Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Empty_Cup]

I don't know what to make of that deposition. There were clearly times when the witness didn't understand questions in haste to answer particulars.

Particularly, early on in the deposition does "come up" mean the same thing as "come up with"?

The way I understood it, GM The' says he and Hiang "came up" in possession of certain forms/styles. I didn't think he actually meant "created out of thin air," even though that's what the judge understood. I think that's why the lawyer interjected.

GMT's position in the deposition seemed to be fairly clear with regards to the short forms and some of the longer forms: he asserts he made these up himself without the help of his brother.

The statement that most take issue with is when he says that the 108 Luohan, short tiger form, crane forms, etc. were essentially made up by him in content but the names taken from "ancient roots". This would seem like a gross omission of truth if I was a student assuming the form content itself was ancient in origin. It just further exacerbated the situation when he then said he represented the material like this because he didn't want to appear boastful.

[Shaolin Wookie]

I was told this too, and would not have a problem with it, but that's not what he said during his deposition under oath. He said he created short form from whole cloath, that it was based on the legend of the 108 lohan but that he did not know the 108 lohan, had not seen it before and did not know anyone who had seen it.

GM The's own words for those who have heard 50 versions of the story:

"[In] '65 I teach traditional long form and find out that United States people did not understand it, lose lot of student. So then I begin to create a short form 1 through 30 as a set, and for different belt white to yellow belt 1 three [sic] 10, short form 1 through 10 sparring technique, teach them 20 self-defense yellow to blue, and then move onto from 11 through 15 short form, and beginning teach them long form the tiger and the directional---for directional do. But that take a while to create those."

He then admits that the 30 short forms are not part of hte 108 lohan, which he also admits never having seen in their entirety. He also admits to having created many forms, teaching them alongside what he learned "classically."

Hence, some of SD is GM The' created, some is older stuff. And so we're stuck where we are after 1000 posts---which is which?

[Judge Pen]

I don't know what to make of that deposition. There were clearly times when the witness didn't understand questions in haste to answer particulars.

Particularly, early on in the deposition does "come up" mean the same thing as "come up with"?

The way I understood it, GM The' says he and Hiang "came up" in possession of certain forms/styles. I didn't think he actually meant "created out of thin air," even though that's what the judge understood. I think that's why the lawyer interjected.

Anyways, he mounted a poor defense elsewhere (I think copyrighting intellectual property is a fruitless endeavor), and did admit to making up some stuff--Lohan included.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about a deposition. There's no judge at a deposition. And in order to claim copyright legally, you have to create something unique. Which is why it didn't work in the Hamilton case or the Van Over case.

Look at page 46, lines 7-25 through Page 53. He unambigiously says he created the 30 kata. He says "it's a legend that they have 108 short form, but nobody seen it." He says clearly that he does not know how to do the 108 form (by answering that is correct to the question). You can say that Sin The doesn't understand the question, but the man claims to speak several different languages and to have an engineering degree from UK. He was represented by counsel that raised the proper objections (and several improper objections in my opinion).

He justifies telling students it is part of an ancient system, instead of telling them that he created it himself, because the latter would be boastful.

He admits the same for Fei Hu, Can Ie, Luo Tien, Yin He.

I can't see much room for argument. Either he created these forms, and does not know them or they are part of what is taught in Indonesia and he is willing to lie under oath to assert a bogus copyright claim.

[Judge Pen]

GM The's own words for those who have heard 50 versions of the story:

"[In] '65 I teach traditional long form and find out that United States people did not understand it, lose lot of student. So then I begin to create a short form 1 through 30 as a set, and for different belt white to yellow belt 1 three [sic] 10, short form 1 through 10 sparring technique, teach them 20 self-defense yellow to blue, and then move onto from 11 through 15 short form, and beginning teach them long form the tiger and the directional---for directional do. But that take a while to create those."

He then admits that the 30 short forms are not part of hte 108 lohan, which he also admits never having seen in their entirety. He also admits to having created many forms, teaching them alongside what he learned "classically."

Hence, some of SD is GM The' created, some is older stuff. And so we're stuck where we are after 1000 posts---which is which?

He claims that everything that he submitted via VHS was subject to the copyright. They do not list all the forms in the deposition, but he lists some of them.

