Question for those who have studied many different versions of Wing Chun. [Archive]

Ultimatewingchun

04-08-2004, 12:52 PM

phantom:

I've got to take a little issue with Ernie and Dhira (KWJ) on this - even though I agree with them on so many other things - and always welcome and respect their input...

I have a real life story that directly relates to your questions...I was with Moy Yat (also a direct student of Yip Man) for exactly 8 years - I started on May 16th, 1975.

In late 1982 William Cheung first went public with the whole Traditional Wing Chun thing....the "missing footwork"....the central-line principle (in addition to the centerline), the blindside strategy, etc...and I was so enthralled with his magazine articles and the photos that I started working with his stuff - sometimes right even in Moy Yat's classes (of which I was one of about three people who was doing most of the teaching)....Moy Yat eventually saw this and hit the roof !!!

On thing led to another...he called me into his office one day - we had a big argument about a number of things (with Cheung's stuff being at the top of the list)...I walked out and never went back...What was most amazing was that the date was May 16th, 1983.

I became a student of William Cheung in August, 1983.

Now this is an extreme example - but looking back I can definitely see why Moy Yat would be upset - even if I hadn't done any of Cheung's stuff in the school.

To do a crosstraining thing would be less sticky, IMO - but to simultaneously have two different Wing Chun instructors - and expect them (especially the original instructor) not to be upset about it - is probably expecting way too much.

I walked in unannounced one weekday afternoon and visited Moy Yat at his school quite a few years later, paid my respects, and had a pleasant chat - which I'm very happy that I did - because I learned a lot from him...and never saw him again. He passed away and I went to the funeral parlor in Chinatown here in NYC to pay my final respects several years ago.

PaulH

04-08-2004, 01:13 PM

Victor,

Good post! I like to clarify somethings. I know Ernie would do exactly the same thing as I said in my post. I think the issue that he and Dhira raised is that you take responsibility for your own life direction. They may be a little blunt in putting their point across, but their heart is gold.

Regards,
PH

Ernie

04-08-2004, 01:37 PM

victor

i think we have a different era thing , plus moy yat [ who i respect ] was into the who disciple thing . that stuff makes me turn and run

but i know it's old school and traditional

obviously i am not

in a sense or two a degree i have 2 wing chun teachers and had 2 others before

gary is the one i invest in because he pulls his $hit off and knows how to teach it .
hawkins is more of a friend but just last weekend i spent an hour with him at garys school after everyone left '' we are all friends ''

since gary has told me to teach , he also told me he excpects me to go out and work out with as many wing chun and non wing chun people as i can
to learn and gain experience [ i would do this anyway ]

because of this openess i will stay and help him with all that i can
like i would with any friend , no strings attached

but the minute it becomes a sifu order thing he knows i would be out , and he respects that about me

so i give respect to those that are respectful to me and i am loyal to my friends

i keep it simple
:D

PaulH

04-08-2004, 02:01 PM

In a sense, Gary and you are a perfect fit. "Sifu" always says that he is not interested in trapping any of his students! Ha! Ha! We're just loyal because he is a good coach. One good turn deserves another!

Regards,
PH

Ernie

04-08-2004, 02:10 PM

i think you hit it on the nose

about it having to fit

i would never feel comfortable in a place that was traditional in the sense of uniforms and bowing , belts , stuff like that

i did in my youth and hated it

now some other people like all that stuff and would hate it if it was missing

so to them it has meaning and then they might feel the bond between sifu and student as more then just a coach as i see it

but i still don't get why a teacher would tell a student there is no need to look anywhere else , that would raise flags with me

but i'm off subject and would like to say sorry to the original poster .

04-08-2004, 02:18 PM

Is your question around studying from more than one teacher or school at a time? Or changing from one teacher to another? Just want to be sure I understand your question in context, lest I get on about something in my own experiences that may be wholly irrelevant.

In the generic sense, I must agree with Paul. Balancing our personal needs or wants with due consideration toward others is never inappropriate. No less toward those who have given much of themselves by way of investing in us (e.g., our teachers). People are complex creatures, such that even if we do all the seeming "right" things or make all the appropriate judgments, there is no guarantee our ideal outcome will materialize, or that others will respond as we might wish. We can only try our best to perceive and balance what is most important and, as we proceed, treat others and ourselves with sincere consideration and respect. A little empathy and The Golden Rule, while not panaceas, can be helpful allies when things get murky. I guess it goes without saying I am not very big on a screw-you type of attitude, LOL.

Enough of my off-hand generalizations, and back to wondering about your particular scenario.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

PaulH

04-08-2004, 02:34 PM

Kathy,

It's never generalization when it comes to cultivation of good characters. Thank for your heartfelt post!

Regards,
PH

KenWingJitsu

04-08-2004, 03:27 PM

Victor, IMO if we agreed on every single thing, something would be wrong. We are already on the same page anyways, so it's a difference of opinion. No big deal really.

Thing is, I agree with the reasons you left Moy Yat. i, like Ernie and like Kathy stated, think you should be responsible for....you. All that tradition "sifu" stuff hinders people from true learning IMO.

I too had the same experience as you. Before Wing Chun, I was a Kenpoist. The place I trained at quite simply...suck'd. They were all about learnign as many forms as possible, even making some up so that each belt could have more forms & katas to learn. They hardly ever sparred. They couldnt fight. it was horrible. 2 years was all i could take and I left for a Kenpo place that fought all the tiem & hardly did forms. (in fact it was a breeding/training ground for the early UFC fighters which is where I got my intro to MMA). My former instructor hit the roof badmouthed the other guys even though they would have wiped the floor with him & demanded I come back. i wrote him a letter politely telling him where to place his demand.

Fast forward a few years. I'm studying BJJ. At the studio I go to the people are ENCOURAGED...even begged to go train elsewhere and experience what other BJJ styles are out there and how we compare. Why? to improve & learn. The teacher knows his stuff is good, and isnt afraid to have his students compare it, This is the difference with modern day performance based training and the outdated, destructive, traditional approach. In the end, it's all about you, not some 'sifu' or 'master'. After all if you dont find what's best for you, that 'master' wont show up when you're about to get your @ss kicked. no magic bat signal for you. Only your honest evaluation of your training and whehter or not you took the steps YOU feel are necessary for YOU to get the best out of what you want.

