Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 191

Thread: On why I think Hendrik is on to something.

  1. #1

    On why I think Hendrik is on to something.

    I have little time for debates as to what is the most probable historiography for the development and emergence of wing chun. It is indeed an interesting topic but I find it foolish to devote a great amount of emotional energy into such debates.

    I met with my previous Sifu not too long ago and we talked about teaching method and at what point to introduce the idea of 'bows' or reference points for the various joints of the body. Contrary to popular belief those ideas are in Ip Man wing chun and something that I have heard and seen passed on by those good folks at the VTAA in HK, as well as through their representatives in the UK. I put it to him that one can accelerate very quickly the development of a given student by introducing the idea of 'bows' at an early stage, that is in lesson one.

    His reply to me was "Paddington, it is just too complex and we prefer to teach about triangles. They are really simple so why confuse matters with introducing a 'high level concept'?". My reply was that the idea of a triangle is actually more abstract and requires a visual reference and often students can be seen distorting their shapes as they move about to 'see' triangles in their structures or indirectly, via the use of a mirror.

    We both agreed that one of the hardest things for a beginner to come to terms with was relaxation, structure and alignment and I pointed out that by introducing the idea of the 'bows' first, one introduces focus for the mind when it comes to relaxation. It is one thing to tell someone to relax and another to point out where they need to relax.

    I argued that the idea of the 'bows' is actually a lower order concept as it relies on sensation and feeling and discovering the body. One can focus or have intent at each of the 'bows' and attempt relaxation through each of them sequentially. What is more when one looks and experiments with the alignment of bows, inasmuch as achieving good structure, the mind's focus and intent is further refined to those muscle groupings responsible and it makes it easier for students to attain the required relaxation and body sensations, to achieve good structure and actually 'feel through their bones and joints', jin flow.

    Having recently taken on a few students I experimented with delivering the basics as my previous Sifu had done with some of them and with the others, I used the idea of the bows and more meditative exercises to enhance relaxation and body sensation first. In my overly small and unrepresentative sample I found that those I took through the second path were able to progress more quickly.

    I could continue to sing the merits of Hendrik's contributions from a pedagogical perspective or even prove to you mathematically and with physics using real data, why he is right on so many other points. However, I think I will save that for an article or a small book. I am not claiming to be a Sifu nor am I saying that Hendrik's way is the best way just that for me and a few of my students, it works.

    I feel that people are giving Hendrik too much of a hard time and have not really experimented with what he suggests. Hendrik has spent a lot of time responding to my questions and even responded by making videos that directly addressed said questions. He even helped me overcome some injuries. He has never asked me for money nor asked anything of me in return but yet continued to give so freely, even when I disagreed with some of the decisions he has made. It is for these reasons that I find it hard to believe his sole intent is financial or malicious, despite the accusations of late.

    Ciao.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Paddington View Post
    I have little time for debates as to what is the most probable historiography for the development and emergence of wing chun. It is indeed an interesting topic but I find it foolish to devote a great amount of emotional energy into such debates.

    I met with my previous Sifu not too long ago and we talked about teaching method and at what point to introduce the idea of 'bows' or reference points for the various joints of the body. Contrary to popular belief those ideas are in Ip Man wing chun and something that I have heard and seen passed on by those good folks at the VTAA in HK, as well as through their representatives in the UK. I put it to him that one can accelerate very quickly the development of a given student by introducing the idea of 'bows' at an early stage, that is in lesson one.

    His reply to me was "Paddington, it is just too complex and we prefer to teach about triangles. They are really simple so why confuse matters with introducing a 'high level concept'?". My reply was that the idea of a triangle is actually more abstract and requires a visual reference and often students can be seen distorting their shapes as they move about to 'see' triangles in their structures or indirectly, via the use of a mirror.

    We both agreed that one of the hardest things for a beginner to come to terms with was relaxation, structure and alignment and I pointed out that by introducing the idea of the 'bows' first, one introduces focus for the mind when it comes to relaxation. It is one thing to tell someone to relax and another to point out where they need to relax.

    I argued that the idea of the 'bows' is actually a lower order concept as it relies on sensation and feeling and discovering the body. One can focus or have intent at each of the 'bows' and attempt relaxation through each of them sequentially. What is more when one looks and experiments with the alignment of bows, inasmuch as achieving good structure, the mind's focus and intent is further refined to those muscle groupings responsible and it makes it easier for students to attain the required relaxation and body sensations, to achieve good structure and actually 'feel through their bones and joints', jin flow.