I understand that he is simplyfying techniques, but in various articles, speeches, websites he has said he knew the underlying material. They come from this temple etc. Here is not only admits to not knowing the underlying material but to not telling his students the truth (because in his culture that would be boasting).

Is Sin The had not claimed that the underlying material was part of material learned by Su Kong (because he was the only one that could master all the material from all the temples) and said the lower belt curriculum was created to teach the basics so that a student could handle the more advanced classical material, then most of this controversy would be avoided.

[Shaolin Wookie]

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about a deposition. There's no judge at a deposition. And in order to claim copyright legally, you have to create something unique. Which is why it didn't work in the Hamilton case or the Van Over case.

Look at page 46, lines 7-25 through Page 53. He unambigiously says he created the 30 kata. He says "it's a legend that they have 108 short form, but nobody seen it." He says clearly that he does not know how to do the 108 form (by answering that is correct to the question). You can say that Sin The doesn't understand the question, but the man claims to speak several different languages and to have an engineering degree from UK. He was represented by counsel that raised the proper objections (and several improper objections in my opinion).

He justifies telling students it is part of an ancient system, instead of telling them that he created it himself, because the latter would be boastful.

He admits the same for Fei Hu, Can Ie, Luo Tien, Yin He.

I can't see much room for argument. Either he created these forms, and does not know them or they are part of what is taught in Indonesia and he is willing to lie under oath to assert a bogus copyright claim.

LOL...typed "judge," meant lawyer. And I wasn't defending him. Went back and re-read it. You're right. I thought he said that he created the names, not the forms of Fu Hu Chien, Chan Ie, Luo Tien, and Yin He. Bit of both, it looks like.

And that's why he lacks credibility. You can't tell whether he's lying under oath or telling the truth, since you can't tell whether he's lying or "storytellin" when he's not under oath.

[Shaolin Wookie]

because in his culture that would be boasting).

Is Sin The had not claimed that the underlying material was part of material learned by Su Kong (because he was the only one that could master all the material from all the temples) and said the lower belt curriculum was created to teach the basics so that a student could handle the more advanced classical material, then most of this controversy would be avoided.

I agree. Sounds about right. The truth tends to end controversies pretty quickly.

[Judge Pen]

LOL...typed "judge," meant lawyer. And I wasn't defending him. Went back and re-read it. You're right. I thought he said that he created the names, not the forms of Fu Hu Chien, Chan Ie, Luo Tien, and Yin He. Bit of both, it looks like.

And that's why he lacks credibility. You can't tell whether he's lying under oath or telling the truth, since you can't tell whether he's lying or "storytellin" when he's not under oath.

LOL. Gotcha.

Because I saw some of the forms performed in Indonesia by people that were not trained by Sin The I tend to think that he did not create all the material he claims to in the deposition which further clouds the issue. The only thing that isn't cloudy trhough all this is that these copyright claims have destroyed his credibility.

[Shaolin Wookie]

When I started cross-training in other styles/MA's, part of the reason was to test what I knew against what other teachers were doing. I didn't particularly care if GM Sin "created" his forms out of thin air based on his previous MA experience, since you can't test these in ay other way than putting up your skills against opponents. Part of it was to test the quality of his techniques and what I had received from my Sifu.

I don't take much from any horse's mouth, so I like to test things. At some CMA schools I saw more focus on technique and posture. I wasn't used to so much nitpicking about particular turns of a wrist during a form. Often, in SD, you learn to block with a particular handform, and you cover the line---it's not about a 45 degree turn of the wrist, but instead about covering lines of attack with minimal effort to create openings that you can exploit. That made sense to me. And when time came for contact, I was often greatly disappointed by those who focused on 45 degree turns of wrists and whatnot if they couldn't cover the center. Now, I'm not sayinig that all SD students are great fighters. What I'm saying is that the principles I was taught by my Sifu served me well. There are plenty of forms collectors in the SD system.

Anyways, I find it disturbing that GM Sin co-opted names for forms that he created (as you just clarified for me, JP). That pretty much erases any chance that GM The' has any credibility whatsoever.

