioned term "panocha" suits you just fine. Or you can prove me wrong, but i doubt that will happen.

[DF]

Illusionfist,

leave it alone, why are you arguing with a troll. No real CLF elder will want the family laundry being aired out like this. Only a troll will takes pleasure in continuing this in the manner it is now.

DF

[extrajoseph]

DF is right, don't feed me, otherwise you will be sorry.

However, if you think I am not a troll, then let us restart. Now, you want to talk about ISSUES. What do you think the key issues are and how do you think Dave Lacey has addressed them on his website? I must have missed his points of argument, please enlighten me. IOW, what do you want me to put up since I have no intention of shutting up? BTW, this is a plead-post to Dave Lacey and since I am sure he has no intetion of joining us, you and others may as well come and have some fun.

I can't help but noticed you signed yourself off as Evil Hung Gar Gestapo, are you sure you know enough about CLF history and politics to be involved? Also, isn't there enough contraversies in Hung Gar for you to police than to worry about another style?

I am sorry you didn't appreciate my literary effect, it was just a fun thing to do at the time and nothing serious was intended.

Whether you want to continue talking to me or not is up to you. I hope you will.

Cheers,

JosephX

[illusionfist]

My knowledge of CLF and its history is irrelevant in this whole argument. The point being is that i'm outside of the CLF element and i can see through your veiled attempts at trying to deface Dave Lacey, Buk Sing, and the Hung Sing clans. You turn the discussion around on others so that you dont have to answer anything (which was also your tactic that was used in response to everything BC said). You make comments under the guise of jest just so you can bail out on the situation if it gets too hot and you get called on your BS, then you say, "it was just a fun thing to do at the time and nothing serious was intended."


It is apparent you go back and research what Dave has said on his site, and yet you say you failed to see the points of argument? You nitpick at what he says yet you dont see the actual ITEMIZED list of questions Dave wrote on his site? Quit trying to turn the discussion around on other people so they can spell out everything. You know what was said, just answer it...

You like to be the bearer of bad news that will be detrimental to decades to come, but yet the news you bring is just something that is only bad in your own mind and self-serving to your own interests. CMA have gone through much worse and have endured, so what you try to claim as being detrimental to the family of CLF is hogwash.

If you know how detrimental this kind of discussion is and how it relates to Hung Kuen disputes in the past, why do you go on in the manner that you have? If you followed the previous disputes, then you also know how they were handled. They were handled in the exact same fashion Dave Lacey is proposing.

[extrajoseph]

If you really want to see some dirty laundry you should look up Dave Lacey¡¦s website. How would you like it if someone attacked you and called you names then hide behind his computer so you have no way of answering back? I am not an elder and if I am one, I would have written to Kong Hing and give Dave Lacey an earful by now.

My gripe is with Dave Lacey and not with you or Illusionfist. I have no choice but to vent my feeling here, I am sure he reads every one of my words and he is going to write another chapter on his website soon to counter attack me from a safe distance.

Please don¡¦t call me a troll and insult me, just put me on your ¡§ignore¡¨ list if you don¡¦t like what I have to say.

Yours always,

Jo Seph

[extrajoseph]

Instead of trying to talk about the issues as requested by yourself in the first place, you are now attacking me in person instead, the same way Dave Lacey handled the whole history controversy.

He proposed to have the matter dealt with by the elders in private, then immediately went on the offensive and attacked anyone who doesn¡¦t agree with him in the public domain. Is this the way they do things in a Mu Duk way?

Let us get back on track and take one issue at a time and look at it in detail. You can repeat Dave Lacey¡¦s questions if you like.

On the other hands, if you think it is detrimental to CLF, then you can stop replying to this post and it will stop by itself as well.

It is over to you.

Yours always,

Jo Seph

[Fu-Pow]

Illusionfist-

Is there any chance that you are a personal aquaintance of Dave Lacey's? Don't let your personal knowledge cloud your judgement. The true instigators in this have been from the beginning Frank McCarthy and Dave Lacey.

Anything thing else was simply a discussion between friends on an internet discussion board.

As to Dave Lacey's "points" that he makes on his board. Most of them are completely ludicrous and poorly argued. He makes logical fallacies all over the place and confuses personal opinion with fact. His "questions" are loaded and sarcastic.

BTW, who decides that Dave Lacey gets to ask the questions that are to be answered? The most fruitful discussion thus far have been inquiries into the politics of the CLF Union in Hong Kong which Dave Lacey so adamantly avoids answering.

As far as the "true" history, there is a rule in science and I think it should apply here. It is called Occam's Razor (you can look up the principle if you like.) Simply stated it says that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

As Doc Fai-Wong pointed out in his book the Hung Sing/Bak Sing history asks us to believe events happened that run contradictory to what we know about Chinese culture at the time.

It also incorrectly attributes the formation of Choy Lay Fut as the combination of Choy Ga, Lay Ga and Fut Ga into one style. Incorrect because none of these styles resemble Choy Lay Fut.

There are huge inconsistencies in the Hung Sing version of the history that need to be resolved.

To draw attention away from these inconsistencies Dave Lacey brings up Chan Family inconsistencies that are actually miniscule and irrelevant to the underlying issues. For example, the faked picture of Chan Heung. Even if this picture is a fake it brings us no closer to the true history because it would have been faked rather recently. Or the Tiger Skin story, obviously an embellishment or fabrication, but criticizing it still does nothing to bring us closer to the origin of the art.

What we need to address (which no one wants to) are the cold hard facts, like dates, locations, birth and death records, primary source materials, sociological information about China at that time, a correct and thoroughly researched lineage, comparison of forms/techniques/training methods amongst lineages, etc, etc, etc,.

This kind of research is not fun or easy. And some people's egos might become bruised as the "truth" is revealed.

So instead of undertaking this we pleasantly live in a fantasy world where "Sifu knows best" and we shuffle about for position and argue about nothing.

And now that I read the words that I wrote I realize that this forum is really a big waste of my time.

There is an expression "zither,chess, painting, book and sword." These were the 5 excellences that a Scholar-Warrior was supposed to master: music, strategy, visual arts, book learning and military arts.

Playing here reminds me of playing chess. We all jockey for position, but I guess in the end this game of chess is simply a virtual waste of time and the real game is out in the real world.

See you at some tournaments soon Dave Lacey and students.

Bye for now.

[extrajoseph]

Once more you have expressed things in a way much better than I can.

Once more you have inspired me to hold my tongue.

My fullest admiration and best wishes,

JosephX

[Serpent]

Well said, Fu-Pow.

[DF]

extrajoseph,

I have no gripe with you either, for I don't even know you. As I said earlier, I have friends from all three lines of CLF. It is like watching your friends going thru a bad break up and it is getting uglier by the day. It is true that there always be politics and disagreement among families but still it is hard for a concern outsider to watch. It is your family and as a Hung Ga player, it is not my place to tell you guys what to do and how to do it or even to say who is right or wrong. I just want to voice my concern since I have friends that are CLF players. Hung Ga family went thru similar things last year as many are aware of. We collectively had decided to come to a resolution behind close door and stay as "one family". Yes there are issues that still unresolve, but we will deal with them privately thru designated rep from each of our respective lineages in private. The goal is the fighting and arguing has to stop with my generation so the latter generation will spend their energy in better the family rather then fighting. I apologize again if I intrude into matters that is not concern of mine. Sometimes I take the word" mo lum yat gar" too seriously.

peace

DF

[illusionfist]

Fu Pow- I totally understand what you are saying and if you can honestly come from that perspective (a more scientific one), you should also see that what was proposed in the beginning isn't something that is far fetched or even detrimental to family issues within CLF.

You say the points Dave Lacey made are "completely ludicrous and poorly argued." I have not seen anything that has been posted on these boards that have been any better since this whole argument began. If the statements were totally ludicrous, then it should be easy to disprove the statements with solid evidence.

