Honest HFY Question-

[taltos]

VTM and HFY, well we have never seen anything which is first hand research on this matter. It is always a point of view. That is not history at all. Its fine to have your view, but its not history Fact if you can not show it to be.

http://www.mengsofaz.com/currentarti...omparisons.htm

Among other things, this article states...

If the museum has introduced information in a manner that has been perceived as offensive to other lineages, we apologize. It has never been our intent to imply a subjective value consideration to one system over another.

They also state...

Our true intent has always been the accumulation and communication of science through real experience. Since most of Wing Chun must be learned through touch and the interaction of energetics, the museum will forever insist that its staff members attain this experience hands-on rather than through written and verbal means. The traditional Shaolin phrase for this type of learning is “Hau Chuen San Sau” meaning “face-to-face” and there is great wisdom in the need for it.

Truth in a martial system cannot be ascertained by dissertations and written or verbal treatises. Truth must be discovered by touch.

Here is what we have:

1. SOME members of the VTM study HFY. Not all. The VT Museum website also lists the following people as contributors that have offered information on their respective lineages:

Jim Roselando, Koo Lo lineage Affairs Director
Futshan Jing Mo, China Affairs Director
Yip Chun, Historical Advisor
Yip Ching, Technical Advisor
David Peterson, Technical Advisor
John Crescione, Technical Advisor

These people do not study HFY, and have only offered information to the museum concerning their respective lineages. They did this in a spirit of sharing, and I greatly respect that willingness. But they do not automatically accept everything that the VTM says either.

2. Since members of the VTM hold a certain view, and some of those members also train HFY, it is assumed that whatever the VTM says is also what HFY says. And yet no one goes so far as to say that whatever the VTM says is also what Jim Roselando, the Futshan Jing Mo, Yip Chun, Yip Ching, David Peterson, and John Crescione say.

3. The VTM has stated (as has HFY) numerous times that the HFY organization and the VTM are NOT identical. Yes, there is overlap. But one is not the other.

4. The VTM has made statements like the one I posted above, in online articles and in public statements. We are all human, all passionate, and all prone to imperfection. We also recognize that and try to set the record straight.

If someone has a problem with something that Gee Sifu has directly stated, or that has been stated to be the "official" HFY position, that's one thing. To my knowledge, this has NEVER been the case.

If someone has a problem with what the VTM has stated, take it up with the VTM. They will be happy to share why they feel the way they do. About whatever they have made statements about.

If someone has a problem with what an individual has stated, take it up with the individual.

It is silly to go after someone because of what their cousin did. Silly. To say that the VTM = HFY in all ways without including everyone affiliated with the VTM (those mentioned above) is faulty logic and illustrates the true intent. It either applies to EVERYONE, or it does not apply. Also, to continue down this path without acknowledging the efforts that have been made to rephrase (the bold above) illustrates that people are just picking and choosing what they address and do not address.

It has been stated that TWC had some growing pains with the way they related to other WC IN THE PAST. Changes were made, everyone has moved on, and we are all the better for it. From what I have read, people feel or have felt the same way about the VTM. The VTM has tried to rephrase and move on. Since we all moved passed this in regards to TWC, can we not move past it here. We, again, will surely all be better off by doing it.

But hey, it's a free country (or countries, as it were, given the international nature of this forum), so if you have an issue with what a person (or organization) has said, talk to the person (or organization). But don't equate distinct entities (even entities with overlap) as being 100% one in the same. As in all organizations and families, opinions may vary. HFY has NEVER, to my knowledge, taken an official position on any of this. They have never claimed anything other than "this is our oral history as handed down in our lineage." Much like MANY MANY other lineages.

And really, with regards to this whole HFY/TWC thing, both Sifus (Cheung and Gee) have stated that they have never met. So to state or imply otherwise is basically to state or imply that both gentlemen are liars, and neither of them deserve that.

-Levi

[Wayfaring]

This is where the concept of TIME has a very important application. I will probably be spending most of my time operating on a smaller east-west plane at a very close distance to the opponent - because the outside path won't help him loop around me IN TIME to stop himself from getting hit or kicked.

