HFY History

[BPWT..]

Hi there. I agree that ALL chi sau focuses on training structure in movement and controlling space. While I only have a minute, I just wanted to clarify one distinction in case there was any confusion - HFY's Kiu Sau methods are not terms to describe what is going on in Taan/Bong/Fook chi sau. What I mean is, our kiu sau is not a method for describing terms for the actions that occur withing T/B/F chi sau, as some other arts that have kiu sau broken into action like spit/swallow, wink rise, etc as I've seen in say, Chi Sim. HFY's bridging applications of Kiu Sau and T/B/F chi sau are 2 separate platforms in our overall Chi Sau 'umbrella'. While they both do deal with a 'bridge', they are two very different applications of 'chi sau' bridging for 2 distinct timeframes with very little overlap, if any.

For example, commonly seen tan/bong/fook chi sau works from either a single hand engagement (dan chi) or 2 hands engaged (what you may call lok sau/lat sau?) - but they both work from squared-up, 'inside-the-shoulders' connected position (inside the box). HFY's Kiu Sau training on the other hand, typically starts from a no contact position focusing on single arm engagement outside-the-box working to the edge of the box and sometimes getting into 2 arm contact. But they are 2 different focuses on mechanics, contact points, leverage, position and range, not to mention the separate Heaven/Human/Earth concepts and strategies/tactics that apply to one or the other (sure, some of these concepts do overlap).
As has been pointed out earlier, without direct sharing in person, words only go so far, but hopefully this helps in drawing a distinction between HFY's T/B/F Chi Sau and HFY's Kiu Sau!

Thanks for sharing further I think I get what you're saying. To add some clarification from my end too:

When I say T/B/F Chi Sau, I refer to the rolling action with forward pressure (we call this Poon Sau in LTWT). The Kiu Sau element doesn't happen in the roll (I think you know that but I explain it just to be clear). It is what happens when we initiate attacks from Poon Sau.

For example, the first attack sequence in the first Chi Sau section, from the roll, is a Com Na Sau method (in this case one hand pulling and the other hand pushing your partner's arms). This use of two forces momentarily locks up their shoulder, aiding the attack that you then issue - a palm strike. So a simple jamming method. When you issue the palm strike your other hand utilises the 'locked up shoulder' by sealing. Your partner defends against the sealing with a Lan Sau or Kau Sau (depending ) which is a way of leading, and deals with the palm strike by using a Jum Sau, which sinks but most importantly moves forward to the other person's centre. So it is intercepting/cutting. This opening movement's attack and defence is simple and quick, and utilises (from both people) forward pressure and stick/contact. But even in these simple motions you are learning Kiu Sau methods of jamming, sealing, leading and intercepting/cutting.

Of course there is stepping and shifting happening to.

When I say we use Kiu Sau methods in Lat Sau, I'm not meaning Luk Sau. Our Lat Sau starts with no contact - typically both people stand with Wu Sau and Man Sau, and then the distance is closed as one person enters and attacks. So just like you were describing, this starts as a no contact position and then typically moves into a single arm engagement and sometimes, in fact often, then leads to 2 arm contact. I say 'often', as we are usually looking to strike and control and while it is preferable to do this with a single arm, often two are required.

We don't talk, in LTWT, about Heaven/Human/Earth but we do divided the body up in a standard (well, I think it is standard), way - levels and gates, etc. Like in this pic.

[Savi]

BPWT, I follow and relate to your explanations, as it has much in common with my education and practice in Moy Yat VT. As you describe Kiu methods like “shear, pull, slice, swallow, etc…” that type of language goes more towards the qualities of using techniques (or describing the actions of those) to create opportunities against your opponent, and are as descriptive as Shaolin 18 Kiu Sao, and I get it. This is where thing diverge with how things work in HFY, because that communication language is not compatible to HFY technology which means it doesn't describe what or how our technology functions. Language comes with its own baggage, and things can get too “grayscale” when describing things.

I mentioned earlier that HFY Chi Sao does not follow the roadmap I shared. HFY essentially has a different “operating system” whilst having common ground on emphasizing Centerline and structure. Over the years we have talked about HFY Heaven Human Earth (Tien Yan Dei), HFY Time Space Energy formula, Reference Point system, 3 Bridges Philosophy... why? Square one. That is where you start if you are really interested to learn about HFY.

Looking at your diagram, and thank you for sharing that, it appears that in your WT there are 4 zones with 3 levels? Am I looking at that correctly? Two high zones and two low zones while the high zone is divided into 4 levels, or are your 3 levels 3 "gates" with a left and right side? Or do you count them as 6? How is it interpreted?

In HFYWCK, our structures and spatial concepts are driven by two idioms:
“Three Point One Line, Establish Original Nature” and “Five Ways and Six Gates, Influence the Universe”

Our designations of space and structure are different than your diagram, though may look the same at first glance!

