Page 8 of 28 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 409

Thread: Latest WCI and WCK history

  1. #106
    Anyone else notice how Hendrik is not involved anymore in the several historical discussions taking place on the Wing Chun forum? Just an observation.

    Ron Goninan
    China Fuzhou Zhenlan Crane Boxing Australia
    White Crane Research Institute Inc
    http://www.whitecranegongfu.info
    A seeker of the way

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Minghequan View Post
    Anyone else notice how Hendrik is not involved anymore in the several historical discussions taking place on the Wing Chun forum? Just an observation.
    Yes, I did notice that! And I also noticed that when it was pointed out to him that he was most certainly wrong about a statement he made he neither acknowledge it, apologized, or corrected it. He simply ignored it.

  3. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    Yes, I did notice that! And I also noticed that when it was pointed out to him that he was most certainly wrong about a statement he made he neither acknowledge it, apologized, or corrected it. He simply ignored it.
    You are free to think as you like.

    However, perhaps, I just give face and not intending to proof anyone wrong?
    Silence mades everyone happy.

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, canada
    Posts
    964
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Minghequan View Post
    Anyone else notice how Hendrik is not involved anymore in the several historical discussions taking place on the Wing Chun forum? Just an observation.
    Why should he waste his time?

    I really don't get you guys, when Hendrik shares his view you get upset and argue with him, then when he is silent, you get upset with him lol.

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,781
    Ok, so if I'm reading this right Keith, are you saying what Robert is 'sharing' is that both Ip Man and William Cheung are, well, liars?
    I guess you could add Ip Man's sons to the list as well, as my first sifu has personally heard directly from both of them about their father having learned from LB as well. More 'liars'? I surely don't think that's what's being implied here is it?

    Further, why would all of these people not just say Yip Man learned form YKS if it was true vs. some made-up person and then keep telling this tale? And without any proof, why would anyone doubt them? I think Ip Man's sons and his direct students would know better than someone today that's never even met Ip Man. But really, who cares if Ip Man learned from LB anway? Unless someone has something to gain from LB not being real? Which IMO would only serve to deligitamize the whole YM lineage for someone's personal gain or promote and agenda.
    Last edited by JPinAZ; 03-26-2014 at 03:34 PM.
    What chi sau is, or isn't, or is, or wait, what is it..: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...2&postcount=90

  6. #111
    Why should he waste his time?

    I really don't get you guys, when Hendrik shares his view you get upset and argue with him, then when he is silent, you get upset with him lol.
    What don't you get? He comes on here starts threads about "His-Story" and when asked for his proof or validation of same simply ignores the questions, post something totally unrelated skipping answering the questions put to him and then when it all gets heavy, takes off!

    Ron Goninan
    China Fuzhou Zhenlan Crane Boxing Australia
    White Crane Research Institute Inc
    http://www.whitecranegongfu.info
    A seeker of the way

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, canada
    Posts
    964
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Minghequan View Post
    What don't you get? He comes on here starts threads about "His-Story" and when asked for his proof or validation of same simply ignores the questions, post something totally unrelated skipping answering the questions put to him and then when it all gets heavy, takes off!
    I know where you and Keith are coming from because I had the same opinion of Hendrik before I met him. But after meeting him, I can tell you Hendrik is one of the most generous and knowledgeable wing chun person out there. So Maybe ask him if you can visit him at some point so that you experience what he is saying first hand, once you feel it, you'll understand right away.
    Last edited by kung fu fighter; 03-26-2014 at 04:59 PM.

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by kung fu fighter View Post
    I know where you and Keith are coming from because I had the same opinion of Hendrik before I met him. But after meeting him, I can tell you Hendrik is one of the most generous and knowledgeable wing chun person out there. So Maybe ask him if you can visit him at some point so that you experience what he is saying first hand, once you feel it, you'll understand right away.
    That may be true Navin, but the fact remains that he made a completely wrong statement here and when it was pointed out to him he simply ignored it and stopped posting. He has been telling people that they are wrong about their Wing Chun for so long, but when he himself is caught in an obvious error he skips out! Surely you can see where that doesn't go over too well? If he had simply said.... "you are right! My bad! I didn't realize that is how KLPS was organized! Thanks for the info!" .... I would think much more of him. But he didn't. I had started to really get "on board" with him and have supported him here on several occasions. Robert Chu backing up his theories meant a lot. But then he turns around and makes some rather insulting comments directed at Ku Lo Pin Sun and indirectly at Fung Chun (which I'm sure he would now deny), and when it is pointed out why his opinion is wrong he bows out without apology. That doesn't sound like a very nice guy to me. If someone can't admit when they are wrong, I think that is pretty telling.

  9. #114
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Ok, so if I'm reading this right Keith, are you saying what Robert is 'sharing' is that both Ip Man and William Cheung are, well, liars?

    Not exactly "liars." I explained that above.