4) As for high positions - in theory the line still exists...but again, from a very close distance I can focus on going straight in and not be too concerned about some looping overhand strike - because the opponent is too far out of his own Central Line to be able to hit me IN TIME before I hit him.

If, on the other hand, he were standing some 4 feet away or more, for example, when he tries an overhand shot that starts out looping outside of the "exact" Central line boundaries as they are defined within the TWC SLT, I would have no choice but to have to deal with it - ie.- defend against it with a high bong sao or a high bil sao, or perhaps some footwork, or whatever...since he might be INSIDE my central line parameters too quickly for me to just go forward and strike. So the concept of speed - as it relates to TIME - must be taken into account as well. My eyes must tell me on a split-second how long will it take for his outside-the-Centraline strike to make it inside and therefore be a threat.

As for below the waist: it's still the same east-west parameters but preferably (and again this will be TIME and SPACE dependent)...preferably I'm using legs against legs in attack and defense.

Victor,

I'm starting to pick up the idea that some of what you talk about central lines may share some similarities with how we deal with facing. Honestly, I don't think I have a good grasp on what you mean by central lines yet over discussions and your writeups. I'm going to go over a few of your posts on it and see if I can get a better picture.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Glad to hear that, Wayfaring. And feel free to ask any questions about it that pop into your head, like Levi did.

[taltos]

Parlati Sifu,

That makes sense. And I agree with what you said about heights. While the central line (or facing, or whatever it is called in each system) extends up and down and forward into infinity, it is only the heights and ranges that bring you into actual danger that needs to be addressed. And ditto about the very lower heights... the legs are much closer, and thus much more suited to address issues in those areas (that it, while you are still in an upright position of course).

Thanks for the info! Much appreciated.

-Levi

[Alan Orr]

http://www.mengsofaz.com/currentarti...omparisons.htm

Among other things, this article states...

If the museum has introduced information in a manner that has been perceived as offensive to other lineages, we apologize. It has never been our intent to imply a subjective value consideration to one system over another.

They also state...

Our true intent has always been the accumulation and communication of science through real experience. Since most of Wing Chun must be learned through touch and the interaction of energetics, the museum will forever insist that its staff members attain this experience hands-on rather than through written and verbal means. The traditional Shaolin phrase for this type of learning is “Hau Chuen San Sau” meaning “face-to-face” and there is great wisdom in the need for it.

Truth in a martial system cannot be ascertained by dissertations and written or verbal treatises. Truth must be discovered by touch.

Here is what we have:

1. SOME members of the VTM study HFY. Not all. The VT Museum website also lists the following people as contributors that have offered information on their respective lineages:

Jim Roselando, Koo Lo lineage Affairs Director
Futshan Jing Mo, China Affairs Director
Yip Chun, Historical Advisor
Yip Ching, Technical Advisor
David Peterson, Technical Advisor
John Crescione, Technical Advisor

These people do not study HFY, and have only offered information to the museum concerning their respective lineages. They did this in a spirit of sharing, and I greatly respect that willingness. But they do not automatically accept everything that the VTM says either.

2. Since members of the VTM hold a certain view, and some of those members also train HFY, it is assumed that whatever the VTM says is also what HFY says. And yet no one goes so far as to say that whatever the VTM says is also what Jim Roselando, the Futshan Jing Mo, Yip Chun, Yip Ching, David Peterson, and John Crescione say.

3. The VTM has stated (as has HFY) numerous times that the HFY organization and the VTM are NOT identical. Yes, there is overlap. But one is not the other.

4. The VTM has made statements like the one I posted above, in online articles and in public statements. We are all human, all passionate, and all prone to imperfection. We also recognize that and try to set the record straight.

If someone has a problem with something that Gee Sifu has directly stated, or that has been stated to be the "official" HFY position, that's one thing. To my knowledge, this has NEVER been the case.

If someone has a problem with what the VTM has stated, take it up with the VTM. They will be happy to share why they feel the way they do. About whatever they have made statements about.

If someone has a problem with what an individual has stated, take it up with the individual.

It is silly to go after someone because of what their cousin did. Silly. To say that the VTM = HFY in all ways without including everyone affiliated with the VTM (those mentioned above) is faulty logic and illustrates the true intent. It either applies to EVERYONE, or it does not apply. Also, to continue down this path without acknowledging the efforts that have been made to rephrase (the bold above) illustrates that people are just picking and choosing what they address and do not address.