[Savi]

HFY’s Siu Nim Tau opening movements illustrate how we center both wrists onto the Centerline at three key points (head, chest, waistline) up and down the centerline. Not only is this an extension of HFY Heaven Human Earth theory and HFY Reference Point theory, but it details the acknowledgement of the high middle and low gates of the body. In Non-HFYWCK branches you won’t typically find the arms going above the shoulders when doing the opening of the form. With all due respect, TWC does raise the hands above the shoulders when the arms cross which is similar to HFY, although in videos you can see there are structural and theoretical differences. Structurally, TWC crosses the forearms like an X-shape through the centerline, and does this to express their Central Line theory (which does not exist in HFY).

Though the “pattern” of crossing the arms (wrists or forearms) through the centerline is generally common in WC, the reasons in each branch can vary greatly. In HFY, we cross the arms at the wrists forming more of a triangular “V” shape at each of the 3 bounds of the Centerline. This illustrates how we set up our foundational Jong Sao structure for the purpose of HFY’s Occupying Space concept and TYD theory (Structure concept married to Time and Space concept) to the Center Line. To occupy space is to not chase or address the opponent’s hands, but to address specific areas of space for interception; places of defined height/width/depth for structural placement, for more advantageous positioning of hands and elbows as defined by our concepts. This also comes from the military’s influence of the art: battle formation. Or you can use the analogy of playing zone defense instead of “one on one” in basketball. It’s tactical.

In the opening sequence of the HFY SNT form, you will see both wrists stay tracked to the centerline up from the head down to the waistline. How we Chi Sao is driven by this purpose for how we engage in combative form forces the opponent to earn the Chi Sao – presenting a foundationally structured Jong Sao to the High Gate, as opposed to using/offering Tan Bong Fook to the opponent to bridge. This very idea is central to determining whether you Spar or Chi Sao when the distance/gap closes. Our Tan Sao Bong Sao Fook Sao are not based on sensitivity training; rather, are given rise through the HFY Time Space Energy formula and within that the Reference Point theory to Occupy Space first.

[Savi]

How we approach Kiu Sao in HFY is no different than any other subject in the art, but the foundation is where we begin (HFY’s Tien Yan Dei, Time Space Energy formula, Reference Point theory, Saam Mo Kiu) developing kung fu. Depending on the subject to be trained, the history and background of the technology is typically taught first, the strategy tactic and nature of the technology, and how we go about training follows our HFY Saam Mo Kiu (3 Connecting Bridges) philosophy in translating “drill skill” into “combat skill”.

In HFY, I can point to more than half a dozen different “subjects” within the body of our Kiu Sau subsystem for long and short range combat. Again, not the same language or method as Shaolin 18 Kiu Sao. While Kiu Sao has its own “rolling arms” platform, it is dynamically different from Tan Bong Fook Chi Sao. Different mechanics, different toolsets, different usage of range and space. One example for the difference between Kiu Sao and Chi Sao is that Kiu Sao technology does not utilize the Fook Sao tool, which in HFY, is a close/short range tool. Fook Sao is not appropriate for the realm of Kiu Sao Faat.

Also, I don’t find much common ground at all between HFY methodology and the video you posted of Alan’s work. Our Kiu Sao doesn’t mesh into his ideology or how he works with ranges. HFY structures, mechanics, energies, and usage of space are all vastly different. That’s pretty much what I can tell you about that.

[Savi]

On some interesting historical notes, one of our member’s uncle has been a longtime disciple of the late GM Wai Yan of Chi Sim Weng Chun. Chuck’s uncle spent more than 30 years with his Sifu Wai Yan and reported to us during one of our Kung Fu Tong research trips that GM Wai Yan did in fact know Leung Bik and frequently had dim sum on Hong Kong island with him. GM Wai Yan described to him Leung Bik’s Wing Chun as well, stating that Leung Bik used a lot of kicks, even high kicks, and his hands were solid, strong, and fast. To me, I can agree from the description it sounds more like TWC from what I have seen from them. Since TWC gives credit to Yip Man and YM to Leung Bik and Leung Bik up to Wong Wah Bo, then Leung Bik is a part of the legacy of the Opera Society Wing Chun’s history and heritage.

Earlier this year, Sifu Billy Lau shared his recent experiences over on FB, about his training with our Sifu. He met a man who knew our Sifu back during the 1970’s and both he and Billy got to exchange some kung fu!

“I first would like to give thanks to Sifu Grandmaster Garrett Gee for a wonderful training session on Wednesday morning August 28th, 2013 this past week as we trained rigorously for several hours at the St. Mary’s Square park near San Francisco Chinatown in California. I am personally extremely grateful and appreciate the dedication coming from an authentic Grandmaster offering this type of personalized old Kung Fu tradition of Hou Cheun Sun Sou passing on the art of Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kuen.

While we continued to train, I had the fortunate opportunity to have met Richard Ng who was just walking through the park and happens to be an old timer acquaintance of Sifu Gee. Richard Ng had practiced nearly 30+ years in the art of Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu and has known Sifu Gee back in the 1970’s when Sifu Gee first taught in the Chinatown location. Richard Ng ended up sparring with me while we were practicing and even though he was much taller than I with better physique, I was able to utilize the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu Jeet Kiu and Sam Ton Dai Gai on three range interceptions against his Choy Lay Fut Kung Fu.

