Honest HFY Question-

[anerlich]

Keith, that's a funny diagram but I don't think "prevailing" TWC conjecture agrees with it.

Also, YM has been credited with creating many things... (like the wooden dummy for example), that we know that he didn't invent.

I've never heard that YM invented the dummy. Even the TWC "legends" have it developed by the 5 "original gangsters" who escaped the Temple, replacing the 108 dummies in the temple with 108 drills with a single dummy with 108 movements.

It's incumbent on anyone claiming the inside track on history that they not misrepresent what others actually said so as to make themselves look smarter than they really are.

[Alan Orr]

As this thread is about HFY. Let me ask a few question to you guys.

Lets see if one can ask HFY members simple questions on the art they follow without them taking it as a personal attack. So far what ever I have asked anything I end up with a attack on my teachers background and skill. All fine, but the question never get answered. These questions are just the things that don't add up for me so far. Its not a personal attack on HFY, just points of interest on the background of what we have seen or even not seen!

So my few questions are:

If HFY is so unique,

1) why is it that the SNT set and the TWC ASLT set are so similar?
2) The Chum Kiu sets are almost the same?
3) They have the same entry technique?
4) they cross hands at the same height?
5) The MYJ of the HFY system is so close the the TWC MYJ? Especially the section in the book MKF...
6) The Bai Jong of the knives (like a V) is so similar?
7) The body structure looks the same?
8) Wang Ming and William Cheung look so similar? LOL
9) The Biu Jee has the TWC opening trademark of finger jabs...
10) The keywords of the pole matches Lui Yon Sang's Fei Lung Fu Gwun methods?
11) The punch is the same in both systems
12) The Tan Sao is the same height as TWC
13) It has a big Huen Sao just like TWC's
14) The history is so similar to TWC's alleged destruction of the Shaolin Temple, with 5 elders surviving
15) If it is allegedly so old, why is it that it has som much in common with the Yip Man system?
16) Both systems have the cross arm Chi Sao methods

Bottom line is HFY is too similar to TWC; it would be too much to be coincidence. Someone must have studied from someone. There are too many trademarks and signature moves.

The big questions - My thought is the secrecy.


G Gee says there is HFY in China, but no one has heard of it. If it was a big Secret then why did he start to teach it? and who said he could do so? Why has no one else learned it other that Gee? HFY have suggested that William Cheung must have learned some HFY back in the day. If that was true then why did he not run in to touble with this secret Society? A lot of the terms used have said to be from translated HFY secrets. But no one has seen any of these documents. Can they be shown? That would be a good way to show its not just Gee making things up each week. A lot of the language used seems very modern?

Regards

Alan


These are just questions that come to mind. Again not an attack on HFY, just points that don't add up unless explained.

Regards

Alan

I posted the same questions of the HFY forum and they removed them! I am told that asking questions in HFY they don't want to / or don't know the answer for is not allow. You must have the seal of something or other and the golden thing or whatever and also the secret paper from neverland. Plus you need to be good at drawing pictures. This all may change as HFY do keep finding they know more as time goes by... like the film menento... but more of a comedy.

[JPinAZ]

Alan, you are a friggin joke. How many times are you going to ask the same questions you know we aren't going to answer?? All you are doing is looking for attention - it's so sad..

Your ‘questions’ are only a way for you to start crap with the HFY lineage (as well as TWC IMO) and its members, drag down yet another positive thread and you know it. You have no interest in HFY, and you clearly do not like it's members - so stop the BS. You aren't interested in answers, you are only interested in spreading lies, passing insults and making points that don’t exist. It's clear that you are trying to take the focus off the positive direction this thread is trying to go by repeating yourself over and over with you silly a$$ questions. You are a **** idiot if you think no one can see this.

Then you go as far as insult our past lineage holder as well as William Cheung with your ‘jokes’ ('quesiton' #8). No one's laughing. Who the hell are you anyway?? You take a play directly from your own Sifu’s playbook. First he insults William Cheung & the TWC lineage, and now you do the same with your funny ‘questions’.

You say you've always been open about your views - But you are NOT being HONEST about your intent or TRUE feelings toward HFY. And your sifu is the same. And T as well.... the joke you guys make of yourselves is evident in every new post you write, and you can't even see it.

And then you expect us to answer your silly-a$$ questions?? You're a moron if you think that's going to happen.

[JPinAZ]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Orr
As this thread is about HFY. Let me ask a few question to you guys.

Lets see if one can ask HFY members simple questions on the art they follow without them taking it as a personal attack. So far what ever I have asked anything I end up with a attack on my teachers background and skill. All fine, but the question never get answered. These questions are just the things that don't add up for me so far. Its not a personal attack on HFY, just points of interest on the background of what we have seen or even not seen!