PaulH

04-08-2004, 04:03 PM

Dhira,

Good honest post from an honest trainer! My former coaches said very much the same things as you. They told me to always question whether one trains honestly or not. Not an easy task as learning is fun but training is boring! Ha! Ha!

Regards,
PH

TenTigers

04-08-2004, 04:45 PM

ok, my story's a little different;started with one Sifu with a friend, but he dropped out and since I couldn't do chi-sao without a partner, so did I-probably was a bad move(this was with Alan Lamb in his basement in Flushing, in retrospect, I should've stayed and trained with Sifu Lamb one on one-stupid kid)
The next Sifu I left because I simply didn't have the funds, and at the time, he was trying to decide if he was Moy Yat, William Cheung, or JKD-but the training was good. Sifu three was a work partner who studied with Inosanto, Hawkins Cheung, Augie Fong, and Duncan Leung-I guess he never stayed in one place-didn't stay here long either-but it was fun while it lasted.Best chi-sao teacher I ever had-but I learned by getting whupped. Next guy was teaching Wing Chun and Hung-Ga together, but his Wing Chun was not what I was looking for. He had size and used it more than technique, and the chi-sao was based on "tricks' rather than sensitivity and skill. We later broke ties under not so great circumstances-water under the bridge. Another guy was teaching under Moy Yat and we trained together in exchange for using my space to teach. He was ok, but didn't have much energy, so his school never took off. But he did. Kinda just stopped showing up. I had another guy who we exchanged Bak Mei for Wing Chun, I believe he said his Sifu trained under Wong Shum Leung-in any event-he had some real good reaction drills. Most recently I was training with Sifu Alan Lee, who didn't care who I studied with, as long as I train now. Period. Nothing to prove.
So, basically I did not have a problem since I was not under any specific teacher while studying under another-except the Hung-Ga guy and the Moy Yat guy, and they were friends, so there was no problem anyway. I think that if you study under more than one teacher of the same style it might be of concern to the Sifu that you will not be able to embrace his teachings because you are really sitting on the fence. There will always be some shred of doubt, or confusion. Kind of like a full cup. To go the next step and actually demonstrate and practice the other guy's stuff in class is showing a complete lack of respect for the Sifu, whether or not he even knows about it. The issue isn't that he would be insecure, but one of respect. Giving face. Since you were an instructor there-worse still, because you were basically sending the message to the students that Sifu's stuff wasn't good. That was a long time ago, and you were young. You grew up, became a Sifu in your own right, and even paid respects to your Sifu later, which shows your character.
To illustrate this a bit more, there was this Hung-Ga/Wing Chun Sifu, (who shall remain nameless)and he allowed a guy from another system SPM(one that this Sifu wanted to learn)in his school. This guy paid no tuition, simply came down to train and play chi-sao with the other students. He wanted all the benifits, but did not support the Sifu. Worse yet, when he was on the floor, he would constantly talk about how Hung-Ga and Wing Chun were no good. Again, not giving face to the Sifu. AND he was a guest in the school. So what would YOU do?

FooFighter

04-08-2004, 05:32 PM

Phantom

Alan Lee Sifu is very confident his wing chun ability and teaching ability. He has told me, has encouraged me and others to see others wing chun schools and exchange ideas if possible. If I saw something better than I could leave his school. He saw this with a smile and I havent seen anything like his wing chun in NYC.

However some sifus arent that open minded. This is America and not China, but if have close relationship with your Sifu, then I think you should ask him for his opinion. However if you have business relationship, then heck ya do as you will brother.

Traditionally, yes it would be disrespectful to study at another school but times has changed. The only problem is that you never get a stable foundation and your wing chun will never get better if you study we many wing chun sifus. No, not all versions are so similiar, especially in Yip Man Wing Chun. TWC and HFY are pretty standard, but in YIp Man WC families, it could be like light and day brother.

If you have studied multiple versions of Yip Man's WC, what reason did you give your sifu for wanting to? You should say, "Sifu, I am interested in learning from another teacher and you sux. So I am paying you anymore, so bye, ok?"

anerlich

04-08-2004, 05:54 PM

This is America and not China

Actually it's the rest of the world, not just America, as much as some Americans seem to forget.

As much as some might like to think differently, a teacher is a human being like everyone else. These situations can be dealt with well or poorly by both student and teacher.

It would generally be polite to discuss the situation with your current Sifu before leaving ... unless the guy is unreasonable himself (and some are). As long as you're up front about what you are trying to find by seeking extra/other tuition, it SHOULD be OK (unless one of you is being a d*ck). If you point out what you feel you are missing, your current instructor might even be able to rectify the situation, he may have misjudged your aspirations or something.

OTOH, if a student has aspirations his Sifu recognises can't be fulfilled in his current school, he should let that person move on.

It's probably too much to expect that he will continue to treat you exactly the same as people that spend more time with him than you will in future. It's always a two way street, and only a fool keeps giving if he gets nothing back, or worse, his sincere efforts on your behalf are ignored or denigrated.

Treat it not as a master/student in the Shaolin Temple type of relationship, but rather one between two mature adults, one of whom wants to change the nature of the relationship without unnecessarily p*ssing off the other.

Phil Redmond

04-08-2004, 11:57 PM

>>Actually it's the rest of the world, not just America, as much as some Americans seem to forget....<<

I'm in Canada every weekend and I have friends from all over the world who have similar opinions. Fortunately I'm not a part of that "some" you mentioned. Anyway, I had my own business and had someone to run it so I was able to study from different schools at the same time. For a while I studied 2 versions of WC at the same time. The subject just never came up during classes though ;)

yylee

04-09-2004, 01:00 AM

Both of my WC lineages are YM lineages, one is technique oriented, the other is energy oriented (I don't mean "muscle" energy, far from it). I am still in good relationship with my first Sifu, I simply faded away from his school after I got married. I went to a different lineage because I felt like I needed more exercises and my WC sucked (trust me, it's true!). Once in a while I go Dim Sum, or have a late night coffee with my first Sifu. We are more like friends then Sifu-Student at this point.