Using the razor as a point of argument in this is not valid dude. You know that CMA is rife with all sorts of things that would make the simplest answer too short sided.

"BTW, who decides that Dave Lacey gets to ask the questions that are to be answered?" Given that JoX said he had the proof to make Dave Lacey look like an idiot, i would say that the preponderence of the evidence lies on JoX's irrefutable proof. This is why i would say Dave asks those questions since JoX has the "proof" supposedly. I'm sure if there was a concise answer given, Dave would be more than happy to address the issues regarding the CLF union (which he already addressed in his previous posts on his site, but i guess you guys aren't satisfied with it).

JoX- I have not even remotely gone personal with you because i have nothing to gain from that. What i have spoken about before is based clearly from your actions on these boards. If you take it as personal jabs, then so be it. I think its evident that you are just arguing to argue. You have once again avoided the situation by passing the buck on to me and trying to make me seem like I should illustrate the points that have been made. You know exactly what BC asked and you have yet to answer it. You know what was asked on Dave's site and you have yet to address the actual questions. Instead you just attacked semantics and are trying to cast dispersions on Dave Lacey's mo duk now (like you are the epitome of Mo Duk :rolleyes: )

You say that you being mentioned in his posts is airing out the dirty laundry, but i think its just him making a character observation and calling a spade a spade. You can't sit here and try to say that you have not deserved the flack you have gotten. Just look at how you act on the boards? You honestly want people to treat you in a respectable manner when you have not been respectful throughout the entire process. You openly defied the elders and their involvement in this process since the very beginning. You have made slanderous statements, twisted arguments around, and have avoided any attempts at civil debate, and now you are crying that YOU are the victim? Give me a break man. Dont be a "panocha" and just stand up for what you said and deal with it.

So how bout you just get down to it eh? As BC once told you, just answer what was asked of you and anything else shows your true character and intention. Surprise us for once and actually contribute (constructively).

With that, i bid you adieu and have officially signed off from this business. We now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

Kiu Saus and Kisses,
IF

[Serpent]

Illusionfist, You obviously have a tendency to defend Dave Lacey. For whatever reason it seems that you have considerable sympathies with him. Surely you can't consider his extensive pages and pages of barely coherent ramblings and personal attacks (not to mention complete misinformation, not least in his assumptions about the people on this board) as even vaguely constructive to the discussion. Sure, JoX can be circular in his arguments and not too constructive, but you talk as if Lacey is being concise and forthright! Personally, I find it a lot easier to understand JoX and Fu-Pow than I do Dave Lacey (or bean curd, k-no or Frank McCarthy for that matter), and they both seem to be far more interested in facts and open debate. Lacey just casts venomous barbs from his ivory tower.

Don't forget that all this started with Frank McCarthy telling everyone to watch out as he was going to shake their world. Pretty antagonistic and arrogant to say the least. Lacey has jumped on board with his own special brand of lunacy and is making no more sense than McCarthy.

It really would behoove Lacey to get his own family in line before demanding and insulting faceless nobodies on the internet.

[regulator]

i've been following this latest addition to your shameful conduct for a while, and the whole time i was wondering "when will Joseph actually answer the points that Master Dave Lacey presents?"
well, ladies and gents, i think we all know the answer to that. he won't, because he either cannot, or does not care to. Joseph, you keep mentioning "discrepancies" yet you refuse to point them out and logically refute them! It has even gotten to the point where Illusionfist, who freely admits he is "outside the CLF element", points out your folly and yet you STILL continue under the pretense of "finding the truth" and doing what you are doing for the benefit of people. You aren't fooling anyone.
You don't even post with the same intent in several different posts. I don't believe you're one person. In fact, there are those who believe you are specifically here just to "stir up the sh!t" and watch the sparks fly. Master Lacey has invited you to settle this face to face, yet you turn everything around and point the finger back like a spoiled little child trying to escape the blame. Master Lacey makes some good points, and you have yet to refute them! The way you post is clearly the work of more than one person. Some of your posts appear to be, for lack of a better word, passive.... while others are clearly inflammatory. I think you just like making waves, myself. Bean Curd said it best when he said "you are a paper tiger".
As Illusionfist said, don't play the hapless victim here. You've all gone to Master Lacey's website, there is a contact telephone number there PLAIN AS DAY for all to see! Yet you maintain that you have no way to contact him?!?!? He has personally and directly invited ALL of you detractors to meet with him and other elders to discuss (yes, discuss!) this matter face to face! Who are the real ones hiding behind their monitors? If I have a problem with an elder or one of a more prominent generation than me, shall I expect him to come to me? HELL NO! I must go to them! That's the way it's been for many moons, and it will continue to be that way, because although he takes the time to write you occasionally, i'm quite sure that Master Lacey has more important things to do than hunt you weasels down! There is no question that he has contributed a legacy to CLF, and helped perpetuate it's spread... what have you done Joseph? FuPow? Besides puff your chests up on Kung Fu Magazine forums? I mean really... it's a wonder anyone takes you kids seriously anymore! Again, I draw on Illusionfist's previous posts... if you were anything close to the students of history that you claim to be, you'd realize with the greatest of ease that these disputes have been handled effectively in the past, by tried-and-true methods, and Master Lacey is employing those methods. These methods separate the men from the boys, so to speak, and those who have material of real value can present it to those who are in the position to do something with it (the elders)! You act as if David Lacey is trying to lure you into some sort of trap... what, with the press and neutral parties there as witnesses? Where exactly would that get him? Stop stalling for time and taunting Master Lacey.... it is YOU who must "do the right thing" and stand up for your so-called "beliefs". In person. Have you the guts? Probably not. My guess is, you'll try to turn this around and attack myself, Master Lacey, perhaps Illusionfist and Bean Curd as well, as has been your pattern, to attemp to distract everyone from the fact that you CLEARLY don't have the "cajones" to go to Master Lacey with your so-called evidence and "discrepancies" and take this to the next level!
no, no.... you kids are content to keep it here, where you can hide behind your screens, post all you want without thinking things through, all the while switching who posts in some pre-pubescent teenage game of "my turn, my turn!".
You've been called out on numerous occasions. You dont' respond with anything worthwhile. You stall for more and more time, giving less and less valuable reasons for doing so, and losing what chances you have at being taken seriously. so , you are correct in saying ... "Do the right thing" is the theme here... but it's on you to do it!

p.s. due to my non-spanish speaking ignorance, Jaza has pointed out to me a supremely grave error of truly colossal propotions. my sincerest apologies to any offended readers! i shall endeavor to vastly improve my comprehension and mastery of espanol in the days to come... because I have the cOjones :D

[JAZA]

If they don't have the "cajones" means that they don't have boxes.
Two much mexican films dude, is "cojones".

[Rapid Fire]

Extrajoseph stop pushing the boundaries with Master Lacey as your identity will soon be revealed and consequences will follow.

Master Lacey is famous within the CLF family and has always upheld the good name and honour of his school and of CLF.

Master Lacey does not hide his identity as you do and does not hide behind a fictitious alias. If you want to speak like that about him then be a man and reveal yourself.

[anton]

ExtraJo:
You say that you have no other way to contact Sifu Lacey and so you post garbage supposedly addressed to him on these forums. ANyone with an ounce of intelligence can see that these posts are intended to publicly defame Sifu Lacey and are not addresed to him at all. You say there is no way to contact him, yet his number is on his website and he has personally invited you to meet with him. You have not declined the invitation, giving a reason. You have not offered an alternative invitation or described conditions under which you would be prepared to meet him. You have simply ignored the offer, hoping others would not notice your cowardice and would continue to be lead by your irrelevant posts.