It has been stated that TWC had some growing pains with the way they related to other WC IN THE PAST. Changes were made, everyone has moved on, and we are all the better for it. From what I have read, people feel or have felt the same way about the VTM. The VTM has tried to rephrase and move on. Since we all moved passed this in regards to TWC, can we not move past it here. We, again, will surely all be better off by doing it.

But hey, it's a free country (or countries, as it were, given the international nature of this forum), so if you have an issue with what a person (or organization) has said, talk to the person (or organization). But don't equate distinct entities (even entities with overlap) as being 100% one in the same. As in all organizations and families, opinions may vary. HFY has NEVER, to my knowledge, taken an official position on any of this. They have never claimed anything other than "this is our oral history as handed down in our lineage." Much like MANY MANY other lineages.

And really, with regards to this whole HFY/TWC thing, both Sifus (Cheung and Gee) have stated that they have never met. So to state or imply otherwise is basically to state or imply that both gentlemen are liars, and neither of them deserve that.

-Levi

Another post about nothing. Its a lot to say with no answers. This is not history.

Re your last point - no body has said how they think HFY was developed. Only questions about its close look of TWC. Cheung Sifu has many DVD's out. Its not hard to learn forms and then add stuff. I not saying thats what has happened. All I am saying is no really knows why they look the same. So, people ask questions. Simple.

[taltos]

I have not even a problem with HFY. I do have a problem with the guys in that group who always attack my teacher and have nothing to say but child like name calling.

Respectfully, If that is the case, then why even bring HFY into the discussion? Just address it to the individuals.

I am NOT meaning any ill will here, just making an observation. Engaging in tit-for-tat just accelerates the downward spiral. Sticking to the issue (and sticking to the actual people involved) keeps things on track.

I am reminded of what is trying to happen here with Parlati Sifu explaining some TWC things. By sticking to the topic, and sticking to the people involved, it has managed to limp on in spite of all this other stuff and there has actually been some good stuff as a result.

-Levi

[taltos]

Why does HFY not put some clips up for people to see?

Because that is what Gee Sifu has asked for, and while we are all free individuals, we have decided to honor his wishes.

-Levi

[Alan Orr]

Once again, I would like to remind Alan, on one hand, and some of the HFY guys on the other hand, that the best way to find out about just how close the connections may (or may not) be between HFY and TWC is through a very thorough examination of the systems themselves.

If you really want to find something out about this Alan, beyond what we already know about the alleged histories of the two systems, and beyond the personality problems that some of us have had in the past (and surely I've had plenty to say about Benny Meng in the past, as you may recall)...

the best way, Alan, is to ignore the posts that are criticizing you, or Robert, or whatever.

Just ignore it. Who cares what some people may think about you or Robert?

Who cares what I really think about Benny Meng?

Who cares what some HFY guys may think about me?

BUT AN EXAMINATION OF THE TWO SYSTEMS FOR REASONS OF COMPARISON IS UNDENIABLY SOMETHING THAT INTERESTS MANY, MANY PEOPLE.

Don't you agree?

Hi Victor

I agree with you.

You and I may not always agree 100%, but we can always chat and debate. I am also sure when we get a chance to meet up we will train we will bang heads have some fun then go for a drink. Thats because we have nothing to hide or worry about.

I have since TWC and Cheung Sifu first hand, also my teacher has a good understanding of his methods. I have seen some HFY and read the book. So, from that I had some questions. Simple.

These things have nothing to do with my teacher at all. Its just the HFY way to redirect the questions away and not answer them.

Maybe you should ask! It will in interesting to see if they will answer you. As you see they are now trying to be nice to you. Why is that? Another good HFY plan.

Best

Alan

[taltos]

a lot to say with no answers

No answers to your questions, perhaps. But I wasn't trying to answer your questions. I was trying to point out something that may allow us to compartmentalize our opinions and keep from having our opinions for one organization cloud our opinions on another. Here in the US we're in an election year, so clouding the issues is all day, every day on TV, and it gets real old real fast.