The transition from a technique base art to an energy base art is - painfull but enlightening. Everything about WC as I knew it came to an end, the world fell apart in front of me. All the so called Pak Sau, Gum Sau, Gaan.. whatever, don't work in front of the energy realm people! I thought I could ChiSau, but,.... wait a minute, in front of the heavy hands, I could only roll for may be a minute or two.... (true story from yylee, you don't get to hear it else where!).

In my own experience, energy base and technique base WC are disjoint set of studies. You cannot have both at the same time, may be they meet at some point, which I doubt. The two paths are very different. For beginners may be it is better to choose one of your own liking. Techniques, IMHO, are not something you could freeze and teach it like step 1, 2, 3 and bingo. They need to be driven by a good engine behind it. Once you have begun to master the energy, techniques become second nature.

Gangsterfist

04-09-2004, 12:34 PM

Ahh politics of wing chun, something I guess I will never escape. It just depends on how you look at it. My sifu is traditional in the sense that he has us call him sifu, and we have senior and junior students. Seniors will help the juniors so on and so forth. We call each other our kung fu brothers/sisters/uncles etc (sibok, sigung, sihing, etc).

My sifu has the mentality of as long as you keep training martial arts he will be happy for you. He does not want any of us to give it up. My sigung has helped out a few people (who are now famous, for lack of a better word) that have turned on him due to lineage. Yip Man and HFY play a lot into the politics of my lineage. If you change lineage in our view is fine, if you do it and then be spiteful back towards us we look down upon that.

Then again I have met people who are totally untraditional and will not let you call them sifu, and are very very good martial artists and very good teachers. It all comes down to the individual. A guy I know (who I am considering cross training with) teaches 6 elbows system for free. He won't let you call him sifu either. You just have to show up and give it your best. He is more like a coach I guess than a sifu, and he is one of the best martial artists I have ever come across.

So, as long as you do your change in respect for those you trained with before I do not see a problem with it. At first there may be hard feelings, but I think if you maintain your respect for the person eventually you would be able to meet on common ground.

04-09-2004, 01:16 PM

I can understand your perspective, YY. My experience and observations are quite similar to yours.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

yuanfen

04-09-2004, 05:32 PM

Wing chun is Chinese in origin. So if the sifu is from HK or Macao
it is natural to find a middle way of expressing respect in the bridging of cultures..

But China has different layers of traditions and demographic distinctions and personalty variables. Shows in the varying chemistries of wc families.

I am Indian in origin- and respect for all my teachers in any subject comes to me naturally. So I add bits and pieces of my worlds and my late wife(Creek Indian) worlds into the current not always symmetrical mosaic.Respect is not servility and includes self respect.

So- details in relationships can vary. Each to his own.

I am in the Augustine Fong lineage and respect him and sigung Ho Kam Ming...but I am not in the least bit discouraged from going
to visit other schools or interacting with them or seeing what goes on in the wing chun world.Or tasting other styles. And- I dont speak for any one but myself.

I have not had the need to switch from one sifu to another-learned from different elder brothers and one elder sister within the same family..

If I were the original poster- I would talk with the sifu and them make up your own mind.

Phil Redmond

04-09-2004, 05:35 PM

Gangsterfist, do you mean that some one is teaching elbows as a separate system?

Gangsterfist

04-09-2004, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
Gangsterfist, do you mean that some one is teaching elbows as a separate system?

Nope, its a complete system called tai hui (pronounced tie hoy). Its based of 6 elbow postures. I have not formally trained in the system but my sifu is one of the students of a local man who teaches it. The history of it, is there is no lineage because it was a closed door art only taught to the emporer's royal guard. It only recently (like 150 years go) became taught publically. A travelling doctor cured some of the emporer's guard who were very sick and they had no way to pay him. The doctor asked to learn their kung fu instead, and they taught him it. So it also called 6 elbows. There is an external side and internal side, with external and internal forms. I do not know much about it besides that. From what I have been told it is very similar to wing chun in several aspects. When I start training in it, I could possibly explain more about it.

Here is a link to a breif history of it, It has had several names 6 elbows kung fu, secret fist, and tai hui.

http://www.taihui.com/history.html#taihui

yylee

04-09-2004, 09:14 PM

Originally posted by kj
I can understand your perspective, YY. My experience and observations are quite similar to yours.

sure there are higher mountains above mountains.... ;)

canglong

04-10-2004, 10:22 AM

Always seek the truth
Always speak the truth
Always be open to the truth.

Tom Kagan

04-12-2004, 09:28 AM

In late 1982 William Cheung first went public with the whole Traditional Wing Chun thing....the "missing footwork"....the central-line principle (in addition to the centerline), the blindside strategy, etc...and I was so enthralled with his magazine articles and the photos that I started working with his stuff - sometimes right even in Moy Yat's classes (of which I was one of about three people who was doing most of the teaching)....Moy Yat eventually saw this and hit the roof !!! On thing led to another...he called me into his office one day - we had a big argument about a number of things (with Cheung's stuff being at the top of the list)...I walked out and never went back...What was most amazing was that the date was May 16th, 1983.

I became a student of William Cheung in August, 1983.

Now this is an extreme example - but looking back I can definitely see why Moy Yat would be upset - even if I hadn't done any of Cheung's stuff in the school.

Interesting. My experience with Sifu could not have been more different than yours.

Almost from the start, he was encouraging me to visit and get to know other teachers, and, if I found something which fit me better, he would help me, if he could, become a student there.

I also know that as early as 1965 when he was teaching in Hong Kong, Moy Yat had written letters of introduction for some so that his student might have a better chance to be accepted into the other Sifu's family - including to some letters to his own SiHings.

I just wanted to relay my experience with Moy Yat as being quite different than Victor's. That's hardly surprising, because he and I are different people. This post is not meant as a rebuttal, though I will admit I originally was not going to post on this subject. Sorry. I mean no disrespect to my SiHing, Victor. He spent eight years with Moy Yat and is as qualified (or not) as anyone else, myself included, to discuss him. I've also had my share of arguments with Sifu. It's just a part of the nature of any relationship.