As you have almost completely ignored the invitation by Sifu Lacey to discuss this in person, and prefer to continue this dispute over the net it can only be inferred that your true purpose here is to stir up **** and defame Sifu Lacey. If you were interested in constructive conversation with SIfu Lacey, you would have accepted his offer.

Why are you scared to met him?
He does not want your personal contact details. He is prepared to meet you with members of the publice present. If you had a particular place or people you would like to be present in mind, I'm sure Sifu Lacey would happily agree. Don't reject the prospect of a personal meeting altogether, like a coward. At least tell us this: Under what circumstances would you be prepared to meet with Sifu Lacey to hold a productive discussion regarding these issues? If these are reasonable Sifu Lacey will agree... what's the problem? Why are you so scared to meet with him?

[extrajoseph]

HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....
HOLD MY TONGUE....



Hi guys,

I am trying my best, give the man a fair go.....

Peace,

JosephX :)

[iron_silk]

well guys

I've asked k-no to pass on my questions to Lacey, so we could wait and see what he has to say.

unfortunately he always seem to be on a trip.

But I'm sure k-no will let us know or me know when they are answered.

[JAZA]

Master Doc Fai Wong also have his address, phone and mail on his website, and Master David Lacey put some comments about him in his article.
Why he didn't contact him to discuss his versions, and use his website to do it publicly?

I'm not related with master DFW, just showing a fault of consequence.

[Fu-Pow]

Regulator-

It's funny how the story of " how we ended up where we are" has changed.

You refer to Joseph and myself as Dave Lacey's "detractors." And yet Dave Lacey was never mentioned on this website until his students pointed us to his website where he attacked us calling us the " Faan Guak Chias" of CLF.

The fact is that Master Lacey entered into this discussion of his own volition under the pretense that he is some kind of "defender of the Hung Sing history".

And when he found that his name didn't carry any weight and his threats and posturing had no effect he became increasingly upset. He increasingly demanded a" meeting" to take place.

But what obligation do Joseph, myself or anyone else have to meet with him?To satisfy the interent forum? He does not speak for the Hung Sing or Bak Sing family. Why does he want this meeting to take place so badly between him, his Sifu and his "detractors"? I don't know the answer to that I don't really care to find out.

The fact is that the internet is actuallly in many ways a better outlet for these issues. Anonymity allows us to say things and bring things out into the open that would otherwise go unspoken because of loyalties, social standing, etc. This is what Dave Lacey got so upset about from the beginning. Joseph and myself got closer and closer to the real source of conflict. It has something to do with the CLF Union in the 1970's.

So if we want to uncover the "true history of CLF" which everyone claims as there ultimate goal. Then the internet can really be a useful tool.

As far as politics go, what needs to occur is not a meeting between Joseph, myself or Master Lacey but rather the top elders of each branch who have the AUTHORITY to issue a decree that resolves these issues once and for all. Dave Lacey can write whatever he wants on his website or we can write whatever we want here but it really has no effect. We do not speak for all of CLF.

The Hung Ga people reached a compromise a few years ago. They chose to remain as one family. Why can the CLF people not do the same thing? The other option is to split the family into different styles. Perhaps that is the intention of Dave Lacey and other from the beginning. Perhaps they would like the Chan Family to call there style something else like Chan Ga or something? How disrespectful is that?

Even if a compromise is reached and a decree is written, there will be dissention as each Sifu and player will come to their own conclusion regarding the history, but at least with a decree there will be a precedent to point to.

In the meantime I see nothing wrong with discussing these issues on this forum and allowing each individual to come to his or her own conclusion.

Make no mistake..... from the beginning it is Dave Lacey and Frank McCarthy who have tried to make this personal.

I know that at least I have tried to make it "impersonal" and really get at the "truth" of what's going on. For that I have been called a coward.

I do not know Joseph X's intention here or if he has an agenda. Buy there is no "conspiracy" between him and myself as Hung Sing/Bak Sing "detractors."

His behavior on this forum is not any less then Master Lacey's has been on his website. The only difference is that Master Lacey's put's a name to his, so it some how makes it better? In my opinion it is just stupidity to act badly and then put your name to that action.

I find it surprising that so many people rush in to attack Joseph and let Master Lacey off so easily. Joseph has contributed a wealth of technical info to members of this forum myself included. This is why I have been reluctant to renounce him even though at times his behavior has been deplorable.

I will admit as of recently I have made outlandish claims and intentionally stirred the pot. But it was only in jest, to highlight the ridiculousness of the tactics of Master Lacey and others.

In other words, Master Lacey is really Chinese. No harm intended, just having a bit of fun at an others expense.

All for now.

[regulator]

come on now... don't change your tune now that you guys are on the hot seat. let's take a look at some of the things you said...

you say You refer to Joseph and myself as Dave Lacey's "detractors." And yet Dave Lacey was never mentioned on this website until his students pointed us to his website where he attacked us calling us the " Faan Guak Chias" of CLF.

i don't really see your point there... what does Master Lacey not mentioning you previously have to do with you not being a detractor of what he says?

you say But what obligation do Joseph, myself or anyone else have to meet with him?To satisfy the interent forum? He does not speak for the Hung Sing or Bak Sing family. Why does he want this meeting to take place so badly between him, his Sifu and his "detractors"? I don't know the answer to that I don't really care to find out.

of course you know "why". it has been explained to you time and time again. that's the way to settle disputes honorably and with real results.

you say Anonymity allows us to say things and bring things out into the open that would otherwise go unspoken because of loyalties, social standing, etc.

while this may be true, to a certain extent, the fact of the matter is, it also allows you to sling **** at people from behind a virtual ivory tower, as someone mentioned earlier. to find out if what you say really has merit, and if your intentions really are pure, why not meet with someone who can plead your case before the elders? or at least have the guts to show up and tell them what you think in person, if you think these matters are so important?

you say if we want to uncover the "true history of CLF" which everyone claims as there ultimate goal. Then the internet can really be a useful tool.

uhh.... riiiiiiiiiiight i can see how utterly 'useful' it has been so far! look at all the progress that has been made in this forum alone in discovering the 'true history' of CLF!!! :rolleyes:

you say As far as politics go, what needs to occur is not a meeting between Joseph, myself or Master Lacey but rather the top elders of each branch who have the AUTHORITY to issue a decree that resolves these issues once and for all. Dave Lacey can write whatever he wants on his website or we can write whatever we want here but it really has no effect. We do not speak for all of CLF.

allow me to post some things from Master Lacey's site that he wrote: he must be prepared to dispute the true historical facts behind CLF’s history with the Hung Sing and Buck Sing elders of the 5th generation FACE TO FACE. and LET THE ELDERS RESOLVE THE CONFLICT DISCREETLY and yet even more of the same tone in THE QUESTION IS:– IS THIS AUTHOR OF “HISTORICAL MISCONCEPTIONS” PREPARED TO DISPUTE THE TRUE HISTORY OF THE FUTSAN HUNG SING GWOON & CHEUNG HUNG SING’S LEGACY BEFORE THE HUNG SING & BUCK SING ELDERS OF HONG KONG & SINGAPORE TO PROVE TO US THAT OUR HISTORICAL FACTS ARE WRONG AND HIS IS CORRECT? IS HE GOING TO DENY HIMSELF AND US THE HONOR OF DEFENDING OUR CLF HERITAGE IN PERSON? WHY? DIDN’T YOU (joseph – kuluye) SAY YOU HAVE ENOUGH “EVIDENCES” TO MAKE US LOOK LIKE FOOLS? WELL, ARE YOU AND YOUR ELDERS CONFIDENT AND READY TO MEET WITH MASTER KONG HING & OTHER 5TH GENERATION ELDERS OF THE BUCK SING AND HUNG SING SCHOOLS?

what we have here sir is a direct attempt to facilitate exactly what you said, a meeting between elders.

you say The other option is to split the family into different styles. Perhaps that is the intention of Dave Lacey and other from the beginning. Perhaps they would like the Chan Family to call there style something else like Chan Ga or something? How disrespectful is that?

again, i post directly from Master Lacey's site... PRIDE has played an integrated role in dividing Choy Lay Fut martial arts into two major Sects - the CHAN HEUNG branch and the CHEUNG HUNG SING branch. This is sad because though the two branches may not share the same sentiments, they should never let politics cause a rift between them - for they share a common goal and that is to be united in their efforts to uphold the good reputation, and to bring honor to Choy Lay Fut martial arts.

now, while i don't presume to speak FOR Master Lacey, one could easily infer from the previous statement that he seeks UNITY in CLF as opposed to DIVISION.

as anyone can see, the arguments you present against what Master Lacey has said have no merit, by his own very words in many cases!