So my few questions are:

If HFY is so unique,

1) why is it that the SNT set and the TWC ASLT set are so similar?
2) The Chum Kiu sets are almost the same?
3) They have the same entry technique?
4) they cross hands at the same height?
5) The MYJ of the HFY system is so close the the TWC MYJ? Especially the section in the book MKF...
6) The Bai Jong of the knives (like a V) is so similar?
7) The body structure looks the same?
8) Wang Ming and William Cheung look so similar? LOL
9) The Biu Jee has the TWC opening trademark of finger jabs...
10) The keywords of the pole matches Lui Yon Sang's Fei Lung Fu Gwun methods?
11) The punch is the same in both systems
12) The Tan Sao is the same height as TWC
13) It has a big Huen Sao just like TWC's
14) The history is so similar to TWC's alleged destruction of the Shaolin Temple, with 5 elders surviving
15) If it is allegedly so old, why is it that it has som much in common with the Yip Man system?
16) Both systems have the cross arm Chi Sao methods

Bottom line is HFY is too similar to TWC; it would be too much to be coincidence. Someone must have studied from someone. There are too many trademarks and signature moves.

The big questions - My thought is the secrecy.


G Gee says there is HFY in China, but no one has heard of it. If it was a big Secret then why did he start to teach it? and who said he could do so? Why has no one else learned it other that Gee? HFY have suggested that William Cheung must have learned some HFY back in the day. If that was true then why did he not run in to touble with this secret Society? A lot of the terms used have said to be from translated HFY secrets. But no one has seen any of these documents. Can they be shown? That would be a good way to show its not just Gee making things up each week. A lot of the language used seems very modern?

Regards

Alan


These are just questions that come to mind. Again not an attack on HFY, just points that don't add up unless explained.

Regards

Alan


I posted the same questions of the HFY forum and they removed them! I am told that asking questions in HFY they don't want to / or don't know the answer for is not allow. You must have the seal of something or other and the golden thing or whatever and also the secret paper from neverland. Plus you need to be good at drawing pictures. This all may change as HFY do keep finding they know more as time goes by... like the film menento... but more of a comedy.

I am going to ask that the moderators remove both this post and the previous one with alan's 'questions'. Questions are fine, but direct insults to several lineages as well as respected leaders/Grand Masters of the systems should not be tolerated. This type of behaviour in no way promotes ANY good will, attempt at postive discussion or anything else. And I do not feel I am over reacting. It was let go once, but repeating the same crap because it wasn't show enough attention the first time is a clear indication of Alan's bad intentions to disrept this thread and pass insults.

Jonathan

[Alan Orr]

Why ask the moderators remove my questions?

I see no insults from me. Jonathan you are the one insulting me. LOL

I do have respect for William Cheung Sifu. I was not making fun of him at all. I was making fun of the person who had drawn the picture in the HFY book. It looks like at a subconscious level they may have been trying to same something OR it maybe its like the The Da Vinci Code.

Anyway, others agree that they have the same questions. I am not trying to be rude at all. I am only asking questions that come to mind from what I have seen and read.

Alan

[taltos]

I personally believe that (insert any WC lineage) has similarities with (insert any WC lineage) because WC (all WC to a certain extent) shares a common thread of history, principles, etc. I also personally believe that (insert any WC lineage) has differences with (insert any WC lineage) because WC is now a "fractured" art in that families/lineages have branched off and separated from one another. Certainly inside our schools the differences matter greatly (because they dictate our training methods), but outside our school aren't we far better suited in focussing productively on what we share in common?

I personally don't have much interest in which lineage is "more" similar or "more" different. ALL lineages are different (or else the lineages wouldn't exist), and ALL lineages are similar (or else it wouldn't be WC).

-Levi

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun
It's the basic balanced body structure and the proper placement of one's arms/hands/feet in order to adequately cover the gates without too much or too little limb extension...vis-a-vis any given adversary's opposing structure.

Is that it?

..................................

(AND DUENDE'S RESPONSE)...

Victor,

What you are describing is along the lines of what we refer to as "inside the box" range and gate theory's and concepts. While Sup Ming Dim certainly has a spatial relationship, it's purpose is one of providing structural energy. (duende)

***OKAY.

..................................

"It's how we express these concepts and how they function in our system over-all that makes our two systems not the same." (duende)

***BUT I CAN'T BE EXPECTED to know that since you haven't (as yet) "expressed" these concepts and how they function in a CLEAR manner. Perhaps Savi will do so - especially since my post was addressed to him.

.........................................