For what it's worth, I have seen Sifu do a lot to discourage another one of my SiHiings in a similar fashion as Victor describes. Yet, Sifu was telling me the opposite. He wasn't duplicitous about it; he would do this directly front of both of us.

Of course, everyone's experience is different. And while the Moy Yat I knew in the 1990s was different from the Moy Yat Victor knew in the late 1970s, Moy Yat was 37 years old already when Victor met him. Sifu's character was pretty much set. Those who knew him long before Victor pretty much confirmed to me that my observations regarding Moy Yat were not all that tremendously out of line with the observations of many other people, including many observations as retold by my SiHing, Victor.

Tom Kagan

04-12-2004, 10:18 AM

... because of this openess i will stay and help him with all that i can like i would with any friend , no strings attached ...

See? You do know exactly what it takes to be a Disciple in the correct and traditional understanding of the way, shape and form to do it. :D

'Disciple' is such a loaded word in this world and 'Sifu' is such a loaded word in the world of Martial Arts. From my perspective, that's probably why I think you would hate it with a passion to be referred to as such. I can't say I blame you at all. :)

Ultimatewingchun

04-12-2004, 10:46 AM

Tom Kagan:

Your post was very revealing..I have also seen Sifu Moy do the same thing...if he liked you and wanted you to stay...he would definitely discourage any thought or talk of leaving for another school...if he didn't like or trust you...he might actually encourage you to check out something or someone else.

Tom Kagan

04-12-2004, 11:21 AM

Perhaps you are right and Sifu did not like me. It never occurred to me to ask him whether he did or not.

Perhaps you are right and Sifu did not trust me. I never asked whether he did or not. But if he did not, why did he want me to take the chops to my house until I convinced him he was being silly?

Does it surprise you that I do not agree with your interpretation as to why Sifu would act as we both observed? :)

I spoke at his funeral. You were discussing Kung Fu with Julian and asking him to throw a punch at you.

We're different people, SiHing. I also know that Sifu did, in fact, like you and cared about you. But, I don't think that was the defining factor in the difference between our relationships with our Sifu.

Ultimatewingchun

04-12-2004, 01:06 PM

Now Tom...I have recently asked Miguel Hernandez (several months ago) if I ever met you - because I didn't recall knowing you - but have had some conversations on this forum with you fom time to time...Miguel said that I probably didn't; because, like Miguel, you came to Moy Yat's school after I left.

So I don't even know what you look like...and if you say you were there, and that you spoke in eulogy - I believe you.

But what I do remember very clearly was sitting in the back and talking to John Cheng (Moy 4) quite a bit...and I do remember Julian (along with some other folks) - coming over to say hello.

But at no time did I ever ask Julian to throw a punch at me.

That's not only absurd - it's insulting.

You obviously have some sort of axe to grind (for whatever reason)...perhaps what I told you of some of Sifu Moy's methods of dealing with people bothers you?

Bother you or not...is it the truth?

Did he do things like that?

Now I can't claim to know what his behavior was like after May, 1983 - maybe he changed somewhat as he got older (like so many people do)...maybe he didn't.

But if you don't believe what I told you then ask someone else who was there during the years 1975-1983 (John, Mickey, Lester, Julian, Henry, etc.)

I didn't happen very often - but I did see him on occasion try to discourage certain individuals by suggesting that they try something or someone else - and for the reasons I gave.

If he spoke to you like that (years after I left)...but did like and trust you (as your story about the chops suggests) - then maybe he changed somewhat after I left.

Who knows?

phantom

04-12-2004, 01:35 PM

Thanks, guys. I was really thinking about studying under two sifus at the same time, rather than leaving one for another.

Tom Kagan

04-12-2004, 01:55 PM

We have not met.

I have no axe to grind with you. As for what transpired at the funeral, he remembers differently. Whether you find what he said as insulting, that's between you and him, though I suppose there is a chance I misunderstood him. (If that is the case, then I apologize because it was not my intent at all in relaying an observation.)

As for talking to the others, I have. Without pointing fingers or getting anyone else into this quagmire (and regardless of any personal interpretations which I have tried to minimize and just make observations), without even knowing you personally, I have "stuck-up" for you in the past with the simple reminder that you came to pay your last respects. (To me, that one act alone is proof you are SiHing.)

In regards to your argument as to why Moy Yat acted as he did, I want to point out that you have one SiHing and one SiDai, whom you trained with regularly during that era, who SiFu did not particularly like personally. Yet, he wasn't trying to "send them away" like you describe.

I don't deny at all he did what he did as you say. As I mentioned, I've seen it myself. He didn't change in that respect as he got older. But I also know he did the exact same thing but in reverse to people in the situation we are discussing. It is simply not possible to correctly reconcile this fact with your interpretation of whether he liked a student or not as being the deciding factor in how Moy Yat behaved towards a student.

Ultimatewingchun

04-12-2004, 02:36 PM

Tom:

First of all - I'm sure if Julian told you that - then he was just kidding around with you. Julian was always quick with a joke and a smile.

And as regards Sifu Moy telling you to investigate other schools/instructors if you thought that might help you - without that meaning that he didn't like/trust you...

then maybe something did change within his mind as years went by...But when I was there he was always VERY concerned about growing his kung fu family - and rightly so. Remember...he had just come from Hong Kong only a year-and-a-half before I met him in May, 1975 - and was starting from scratch.

Having students leave to go train somewhere else was not something he welcomed in those days - believe me. Unless, as I said - it was someone who he considered to be something of a problem.

By the time you had those kinds of conversations with him - it's quite possible he was genuinely giving you encouragement to check things out on your own - precisely becasue he liked you - and therefore wanted to help you come to your own conclusions...while at the same time telling others the same thing because he DID want them to leave (ie.- he didn't like/trust them).

Sifu Moy never lacked for subtlety.

I'm sure you know that.

Tom Kagan

04-12-2004, 04:42 PM

First of all - I'm sure if Julian told you that - then he was just kidding around with you. Julian was always quick with a joke and a smile.