    I guess you could add Ip Man's sons to the list as well, as my first sifu has personally heard directly from both of them about their father having learned from LB as well. More 'liars'? I surely don't think that's what's being implied here is it?

    Yip Man's sons were not around during this period of Yip Man's training. They are simply repeating the stories that they were told.

    Further, why would all of these people not just say Yip Man learned form YKS if it was true vs. some made-up person and then keep telling this tale?

    Yuen Kay Shan was not from Yip Man's lineage. Chu Chong Man and Tang Yik were not from Yip Man's lineage. From what I understand, it would have been considered improper to go outside of one's lineage for further training. Leung Bik would have been part of Yip Man's lineage since he was supposedly Yip Man's grand-teacher's son. But I can't say that I fully understand the Chinese family/lineage traditions and politics. I'm just trying to explain what I understand about the theory that Robert Chu and others have proposed. Hunter has pointed out that there were trips to Fung Wah's gravesite to honor him. Where is Leung Bik's gravesite? Why do we not hear of trips to his gravesite to honor him?


    And without any proof, why would anyone doubt them? I think Ip Man's sons and his direct students would know better than someone today that's never even met Ip Man.

    None of them were around during this period of Yip Man's life. None of them met Leung Bik. They are just repeating a story they were told. No one has provided any factual evidence that Leung Bik actually existed other than a photograph of unknown origin and questionable authenticity. But we know Yuen Kay Shan was real. We know Chu Chong Man and Tang Yik were real. We know that Yip Man spent time with all three of them. We have Sum Nun saying that Yuen Kay Shan shared the Chi Sao rolling platform with Yip Man. We have a rival story saying that Yip Man learned from Fung Wah, not Leung Bik. So which story do we believe?


    But really, who cares if Ip Man learned from LB anway? Unless someone has something to gain from LB not being real? Which IMO would only serve to deligitamize the whole YM lineage for someone's personal gain or promote and agenda.

    I think its just for the sake of history and curiosity. Personally, I like history. The person that stood the most to gain from the Leung Bik story has already ridden that horse all the way to the bank and doesn't need it any more.
    Last edited by KPM; 03-26-2014 at 06:15 PM.

  10. #115
    I know where you and Keith are coming from because I had the same opinion of Hendrik before I met him. But after meeting him, I can tell you Hendrik is one of the most generous and knowledgeable wing chun person out there. So Maybe ask him if you can visit him at some point so that you experience what he is saying first hand, once you feel it, you'll understand right away.
    Navin, Thanks for your reply. But as Keith said, Hendrik doesn't come across as the "caring, sharing kind of guy".

    OI too started supporting Hendrik in some of his posts but when he blatantly comes on here and tells other people they have got it all wrong, that he is the only one who has got it right and that others Wing Chun is not Wing Chun .... well I lost respect for him and his message right there.

    I myself have asked him for some of his insights into certain subjects to which he has said yes only for that information never to surface which kind of leads me to hazard a guess that he doesn't want to share or he doesn't have that information and is talking up a load of bull!

    You simply6 cannot come to respect someone who constantly implies that only he has the "good oil" and that others have all got it wrong.

    Regardless of what martial arts you do that's just not good etiquette and regardless of the martial arts that kind of behavior is simply not mindful or respectful of others.

    Herein lies Hendrik's problems all of his own making!

    Ron Goninan
    China Fuzhou Zhenlan Crane Boxing Australia
    White Crane Research Institute Inc
    http://www.whitecranegongfu.info
    A seeker of the way

  11. #116
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, canada
    Posts
    964
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    But then he turns around and makes some rather insulting comments directed at Ku Lo Pin Sun and indirectly at Fung Chun (which I'm sure he would now deny), and when it is pointed out why his opinion is wrong he bows out without apology. That doesn't sound like a very nice guy to me.
    Keith everyone is entitled to their own Opinion, Hendrik included. I am pretty sure Jim Roselando Probably showed Hendrik PSWC since Jim visited him a few times.

    What was the insulting comments Hendrik directed at Ku Lo Pin Sun and indirectly at Fung Chun? I don't remember reading anything like that.
    Last edited by kung fu fighter; 03-26-2014 at 10:52 PM.

  12. #117
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by kung fu fighter View Post
    Keith everyone is entitled to their own Opinion, Hendrik included. I am pretty sure Jim Roselando Probably showed Hendrik PSWC since Jim visited him a few times.