But since I'm not looking to become a licensed operator of a SD/CSC school, I can't say that it bothers me too much. The forms are "created" and "original" according to GM The' (which is doublespeak, plain and simple), but I can and do utilize them for martial purposes. I get what I wanted out of training--self-defense [which is a good offense].

Here's where it's annoying. When asked what style I study, I can't simply say "Shangtung black tiger" without the quotation marks. It now has two meanings.

[Judge Pen]

When I started cross-training in other styles/MA's, part of the reason was to test what I knew against what other teachers were doing. I didn't particularly care if GM Sin "created" his forms out of thin air based on his previous MA experience, since you can't test these in ay other way than putting up your skills against opponents. Part of it was to test the quality of his techniques and what I had received from my Sifu.

I don't take much from any horse's mouth, so I like to test things. At some CMA schools I saw more focus on technique and posture. I wasn't used to so much nitpicking about particular turns of a wrist during a form. Often, in SD, you learn to block with a particular handform, and you cover the line---it's not about a 45 degree turn of the wrist, but instead about covering lines of attack with minimal effort to create openings that you can exploit. That made sense to me. And when time came for contact, I was often greatly disappointed by those who focused on 45 degree turns of wrists and whatnot if they couldn't cover the center. Now, I'm not sayinig that all SD students are great fighters. What I'm saying is that the principles I was taught by my Sifu served me well. There are plenty of forms collectors in the SD system.

Anyways, I find it disturbing that GM Sin co-opted names for forms that he created (as you just clarified for me, JP). That pretty much erases any chance that GM The' has any credibility whatsoever.

But since I'm not looking to become a licensed operator of a SD/CSC school, I can't say that it bothers me too much. The forms are "created" and "original" according to GM The' (which is doublespeak, plain and simple), but I can and do utilize them for martial purposes. I get what I wanted out of training--self-defense [which is a good offense].

Here's where it's annoying. When asked what style I study, I can't simply say "Shangtung black tiger" without the quotation marks. It now has two meanings.

I can say that I share your experiences with cross-training. I never felt that my SD training was "superior" to the stuff I learned elsewhere, or to the people that I sparred nor did I feel that it was inferior or that I was outclassed. I thought it served me well enough.

[wenshu]

I drank tea this morning but I am calling it coffee. Why? Because liquid is liquid right?

Actually, it wasn't really tea either. It was tepid dishwater but I'm still calling it coffee (that was really tea) because I don't want to have to admit to myself that I just wasted my entire morning drinking tepid dishwater.

[hskwarrior]

Now, I'm not sayinig that all SD students are great fighters. What I'm saying is that the principles I was taught by my Sifu served me well. There are plenty of forms collectors in the SD system.

is there any GOOD video of SD fighting? i'm sure ALL of us want to see good fighting, even if it comes from SD. So, post it up.

[Shaolindynasty]

At some CMA schools I saw more focus on technique and posture. I wasn't used to so much nitpicking about particular turns of a wrist during a form. Often, in SD, you learn to block with a particular handform, and you cover the line---it's not about a 45 degree turn of the wrist, but instead about cove

The "nitpicking" of technique and posture are essential to learning the correct structure of the movements. With the correct sturcture you can maximixe the effeciency of your defense and maximize execution of power. I was struck by this difference when I began training in choy lay fut after I left my "kungrate" school. If the instructor doesnt show you the importance of such details it can seem like "nitpicking" but usually those details are important. Luckily I was told the why of the details from day one once I started clf. Later I understood my 1st sifu didnt teach me about structure because he didnt know

2 problems with that. If I ask my classmates to spar with me so that I can post a vid online in order to show a bunch of online pundits that people in our art can fight, I'll fet turned down. I've asked before and got zero affirmative a.

Why? we do it all the time

[Empty_Cup]

The long and short of it is that important details are important. It's pointless to make a blanket statement that all details are important and sifus who don't dictate what angle your pinky finger is in know nothing.

[Shaolindynasty]

It's pointless to make a blanket statement that all details are important and sifus who don't dictate what angle your pinky finger is in know nothing.

I'm only speaking on my own experience

[JSE]

Been lurking for quite some time. Finally registered. Seemed like a good time as it appears there is actually some constructive discussion taking place.

Salutations.