How true. But if he did say it as a joke, then it was my personal favorite kind of joke: No one at the table got it except for him, and he kept a straight face. :D

It all happened later the same day of the funeral. When another person at the table - a SiHing of your training era and the person Julian addressed his comment - and one of the guys Sifu didn't like :) - had the same reaction you did in your post by pointing out it was insulting to do that, that was the first time I expressed my point about you coming to pay your respects and the last time I ever needed to within the Moy family (but it's not as if you, as a subject, come up all that often :p :) ).

The other two times were: once to two former students of yours I met when they said you wasted a lot of time making unnecessary comparisons to Moy Yat (they were with you for maybe two years, tops), and once when someone posted a question on-line in a defunct forum soliciting opinions about you of which there was not a single response remotely favorable, save mine.

There is no question Moy Yat 'loosened up' as the years went by and relaxed a bit - he had already managed to "raise" several students and was reasonably satisfied with the result (regardless of whether they stayed). But, he was never personally happy about any of his students leaving the nest. (Relieved? Yes, sometimes. Happy? No.) But, to him as a SiFu, that's the job he signed on for and already spent ten years in Hong Kong working at.

While I'm far from an expert on Moy Yat, perhaps because he knew I had taken care of quite a few foster children, SiFu and I actually had many conversations on this very subject addressing his entire teaching career.

Believe me, when the only fair and proper thing to do is treat each one as "your own" - and you don't know if it's going to be for six hours or six years or more - and you don't know if they are one day old or fifteen years old until they are put right in front of you (chronological or training age) - or whether they are the the ones where you cannot stand them and long for the hour to give them back to someone, anyone - you don't want to see them go. You can be happy for them when it comes (especially if it's the right time), but you don't have to like it. :D Sometimes it's easier to deal with than at other times.

Regardless, if that's the way one felt it needed to be done (as I do for my foster kids and he did for "his"), without the emotional commitment from the start, it wouldn't work at all.

And, like his subtlety, Moy Yat never lacked for emotion, either. ;)

russellsherry

04-13-2004, 05:34 PM

hi guys this subject is a bit close, to home here but , here goes nothing, i was with a chinese australian , with whose name i cannot seem to rememeber after being with him 16 years , dave peterson was in the same kwoon and it was he whom taught me bong sau and sidekick, this sifu when i lok back at it while he tuaght us strong basic"S he left a lot out forward pressure in chi sau bill jee had to many elbows but the sifu cliamed he was a student and repersentative of wong shun leurng when sifu told me ; how much training he had i fell over backwoods. i trained at grandmaster cheungs adacdermy for least than six mouths than met sifu foggie with whom had stuided in hk with sifu stephan chan and i trained with him a little bit as well when he came to australia , then i had the great fortune to meet quite by accident my close friend , and like a brother to me and my sifu randy williams sifu wiliams tuaght me to apprecaticate my past sifu"S and tuaght me on a one to one level in which i had not expereinced before . it is good to lok beyond your own school yip man gave eveyone different version
of wing chun for many varied reasons . peace russellsherry

Ultimatewingchun

04-13-2004, 09:40 PM

russellsherry:

You really brought back some memories for me with your post - as well as provoking some ideas that might explain perhaps more than a few mysteries (controversies?).

And apropos to much of the previous discussion on this thread - those memories (and the ideas) have to do with my first Wing Chun sifu...Moy Yat.

He ALWAYS tried to emulate Yip Man's teaching methods and ways of looking at things concerning Wing Chun.

One of the complaints I had with him (and occasional arguments) was that I wanted to experience a more combat-oriented approach to the training in his school...(I wanted to see and do more physical conditioning during classtime...more actual contact sparring with protective equipment...more street self-defense training, etc.)

You just reminded me of something he once said. Something to the effect that he COULD train some people like that - if fights or tournament competitions were his goal...and had actually done so upon occasion with one or two of his former Hong Kong students. He explained how he would organize and approach that kind of total combat oriented training - the regiment he would put someone through, etc.

But now...here in America - he said that he wanted to totally concentrate on teaching his students the entire Wing Chun system as he knew it...so that they could go on to open schools of their own and help spread the art throughout the world. He wanted to train...first and foremost - Wing Chun Instructors.

Which is exactly what he did.

So when you said that "Yip Man gave everyone different versions of Wing Chun for many varied reasons"...

A BELL WENT OFF IN MY HEAD. In a sense, that was what Moy Yat was telling me...and he prided himself on ALWAYS trying to follow the teaching methods of his sifu, Yip Man.

Yip Man knew who his best fighters were - he knew who were better at things like organization (and Moy Yat prided himself as being one of Yip Man's best at this - and I believe him)...Yip Man knew who excelled at teaching - at getting necessary practical school affairs taken care of (birthday banguets , Chinese New Year celebrations) - who was better at this...at that.

Moy Yat would mention things like this all the time.

MUCH FOOD FOR THOUGHT AS REGARDS SOME NOW-LONGSTANDING CONTROVERSIES WITHIN THE WING CHUN WORLD.

Thank you for your post.

Tom Kagan

04-14-2004, 09:32 AM

So when you said that "Yip Man gave everyone different versions of Wing Chun for many varied reasons"...

A BELL WENT OFF IN MY HEAD. In a sense, that was what Moy Yat was telling me...and he prided himself on ALWAYS trying to follow the teaching methods of his sifu, Yip Man.

I agree.

In my opinion, one of the more cagey things Yip Man did was this.

If a teacher teaches one thing to student A, another thing to student B, and still another to student C, if each of those students wanted to really learn everything, it required them to work together or be stuck in mediocrity..

So, if you were say, "King of the Kwan", that didn't necessarily mean you were the best at it or knew everything about it. It meant that if another student wanted to properly work on the Kwan , he/she had to develop a relationship with you. (And, in my humble opinion, the most important job of the King was to make sure to point a student toward the correct other students with which to practice.)

I'll never forget the conversation I had with SiFu in the hospital the night of his second stroke. In my typical fashion, it was well after visiting hours were over and everyone else had gone home, save one person I met in the lobby. I was sitting in his room for about 10 minutes when he woke up and saw me):

Me: "Rough day?"