I was only trying to bring an end to this "internet BS." Like you have mentioned that you and Meng Sifu tried to do. THAT was my intent, not a treatise on HFY and TWC. I have NEVER seen a single TWC form to completion, online or otherwise, have never attended a TWC seminar, read a TWC book, watched a TWC video, so I really an in NO place to even address your questions since they are HFY and TWC specific.

Sorry if my intent wasn't clear.

-Levi

[Alan Orr]

No answers to your questions, perhaps. But I wasn't trying to answer your questions. I was trying to point out something that may allow us to compartmentalize our opinions and keep from having our opinions for one organization cloud our opinions on another. Here in the US we're in an election year, so clouding the issues is all day, every day on TV, and it gets real old real fast.

I was only trying to bring an end to this "internet BS." Like you have mentioned that you and Meng Sifu tried to do. THAT was my intent, not a treatise on HFY and TWC. I have NEVER seen a single TWC form to completion, online or otherwise, have never attended a TWC seminar, read a TWC book, watched a TWC video, so I really an in NO place to even address your questions since they are HFY and TWC specific.

Sorry if my intent wasn't clear.

-Levi

Sure. I can see you are trying to clear the air. All good. I tried that and Benny did agree after we met that was the best way forward. Of late some of your group has started the whole thing again. Sad but true.

Anyway, my questions are still of interest to others and where asked in order to understand the background of HFY as they say they are the original wing chun.

The other BS stuff is just for the weak minded people. BFD.

My best to you Levi

Alan

[canglong]

Originally posted by Alan Orr
Good post Keith. The HFY guys hate being asked anything, but they like to talk alot. I have never add any problem with TWC or any other branch of wing chun. I have not even a problem with HFY. I do have a problem with the guys in that group who always attack my teacher and have nothing to say but child like name calling.

What we hate is answering the same stupid questions over and over again that come from a group that has more to answer for than anyone else. Alan you need to resolve the fact that your Sifu produced a book which research says Wing Chun comes from Shaolin but he himself believes in some White Crane theory. Just because Robert doesn't like the answers he keeps sending your dumb puppet @ss out to ask them over and over again. You haven't had any problems with TWC. This is not about you this is about a Sifu out of control. You would not even be here were it not for Robert Chu sending you, Terence and others out to see how long you can drag out a thread on KFO for his sick twisted benefit every time he gets a wild hair up his @ss here come the trolls like clock work. A leopard like Robert Chu has not changed his spots since he began feuding with Randy Williams, William Cheung, Moy Yat, Lei Mu Shan, and many others and not even Victor will dispute that.

There are honest answers to honest questions all over this forum if a person is willing to look and take some initiative they can learn a lot of things. There are also bait and switch questions all over this forum and anyone watching knows that when HFY is involved those questions always always without exception come from the same d@mn group of Robert Chu cronies. This type of crap does not happen by accident. There is no denying that Robert Chu has been attacking HFY since it was introduced to the public and people like Victor have taken the bait and joined in on that attack without ever understanding the facts. It just even so happens that in this particular thread Robert was gracious enough to bless us with his presence. This thread just as predicted is now living proof that John Crecione's question was never sincere or honest!

Alan you and Victor don't recognize the answer because you refuse to call a punch a punch and a kick a kick All WING CHUN COMES FROM THE SAME SOURCE There are similarities that will always exist and if you throw in White Crane of course you will needlessly make things harder than need be and confusing. After 1850 there exist at least 2 branches of Wing Chun that of Wong Wa Bo/ Leung Yee Tai and that of Hung Gun Biu and the Boxer Society. This explains why some things may now look different. Arguing over the differences you don't study is a waste of time that you and Victor are now engaged in at the moment which is just silly and equivalent to trolling to those that understand the facts.

So again Gwai Ma is present in all southern martial arts in some form or another. Gwai Ma is more a term emphasizing the use of the knee but more times than not any specific use because it is a general term. Any system which emphasizes tin yaan dei as Hung Fa Yi does and being a southern martial art will utilize Gwai Ma but it will not be specific to the Bui Jee level because again it is a general term.

[reneritchie]

FWIW - And daring to return to the original topic, Gwai Ma is technically not in any of the forms in YKS/SN WCK (not in SLT, CK, BJ, HJ, etc.), it's in an extension to the second of the 12 free hands (Side Punch is extended into Kneeling Side Punch, which is also a heckuva leg workout...)