Come on Fu Pow, certainly you can do better!
can't you?

[Fu-Pow]

?
i don't really see your point there... what does Master Lacey not mentioning you previously have to do with you not being a detractor of what he says?

The point is that people on this forum, including yourself try to portray Dave Lacey as the defender and Joseph and myself as the attackers. When in fact the opposite is true. Dave Lacey took it upon himself to "show up" the Hung Sing/Bak Sing "detractors" on his website. Previous to these postings he was totally uninvolved and his name was never mentioned. Then when Joseph and myself rebutted his arguments he claimed us to be personally attacking him.


of course you know "why". it has been explained to you time and time again. that's the way to settle disputes honorably and with real results.

But the dispute is not between myself, Dave Lacey or Joseph personally. It is a historical dispute amongst branches of CLF and even amongst Sifu's of the same branch. All Joseph and I have done is to bring up those differing histories and discuss the validity of those histories and why and how the differences occurred. As soon as we approached the why Dave Lacey took it upon himself to bash us on his website. Perhaps we were hitting a little too close to home. I personally believe in full disclosure and freedom of speech.


allow me to post some things from Master Lacey's site that he wrote: he must be prepared to dispute the true historical facts behind CLF’s history with the Hung Sing and Buck Sing elders of the 5th generation FACE TO FACE. and LET THE ELDERS RESOLVE THE CONFLICT DISCREETLY and yet even more of the same tone in THE QUESTION IS:– IS THIS AUTHOR OF “HISTORICAL MISCONCEPTIONS” PREPARED TO DISPUTE THE TRUE HISTORY OF THE FUTSAN HUNG SING GWOON & CHEUNG HUNG SING’S LEGACY BEFORE THE HUNG SING & BUCK SING ELDERS OF HONG KONG & SINGAPORE TO PROVE TO US THAT OUR HISTORICAL FACTS ARE WRONG AND HIS IS CORRECT? IS HE GOING TO DENY HIMSELF AND US THE HONOR OF DEFENDING OUR CLF HERITAGE IN PERSON? WHY? DIDN’T YOU (joseph – kuluye) SAY YOU HAVE ENOUGH “EVIDENCES” TO MAKE US LOOK LIKE FOOLS? WELL, ARE YOU AND YOUR ELDERS CONFIDENT AND READY TO MEET WITH MASTER KONG HING & OTHER 5TH GENERATION ELDERS OF THE BUCK SING AND HUNG SING SCHOOLS?

But this is not what I alluded to. He wants a meeting between Joseph, myself and the Bak Sing and Hung Sing elders. What I'm advocating is a meeting between the Bak Sing, Hung Sing and Chan Family elders. This is only way that reconciliation can occur. Joseph and myself do not have the authority to resolve such matters and so any meeting between us and the Baksing/Hung Sing elders would be fruitless. I'm guessing that this is an attempt on Dave Lacey's part at intimidation. Nice try but it didn't work.

And just because one person doesn't like us discussing history on a website. Too bad. It's a free world. Neither Joseph or myself claimed to speak for anybody but ourselves. It is Dave Lacey who has tried to make us Chan Family represenatives, which BTW is pretty funny because I'm from the Hung Sing branch.


again, i post directly from Master Lacey's site... PRIDE has played an integrated role in dividing Choy Lay Fut martial arts into two major Sects - the CHAN HEUNG branch and the CHEUNG HUNG SING branch. This is sad because though the two branches may not share the same sentiments, they should never let politics cause a rift between them - for they share a common goal and that is to be united in their efforts to uphold the good reputation, and to bring honor to Choy Lay Fut martial arts.

Sounds good, but what's he gonna do to facilitate this "unity." Personally attack low level players on an internet message board? Not much of a strategy.


as anyone can see, the arguments you present against what Master Lacey has said have no merit, by his own very words in many cases!

I don't present any arguments against what Dave Lacey has said. I present arguments against what YOU and others have said. The "history" of this bickering is even being changed by people on this board. How could we ever hope to deduce events 100+ years ago.

There are many people on this board who are quick to follow an attack. Its kind of a mob mentality thing I think.

[JAZA]

I post previously in other thread the same questions, but nobody answer.
Why master D. LAcey don't contact the elders of Chan family and Chan Yiu Chi students in HK directly?
If this is an old issue, why the elders haven't arrive to final point in associations like HK CLF associations.?
There was any public statement in Malaysia meeting about this issue?

[Fu-Pow]

Why master D. LAcey don't contact the elders of Chan family and Chan Yiu Chi students in HK directly?

Excellent question. Why not? Isn't there a CLF Union in Hong Kong that is supposed to debate such issues? Why haven't we recieved any decree from them on this issue?

[CLFNole]

This whole thing is getting crazier and crazier by the minute. What makes you think just becuase people are 5th generation elders that they have history right. The same can be said for the Chan Family since they base everything on the writings of Chan Hueng's grandson, Chan Yiu Chi.

Since there is no direct information from either Chan Hueng or Cheong Yim this is an exercise in futility. Lets stop with all the generation BS and just stick to clf. Last time I checked all of our various branches, lineages, whatever you want to call them looked like clf to me (gwa, sow, chop, etc...)

We all do clf lets leave it at that. Enough of the personal agendas that some people appear to have. Both sides in this can be seen as at fault. No one will win this stupid arguement that just never seems to end.

This is the problem with martial arts these days too many people want to talk about this and that and what generation they are while the just get fat, out-of-shape and their clf wastes away.

Lets try once and for all to discuss clf in a positive light.

Peace.

[iron_silk]

Ha ha ha

CLFNole is right! It's been pretty crazy. For all who's apart of this.

I especially like how they discredit Chan Yiu Chi (3rd gen/grandson of Chan Heung) yet what all their 5th generation master say is gold.

PLUS all had to be Hung Sing and Buk Sing lineage who has a strong potential for bias why none from Family?

oops...didn't mean to perpetuate this argument or did i?

[CLFNole]

iron_silk:

I don't put 100% weight on Chan Yiu Chi either. Afterall the manuscript was not written by Chan Hueng himself nor his son. I know a lot about my own grandfather however I don't think I could come close to writting about his history so much of what he wrote had to be based on stories since he wouldn't have had much 1st hand knowledge.

Both sides have holes in their stories and both use the stories to make their respective sides seem more pure or better. History doesn't mean squat. History isn't gonna save your arse in a fight. All that matters is how good is your clf (hung sing, chan family or buk sing), everything else is just wasted breath because no one has the 100% real truth and I think no one ever will.

Peace.

[iron_silk]

You are right but I wasn't putting 100% on Chan Yiu Chi since there is no 100%

I was merely stating the contradiction...besides it's pointless to go on debating here anyway. It totally lost it's fun for me.

You are right about history vs kungfu and history won't save your ass...BUT it is not about effectiveness of kungfu nor debating how it will help at all.

People like debating history. It is part of the system...perhaps not necessarily part of the "fighting" aspect...still it's important for different reason. Definitely not for fighting though...

and/or it's fun for some people...or just something to do.