SiFu: "Terrible. .... .... .... Terrible. Terrible."

(a one minute silence)

SiFu: "Listen, anything happen to me, you go to [SiHing A], you go to [SiHing B], you go to [SiHing C] ..." (He listed 5 before I interrupted.)

Me: "You don't have to worry about that right now."

SiFu: "They take care of you training."

(a fifteen second pause)

Me (in mock indignance): "What makes you think I'm not doing that already?"

Half of SiFu's face lit up and he smiled on one side - the other side being paralyzed - and he fell back to sleep.

Ultimatewingchun

04-14-2004, 09:56 AM

Tom:

Beautiful story...you brought a tear to my eye.

-Victor

russellsherry

04-18-2004, 04:30 PM

hi sifu victor and tom do you know the one thing that gets on my nerves in wing chun is we olny should have one sifu in wingchun , remember yip man had 2 sifu athough , he addressed leung bik as sisok , but eveyone had a diffrent apporch to wing chun iit does not matter about tan sau being at what angle it matters how you make tan sau or your wing chun work for yourself, do you know it was said in a letter or artical that i read in the old real kung fu hk mags that leung shern had some of grandmaster cheung style in his wing chun this just shows how sigung yip tuaght and while i see many things the same as my wing chun to others , some would say the way, ia m doing it is wrong but their, not taking into my disabilatey and how i worked around it peace russell sherry

04-18-2004, 05:20 PM

Hi Russell,

Originally posted by russellsherry
do you know it was said in a letter or artical that i read in the old real kung fu hk mags that leung shern had some of grandmaster cheung style in his wing chun this just shows how sigung yip tuaght

I'm not sure what the implication is here or in the referenced article.

William Cheung was about 13 years old when he began learning from Yip Man. During the time that Leung Sheung lived and studied with Yip Man, William Cheung would have been a child.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

yuanfen

04-18-2004, 05:35 PM

Russell sez:

remember yip man had 2 sifu athough , he addressed leung bik as sisok ,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The meaning of sifu is changing in some quarters.

A different time and place(s).

Ip Man had only one sifu-Chan wah Sun... but he learned from elder kung fu bros and from Leung Bik in his own story. Ip Man's
oral recognition of sifu(CWS) and kung fu elder brother(CWS's student) and kung fu uncle(Leung Bik) was fairly traditional. In the written traditional lineage in the art there is recognition of the sifu-not necessarily everyone one learns from.

CWS had died when Ip man met Leung Bik in his story..

In a biological familial anlogy, you can have a single father but learn from brothers, uncles etc. Same in an analogous kung fu family.

Much depends on what one means by a sifu.

In todays "organizations" many traditional meanings get fuzzy
at times. ... sometimes skipping up "hierarchies" for appearances of prestige and ego possibly.

Norms were violated in earlier decades too. You dont wash family dirty linen in public for instance- but some did and have.

You have conflicts of culture and also of ethics at times in the usage of terms. Of course these are separate issues from skills
and acquiring them.

russellsherry

04-20-2004, 07:03 PM

hi kathy jo what i was getting, at was when grandmaster yip taught , his teaching was geared toward, size and weight ete leung shern sifu was a big man and sifu yip would have taught him a big man"S style as with the same as si gung cheung but, it would not make much , sence to teach wong shun leung and chow sze cheun sifu the same as william sifu because they are small guys , i look at wing chun that every family if you like were
, taught a bit part of a whole , and that no one is right , or wrong , it just the way we interpert our various methords that is different peace russellsherry

04-20-2004, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by russellsherry
hi kathy jo what i was getting, at was when grandmaster yip taught , his teaching was geared toward, size and weight ete leung shern sifu was a big man and sifu yip would have taught him a big man"S style as with the same as si gung cheung but, it would not make much , sence to teach wong shun leung and chow sze cheun sifu the same as william sifu because they are small guys , i look at wing chun that every family if you like were
, taught a bit part of a whole , and that no one is right , or wrong , it just the way we interpert our various methords that is different peace russellsherry

Thanks for explaining, Russell. Based on that reasoning, I can see why someone might postulate that.

Interestingly, what Leung Sheung taught and they way we still learn is very much geared toward optimizing the assets of the smaller, weaker person. Even the big people are taught to "think small" and give up their reliance on size and strength. This is something he was adamant about, as are all of his students I have met so far. There is always someone bigger, stronger and badder, such that eventually competing on the basis of those assets will break down.

Based on my experience, understanding, and word from those who were there first hand, the theory of Leung Sheung having a big man's slant on the art doesn't hold. Body shapes don't dictate what's in someone head. The way we practice is also fundamentally different from TWC - virtually on different ends of the Wing Chun spectrum.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

Ernie

04-20-2004, 07:51 PM

tom

[['Disciple' is such a loaded word in this world and 'Sifu' is such a loaded word in the world of Martial Arts. From my perspective, that's probably why I think you would hate it with a passion to be referred to as such. I can't say I blame you at all. ]]

hey sorry i must have missed this reply

yes your right about me , i can't stand '' tradition '' and i have a dificult time with those that have a '' traditional mindset ''
my senior at school has lived in temples and done live in programs with other teachers up to 7 years in length .
and we bump heads alot

since we bot are now teaching it will be interesting to see how things turn out :D

04-21-2004, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by Ernie
yes your right about me , i can't stand '' tradition '' and i have a dificult time with those that have a '' traditional mindset ''
my senior at school has lived in temples and done live in programs with other teachers up to 7 years in length .
and we bump heads alot

since we bot are now teaching it will be interesting to see how things turn out :D

Ha ha ha - nature always seeks its balance. :D

Regards,
- kj

old jong

04-21-2004, 07:13 AM

Originally posted by kj

Ha ha ha - nature always seeks its balance. :D

Regards,
- kj

Not only it seeks it but,it always finds it!...;) The existence of "the other end of the Wing Chun spectrum" is only validating it's opposite .

