I don't know a lot of the forms you guys bring up like bot bo, but it just looks like the guy is going at it half ass.
I don't know a lot of the forms you guys bring up like bot bo, but it just looks like the guy is going at it half ass.
"For someone who's a Shaolin monk, your kung fu's really lousy!"
"What, you're dead? You die easy!"
"Hold on now. I said I would forget your doings, but I didn't promise to spare your life. Take his head."
“I don’t usually smoke this brand, but I’ll do it for you.”
"When all this is over, Tan Hai Chi, I will kick your head off and put it on my brother's grave!
"I regard hardships as part of my training. I don't need to relax."
flowery fist and brocade legs
I have no idea what WD is talking about.--Royal Dragon
I used to grow long hairs and have a pony tail back in college days in the 80'.
however, I have to cut short in the beginning of a semester. Because of hair code and dress code in college. however, the military instructor or Jiao Guan always gave me huge leeway. meaning we met each other half way. so I cut my hairs to shoulder length so that I may grow longer faster later on. so when registration time came, Jiao Guan just looked the other way.
--
For dress;
a pair of dark pants with white t-shirt and maybe some tie up (Ban Tui) above ankles would be enough nowadays.
the long pony tail is over done as pointed out.
--
A long ponytail and a Manchu queue are two different things.
i didnt think qing dynasty hairstyles were cool with most han chinese
hairstyles of 100+ years ago are pretty out there, but have little to do with kungfu.
anyway, his bsl ain't that great and you're right jethro, it is half assed.
If people want to learn half assed then that's up to them I guess.
Kung Fu is good for you.
On the previous thread, Gene says he thinks the guy learned at Lam Kwoon. Generally I cede to what Gene says, but I'm still not so sure.
By the way, this is referencing this guy's Bot BoOriginally Posted by Gene Ching
The funny thing is that the missed detail is one reason I do think he's a video student. Right before the first back sweep, he misses some stance shifts. They may have been emphasized in the video lessons, but take a look at Sifu Wing Lam's demonstration of the set from the same instructional video. There's the very same omission. To me, it looks like a mistake on the video that showed up in the video student's set.
Secondly, Gene doesn't know the guy, and he was at the Wing Lam school for decades. Gene left in early 2002 if I remember correctly, but I left in 2005. During that time, I was training and teaching at Lam Kwoon six days a week and I knew all the instructors and most students. I don't know this guy. If someone stuck with BSL at Lam Kwoon long enough to learn #8, I would have most likely remembered him. So I'm pretty sure he was never at the main school, unless he started sometime after I left in August 2005 and before all the classes dissolved in January 2006.
The only other explanation of which I can think is that (1) he learned from one of the daughter schools, (2) he was a morning BSL student back when we had the morning class, which seems unlikely because I think Justin taught that class and he was a hardass for details, or (3) he was a private student.
Given all that, the video comparison definately leads me to believe he's a video student. But my sihing has shot me down before, so I could be wrong.
Video student or not I doubt Wing Lam told this guy that he is ready to teach. His look makes it far worse. People like that give a bad name to Kung Fu. Sifu Wing Lam may want to take a look at these videos.
Last edited by The Xia; 10-17-2006 at 12:29 PM.
I'm not sure what purpose it serves to bother with anything more than simply noting that it isn't up to snuff really. People can call themselves whatever they like. This dude is just one more in a long line of many who call themselves this or that.
Indifference is the correct tool in this matter. making a bunch of noise about it just creates controversy which in turn actually lends more creedance to what he is doing than not.
Kung Fu is good for you.
Picture it this way David. Let's say you are a Sifu and some guy takes a few classes and then goes out and teaches your material poorly. On top of that, he claims he is in your lineage. Can you see how this may upset you?
well, im not a sifu but i understand your point. however, it would be found out, such as it has been here and other places or through word of mouth in which case it would all be regarded as mere vaniloquence and there would be nothing to be upset about.
Last edited by David Jamieson; 10-17-2006 at 03:01 PM.
Kung Fu is good for you.
You know how gullible the average person is when it comes to martial arts. Most don't even bother to do research.
Unfotunately true... I am reading a book by one of my favorite stupid-book authors. She has made several blunders along those lines. Most of them have been along the lines of how a very good fighter has no need to practice skills they've already mastered and how a smaller person can never through a bigger person.
Though, as most of here readers are likely clueless about martial arts of any kind, I doubt she really cares. The sad part is, some of her readers will see that, assume she did do here research, and take that drivle as fact. And having it in thier head as fact, they might assume a truelly good teacher is full of B.S. because what that person is teaching contradicts what So-and-so wrote in a romance novle once...
I guess they needed an "exotic hobby".