"Some people may have trouble seeing my point here, but that's the whole point isn't it. If you don't know what to look for, you certainly are not going to see it. But with true hand to hand contact, you can very easily feel it." (duende)

***WELL duende, since I'm doing wing chun for 33 years I'm sure I'll "know what to look for" once it's explained a little more clearly. And yes, I can "feel" it from hand-to-hand contact since I've been doing various forms of chi sao and kiu sao for over 30 years now. Shouldn't be a problem.

................................

"Anyways. I certainly don't want this to become some cat and mouse game between our two groups here on KFO." (duende)

***ASKING for clearer explanations of certain HFY terms and concepts in order to make a more precise comparison is not a cat-and-mouse game.

...............................

"I think we both have already shared plenty of information at this time. However, if you really want to compare and contrast, come by for a visit." (duende)

***NO, on the contrary...none of you have shared enough CLEAR information the way everybody else around here shares the particulars of their respective wing chun/vt/wt systems. And this thread is a good opportunity to finally join the party.Try it. You might find it be illuminating and refreshing.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Remember Time/Space and Energy are all linked. One can not change without effecting the others. Even if you break them down individually. Take space for example. Most people only consider up/down (height) and side to side (width). Maybe in and out (depth) for the 3rd dimension. But movement in 3D space requires much more than that. Therefore HFY also takes into consideration what we refer to as diagnal (depth with width or height or all three at the same time).

This may sound too complex for some, but when you are sticking to a bridge using leverage and true occupation of space, it is fundamental." (duende)


***ONLY because there's no visual to go along with it (for some) - and because you're assuming too much.

But do you really think that most of us don't understand the idea of occupying/working with a certain amount of space in terms of height, width, depth, and diagonal movement???

Where would you get such a notion?

[Liddel]

Vic said -

do you really think that most of us don't understand the idea of occupying/working with a certain amount of space in terms of height, width, depth, and diagonal movement???
Where would you get such a notion?

LOL - Vic, if they're not content with 'x' 'y' 'z'..... add a 'w', fine.
The only thing it changes is your perception, not reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_dimensional_space

Check the link to Minkowski's sapce....perhaps thats what he's alluding to LOL.

Personally i cant see the training bennifits of adding a 'w' axis, but im open to having my mind changed on that one....

Its been said that Vic, Alan and others have posted with negitive type tones in thier posts but IMO its comming from both sides, cause this next one sounds like im being spoken down to.....(and im impartial, not knowing or having any affiliation/ bias toward either side...)

This may sound too complex for some, but when you are sticking to a bridge using leverage and true occupation of space, it is fundamental.

True occupation ? like theres any other kind ?

Seems like we're getting cloer to "discussing" philosophy rather than the application of, in reality....

DREW

[Ultimatewingchun]

Thought this was funny..

Is this prevailing thinking now of TWC lineage?

http://www.wcarchive.com/images/line...iam-cheung.jpg

***HARD TO TELL what the thinking is in that photoshop adaptation. First of all, where did you find that? Secondly, is it saying that William learned one thing from Yip Man and some "HFY" from someone else?

Is that it?

[Ultimatewingchun]

It seems that some people are having a challenging time relating to the idea of "width".

We use this concept in TWC by way of the concept referred to as the CENTRAL LINE.

Here's part of what I wrote about it in Brian Scanlon's (Beyond1) wingchun wikipedia:

The Central Line
It all starts with the Central Line principle, which defines the area a practitioner, without pivoting his hips, can cross his wrists evenly at the lower, middle, and upper gates when in a neutral stance. The very first movement you make with both arms after opening up your stance in any of the three forms - and immediately before throwing the vertical punch with your left hand - is the move that defines the central line.

Recall the X-like movement (or scissor-like) motion your arms make when they go down from the chambers to the lower gates. Now freeze that movement for a moment. In other words, before rotating the X/scissor position up toward the higher gates - and while still in the down position - start moving both arms to your right.

Remember not to pivot your hips or shoulders, and notice when the hands and fingers would start to no longer reach to the exact same distance evenly if you were to continue to move them to the right (because your right arm and hand would now be extending further than the left). In other words, you’ve just reached the eastern border of your central line.

(For purposes of simplicity and clarity I will take the liberty of introducing a terminology of my own that I use to teach TWC to my students). Whatever direction you are facing, call that North. South is therefore behind you. East is to your right, and West is to your left. Now back to the Central Line.

Move the X/scissors to the left (west) until you reach the same position just described. You have now totally defined (or traced) an imaginary horizontal line. To put that another way, an east-west plane known as the Central Line. And if you position your body in relation to your opponent so that all blocks, parries, strikes, etc. only travel within the parameters of this central line - then you will always maximize the use of both arms for simultaneous attack and defense, and minimize the target area you present to your opponent.