Ernie

04-21-2004, 07:39 AM

screw that he's out of shape he will die first and then i will have my sweet unbalanced chaos weeeeeeeeeeeee ha ha aha ha :D

old jong

04-21-2004, 08:03 AM

Originally posted by Ernie
screw that he's out of shape he will die first and then i will have my sweet unbalanced chaos weeeeeeeeeeeee ha ha aha ha :D

Sure sounds unbalanced to me!...;)

Ernie

04-21-2004, 08:13 AM

i wouldn't have it any other way ;)

who knows jong one day you might come to work and see me as one of the '' permanat residents ''

picture that a 6 foot 200 pound wing chun guy just wandering the halls talking to himself and trying to pak sau imaginary attackers .

we would have so much fun :D

old jong

04-21-2004, 08:32 AM

I once had to deal with a 6'4" 270pds who had gone bad in a corridor.He was punching holes in the walls with his head while slicing his face and arms with broken glass!...I had lots of fun!...

Even if I'm 5'10" and 218'I did my best not to meet force with force when he charged me.
I'm very hard to impress or intimidate normally but that was a hard one!...

Ernie

04-21-2004, 08:43 AM

good to see your still here my friend , on of the guys at my school is a gaurd in the medical ward in prison ,
he works the night shift i can't believe some of the stuff he has to go through

alot of these people have deseases and he has to avoid all blood contact while dealing with guys that are killers

i am humbled by the lives of such people

so again my friend stay safe

old jong

04-21-2004, 09:05 AM

I guess I was lucky a few times.I always managed to control my "clients" without hurting them or getting hurt myself but that times was an exeption.I had to punch him quite hard in the solar plexus a few times to soften him enough before I could control him. One other times,I was attacked by two guys at the same times as I was controling another!...I admit,I lost my temper a little bit when one of them kicked me in the face when I was kneeling over the guy I was controling and I went hard on these two but a coworker came to stop me before I do too much damage on them.I was lucky he came because I was really mad!...

Only a few years to do and I retire!....:cool:

old jong

04-21-2004, 09:14 AM

Let's not highjack this thread anymore!...;)

saifa5k

04-25-2004, 08:12 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by phantom
[B]Did you ask your first wing chun sifu for permission to study another version of wing chun?

Personally I think a persons ultimate responsibility is to themselves. In my own experience I was told something like it was "bad for me to train with another wing chun teacher because I would be giving away my teachers "chi sau energy" or something to that affect. Dont know if I buy that argument or not. I do think there is a Respect issue involved though.

Dave c

saifa5k

04-25-2004, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by yylee

In my own experience, energy base and technique base WC are disjoint set of studies. You cannot have both at the same time, may be they meet at some point, which I doubt. The two paths are very different. For beginners may be it is better to choose one of your own liking. Techniques, IMHO, are not something you could freeze and teach it like step 1, 2, 3 and bingo. They need to be driven by a good engine behind it. Once you have begun to master the energy, techniques become second nature. [/B]

I agree with this very much. IMO it takes qute a bit longer to learn energy based wing chun but in the end it will be a much higher level than just learning techniques.

Dave c

saifa5k

04-25-2004, 09:15 AM

Originally posted by kj

Based on my experience, understanding, and word from those who were there first hand, the theory of Leung Sheung having a big man's slant on the art doesn't hold. Body shapes don't dictate what's in someone head. The way we practice is also fundamentally different from TWC - virtually on different ends of the Wing Chun spectrum.

I have to agree with this, while my experience in TWC is limited to one semimar with William Chueng a couple of years ago in Mt Home, AR I found it to be an almost completely different art than the wing chun that I have been exposed to in the Leung Sheung - Ken chung lineage.

I do wonder though if maybe size did have something to do with the TWC focus on always going to the outside instead of just taking whats given?

Dave c

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

04-25-2004, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by saifa5k
I do wonder though if maybe size did have something to do with the TWC focus on always going to the outside instead of just taking whats given?

Could be. Perhaps also related to inherent attributes of youthfulness.

Regards,
- kj

Ultimatewingchun

04-25-2004, 09:46 AM

Going to the outside is emphasized in TWC because it minimizes your chances of getting hit while maximizing chances to have two of your arms fighting only one of his...

so it's an excellent strategy.

But it is also understood in TWC that getting to the outside (the blindside) is not always possible - and so fighting "in the middle" is also covered in the training.

04-25-2004, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
But it is also understood in TWC that getting to the outside (the blindside) is not always possible - and so fighting "in the middle" is also covered in the training.

Understood & thanks, Victor.
- kj

Sam

04-28-2004, 09:09 PM

James Cama Sifu
James Cama has trained in Fut Sao Wing Chun since 1975 under Grand Master Henry Leung (Hong Lei,Chi Man) whom trained under Great Grand Master Gao Jhi Fut Sao the venerable Hsu Yun. Buddha Hand (Fut Sao) Wing Chun was the inner gate system taught to the inside Abbots whom intergrated it's concepts within the Five Elder surviving arts. The art was originally know as Gu Yee Chuan (Ancient Chivalrous Fist). Wing Chun was propagated through five distict styles. Buddhist, Royal Family, Red Boat, Village, and Ancient which has been lost.

http://futsaoyongchunkuen.com/

Lineage

Hsu Yun------- Leung, Chang Sun
(Gao Jhi Fut Sao) (Gu Yee Chuan)

Henry Leung (Hong Lei, Chi Man)

James Cama
Active Students
Thomas D'Amico(Long Island Branch)
Frank Siliati
Bruce Nepon(Delaware Branch)
Marek Wisniewski
Elton Cohen
Trever Croom
Zee Freeman
Anthony Follari
Gerard Looby
Mark Krivoi
Franco Antico
Roger Rigolli
Peter Bonet
Arthur Glass
John Daily
Charles Kennedy & Kirk Wojack (Chicago Branch)
Eugene Ziskin

Buddha Hand Ancient Chivalrous Fist Wing Chun Kuen
INTERNAL NEI & HEI KUNG

Fut Sao Hei Kung:
Is a complete internal training necessary for the development of Light Skills, Ging, inch power, and Dim Mak. This is a very rare Shaolin set taught out of small villages in Canton.

Ng Mui Nei Kung:
Is a complete internal training necessary for the development of Heavy Horse, Ging, inch power, and Dim Mak. This is also a very rare Shaolin set.

