I want to know everything i can about Hung Fa Yi Wing chun

[sunkuen]

"Unlike yourself I respect each lineage and I'm mature enough to understand that not all Wing chun will be the same as the lineage that I identify with"

Au contraire

I do respect the lineages what I don't respect is the IDIOTS askin' people to run down to ohio to see for themselves!!!

The comparison thing was simply curiosity about the two systems, but your paranoid schizo self got it all wrong and as usual we end up with the VTM putting up it's shields and preparing to photon torpedo any frigin post that doesn't conform to your 3dimensional wierdo wing chun agenda!!!

[Chango]

Sunkeun,
I will just let your words speak for themselves. You really missed the point. But I think it is clear that I will not get through. Reread this thread. I think you will see who is attacking who here. To this day the VTM does not attack any lineage of Wing chun. If you feel threatened then the problem is clearly yours. you have not presented any facts to support your attitude. Just name calling a poor attempts at politics. I cannot see any progress in this post so if you will please excuse me if I direct my energies to a more productive venture. I wish I could say it was a pleasure. but you know how that is.

[wingchunalex]

You are getting a little to hostile in your wording, especially with the name calling. Just put what you have to say out there, just the facts.

[Geezer]

So again I offer to you a visit to the VTM. You will see we have a very friendly and open place for all Wing Chun.

This is about the 3rd time he has given an open invite to come to the school and discuss WCK.
wingchunalex why don't you take him up on the offer.?
I'm sure they would love to Chi Sao as well.!

Please don't come back with a star fist response,I'm not travelling I live too far away come visit me,my mum won't let me have the car.!

[Geezer]

If you can't apply bong sau when someone is going light contact in a friendly match, then there is no way you could apply it in "real combat". saying sparring isn't "real combat" so sparring isn't usefull or important is just an excuse not to sparr.

Sparring isn't real combat,it's a training tool nothing more nothing less.

Writing that people who say sparring is not combat is just an excuse not to spar is a joke.
Maybe it's just that you haven't come to that realization yet.?
Why don't you go to Hilltop,Germantown,Yuma Place behind the 5th Precinct or 5 Oaks but make sure before you get into it that you let them know you only want to SPAR.!

[Geezer]

Now, when you come here, you cross into Canada at the Windsor/Detroit border crossing and go east on the 401 to toronto. Go south on the Don Valley Parkway Till you get to Lakeshore Blvd. Go east on Lakeshore Blvd till you get to Carlaw Ave. Turn left onto Carlaw Ave (north) and the first set of lights is Eastern ave. Go left about two blocks and we're at the corner of Eastern and Logan Ave. It's actually the third building in , on the northeast corner (there is no number on the building) There is a big brick wall in front of the door. Just bang on the door loud so we can hear you, and we'll show you our friendly chi sao. We're very hospitable.

Is there a name for your club,or are you deep deep deep undercover.?

Why are we visiting YOU again.?

[Geezer]

when people go on about how sparring isn't real combat its just an excuse not to sparr.

Why not walk out the front door at Beys and turn left,I'm sure you'd get some real life combat over there.?
Then come back and tell me that Sparring and Combat are the same thing.!

[Jeff Preston]

I didn't say that sparring wasn't useful in developing your natural reactions, and I didn't say that I don't use sparring. What I said was sparring isn't real combat. If you think it is then are wrong because there are rules and it is a controlled environment. That's not real and don't let your self think that it is. Anytime there are rules and pads it's not real because of the environment.

[Geezer]

When dealing with combat there are two aspects: the combat system and the person operating it. In W.W.II, it took 4 to 5 Sherman Tanks to stop one German Tiger Tank. If the crewmen of both sets of tanks were equally skilled the advantage was due to combat system.

I think I understand what you're saying here,Tank for Tank there was no match,the only way to overcome the Tiger was to completeley overwhelm them with speed and numbers.

When you think of what Stalin said about the T34,I think it was quote Quantity has a Quality all in itself.