    Having recently taken on a few students I experimented with delivering the basics as my previous Sifu had done with some of them and with the others, I used the idea of the bows and more meditative exercises to enhance relaxation and body sensation first. In my overly small and unrepresentative sample I found that those I took through the second path were able to progress more quickly.

    I could continue to sing the merits of Hendrik's contributions from a pedagogical perspective or even prove to you mathematically and with physics using real data, why he is right on so many other points. However, I think I will save that for an article or a small book. I am not claiming to be a Sifu nor am I saying that Hendrik's way is the best way just that for me and a few of my students, it works.

    I feel that people are giving Hendrik too much of a hard time and have not really experimented with what he suggests. Hendrik has spent a lot of time responding to my questions and even responded by making videos that directly addressed said questions. He even helped me overcome some injuries. He has never asked me for money nor asked anything of me in return but yet continued to give so freely, even when I disagreed with some of the decisions he has made. It is for these reasons that I find it hard to believe his sole intent is financial or malicious, despite the accusations of late.

    Ciao.
    Hi Paddington
    No one on here, that i can recall, actually said that his ideas had no merit. In fact a lot of people agreed with him on things like 7 bows etc.

    Why i think the majority of people here, me included, got our nose's of joint was his proclamation that he had discovered the "true-source-dna-lineage" of all WC.

    Thats it.

    Sure, we all make fun at his convoluted ideas and methods (the yoga ball was gold! lol), but thats not the issue............


    Its his poorly researched "history", cherry picking of evidence, the use of WC "celebrities" to back his cause, and with a final flourish........... hey presto, WC history is sorted!!!!

    If you cant see that you need to re read the 40000 pages of this as punishment

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by GlennR View Post
    Hi Paddington
    No one on here, that i can recall, actually said that his ideas had no merit. In fact a lot of people agreed with him on things like 7 bows etc.

    Why i think the majority of people here, me included, got our nose's of joint was his proclamation that he had discovered the "true-source-dna-lineage" of all WC.

    Thats it.

    Sure, we all make fun at his convoluted ideas and methods (the yoga ball was gold! lol), but thats not the issue............


    Its his poorly researched "history", cherry picking of evidence, the use of WC "celebrities" to back his cause, and with a final flourish........... hey presto, WC history is sorted!!!!

    If you cant see that you need to re read the 40000 pages of this as punishment
    At no point has a pedagogical argument been made in the affirmative with respects to quickening the rate at which wing chun can be acquired, by a student new to the art.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Paddington View Post
    At no point has a pedagogical argument been made in the affirmative with respects to quickening the rate at which wing chun can be acquired, by a student new to the art.
    Says who??

    Because it isnt on the forum it doesnt exist???

    Seriously, thats a pretty arrogant attitude

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Tainan ,Taiwan
    Posts
    388
    I also think Hendrik is on something , what ,that will remain a mystery

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by GlennR View Post
    Why i think the majority of people here, me included, got our nose's of joint was his proclamation that he had discovered the "true-source-dna-lineage" of all WC.

    Thats it.

    )
    Well then Glenn, you just need to HARDEN THE FX@K UP!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    5,714
    I don't believe Hendrik is after financial gain (though if it turned out to be possible and he didn't take advantage of it he would be an idiot) or operating from malice.

    I do not accept that he is operating from a egoless, enlightened or saintly viewpoint. He wants and demands kudos and status, and recognition that his is the purest historical path.

    He may be on to something, but I would challenge any assumption that the useful parts of it are unique and not derivative or that you couldn't get them from multiple other sources.

    Good for you that your injuries healed because (or in spite) of Hendrik's advice, but he is not qualified in this area, and some of his advice in this area is contraindicated by evidence (weight training or cardio being bad for older practitioners, etc. etc.) and has on occasion been arguably dangerous. His giving of advice in this area has on occasion been irresponsible.

    There are qualified teachers (e.g. with sports science or, if you want, TCMA, credentials from recognised institutions) out there who IMO are far better equipped to advise and coach the MA student. Some of them continue to practice themselves, unlike Hendrik, whose belief systems supposedly prevent him from doing so. Following a particular Buddhist path doesn't make you a better or wiser human being or better at TCMA, it just makes you a Buddhist, and at the root of it all Zen philosophy would probably agree.

    He might be operating from a good place, but if he expects his bullsh!t to be swallowed uncritically he should peddle it elsewhere.
    "Once you reject experience, and begin looking for the mysterious, then you are caught!" - Krishnamurti
    "We are all one" - Genki Sudo
    "We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion" - Tool, Parabol/Parabola
    "Bro, you f***ed up a long time ago" - Kurt Osiander

    WC Academy BJJ/MMA Academy Surviving Violent Crime TCM Info
    Don't like my posts? Challenge me!

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by GlennR View Post
    Says who??

    Because it isnt on the forum it doesnt exist???

    Seriously, thats a pretty arrogant attitude
    I would like to remind you that it was you that advised me to re-read all those threads because you thought that I had repeated something said before. I am sorry that I used words and terms that you might not be familiar with and I say that because your reply above indicates to me that you did not understand what I said. It was not my intent to be arrogant and I understand perfectly that when one uses terms unfamiliar to someone, that it can be interpreted as arrogance but in matter of fact is actually a defense mechanism against the charge of ignorance.

    Quote Originally Posted by anerlich View Post
    [...]
    He may be on to something, but I would challenge any assumption that the useful parts of it are unique and not derivative or that you couldn't get them from multiple other sources.
    [...]
    At no point have I said Hendrik is 'egoless' nor have I condoned his drive for status. As I made clear from the outset, I leave all that baggage to the side and it is somewhat frustrating to read some of the points you make in your reply. The part of your post I cite above says to me that you have not read my opening post in full and / or have failed to understand what I wrote. To quote myself;

    Quote Originally Posted by Paddington View Post
    [...] Contrary to popular belief those ideas are in Ip Man wing chun and something that I have heard and seen passed on by those good folks at the VTAA in HK, as well as through their representatives in the UK. I put it to him that one can accelerate very quickly the development of a given student by introducing the idea of 'bows' at an early stage, that is in lesson one.[...]
    Now, these misunderstandings have obviously antagonised some of you and it is perhaps my fault for using words and phrasing unfamiliar to you. For that I am sorry. I think as soon as people see the word 'Hendrik', a filter seems to appear over their eyes that obscures the content and major points that one is making.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    Well then Glenn, you just need to HARDEN THE FX@K UP!
    Your PM box is full KPM.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by zuti car View Post
    I also think Hendrik is on something , what ,that will remain a mystery
    I am very much interested to read your thoughts on the argument I put forwards in my opening post.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Paddington View Post
    Your PM box is full KPM.
    Ok. Thinned it out some! I think the new forum format counts your "sent messages" against you as well as saved messages. I just got rid of all the "sent messages."

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Paddington View Post
    I have little time for debates as to what is the most probable historiography for the development and emergence of wing chun. It is indeed an interesting topic but I find it foolish to devote a great amount of emotional energy into such debates.

    I met with my previous Sifu not too long ago and we talked about teaching method and at what point to introduce the idea of 'bows' or reference points for the various joints of the body. Contrary to popular belief those ideas are in Ip Man wing chun and something that I have heard and seen passed on by those good folks at the VTAA in HK, as well as through their representatives in the UK. I put it to him that one can accelerate very quickly the development of a given student by introducing the idea of 'bows' at an early stage, that is in lesson one.

    His reply to me was "Paddington, it is just too complex and we prefer to teach about triangles. They are really simple so why confuse matters with introducing a 'high level concept'?". My reply was that the idea of a triangle is actually more abstract and requires a visual reference and often students can be seen distorting their shapes as they move about to 'see' triangles in their structures or indirectly, via the use of a mirror.

    We both agreed that one of the hardest things for a beginner to come to terms with was relaxation, structure and alignment and I pointed out that by introducing the idea of the 'bows' first, one introduces focus for the mind when it comes to relaxation. It is one thing to tell someone to relax and another to point out where they need to relax.

    I argued that the idea of the 'bows' is actually a lower order concept as it relies on sensation and feeling and discovering the body. One can focus or have intent at each of the 'bows' and attempt relaxation through each of them sequentially. What is more when one looks and experiments with the alignment of bows, inasmuch as achieving good structure, the mind's focus and intent is further refined to those muscle groupings responsible and it makes it easier for students to attain the required relaxation and body sensations, to achieve good structure and actually 'feel through their bones and joints', jin flow.

    Having recently taken on a few students I experimented with delivering the basics as my previous Sifu had done with some of them and with the others, I used the idea of the bows and more meditative exercises to enhance relaxation and body sensation first. In my overly small and unrepresentative sample I found that those I took through the second path were able to progress more quickly.

    I could continue to sing the merits of Hendrik's contributions from a pedagogical perspective or even prove to you mathematically and with physics using real data, why he is right on so many other points. However, I think I will save that for an article or a small book. I am not claiming to be a Sifu nor am I saying that Hendrik's way is the best way just that for me and a few of my students, it works.

    I feel that people are giving Hendrik too much of a hard time and have not really experimented with what he suggests. Hendrik has spent a lot of time responding to my questions and even responded by making videos that directly addressed said questions. He even helped me overcome some injuries. He has never asked me for money nor asked anything of me in return but yet continued to give so freely, even when I disagreed with some of the decisions he has made. It is for these reasons that I find it hard to believe his sole intent is financial or malicious, despite the accusations of late.

    Ciao.
    I think that references to bows and triangles and chi and those sorts of concepts do not accelerate learning I think they do just the opposite and they do even worse in getting you to start thinking in the entirely wrong direction. All you need to do is look at good combat athletes and you see guys that have developed very very good skills relatively quickly without any bows or triangles or chi or such things then compare those guys with the academics that love their bows and triangles and do forth but can't do squat.

    Relaxation is easy it comes with familiarity it's no big deal.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by tc101 View Post
    I think that references to bows and triangles and chi and those sorts of concepts do not accelerate learning I think they do just the opposite and they do even worse in getting you to start thinking in the entirely wrong direction. All you need to do is look at good combat athletes and you see guys that have developed very very good skills relatively quickly without any bows or triangles or chi or such things then compare those guys with the academics that love their bows and triangles and do forth but can't do squat.

    Relaxation is easy it comes with familiarity it's no big deal.
    Thing is we are talking about wing chun and that art form. Further, I think you miss my argument as at no point do I talk about chi. I firmly root my argument in terms of body awareness and sensation and contrary to your assertion, in arts such as boxing people do struggle with relaxation. It takes time to become familiar, as you say, so my argument is very much relevant to your POV even if you do not acknowledge that.

    I am not quite sure why you bother to contribute to this wing chun forum if you believe that other combat arts are better suited to whatever your goals might be, tc101.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Paddington View Post
    I would like to remind you that it was you that advised me to re-read all those threads because you thought that I had repeated something said before. I am sorry that I used words and terms that you might not be familiar with and I say that because your reply above indicates to me that you did not understand what I said. It was not my intent to be arrogant and I understand perfectly that when one uses terms unfamiliar to someone, that it can be interpreted as arrogance but in matter of fact is actually a defense mechanism against the charge of ignorance.



    At no point have I said Hendrik is 'egoless' nor have I condoned his drive for status. As I made clear from the outset, I leave all that baggage to the side and it is somewhat frustrating to read some of the points you make in your reply. The part of your post I cite above says to me that you have not read my opening post in full and / or have failed to understand what I wrote. To quote myself;



    Now, these misunderstandings have obviously antagonised some of you and it is perhaps my fault for using words and phrasing unfamiliar to you. For that I am sorry. I think as soon as people see the word 'Hendrik', a filter seems to appear over their eyes that obscures the content and major points that one is making.
    You're right to a degree, I did skim over your initial thread starter so for someone that struggles to read your somewhat convoluted post....... What exactly is the point you are trying to make?

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Paddington View Post
    Thing is we are talking about wing chun and that art form. Further, I think you miss my argument as at no point do I talk about chi. I firmly root my argument in terms of body awareness and sensation and contrary to your assertion, in arts such as boxing people do struggle with relaxation. It takes time to become familiar, as you say, so my argument is very much relevant to your POV even if you do not acknowledge that.

    I am not quite sure why you bother to contribute to this wing chun forum if you believe that other combat arts are better suited to whatever your goals might be, tc101.
    I do not think of wing chun as an art form like ballet but as a combative art. Boxers do not struggle with relaxation and since I've been in boxing gyms for 20 years I think I'd know if they find lol. As I told you relaxation comes with familiarity.

Posting Permissions

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