    What was the insulting comments Hendrik directed at Ku Lo Pin Sun and indirectly at Fung Chun? I don't remember reading anything like that.
    I'm not going to rehash the whole thing. It is laid out over several threads. Essentially Hendrik said that any WCK method is incomplete without the SNT form. I pointed out to him that KLPS does not have the SNT form, and that Fung Chun would have likely not have been happy to hear Hendrik theorize that his WCK was incomplete. Hendrik essentially said "so be it that's the way it is!" Jim chimed in and pointed out that Hendrik really doesn't know much about KLPS and has never really researched it. Like you, I had assumed that Hendrik knew more about KLPS than he actually does! Related to this Hendrik also essentially said that the "gong" development from the SNT form is what is lacking or incomplete in methods that don't have the form and that this "gong" is not developed in San Sik. So I have gone into pretty extensive detail on several different threads to show what I meant by the term "San Sik" from a KLPS perspective, and how the KLPS San Sik train everything that can be trained in the full SNT form. Yet Hendrik continued to repeat his refrain that "gong does not equal San Sik" and never acknowledged my explanation of the San Sik of KLPS and never admitted that his initial impressions were wrong. In this very thread just a few posts up he said:


    However, perhaps, I just give face and not intending to proof anyone wrong?
    Silence mades everyone happy.


    Does that sound like someone ready to admit that they may have been wrong about something? Its no big deal. I'm wrong about things all the time! And I'll admit it when it happens! It just rubs me the wrong way (and evidently I'm not the only one) when someone else isn't willing to do the same!

  13. #118
    Quote Originally Posted by kung fu fighter View Post
    Keith everyone is entitled to their own Opinion, Hendrik included. I am pretty sure Jim Roselando Probably showed Hendrik PSWC since Jim visited him a few times.

    What was the insulting comments Hendrik directed at Ku Lo Pin Sun and indirectly at Fung Chun? I don't remember reading anything like that.

    I totally agree on everyone is free on their own opinion, me included.

    Jim and I being in very closed communication and sharing for almost a decade now.
    Never is there exist a case of insulting anyone or any lineages. If I insult late Gm Fung Chun, Jim will be the first one to raise the flag on me. Since Jim is directly related to and study from Gm Fung Chun.



    Gong is not San sik According to traditional Chinese martial art.
    And SNT is not just many San sik strung together , there are process development sequence steps embedded within snt set which San sik never have . That is the bottom line.
    Ancient Chinese martial art is a hundreds of year old science. I don't write that. And if one never develop gong, how can one know what is it?




    Lots of things I don't want to discuss and choose to keep in silence these days because , it is common that when some cannot face the facts, they will switch to accusation such as insult, stealing, .....etc.

    Using the guilty before proven innocent tactics just to win an arguement.

    or trying to turn others or their students to against me
    for thier own winning strategy which completely got nothing to do with the subject.
    I am not interested in such .



    My interest is to share , discuss and , present facts and realistic technical information. Not to participate in any form of cult type of believe . Or approval and control game . Or to make anyone or any lineage including myself as GOD.


    Time is a great fact teller. Just wait long enough one will see things clearly as things will settle in the coming few years.
    Last edited by Hendrik; 03-27-2014 at 12:34 PM.

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Jim and I being in very closed communication and sharing for almost a decade now.


    Yes. But Jim himself noted that you don't know much about KLPS and haven't researched it much.


    Never is there exist a case of insulting anyone or any lineages. If I insult late Gm Fung Chun, Jim will be the first one to raise the flag on me. Since Jim is directly related to and study from Gm Fung Chun.

    You said KLPS was an incomplete method of Wing Chun. I think that is a bit insulting to anyone that has spent years studying the style, let alone the majority of their life! I think that is a bit of an insult to the memory of Leung Jan Si Jo, given that KLPS is considered his final legacy and summation of his teaching. You are saying that he passed on an incomplete and therefore somehow substandard version of Wing Chun in Ku Lo village. I find that a little insulting.


    Gong is not San sik According to traditional Chinese martial art.
    And SNT is not just many San sik strung together , there are process development sequence steps embedded within snt set which San sik never have . That is the bottom line.


    Did you even read what I wrote about the KLPS approach to training and using San Sik?


    Lots of things I don't want to discuss and choose to keep in silence these days because , it is common that when some cannot face the facts, they will switch to accusation such as insult, stealing, .....etc.


    I was truly interested in how you would justify your comments as they apply to KLPSWCK, but you chose not to respond to any of my explanations or examples. That sure seems to me like it was you not "facing the facts."



    My interest is to share , discuss and , present facts and realistic technical information. Not to participate in any form of cult type of believe . Or approval and control game . Or to make anyone or any lineage including myself as GOD.

    How about just carrying on an honest discussion?...which means not avoiding other people's input and conclusions when they conflict with your own. It means answering reasonable questions when they are asked of you. It means responding to people's points.

  15. #120
    [QUOTE=hunt1;1262308]Have to disagree about Yip man history. I have a great deal of respect for Robert but he is just repeating stories.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cherry picking through hearsay aint history!!

    Also- YKS wing chun is quite different from Ip Man's wing chun---on stance, structure and turning and footwork.
    But repeated opinions that YKS taught Ip Man or that HKM did not finish his pole work with IM is just another
    opinion. But pseudo history abounds in many of these threads.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •