1850"s Spam

[GlennR]

Hi Guys

Im probably out of line starting this thread ,as i dont post a lot here anymore, but i feel somewhat compelled to start this.

Ive just commented on a post by dlcox and ill paste it here again as a reference point.....

Hi Guys,

I understand what you saying and even where Hendrik is coming from, but honestly, enough is enough. How many people from Yip Man's line goes on about their advanced version of SLT, because some lines have one. With this I'm not talking about William Cheung's version but an actual alternate version that contains turning and a small section similar to Chum Kiu, this was taught to some early Foshan students. I've seen it, I've even "practiced" it but will not make claims that it is "original" WC from 1850. I understand what Hendrik is trying to bring across, but if you look closely the agenda is still there. All this DNA and engine talk is just semantics IMO. I can appreciate variety and nuance the same as anyone else, but to hop up on the soap box and reiterate the same dribble over and over is getting redundant. I will give Hendrik credit for his research he does a good job at uncovering WC's past but it all seems to lead into the DNA & engine thing and how a 150-200 years ago it was completely different and how so much has been lost. Nothing has been lost, people just want to believe that they have in their possession something that no one else has. Wing Chun for what it is, is complete and lacks nothing that isn't necessary. I'm pretty sure as an art that visually it hasn't changed much from it's conception. It's only visually different within the lines that have other influences whether they admit it or not ex: Pao Fa Lien, Chan Family, Tang Family, Cho Family, etc....See where I'm coming from, look into it for yourselves only the lineages with obvious other art influences make unverified claims and promote an alternate spin on the history to justify their innovations. Nothing wrong with mixing it up, that's how things evolve after all, just admit to it. Doesn't matter if it happened yesterday or 200 years ago. Even Hendrik admitted that someone in Cho family altered SLT with Choy Lay Fut, could of happened 175 years ago and for all I know that's when the Kuen Kuit was written. Whose to say that their Kuen Kuit wasn't codified after the alterations were made and that's why they have a description for all the moves in SLT. Kuen Kuit proves absolutely nothing other than someone took the time to write their understanding of the art down, it is not a certificate of authenticity by any means.

I can appreciate the relevance of how the formal salutation of Cho family coincides with Hung Mun practices and how that fits in with the performance of the opera. That is interesting, irrelevant but interesting none-the-less. I get it that it's a window to the past and what the art may or may not have looked like back then. But that is still only one version, it's a linear view. There is no absolute proof that Wing Chun was one long form, 3 forms or simply San Sik in it's originality. Truth is all 3 methods were probably used interchangeably and at roughly the same time. My argument from the very beginning is.........With so many branches how could such as huge and integral part of the art be completely forgotten and overwritten as Hendrik, Sergio and others suggest with this "DNA & Engine" theory? It's bullsh!t, nothing more than a shameless ruse of self promotion and anyone who is stupid enough to blindly believe in it obviously hasn't learned any Wing Chun that is worth a d@mn. I don't care what Great Grand Poo Pah of WC you learned from, if you believe this "theory" you didn't learn sh!t.

Now, im known as a Hendrik sceptic ,to say the least, but im actually directing this post (and above comments) to the people that agree with him.

So, here we go......... and im asking this in all seriousness.

Reading dlcox's post, what can you (as a supporter of Hendriks theories) offer as a counter to his above statement. In other words, what can you show us or tell us to back Hendriks claims?

Ill be honest, im posting this out of frustration at his selfish spamming of the forum to push his ideas.
I know a lot of people are sick of it, in particular when he jumps on a thread and starts twisting it into another 1850 thread.

So guys tell me, are people like me wrong?

Or are you guys seeing something i dont?

[BPWT..]

Regarding history and origins of the art, I try to stay out of the discussions as I know very little about this and, for all I know, Hendrik may be correct.

My only beef with the man is the language he, and indeed Sergio too, uses to tell us they are 'reintroducing' things to WCK that have been 'lost/forgotten/misunderstood or misinterpreted, etc.'

What Hendrik refers to as force flow, momentum handling, seven bows, etc, are IMO in lots of people's WCK. In that sense, I fully agree with dlcox.

[GlennR]

Regarding history and origins of the art, I try to stay out of the discussions as I know very little about this and, for all I know, Hendrik may be correct.

My only beef with the man is the language he, and indeed Sergio too, uses to tell us they are 'reintroducing' things to WCK that have been 'lost/forgotten/misunderstood or misinterpreted, etc.'

What Hendrik refers to as force flow, momentum handling, seven bows, etc, are IMO in lots of people's WCK. In that sense, I fully agree with dlcox.

My sentimemst are similar BP.

By all means put forward YOUR views on History, but don't belittle other folks WC as "incomplete"

Oh, unless you can prove otherwise.

[KPM]

Well, I don't know that I would call myself an "Hendrik supporter." I still think he is absolutely wrong with his idea that KLPSWCK can't train the same "gong" within our San Sik as is trained in the SLT form. And I think he is absolutely wrong when he says that since KLPSWCK has no SLT form as a whole that it is somehow incomplete.

But....the idea of "DNA" I think is valid. Going back to my long drawn out argument/discussion on the other thread about HFY......Looking at the similarities between systems of Wing Chun is essentially looking at their "DNA." That's how one can see the difference between the "Red Boat" lineages and HFY as a "Hung Society" lineage. Joy will tell you that there are signature moves that identifies different lineages within Yip Man WCK. Those signature moves are part of that lineage's "DNA."

The idea of an "engine" is also valid. Different systems have different biomechanics that are used to generate power. The "engine" of WCK is different and distinguished from the "engine" of Karate or Tai Chi or Ba Gua or Jiu Jitsu or Boxing, etc.

So Glen I guess you'll have to be more specific about which of Hendrik's claims you want backed up.

[GlennR]

So Glen I guess you'll have to be more specific about which of Hendrik's claims you want backed up.

;

That what he preaches is the original, and that to be "complete" you should follow his theories

He draws any circumstantial evidence to back his claims, like walking into that temple in China, seeing something about small knives society or something like that and... hey bingo... theres the proof!
Its nonsense Keith the way he cherry picks evidence.
He then claims of it being verified by experts, but they are just people with the same agenda/ideas.

So, point 1, the history.

Point 2, the outcomes.
He keeps going on about transformation, complete and so on, so id like to see an example of someone that is simply better at Wc having adopted these methods.

So there is the 2 things, and i want to know WHY folks believe him?!

[KPM]

That what he preaches is the original, and that to be "complete" you should follow his theories

---Can't help with that one. You saw my views on his idea of what is "complete" above.

So, point 1, the history.

---I think the idea that Wing Chun came from a fusion of White Crane and a Snake style is solid. But what kind of historical proof would there be? A document stating "I, Ng Mui created Wing Chun after studying White Crane and Emei Snake"?? There are no "smoking guns." But the legends suggest that this is true. Watching a fight between a Snake and a Crane to gain inspiration is just a metaphor for the system coming from this origin. The link with White Crane should be pretty obvious, given the many similarities we share. The Snake link is a bit more tenuous, but good people have been exposed to Emei Snake and say they see the similarities as well.

Point 2, the outcomes.
He keeps going on about transformation, complete and so on, so id like to see an example of someone that is simply better at Wc having adopted these methods.

----Good point! Rather than all his speeches, I would rather see Hendrik post some youtube footage of what he is saying in action....showing how it works and not just talking about it. He needs to show people applying it in a 2 man format.

So there is the 2 things, and i want to know WHY folks believe him?!

---Like I said, I only believe part of what he has been saying. No one has to be a "Hendrik convert" and buy into the whole package. I believe some of his historical points because it does match what people like Rene Ritchie, Robert Chu, and Jim Roselando have concluded as well. I believe some of his biomechanical points because it does match with good power generation and "force handling" from a biomechanical standpoint. Like any of us, I think Hendrik has a tendency to overstate his case much of the time. This comes across as an "agenda." But really, he has nothing financial to gain. Reputation-wise he comes here and ****es people off on a regular basis, so that can't be the motivation. He isn't trying to build a student base or big organization like Sergio. Heck, does he even have regular students? I think Hendrik just has ideas he wants to share for some validation. That may be an ego thing, but not in a bad way. Everyone wants to have their ideas and opinions validated to some extent. Anyway, just my 2 cents. Probably doesn't help much.

[Paddington]

[...]

So guys tell me, are people like me wrong?

Or are you guys seeing something i dont?

I don't think you are wrong on many points GlennR. Hendrik is spamming the boards and it is understandable given what must be his heightened emotional state over this period, due to all the social drama in which he is entangled. I am not privy to all the drama but if he is a practicing Buddhist, perhaps he should engage in some introspection and consider what he is overly attaching himself to.

As KPM notes, a lot of what he says is already practiced. For example the idea of 'the bows' is in Ip Chun wing chun albeit, in my experience, not openly taught in the 'average' lesson. However, there are things Hendrik has said and introduced me to that are new, useful to my training needs and good food for thought. Personally, I avoid any of the claims to 'origins' and I think it a huge error on Hendrik's behalf to associate himself with Sergio. Oh what a tangled web we weave and all that.

[Hendrik]

I don't think you are wrong on many points GlennR. Hendrik is spamming the boards and it is understandable given what must be his heightened emotional state over this period, due to all the social drama in which he is entangled. I am not privy to all the drama but if he is a practicing Buddhist, perhaps he should engage in some introspection and consider what he is overly attaching himself to.

As KPM notes, a lot of what he says is already practiced. For example the idea of 'the bows' is in Ip Chun wing chun albeit, in my experience, not openly taught in the 'average' lesson. However, there are things Hendrik has said and introduced me to that are new, useful to my training needs and good food for thought. Personally, I avoid any of the claims to 'origins' and I think it a huge error on Hendrik's behalf to associate himself with Sergio. Oh what a tangled web we weave and all that.

Almost Forget to rely this.



I sure has attachment .
My biggest attachment is attached to public minded and do everything to make sure Wck 1850 data is known , so everyone is equally inform in details.


Finally, I must say one thing about Sergio,
he dare to say " if we go far enough we all are one Wck family" and share what he knows and experience .
Based on that I have no regret to share and associate with him.

Who is perfect? And who actually try to do something in return for the wcners?



How many dare to say what Sergio says?
instead of saying ," my grandmaster has it all, my lineage has it too, my lineage is complete Wck.., my lineage is the most original ...etc"

I associate with any wcners who do good for Wck all lineages equal, all my research information can be shared as presently many took them and verify with their own sources directly.

It is about the future of Wck nothing else. Mark my words and let those wcners in 2114 see if it is the case.

[Hendrik]

Opps. The following photos got drop in my previous posts on this thread.



As in the previous fujian white crane photo

Y15合實雙掌穿心貫。
Joining the two palms drive through the heart


Hendrik In the 1998 YKSLT , LA , Sifu Robert Chu school footage

[Hendrik]

As in the previous emei photo


Ya20囘身中宮參佛手
Return ( re capture ) to the center door with Buddha counsel hands


Hendrik In the 1998 YKSLT , LA , Sifu Robert Chu school footage




Finally,
credit has to give to Cho Family who protect and preserver the YKSLT as a 1850 data point , make possible for us to study the Wck 1850. And my late sifu Cho hung choy who share the information with me and asking me to share in the west as his letter shown.

I am just a story teller who is trying to tell the story of once upon a time, red boat opera WCK.

[Paddington]

As in the previous [...]

You just can't stop posting can you? You are aware of the irony here, the title of this thread and your behaviour within it?

EDIT: Hendrik, I think you should consider diverting your discursive energies to writing a book proper rather than wasting it on discussion boards by repeating yourself. Write it in whatever language you feel most comfortable with and justify yourself, as that is what you seem to want to do, that way.

[cobra]

What he is trying to tell you can't necessarily be shown, but first you have to understand you don't know as much as you think you know, then you can learn it. You also must believe there is an easier way and be willing to spend many hours trying to figure it out.