With this position, you maximize your ability to control the straight line path available for attack and defense, while attempting to force the opponent to use an outside path - and therefore an increased distance for him to travel. So in theory this will make your moves structurally faster.

Now when using the Central Line principle, the practitioner will FACE THE POINT OF CONTACT with his vertical, middle-of-the-body centerline when blocking or parrying blows coming in at him, while “returning the fire” in simultaneous (or near simultaneous) attack on SOME OTHER POINT along the east-west horizontal central line. (Although there are some exceptions to this rule which might occasionally require a block or parry to be performed on some other point on the central line -and not on the main middle of the body center line). Nonetheless, blocks and parries are almost always performed on the Centerline.

...................................

SO THE CONCEPT OF WIDTH DOES EXIST WITHIN TWC - and I remember Moy Yat talking about it at times as well - although never to the extent that it's covered in TWC.

And clearly HFY uses it extensively as well.

[Ned]

Chu, BS! "I get blamed for HFY's woes, but if you look at it, I did not create HFY with all its semblances, and secret culture. Nor have I said anything about HFY today. " Chu and his gang make everything turn personal then play victim. "semblances"?, Chu's context is saying HFY is made up, just like he has said in the past. Now the next chu character is alan. Yesterdays on hfy108 it was big T, Terence.

Alan, BS! "Only asking quesiton"? Stupid dumb questions to incite crap upon yourself and chu! "I am only asking questions that come to mind from what I have seen and read." BS! Alan, you do not know **** about kung fu. You are a trouble maker and sound like a beginner in Kung Fu. You trying to make a comparison of kung fu based on a high tan sau. Don't you even know Hung Gar and Choy Li Fut also have a high tan sau. You ask such stupid dumb questions. You do not even deserve an answer to such a stupid question. Then on top of your stupid question you say Wang Ming, my GM's sifu, is a drawing to look like GM Cheung. You are a divisor, underhanded and two faced.

What are you guys trying to do on this HFY/TWC thread? Answer: To cause division in the WC community. Chu talks about ""life is too short for such pettiness" but his word are BS! What you are trying to do is bring TWC and HFY against each other and keep you manipulative corrupt campaign alive. "Let's live in the NOW. "? Well right now you are bringing pettiness to your poor pathtic emotional duress life. "However, there is a distinction between free speech and slandarous talk, and libel and intentional infliction of emotional duress. Also care should be considered when people make threats, as this is illegal."
Chu, your history is pathetic, backstabbing and sabatoge. Bobby gives a very good reality check on you and your pathetic, petty past in his post #197 at http://www.hfy108.com/forums/showthr...t=2403&page=14.

Why the hell do you think you are rejected by the Kung Fu community? You are nothing but sabatoge and Alan and Terence are annoying .

[Ultimatewingchun]

"What you are trying to do is bring TWC and HFY against each other and keep your manipulative corrupt campaign alive." (Ned)

Don't know if this is Robert and Alan's motive or not. And I don't care. Because even if they are - I'm not interested. And from what I can tell - neither is anyone else who's posted on this thread who has experience in TWC, ie.- Phil, Andrew, John.

So again:

There's no reason to turn a discussion of the two systems into a "personality" issue.

Let the concepts, principles, strategies, and techniques speak for themselves.

[taltos]

Parlati Sifu,

I thank you for your posts that attempt to keep the discussion productive. I have a few questions.

I am pretty sure that I understand what you mean by the central line and how you find it. I just wanted to verify (and not assume) some things...

You mentioned how to "draw" the central line from the lower cross hands position. I understand that this is how you define the left and right (east and west, as you said) boundaries.

1. Am I correct in that this left and right boundary exists at all heights (the down position is just an exercise to "draw" it)?

2. Does the left and right boundary change at different heights?

3. Is there a specific distance from the body that this line exists at, or does it extend into infinity?

4. Finally, are there specific lower and higher positions in which this line no longer exists (i.e. above the head, below the waist, etc.)?

Thank you.

-Levi

[anerlich]

"What you are trying to do is bring TWC and HFY against each other and keep you manipulative corrupt campaign alive." (Ned)

Ah, another zealot joins the fray. All those Zen links in your history are really keeping you suckers calm, huh?

Robert's done a pretty crap job of pi$$ing TWC off. He and I exchanged some detailed WC information via email just recently, and IMO I got the better end of the deal.

Anyone who seriously takes Alan's joke, which was obviously a (poor) attempt at humour, about William Cheung and the other guy (who?) as a mortal insult needs to grow a thicker skin, get out more, and possibly seek therapy. The only crime taken there was a crime against decent jokes

TWC don't need Robert and Alan to get into an argument with HFY. HFY have demonstrated several times that they can do a great job in that regard all on their own.