[Alan Orr]

What we hate is answering the same stupid questions over and over again that come from a group that has more to answer for than anyone else. Alan you need to resolve the fact that your Sifu produced a book which research says Wing Chun comes from Shaolin but he himself believes in some White Crane theory. Just because Robert doesn't like the answers he keeps sending your dumb puppet @ss out to ask them over and over again. You haven't had any problems with TWC. This is not about you this is about a Sifu out of control. You would not even be here were it not for Robert Chu sending you, Terence and others out to see how long you can drag out a thread on KFO for his sick twisted benefit every time he gets a wild hair up his @ss here come the trolls like clock work. A leopard like Robert Chu has not changed his spots since he began feuding with Randy Williams, William Cheung, Moy Yat, Lei Mu Shan, and many others and not even Victor will dispute that.

There are honest answers to honest questions all over this forum if a person is willing to look and take some initiative they can learn a lot of things. There are also bait and switch questions all over this forum and anyone watching knows that when HFY is involved those questions always always without exception come from the same d@mn group of Robert Chu cronies. This type of crap does not happen by accident. There is no denying that Robert Chu has been attacking HFY since it was introduced to the public and people like Victor have taken the bait and joined in on that attack without ever understanding the facts. It just even so happens that in this particular thread Robert was gracious enough to bless us with his presence. This thread just as predicted is now living proof that John Crecione's question was never sincere or honest!

Alan you and Victor don't recognize the answer because you refuse to call a punch a punch and a kick a kick All WING CHUN COMES FROM THE SAME SOURCE There are similarities that will always exist and if you throw in White Crane of course you will needlessly make things harder than need be and confusing. After 1850 there exist at least 2 branches of Wing Chun that of Wong Wa Bo/ Leung Yee Tai and that of Hung Gun Biu and the Boxer Society. This explains why some things may now look different. Arguing over the differences you don't study is a waste of time that you and Victor are now engaged in at the moment which is just silly and equivalent to trolling to those that understand the facts.

So again Gwai Ma is present in all southern martial arts in some form or another. Gwai Ma is more a term emphasizing the use of the knee but more times than not any specific use because it is a general term. Any system which emphasizes tin yaan dei as Hung Fa Yi does and being a southern martial art will utilize Gwai Ma but it will not be specific to the Bui Jee level because again it is a general term.

Same old BS. My teacher has no feuds going on. This is HFY sad way to try to get others to back them up. Why? of course to avoid questions as always.

This thread was not about my teacher is was someone else asking about HFY/TWC. I only added my questions to the thread. Simple.

Tony you like to call me names and throw insults at me. Please, next time you come to the UK let me know. I will give you the chance to say it to my face.

Alan

[JPinAZ]

This is the find of post that says a lot but answers nothing. HFY 101!

BTY the chui sao event will have strikes to the head. I not sure what your point is? The event is for people interested in helping wing chun grow and gain respect in the real martial art world.

VTM and HFY, well we have never seen anything which is first hand research on this matter. It is always a point of view. That is not history at all. Its fine to have your view, but its not history Fact if you can not show it to be.

Alan

Alan, this goes both ways. I put it back on you - prove YOUR CSL lineage past Robert Chu... Impossible when the system is named after robert, and is admittedly made up by him. So your lineage is only what, 20 years old? And you question the authenticy of HFY's history and demand for proof of ligitimacy?? If this is the way you think, then you're as big an idiot as I might guess

(BTW, there is NO name calling here if you know how to read - if the shoe fits, wear it. if not, then idiot doesn't apply - an 'educated man' would see this)

[KPM]

FWIW - And daring to return to the original topic, Gwai Ma is technically not in any of the forms in YKS/SN WCK (not in SLT, CK, BJ, HJ, etc.), it's in an extension to the second of the 12 free hands (Side Punch is extended into Kneeling Side Punch, which is also a heckuva leg workout...)

Wow! A straight-forward, easily understood answer to the question: "Does YKS/SN WCK have Gwai Ma in its Biu Gee form?" No beating around the bush, no vague...all southern systems have Gwai Ma...tin yaan da...bla bla bla. Thanks Rene!