FuPow said this once about the supposed Hung Sing lineage
...with their history you have suspend reality...or something like that I no longer recall

[monk weed]

The discussion of the history is not so bad in itself the problem is that it always degenerates into name calling and fighting and at time threats usually between the same groups of people. It is obvious that nothing will ever come of this. Until then this debate on this forum is nothing but entertainment for us when we have nothing else to do with our time.

[CLFNole]

That is a good point. The discussion of history in the proper context is good and I am all for that, however it seems now that any discussion of history is politically motivated and representative of people's personal agendas.

Peace.

[iron_silk]

Good Point!

But the problem rests more with the individuals rather than the topic itself.

History is just history...it's people that made it political!

These people are doing what they want to do. (as I have said before)

Hey CLFNole
I was wondering if in your lineage system was there a form called "Sup Ji Jit Fu" I think it roughly translate as cross pattern intercept tiger.

I think...

[CLFNole]

iron_silk:

I think that is a form from the Chan Heung side and is not seen in the Cheong Yim side. Not 100% sure though. My lineage is mixed from both sides however we don't have that one.

Peace.

[bean curd]

jaza/fu pow - you ask why havn't the elders of buk sing and hung sing contacted the elder of chan family to discuss matters.

what makes you say this has not happened but with no reply. things in past where different, due to different person having family documents, the one who know has them appears to be avoiding such contact.

as the old saying goes " when you attack, you can only reply to what the enemy gives you "

please note here i do not mean " attack " as in an aggressive nature nor do i in anyway state that the current holder of family documents is an enemy, this is far from the case. in actual fact, the keeper is respected well for his skills and conduct, it is just strange how when one asks for a meeting, the reply is not forth coming even when contact is tried on a personal level. things are not as easy as one would feel it should be.

such is life when human nature is involved.

also when i quote old saying i never wish to detract from the clarity of such words, so i always say them as they where written.

[bean curd]

clfnole/iron silk - i hope you don' t mind my coming into your discussin on history. i totally understand where you are coming from, however isn't it human nature, even if the heart has pure intent to bring ones own perspective into such matters. the unfortunate issue and especially from the time period we are discussing regarding southern skills, is that history is mixed with oral tradition and this is also from a personal perspective, albeit clan-family-father-son, and the mix in many ways can be cloudy if not full of mist.

to that end also, can one family (clf) with two sons ( chan heung /jeurng yim ) live with two variations of their upbringing?? the buk sing and jeurng hung sing gwoons do not care if the chan family have their history but they should not and must not belittle the history of the buksing/jeurng hung sing gwoons history, especially from the 1970's when bruce lee brought martial arts to the western peoples attention, did such writtings come out, uplifting chan heung and lowering jeurng yim.

for myself i agree with you both 100% that in fighting history takes no part, history cannot save ones life, however within the faliel piety of which it is such a strong bond, these things are important.we look at history everyday before we practice, we ging lay ( bow ) to either chan/jeurng or tam. we all do gwa sow charp, however the beauty in such things is found hand in hand when one looks at our own history and sees why we do gwa sow charp the way we do, doesn't such variation not only enlighten us into how diverse CLF is yet how close we also are.

[CLFNole]

bean curd:

Agreed, however I think using history for one's own political agendas is wrong. No one will ever be able to prove their story 100% with the information that is out there.

To me Chan Hueng is the founder, Cheong Yim the founder of the Hung Sing branch and Tam Sam the Buk Sing branch. To say the Chan Family people do something else doesn't make sense, looks like, smells like I think it is clf. I have been on websites of some of the people who are big in promoting Cheong Yim as the founder of clf and on their site under history it states Cheong Yim founded the hung sing branch.

Last time I checked a branch comes from a tree so then the tree must be Chan Hueng.

On the other side of the coin it seems like the Chan Hueng supporters try to belittle Cheong Yim to be a lesser martial artist than Chan Hueng. This to me doesn't seem right either. He must have been quite a martial artists since he definately did a lot for the art and produced a vast number of students who are still around today.

Bottom line is everyone should respect each others versions of history. Without any definitive proof otherwise who are we to argue. Listen to your sifu and respect his teachings, unless you unearth some history altering material its just a waste of alot of time and energy arguing your point with someone who might believe the opposite. It is much like religion.

Peace.

P.S. Being directly from a certain part of any lineage doesn't make your martial arts or the martial arts of your students any better than someone that is also within the art. Afterall we all know of some sifus that are "sup ha sup ha".

[Fu-Pow]

Bean Curd wrote:


jaza/fu pow - you ask why havn't the elders of buk sing and hung sing contacted the elder of chan family to discuss matters.

what makes you say this has not happened but with no reply. things in past where different, due to different person having family documents, the one who know has them appears to be avoiding such contact.



First of all Bean Curd, thank you for your decorum. We have finally brought this back around to a respectful discussion.

Here is an honest question: Who in the Hung Sing/Bak Sing family has tried to contact Chen Yong Fa or set up a meeting?

[bean curd]

clfnole you have a very balanced outlook on things. you believe what you believe and let others believe what they have also been taught. on this we speak the same in many ways although our originality of founder differs, but that is yours and i have mine.

our respect for chan heung si is without question as it is also for jeurng yim si and tam sam si , what differs is when others do not show the respect that should be given to those who deserve it and lay it towards another - for whatever reason, you do say it is a political agenda, for myself i can not say, we all lean with our hearts some are just blacker than others.

you said " To say the Chan Family people do something else doesn't make sense, looks like, smells like I think it is clf."

on this i am unsure if you are addressing it to me or speaking in general terms, however if to myself i can assure you such thoughts have never come into my mind or those that i know. i feel my previous post on such matters clarifies such undertakings of thought. we are all clf, the concern is not from a personal skill level but a more historical perspective.

the clarity of all things as has always been the case, and has been on a personal l level and face to face , not only a common occurance within chinese ways but in particular to our martial art community. one could talk of many issues we have faced as a community over the last 80 yrs and in particular from the1970's which for reasons i wish not to go into, cause such disruption where on a grand scale in many fraternities, which even today we still see the results of.

this discussion has done nothing but made the dog dizzy, it has chased its tail for too long, yet some do not wish to let thing lay, and continually try to bring things out in the open, which is something that should not be done. there are things which one could say, however one can only hope that as things are now quieting down they will stay that way, if not, well what can i say !!!

[bean curd]

fu pow

you say - " First of all Bean Curd, thank you for your decorum. We have finally brought this back around to a respectful discussion."

why do you thank me for my decorum ?? you only got what you gave, if you are rude and smart you got it back, if you are polite then that will come back to you. the thing is fu pow you have held yourself in a manner that i care not for, if you wish to change then do it, if not, let that be on your head - it is really up to you, we are all our own masters.

you say - " Here is an honest question: Who in the Hung Sing/Bak Sing family has tried to contact Chen Yong Fa or set up a meeting?"

i take what you have asked as an honest question so please take my reply in the same fashion.

what you have asked is not something i wish to expand on, but if you have the contacts then it is easily discovered. what you will also discover is that the other party has not been forth coming.

[CLFNole]

bean curd:

The statement I made before was not directed at you but as you said a general statement. I made it because someone had said (not sure if here or I read it on a website) that what the Chan Family people practice is not clf. That was what I was referring to, we all do clf albeit some look a bit different than others. To me that is where the beauty lies within one's own interpretation. As long as the core principles remain in tact variations do not bother me.

As far as what I believe I follow what my sifu told me. I don't go back nearly as far as you so I really don't know what happened in the 1970s. My sifu has passed away and my wife does not know much relating to her father's kung fu history. My sihings vary somewhat in what they teach as well so I really don't know, you may be right. If you are no big deal to me because it has no effect on the clf I practice and hold dearly.