[reneritchie]

Interesting conversation all around. Some points I'm left to ponder:

On open minds. 2+2=3 may be incorrect in the context of arithmetic, but, for example, what if you changed the context to sets? 2 socks (1 red, 1 blue) + 2 gloves (1 blue, 1 yellow), equal 3 color sets (red, blue, yellow).

On tanks and guns. Tanks and guns are machines and not subject to emotion and other "baggage" that comes with being human. Thus comparing tank combat might be simpler than human combat. In human combat (even if restricted to one-on-one, which can still vary from duel to ambush, etc.), machine like response could prove less useful than something that takes nature more into account (straight limbs shake less under stress, simple reflexive responses function where complex patterns break down, etc.).

On "Science". Remember flogistron? What was science yesterday is not always science tomorrow. In a lay sense, it can be useful to talk about "science" but even in pure sciences "real truths" are disproved and sometimes disagreed upon among experts.

On History. Sun Yaat-Sen once came up with a history full of Shaolin and rebels and Societies and told his historians to find proof for it. They failed. History isn't easy. Its often fragmented, sometimes contradictory, possibly nonsensical at times, and dependant upon the whims of those who wrote it and those who read it. And often "evidence" can be used equally well to support opposing points of view. There are some good theories out there, strong and weak points in each, but it will take a lot of *specific* and independantly varifiable information to start moving any of them away from simple theory.

On "original". Likewise, specific evidence would be needed showing positively where one branch pre-dated the others. Even in Brian's example (which Jim is fond of as well), the counter-argument could be "all the other lineages got it from HFY (at some point from some individual)". More likely vs. less likely could still be argued, but ruling some out will be a process. And then, the work would just be beginning (unless someone is arguing a divine inception wholely apart from related culture .

(ran out of time but will hopefully continue later...)

RR

[Chango]

Maybe I can offer information on sparring from a boxing point of view. When training for matches you will find a boxer will have several sparring partners. This gives him different looks, timming,habbits etc... But you must remember if you are a sparring partner you will starve if you knock the boxer out or even get the best of him when you spar! You are a live tool for the boxer to use to prepare for the fight. this being said sparring gives you a human factor to work with. Training your reactions,energy transfer, movement etc... It is one of the closest things you will get to live combat. But it is not the same. In fact the fight is closer to real combat becuase atleast the stress from the threat of danger will simulate the stress of a life a death situation. But again it is still not the same. No this is not a excuse not to spar. As a matter of fact it is a reason to sparr as often as possible. I do some type of sparring every day! It helps us gain experience and apply techniques in real time. But don't be fooled to think that this is real combat. Maybe you see it different please explain.

[passing_through]

Wingchunalex,

tan sau can be used in a variety of ways.

True enough. However, how is Taan Sau employed with a focus on maximum efficiency? That was the point of my question. Not "how can you use it?" So, again, how do you use Taan Sau in the most efficient way, at the right place and right time, in a realistic combat scenario? I am not asking how many way can you use Taan Sau. I could use Taan Sau everyday if I was a waiter, carrying trays. This is not the most efficient use of Taan Sau for combat, is it?

I do not put myself in a box of only one way to use tan sau.

We're all in a box of time/space/energy... HFY uses gates to define and control space. Does your approach utilize gates? Would you use Taan Sau in the lower gates?

tan sau can be used most preferably when it can be used to the ouside of the opponents forarm, because it is harder for the opponent to coninue the attack with his free hand because he would have to cross his own body.

Understood. And yet you later note in your post that the opponent could recover with bong sau. "If applying tan da to the outside gives the opponent a chance to respond to one's punch with a block, then one can easily coninue the counter attack with a number of wing chun responses. for instance if one's opponent punches at him and he uses tan da to the ouside of the opponents forarm, but the opponent bong sau's with the same arm the punch was launched from, one can gaum sau the opponents bong sau with the da hand of the tan da and continue the counter attack with a chang jeung. "

If you've applied Taan Sau, how could an opponent react? Your response is an example of looping. Rather than solve the initial problem, you're playing a catch up, if-I-then-he-then-I-then-he game that ultimately requires you to be faster, stronger, quicker, more sensitive, etc.