Internal Training Enhancement Devices:
Iron and Translucent Ball
Chi Palm (Paper, Candle)
Iron Monkey Ring
Finger Claw
Iron Bridge Bar
Chi Body
Sand, Water Jars
External Iron Palm
Bamboo Monkey Ring

INTERNAL HEI &NEI KUNG FORMS

Siu Lin Tao (Little Transmutation) - Meditation, Projection
Cham Kiu (Depressing Bridge)
Joint Dislocation
Biu Gee (Thrusting, Darting Fingers)
Explosive Chi Transference
Siu Baat Gwa (Little Octagon)
Inner & Outer Gates
Mok Yahn Jong (The Wooden Man 108)
Explosive Touch Powers
Baat Jam Do (Butterfly Knives)
Siu Baat Gwa
Lukh Dim Bun Kwan (6 1/2 Point Staff)
Siu Baat Gwa

Vagabond Weapons

Fan,
Flute Double Dagger
Flying Meteor Balls
Turtle Darts
Iron Monkey Ring
Chop Sticks
Star Coins
Snake Entanglement Rope

Sensitivity Training

Lop Sao
Moi Fa Chi Sao
Don Chi Sao
Iron and Bamboo
Ring Chi Sao
Chi Sao
Chi Gerk

Weapons

Baat Jam Do:

The Butterfly knives are also known as Pig Skinning Knives. Baat Jam Do form developes incredibly fast slicing techniques which teaches cutting power and short Ging. Two man weapon set against staff.

Lukh Dim Bun Kwan:

Six and one-half point staff. Taught with a six or eight foot staff. Highly
complex tactical set which teaches long range Fa Ging and pointing.
Two man weapon set against knives

TRADITIONAL FUT SAO FORMS

Siu Lin Tao:
The Little Transmutation also known as The Beggars Hand is the synthesis of the Fut Sao (Buddha Hand) Wing Chun System. Develops Heavy Nei Gung, Horse and Internal/External transmutation. Internal Nei Gung Form - it contains the essence of all three forms. Also, hidden in the Siu Lin Tao are footworks and kicking techniques.

Siu Lin Tao Two Man Form

Loose hands done to a live two man form with sensitivity, ging power and pressure point Dim Mak theory.

Cham Kiu

Depressing Bridge also known as Riding the Horse. This is the second form which develops Monkey Footworks, horizontal torking, angling, locking (chin na) grappling, snake body, crane hand, fox direction, and light skills for moi fa pole. This form is the basis for the fighting concepts of the system. Cutting chi power developed in correlation to the Bad Jam Do Butterfly knives

Cham Kiu Two Man Form Angling Chi Na

Loose hands done to a live two man form with sensitivity, ging power and pressure point Dim Mak theory.

Biu Gee

The Thrusting, Darting Fingers also known as Poison Snake Hand is the third and most advanced form. It develops internal Ging, vertical and horizontal tork, yin and yang theory, inner and outer gate theory, finger and elbow to full body attack, redirection, loose hand and flying chi/eating chi and expulsion/absorption, Fa Ging, vagabond and visibility and advanced Dim Mak.

Biu Gee Two Man Form Dim Mak Pointing

Loose hands done to a live two man form with sensitivity, ging power and pressure point Dim Mak theory. .

Siu Baat Gwa

The Little Octagon - eight (8) directional chi palm change and invisibility set contains angling, circling, spinning, stealth and walking in circle. Can be done on the moi fa stake poles. This is an evasive invisibility set which puts one in an advantageous position for an immediate counter strike.

Siu Baat Gwa Circling Stealth Invisability

Loose hands done to a live two man form with sensitivity, ging power and pressure point Dim Mak theory.

Mok Yahn Jong

The Wooden Man also known as Fut Sao 108. This is also done on a stake post or in a low horse and with the Baat Jam Do Butterfly knives. This advanced form is the culmination of the Fut Sao training curriculum. It includes the major concepts of all previous forms plus it own advanced Fa Ging and Dim Mak techniques.

Mok Yahn Jong Two Man Circling Stealth Invisability Advanced Dim Mak Fa Gin

Loose hands done to a live two man form with sensitivity, ging power and pressure point Dim Mak theory.

Contact Information: James Cama, JCama108@aol.com futsaowingchun108@yahoo.com Tel: (718)692-2281

Phil Redmond

04-28-2004, 11:03 PM

Hi Sam,
I'm not trying to be argumentative but you should re-check your dates. I was Henry's senior student before James Cama started coming to the Friendship Restaurant.

Sam

04-29-2004, 12:07 PM

I am only going by the date on James Cama's certificate which states 1975. Sifu Cama acknowledges that he met you at Friendship restaurant in the late 70's. Cama Sifu had trained mostly privately at Grand Master Leungs home as you know. You left the system for personal reasons. James Cama completed the system and is acknowledged as having been transmitted the hand by Grand Master Henry Leung. Cama Sifu as you well know has excepted and met all challenges for Grand Master Leung, Fut Sao Wing Chun, and himself quietly and thoroughly.

Phil Redmond

04-29-2004, 03:43 PM

Hi Sam,
for almost 2 years I worked in Henry Leung's restaurant. I went there every night after work and stayed until he closed at around 11PM. We would then take the train to his apartment in Brooklyn where I would stay with him and train a couple of hours. When he moved from Brooklyn to the apartment on Putnam Ave. in Rigdewood Queens I moved my family into the same building. I saw him everyday since I lived on the floor above his apartment. I remember seeing James at the restaurant and only a few times at HL's home. I can't speak about what happened after I left. I'm not sure of the dates. I'll see if I can contact Santo to make sure. I know that I went to Henry after Duncan left for Virginia. And there were onlya few of us studying under Henry Leung at that time. Now that I think of it in 1975 my oldest son would have been only 2 years old. When I met Henry Leung I had 7 children and one on the way.
And that was before James Cama ever showed up. I was the first to get a Sifu certificate from Henry Leung. I was even there when he traced his hand on a place mat in his restaurant to make to logo you know use. I still have copies of that Buddha hand logo.
Phil