I enjoy talking with you since when unprovoked you seem very rational as well as knowledgeable. I always wondered about your clf background, whould you ever care to elaborate a bit on as to your sifu or lineage? If not I understand.

Peace.

[bean curd]

clfnole,

thank you for the kinds words. your sifu ( LKH ?? ) is sadly missed.

my knowledge i can only thank for my sifu, i owe him much, however although you ask again, i decline in your request. this is certainly not the place to talk of such things, i hope you understand

joi gin

[CLFNole]

bean curd:

No problem. Yes Lee Koon Hung was my sifu.

Peace.

[Serpent]

Originally posted by bean curd
my knowledge i can only thank for my sifu, i owe him much, however although you ask again, i decline in your request. this is certainly not the place to talk of such things, i hope you understand

joi gin

And yet so many people give JosephX and Fu-Pow so much cr@p for "hiding anonymously behind their computers". :rolleyes:

[extrajoseph]

Originally posted by bean curd
fu pow

You say - " Here is an honest question: Who in the Hung Sing/Bak Sing family has tried to contact Chen Yong Fa or set up a meeting?"

i take what you have asked as an honest question so please take my reply in the same fashion.

what you have asked is not something i wish to expand on, but if you have the contacts then it is easily discovered. what you will also discover is that the other party has not been forth coming.

I have contacts in both camps and there has never been any formal or informal communication between Chen Yong-Fa and Dave Lacey since he left for the States. To say that the other party has not been forth coming is to give out mis-information and unsubstantiated accusation.

Also, contrary to the myth, Kong Hing and Chen Yong Fa have never met nor spoken to each other.

These are facts and anyone can check by contacting the parties concerned.

I tried my best to hold my tongue but you do test my patience with your lies and inuendoes.

:mad:

[Fu-Pow]

Someone's not telling the truth.

[Serpent]

extrajoseph is not lying.

[Fu-Pow]

I never implied it was someone on the forum....only SOMEONE. Don't stir up **** Serpent.

[bean curd]

joe seph the great communicator and nower of all things. thank you for your informative reply. why is it so informative, because it clarifies that you don't know anything of what you are talking about.

who said it was david ??who said david would be involved??? who mention david in any of the communications that would/did or has transpired in prevous years ??? you are so laughable, please continue your discourse it is a most enjoyable read, childish in its content but none the less enjoyable.

maybe you could tell me the story again of the tiger skin saga, i liked that one, or the discource on the chan heung photo post - 1949 that also was a nice touch, maybe the pre - 1949 also, now that would be something i am sure everyone would love to read, you ran away the last time, now here's your chance to enlighten us all. i am also still waiting for your enlighten answers to my two questions, i am patient i understand it take much time to read those magazines and books again ???

fantasy appears to be your most treasured skill, it certainly isn't history. now if you want to bring up the history again, like i have said, bring your sibuk, proofs, name a time for HK, and not only will you meet the elders you will have a chance to make them kowtow to you, since you are so correct and they are so mistaken.

:D

[Fu-Pow]

Bean Curd wrote:


joe seph the great communicator and nower of all things. thank you for your informative reply. why is it so informative, because it clarifies that you don't know anything of what you are talking about.

We're getting two completely different stories here. What's the real story? Joseph? Bean Curd?

Dave Lacey aside, have the Baksing/Hung Sing elders contacted Chen Yong Fa to set up a meeting to discuss historical issues?

Bean Curd says yes, Joseph say no.

[JAZA]

Bean Curd:

If you ask for Joseph to meet HK people, why don't you go to King Mui now? There you will find Master Chen to discuss with you about the tiger skin.

[Rapid Fire]

Hi Bean curd,

How are you. I am actually trying to figure out who you are as we may Know one another. I am my masters discilpe and If you are who I think you are then you visited me occassionally at my school and we discussed certain strategies.

I have lost your mobile number but some of the people we know in common are Gary , Mick, etc.

Please send me a private message as I would like to hear and speak with you. Buy for now as I have to go shopping to the supermarket.............:)

[yik-wah-tik]

FU-POW---**** YOU *****!!!!!!!
YOU BETTER BACK YOUR **** UP BECAUSE YOU WILL NEVER KNOW WHO'S LURKING AROUND THE CORNER FOR YOU, DUDE!
REMEMBER, I'VE MET YOU ONCE. YOU ARE JUST A KID!

SLURPENT CAN KEEP SLURPING. I AM NOT TRYING TO MAKE ANY OF YOU FRIENDS! KISS MY ASS! YOU PUSSIES ARE ALL MAD THAT OUT OF 1OOO,S OF CHAN FAMILY MEMBERS, YOU SAY THAT ONLY 2 MEMBERS OF THE HUNG SING LINEAGE CAN BRING OUT SO MUCH ANIMOSITY?!!!! AND YOU SAY WE ARE NO-ONE? THEN WHY ARE YOU ALL SO ****ED OFF IF MASTER LACEY AND MYSELF ARE SO INSIGNIFICANT?!

SEE, I DON'T GIVE A **** ABOUT YOU INTERNET NINJAS, I WANT TO HEAR FROM CHAN YONG FA HIMSELF ABOUT THIS CONTROVERSY. NOT FROM ONE OF HIS STUDENTS WHO DON'T KNOW THE ****ING TRUTH.

SO WHERE IS CHAN YONG FA? HOW COME HE HASN'T STEPPED UP AND STOPPED THIS RIGHT WHERE IT STARTED? ISN'T THE KEEPER OF THE STYLE? SHOULDN'T WE BOW DOWN TO HIM BECAUSE HE IS OF THE BLOOD LINE? SO WHERE IS HE? HAVE HIM MEET WITH US AND SET THE STORY STRAIGHT!

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO MASTER CHAN YONG FA......WE WANT HIM TO SET THE STORY STRAIGHT IN FRONT OF ELDERS OF THE HUNG SING AND BUK SING FAMILIES.

FRANK

[premier]

phew..

Everyone.. I hope you realise that this idiotic fight hasn't gone anywhere in the last 6 months. Judging that, how productive you think it is to use your valueable time to post in these threads?

Join my CLF politics thread boycott.


premier

[Fu-Pow]

FU-POW---**** YOU *****!!!!!!!
YOU BETTER BACK YOUR **** UP BECAUSE YOU WILL NEVER KNOW WHO'S LURKING AROUND THE CORNER FOR YOU, DUDE!
REMEMBER, I'VE MET YOU ONCE. YOU ARE JUST A KID!


Frank, you have such an eloquent command of the english language. I am constantly impressed.

Have you ever heard the term "The bark is worse than the bite." I've found this always to be the case.

It's always better to "speak softly and carry a big sao chui."

Chill out, my friend.

BTW, I don't think we've ever met. If we had....I guarantee that you would not be threatening me. ;)

[Serpent]

Seeing as you mentioned proverbs, Fu-Pow, how about this one:

The empty vessel makes the most noise.

;)

[extrajoseph]

Originally posted by yik-wah-tik
FU-POW---**** YOU *****!!!!!!!

SO WHERE IS CHAN YONG FA? HOW COME HE HASN'T STEPPED UP AND STOPPED THIS RIGHT WHERE IT STARTED? ISN'T THE KEEPER OF THE STYLE? SHOULDN'T WE BOW DOWN TO HIM BECAUSE HE IS OF THE BLOOD LINE? SO WHERE IS HE? HAVE HIM MEET WITH US AND SET THE STORY STRAIGHT!

SOMEONE GET THIS MESSAGE TO MASTER CHAN YONG FA......WE WANT HIM TO SET THE STORY STRAIGHT IN FRONT OF ELDERS OF THE HUNG SING AND BUK SING FAMILIES.

FRANK

Frank,

Chan Yong Fa has nothing to do with this mess, so why should he "step up" or "set the story right with in front of elders of Hung Sing and Buk Sing families", may I ask?