Tan sau can also be used to the inside if the situation calls for it, but one must be aware that a posible coninuation of the opponents attack can occure because the other hand is free.

So the opponent can continue the attack not only from the outside and also from the inside? If that is the case, then there must be no most efficient way to use Taan Sau, right?

I also do not subscribe to the use of tan sau at head level because it leaves the lower gate too open, especially if the opponent feints.

If you use Taan Sau at the level of the throat or chest, aren't you leaving your head exposed to potential challenge? If you are punched at the chest and use Taan Sau to engage the attack, you leave your head open to a continued threat from the attack. When you use Taan Sau at the right time and space, you cover both your chest and upper gate at the same time. This one action covers more area - saving you time and energy by using the best position to protect your upper gate.

I do not limit myself to only one "perfect" way of using tan sau, wing chun is adaptive, flexible, and alive in my oppinion.

If a tool exists, it must exist for a purpose. A screwdriver exists to drive screws. It can be used for other things such as opening paint cans but this is not the most efficient use of a screw driver. Taan Sau can use used numerous ways, I don't disagree with that point. However, there better times and places to use Taan Sau. If there is a "better", there must also be a "best". It does not follow that all ways are "better" ways. If this was the case, no way would be any better than any other. Common experience contradicts this assertion. If there is a "more efficient", then there has to be a "most efficient".

If you do something perfect, that is not a limitation. That is all you need. However, I'm asking about the most efficient Taan Sau not a perfect Taan Sau. If a motion is not efficient, you need more technique to recover for mistake. If you don't solve the problem in first place, then you have to have second place.

Instead of saying "wing chun is adaptive, flexible, and alive" you should say realitic combat (and reality itself) is adaptive, flexible and alive. All good fighting systems require adaptiblity, flexibility, and responsiveness - not just Wing Chun.

Using six different Taan Sau to cover every possibility compared to one efficient technique covers multiple possibilities. This is efficiency. One way to do multiple things - no wasted movement or energy. If you use one technique more efficiently than another, you use one move instead of looping and requiring many moves.

Tell you what, let's just cut the chase and just meet and settle this directly. When's good for you? I'll be out of town the 16th to the 26th of August and I have some training this Saturday on the 10th. We could meet over tea, discuss differences in our approaches, and then touch hands to test our assertions. We could even spar if you wish. Ball's in your court.

Jeremy R.

[Chango]

I understand your position on these matters. But I must ask you to offer your off the record opinion on things. I would like to see where you would draw your conclusions on a technical level as well as a historical level. I think the VTM's position it quite clear. The articles will support that position. As a insiders note there is quite of bit of information in the works at the moment to be releasted this year. However I'm just asking you on a personal level where do you believe the system come from and how did it stay consistant if it is subject to change from generation to generation?

Do you spar? if so how often? if not why not?

[yuanfen]

passing through sez:
If you use Taan Sau at the level of the throat or chest, aren't you leaving your head exposed to potential challenge? If you are punched at the chest and use Taan Sau to engage the attack, you leave your head open to a continued threat from the attack.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What? If one is the wooden dummy and...
Only if you dont know what you are doing!!!
HFY folks on the list seem to make low level "straw man" arguments. Good old wing chun aint a straw man. HFY folks have a way to go
demonstrate otherwise. Generalities are not enough.

[yuanfen]

Passing Through sez:From what information that has been gathered to date by the VTM, it is the conclusion of the VTM, as an organization, that HFY is the original style of Wing Chun from which all lineages that contain the three forms of Siu Nim Tau, Chum Kiu, and Biu Ji as their core originated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROFLAO-
Success has a thousand fathers! Fukien crane folks, wu mei folks,
now HFY folks...so many ancestral claims...may be some more are wandering in the Gobi desert ready to file a paternity claim..

Specially when one does the claim, the marketing, the methodology, the inferences, the logic, the "reasearch" all at the same time and place. Another wallah. A new philosophy of science! All you need is a preferred conclusion-then just affirm it whenever you can.

Chango asks Rene- whther he spars. What does that have to
do with the logic if any in the thread?