So suddenly I realized the beauty once again of the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu System of how clear it is that no matter what type of martial arts people learn for extended periods of time, once they utilize outside the box concepts in combat, they violate the true harmony of nature’s Time Space and Energy existence and fall into the category of power, muscle and speed training maneuvering in and out trying to land a lucky punch or strike against me. The advantages we uphold with the unique Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu structure, Sup Ming Dim, Bai Jong, Jeet Kiu and Sam Ton Dai Gai including 3 range execution of Jun Ging and Ton Ging was enough for me to mitigate all incoming blows while kicking him once in the knee knocking him unstable and pushing him back several times with Ng Mui Ying Jong Faat.

Richard was a good sport and even though he has trained more than 30+ years ago and has met Sifu Gee back in the 1970‘s, he never had the opportunity to experience Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu in the past. It is his “Fate”, that after he experienced the sparring match today and personally seeing how Sifu Gee trains me privately, he strongly identifies the uniqueness of the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu System and even though he has 30 something years experience under his belt from another Kung Fu Style, he requested to train with Sifu Gee and I every Wednesdays and learn the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu System.”

Sifu Billy also was very fortunate enough to come across another particular person from the San Francisco community during that afternoon.

“After lunch, all three of us ended up passing by an art gallery. While exploring the paintings, Sifu Gee bumped into yet another old timer acquaintance by the name of Gary Lau, a renowned artist in Chinese Caligraphy Art along with Wu Mo who was the Art Gallery owner. We had an on the spot gathering which Gary Lau, Sifu Gee along with Richard Ng shared some remarkable historical events with me, that happened at this same art gallery location back in the 1980’s as they all witnessed one of the artists called Nancy Song who was also Sifu Gee’s Si Jea passed on a message to Sifu Gee from our SiGung Dr. Wang Ming telling Sifu Gee about his Naturalization and moving situation. I had the luxury to witness also many accounts of Sifu Gee in real street fighting combat in the earlier days while teaching in the Chinatown Circuit.

In the early days from 1975 thru the 1980’s it was not that simple being a Kung Fu Instructor. There were constant challenges whether on the street or in the studio or Kwoon. Richard Ng started sharing of actual events involving Sifu Garrett Gee. One such event was personally witnessed by Richard Ng himself in front of the parking lot of Lion’s restaurant by which Sifu Gee along with only one other student single-handedly took on 10 guys as self defense and defeated all 10 guys to the ground.

On another incident, it was also told that Sifu Gee to have defeated one of the Martial Arts Leading Instructor’s in front of a clan of about 30 Martial Artists and practitioners when Sifu Gee was being challenged to Chi Sao. The important highlight of this afternoon isn’t about hearing how Sifu Gee defeated all the following individuals in such incidents, or defeating this individual Martial Arts Leading Instructor, but rather how during the time Sifu Gee knocked him backwards and was about to fall on the floor, Sifu Gee grabbed him and pulled him back as to not allow this instructor to lose face in front of all his students and through great Kung Fu Honor and Compassion to develop the kind of respect for a Kung Fu Man.

Many stories were told and collaborated as I heard one story at a time of real life street combat situations recollected from actual people and events that really occurred. From one event or story to the next I had a much clearer understanding of the character and person that Sifu Grandmaster Garrett Gee was. He is truly a very compassionate person and that being a Kung Fu Sifu isn’t a simple matter in those days and must require you to be ready for combat in any given moment of time.”

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Savi;1265957]On some interesting historical notes, one of our member’s uncle has been a longtime disciple of the late GM Wai Yan of Chi Sim Weng Chun. Chuck’s uncle spent more than 30 years with his Sifu Wai Yan and reported to us during one of our Kung Fu Tong research trips that GM Wai Yan did in fact know Leung Bik and frequently had dim sum on Hong Kong island with him. GM Wai Yan described to him Leung Bik’s Wing Chun as well, stating that Leung Bik used a lot of kicks, even high kicks, and his hands were solid, strong, and fast. To me, I can agree from the description it sounds more like TWC from what I have seen from them. Since TWC gives credit to Yip Man and YM to Leung Bik and Leung Bik up to Wong Wah Bo, then Leung Bik is a part of the legacy of the Opera Society Wing Chun’s history and heritage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ip Man identifies Leung Bik as his post Chan wah Son teacher. That does not exclusively refer to TWC.

[BPWT..]

Thanks, Savi, JP.

Yes, I am sure there are many differences between our systems and their approaches - and thanks for sharing, it's helped quite a bit. Really hoping to add to that when you've recorded the video footage you talked about.

The pic I posted is fairly old, from Leung Ting's Wing Tsun Kuen book published in 1978. It is okay for what it is, but doesn't show 'depth' for the viewer, so doesn't show how in, for example, a Man Sau + Wu Sau, we'd also define two ranges (in Man Sau: hand to elbow; and in Wu Sau: hand to shoulder). But it gives a general idea.