The fact is no senior members of the CLF fraternity, except Dave Lacey, ever got involved with our arguments, here or elsewhere, showed that there is displine, wisdom and unity within the higher ranks of the family.

The healing process is taking place behind the scene (your Futsan HSG is involved) and most students knew what the scores are, so if I were you, my brother, hold your tongue or treat this forum as nothing more than a place for discussions amongst CLF students.

JosephX

[yik-wah-tik]

you are full of ****. you know noone in fut san. if there was anything going on, you forget we have a someone there and my sifu as well as myself have sifu's in futsan. i was one of a few who were given plaques for honorary lifetime president, i've never been to malaysia but they have heard of my efforts to spread clf. who are you and what are doing other than eating, breathing, and ****ting "kung fu forum", is this your only outlet?
will anyone else listen to you?

reveal yourself oh great one.

frank

[extrajoseph]

If you keep in touch with your Futan Hung Sing Gwoon, you would know the head of the school Sifu Huang went to the Choy Lee Fut History and Development Seminar organized by the King Mui Chi Jo Gwoon in Sun Wui last Saturday afternoon. He presented his paper on Futsan Hung Sing Gwoon amongst many elders from mainland China and Hong Kong and Macau. No one mentioned Chan Heung not being the founder of CLF and everyone was friendly and united in developing and promoting CLF for the future.

Sun Wui is the birthplace of CLF and not Futsan and no one disagreed with that. You can ask Sifu Huang yourself if you do not believe me.

Frank, CLF is a great system and we should work together and not trying to segregate ourselves into rivalling camps. See you in China next year in the first China CLF International Championship which is on the drawing board as a result of this meeting.

All the best,

JosephX

[Serpent]

Ever get the feeling that you're just a muppet, Frank?

You should.

[Fu-Pow]

Careful guys Frank might snap if we keep busting open his world like this....

[T. Cunningham]

Well said Joseph. Now that this is settled with the elders (the people who actually set policy), we can get on to meaningful discussions about CLF.

Aren't you all glad that its over?

Peace to all brothers and sisters in the CLF family.

T. Cunningham

[SETANSI]

History of Hung Sing Choy Lay Fut

The birthplace of Choy Lay Fut was in the county of Futsan, Guangzhou province, China.
Chang Heung was a village teacher who was known to be proficient in Martial Art and he taught in the Chan Clan of King Mui village in Sun Hui county. One day a young Martial Arts enthusiast by the name of Jeong Yim was introduced to him. Jeong Yim was in need of temporary abode and Chan Heung took him in. It was said that Chan secretly imparted his knowledge of the Choy and Lay Kar fighting techniques to Jeong Yim, as strict traditional clan rules forbid him from doing so openly since Jeong Yim was an outsider.

When the village elders discovered this secret years later, Chan had to send Jeong Yim away. He gave him a letter of introduction to a Shaolin Monk by the name of Chi Cho (Green Grass) at Mount Bakpei. (Chan was supposed to have gone under the monk for study in the Shaolin fighting art years ago but due to some reasons, it did not materialise). The monk accepted Jeong Yim as his student.
He not only mastered the Shaolin Palm techniques but also acquired knowledge on the use of herbal medicine from the monk. Before his departure from Mount Bakpai, the Monk gave him an alias.
He was to be known henceforth as Jeong Hong Sing - with the implied meaning that the Hong (Hung) Moon (Triad Organisation of that time) would "Sing" - triumph over the Ching Government.

Upon his return to the village, Jeong Hung Sing awed the villagers with his skill and was received warmly by Chan. Jeong Hung Sing reciprocated his teacher by sharing his newfound skill with him. They accorded each other with the respect as fellow disciples and began to synthesise the fighting skill from the three different schools of Choy, Lay and Fut (Buddha).

The art which they referred to as "Fut Kar Zheng Zhung" - meaning, the origin of Shaolin.

Every school of Martial Arts has their own unique form of salutation. The founders of Choy Lay Fut developed a series of fast and successive movements as the Choy Lay Fut salutation. These movements with esoteric names were personifications of a poem, which contained revolutionary sentiments. The poem consists of four stanzas with a main character in each stanza. When the four characters were stringed together in sequence, it would read "Overthrow the Ching, restore the Ming"

The founding of Futsan Hong Sing Koon

The name Jeong Hong Sing became synonymous to Choy Lay Fut. The first ever Hong Sing Koon was founded in 1839 by Jeong Hong Sing in Futsan county of Guangzhou province. Among his choice disciples were Chan Ngau Sing, Lei Yan, Tam Lup, Lui Chan and many others.
There were soon more than a dozen branches of Hong Sing Koon in Futsan county as the fighting art gained wide recognition. The popularity of this Martial Art spread to other counties and cities. Many Martial Artists from other schools came to challenge Jeong Hong Sing. They were all defeated. Some became his students; other left with bruises and a bruised ego.

The death of Jeong Hong Sing

The popularity of Choy Lay Fut eclipsed the names of many other Martial Art schools in Guangdong. It created much displeasure to the Martial Artists of other schools because it affected their livelihood.
One day Jeong was ambushed by a group of armed men at the pier where he was to board a boat to the Chan Village. He recognised some of them as Martial Artists he had defeated before. A fierce fight ensued as Jeong used the oil-paper umbrella he was carrying as weapon and put up a good fight.
Three of the assailants were dead and a number of them wounded as the rest of them fled. Jeong was badly wounded as he staggered back to Futsan Hong Sing Koon.
He died from his wounds shortly after.

Regionalisation of Choy Lay Fut

Chan Hau Shing and the rest of Jeong's students went on a rampage in Futsan to seek out their teachers killers. Those who were responsible for the incident went into hiding and in desperation, some of then sought refuge with the Manchu government.
They charged that Futsan Hong Sing Koon was the headquarter of anti-government activities. That led to a clamp down on Choy Lay Fut practitioners and the closure of Futsan Hong Sing Koon.
Jeong's students scattered and successfully spread Choy Lay Fut throughout China.

Home

[extrajoseph]

There is some inconsistence in the version of history as posted by Setansi:

1) The birthplace of CLF was in Sun Hui and not Futsan, this was even acknowledged by Futsan Hung Sing recently. However, the birthplace of Futsan Hong Sing was in Futsan.

2) The story that Jeong Yim was not allowed to learn Choy and Lay Kar fighting techniques because he was an outsider was not consistent with history. Chan Heung taught many outstanding students like Loong Gee-Choi and others with non-Chan surnames.

3) The name Jeong Hong Sing as applied to Jeong Yim does not implied ¡§triumph over the Ching Government¡¨. The character Hong in this case (made up of radicals for river and bird) is not the same as in Hong in Hong Moon.

4) Jeong Yim founded the Futsan Hong Sing Koon in 1851 and not 1893. Futsan Hong Sing celebrated their 150 years anniversary last year.

5) The death of Jeong Yim was not clear, Futsan Hong Sing said in their journal last year he died peacefully at the age of 70.

The story/myth that CLF was a misnomer and its real name was Fut Gar Jing Chung was first touted in the early 70s. It was criticized by the elders of the time and was dropped soon after. It looks like it is making its round again.

[yik-wah-tik]

fool-paw....hahah....hahahaa......hahahahahahahahahahah ahahjoseph too......hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ......hahahahahahahahahahahahaha......hahahahahaha hahahahah.........ha......haa.....hahaha......haha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaa

[yik-wah-tik]

i can see that this historical dedauchery will never exceed the confines of this forum. you people here are so funny to me. i know that joseph is bs'ing you guys again because we called fut san and asked about a few things last week, joseph names a huang, well which one, there is truly one head of the fut san branch, but he remains in the background. there are many sifu in fut san of hsk and they will do what ever they will do. as for me, it doesn't matter. sets don't mean a thing when it comes to survival. what it truly comes down to it is "can you effectively defend yourself using your clf and not some boxing or kickboxing type moves?" or are you all just some studio fighters? real big in the studio but run and hide when someone really puts a whoopin' on your ass. but most of you don't understand what i am talking about...........it's all good though!

truly the history aspect doesn't have anything to do with me knowing how to use my clf. only poosies have to fight with words, attempting to outwit the other, and publicly embarrass someone. just as jospeph wishes to debate with master dave lacey, he won't meet with him in person, but behind a computer screen he will stand his ground. meet master lacey, and you can bring your friend "camron" with you. joseph, elequencey with words is all you possess. don't fool yourself. joseph, you have know idea how close we are in fut san, we know what is happening, if someone comes around asking questions, etc. our contact w/ fut san is almost daily. but nice try anyway.


frank

[Fu-Pow]

See I was right, he's losing it...notice the maniacal laughter in his last post.


what it truly comes down to it is "can you effectively defend yourself using your clf and not some boxing or kickboxing type moves?" or are you all just some studio fighters? real big in the studio but run and hide when someone really puts a whoopin' on your ass. but most of you don't understand what i am talking about...........it's all good though!

No really Frank, your the only kung fu player that's ever used his kung fu in a fight:rolleyes: .....give your ego a break Frank...your just overworking it now....you know what they say about overworking your ego.... you'll go blind and grow hair on your palms

[Serpent]

That's it, Frank. Don't debate the points that Joseph raises. Don't keep the discussion friendly or try to reassert your position with logic and cool-headed interplay. Just shout about how good you think your kung fu is and neatly avoid the points once again.

:rolleyes:

[extrajoseph]

Originally posted by yik-wah-tik
that joseph is bs'ing you guys again because we called fut san and asked about a few things last week, joseph names a huang, well which one, there is truly one head of the fut san branch, but he remains in the background. there are many sifu in fut san of hsk and they will do what ever they will do.

If my memory serves me right, his name is Huang Zhen-Jiang (or Wong Jang-Gong in Cantonese) and he is suppose to be the official head (Gwoon Jeung) of the Futsan Hung Sing Gwoon. The title of the paper he delivered was called "The Origin of Futshan Hong Sheng Guang and its Contribution to the Development of CMA". If you want me to, I can look up last years journal (if you have a copy) and point out a picture of the man for you.

If they didn't tell you about the CLF seminar/conference in Sun Hui where hundreds of elders and even the vice mayor of Sun Hui attended, then they are trying to pull the wool over your eyes. Obviously you don't know about the politics behind the Futsan Hung Sing Gwoon and the newly established Buck Sing Gwoon in Siu Buck Guangzhou either (the problem was caused by the hidden head if you want to know) and the corruption scandal on top of that. You think you know the people in the bakground but you don't know who is pulling the string. Who has the last hahahahahahahahaaaaaa now?

BTW, what kind of setup you have in Futsan where the head does not know what the tail is doing (your quote: there are many sifu in fut san of hsk and they will do what ever they will do)? If you don't know Chinese then it is always wise to double check the information given to you.

[EddyGman]

either out of naivity or clarity (that is for the reader to decide...).

What is the motivation behind this controversy and what does this controversy really do for CLF on the whole? I mean does it change/improve/disprove or resolve anything? Does it make one a legitimate practitioner of CLF on one hand and some sort of red headed step child?

From what I see, the big uproar really seems to focus on is legitimacy, no? But legitimacy of what? (Please, bear with me for a second... and mind you, I am no where near as well versed on this subject as your most novice participant in this thread...).

There seems to be two sources that validate you as a martial artist: association and skill.

As for association: I do see the point that some will bring up with this: one gets the pure water from a head of the stream. I think that has merit, and it is more likely that you'll get the 'right stuff' (whatever that is...) from that lineage.

However, I'm sure that everyone who would read this has met someone, somewhere, whether in MA circles or elsewhere that has the pedigree, but just don't know what they are doing (and that's not being insulting, just realistic). I've met enough people that are 'well lettered' that still don't know what they are doing to know that certification doesn't mean qualification.

Moreover, does this arguement negate or invalidate the practical skills that the various people have developed or are able to teach? Say this arguement was very pragmatically solved (i.e. a 3rd party finds records in an independent library somewhere that pretty much conclusively point to a person being founder X of the system...), would that change anything? I mean, does it make the other branches somehow invalid?

Now, I do have a bit of interest in this, and some indirect expereinces, in that my sifu was able to see Lau Bun on occasion during the 60's (as LB was teaching one of one of his instructors). Needless to say, he was more than impressed with how powerful he was, combatively speaking. He also spoke about how flawless he performed and regarding his high levels of training (the man could jump his own height + a little).

So, say, for instance, that the hung sing branch of CLF was somehow a 'counterfit', wouldn't that make LB and others a counterfit as well? Skill wise, however, I think you would have a hard time disproving that people like LB knew what they were doing.

I would suspect that there are others of that caliber (I don't know, I know LB was very highly regarded as a superb fighter, which is, so the story goes, why he came to SF).

Which is what it all boils down to, doesn't it? This isn't about who's right or who can develop better fighters or even who does the forms 'right'. I bet if you took their top fighters from each branch, they'd all give each other a run for their money.

And, on the note of legitimacy through association: I think many people will hold to the idea that only those who were taught by the 'right' people will have the skills, abilities, etc. Do you think that even those people will teach their art from generation to generation without changes?

If you do, then you need to study more about human nature, epistimology and the transmission of knowledge. People change things all the time, (though that doesn't mean they do it drastically differently.) and different people have differing teaching methods and relationary styles. Many people will also pick up or develop new ways of relating to things that are unique to them. Does this mean that they are not teaching the 'art' when they teach? Does that mean that, for instance, LB didn't know what he was doing with respect to CLF when my instructor had seen him on multiple occasions?

And again, I am not arguing for just the hung sing branch, but any branch really. CLF is a pretty strong system skills wise, and from what I have seen/read, there is WAY more similarity than difference in these branches.

So, this brings me to the point of what is the point? What is the motivation for the divisions and politics? The only thing I can see is the desire for a few to have legitimate domination over CLF branches by lineage. What that will do, I have no idea, because it won't change what other persons are doing and teaching. I mean, really. Outside of CLF circles, you think anyone looses sleep over this internal arguement? Nope. I think it is a very few people trying to jockey for a position that for CLF on the whole doesn't really matter, because it will not change what others have learned.

So, I hope no one here is offended at these observations and comments, I would actually like to receive people's feedback, so I can clarify these issues for myself. My cup is waiting to be filled. :)

Also: what is the problem with just recognizing and sharing the title of CLF among the differing groups? I mean, you can have different methods of doing the same thing, no? So, again, the motivations are unclear and questionable for why this arguement even is going on.

Again: This isn't meant to be any sort of attack, just more of a question/comment meant to generate information about the reasons for this arguement. Sorry also for any ramblings; it is late!

Ciao!

EG

[extrajoseph]

Her is my two cents worth of feedback:

I guest it all boiled down to Confucian ethics and the idea of respecting and upholding your tradition and ancestry. Fidelial piety is very strong in Chinese culture and knowing the source of the water you are drinking from is a also very strong in CMA tradition.

To have someone telling you that the founder of your system is no longer the real founder, but in fact one of his disciples is now considered the new founder by decreed, is quite an insult to many people. It is a bit like saying your great-great grandfather is no longer your great-great grandfather but someone else was and you are now an offspring of a line of ba$tards.

We know it is nothing much to worry about if you are skilful and confident of what you are doing, but most of us are insecure and some of us just want to know the truth for truth sake, hence the motivation for endless debates, especially when some people started to get personal.

Stay away from all this if you don’t think it is worth the trouble. The truth of the matter is that we are having fun and all this is making us learning more about our history and about human nature.

XJo