Honest HFY Question-

[osprey3883]

Hi Drew,

When i find myself at longer ranges im using the same VT Tools but def in a different way. Distance means a change in timing and of course structure, but ultimately im seeking contact (actively or waiting for it) at any range to allow me to safely enter close range for my VT to work its strenghts.

HFY IMO approaches this a little differently. 180 degrees our Kiu Sau trains us to occupy space in a structured way. As I understand it we don't seek out the bridge, but instead focus on the occupation of space to carry us through. HFY Kiu Sau contains structures/concepts that allow us to fight at a longer range, not needing to close the range to apply its strengths.

To answer your quesion no Kwoons in Vegas so far, though it isn't that far from the Phoenix Kwoon. (I can hear the craps tables calling me now...)

Matt

[Ultimatewingchun]

It's not about hurt feelings, JP...

It's about being so overwhelmed with theory, principles, and concepts...

that the actual application of those things in real time TECHNIQUES gets pooh-poohed.

And that to me is a joke.

Because there comes a point relatively quickly (ie.- inside of months - not years) wherein, if you're not spending at least 70% of your time actually doing it SPONTANEOUSLY AGAINST A LIVE RESISTING OPPONENT, you're not doing it.

You're playing at doing it.

And being a big fan of the great old time catch as catch wrestler, Lou Thesz, I take one of his most famous sayings to heart:

"Age weakens eyesight. But maturity strengthens the ability to see through the B.S. It's a fair trade."

AND THE MORE SECRECY SURROUDING THE ACTUAL APPLICATION OF ONE'S THEORIES AND CONCEPTS - YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT IT'S BECAUSE THE ACTUAL ABILITY TO APPLY BY USE OF SPECIFIC TECHNIQUES IS LACKING.

Which makes it easy to SELL as a "unique" and "special" system that has "so much more" than the next system.

LOL.

[Phil Redmond]

Hello,



Thanks Phil, that helps me understand more the focus of the drill in the clip. (a pre-contact to contact drill with a focus on TWC blind side application if I understand correctly.)

From a HFY Kiu Sau perspective (as I understand it ) I see a disconnect everytime the laapie retreats to then express the blind side strike. This would be seen in HFY as giving up space, as well as not expressing the concepts of structure, forward energy and bridging.

Definitely not trying to knock the drill, just hoping we can better understand each other.

Thanks,
Matt

ALL fights start pre-contact. It makes since to train using both contact and pre-contact drills. Also, ALL WC that I'm famliar with use the concept of structure and forward energy. If you're blindsided or sucker punched there is no forward energy because you weren't aware of the strike.
Theory and concepts have their place but sometimes you have to think out side of the box.

[chusauli]

It's not about hurt feelings, JP...

It's about being so overwhelmed with theory, principles, and concepts...

that the actual application of those things in real time TECHNIQUES gets pooh-poohed.

And that to me is a joke.

Because there comes a point relatively quickly (ie.- inside of months - not years) wherein, if you're not spending at least 70% of your time actually doing it SPONTANEOUSLY AGAINST A LIVE RESISTING OPPONENT, you're not doing it.

You're playing at doing it.

And being a big fan of the great old time catch as catch wrestler, Lou Thesz, I take one of his most famous sayings to heart:

"Age weakens eyesight. But maturity strengthens the ability to see through the B.S. It's a fair trade."

AND THE MORE SECRECY SURROUDING THE ACTUAL APPLICATION OF ONE'S THEORIES AND CONCEPTS - YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT IT'S BECAUSE THE ACTUAL ABILITY TO APPLY BY USE OF SPECIFIC TECHNIQUES IS LACKING.

Which makes it easy to SELL as a "unique" and "special" system that has "so much more" than the next system.

LOL.

Victor,

You're starting to sound like Terence! LOL!

Best regards,

[JPinAZ]

Hi Drew,

HFY IMO approaches this a little differently. 180 degrees our Kiu Sau trains us to occupy space in a structured way. As I understand it we don't seek out the bridge, but instead focus on the occupation of space to carry us through. HFY Kiu Sau contains structures/concepts that allow us to fight at a longer range, not needing to close the range to apply its strengths.

To answer your quesion no Kwoons in Vegas so far, though it isn't that far from the Phoenix Kwoon. (I can hear the craps tables calling me now...)

Matt

Matt, good explanation!

And I think I can hear the craps tables calling too.. a long trip for Drew, a short trip for us. Might be interesting

Jonathan

[JPinAZ]

It's not about hurt feelings, JP...

It's about being so overwhelmed with theory, principles, and concepts...

that the actual application of those things in real time TECHNIQUES gets pooh-poohed.

And that to me is a joke.

If one learns to apply and work under the theory, principles & concepts of WC, the techniques are a resultant. If you focus on only the techniques, well then, that's all you have. A bag of techniques. There's so much more to WC then techniques... but if that's what you want to focus on, good luck to you!

Because there comes a point relatively quickly (ie.- inside of months - not years) wherein, if you're not spending at least 70% of your time actually doing it SPONTANEOUSLY AGAINST A LIVE RESISTING OPPONENT, you're not doing it.

You're playing at doing it.

And being a big fan of the great old time catch as catch wrestler, Lou Thesz, I take one of his most famous sayings to heart:

"Age weakens eyesight. But maturity strengthens the ability to see through the B.S. It's a fair trade.".

What are you even talking about?? You sound like a **** idiot. RC's right (for once), you're sinking down to T's level. Maybe you weren't that far off to begin with.

How does any of this have to do with the first quote regarding techniques vs. concept/principle/theory? So, are you saying that during sparring (which is what I assume you are talking about here) that one should forgo the concepts and principles of WC and just focus on technique??
Again, if that's your focus, more power to you. But your post regarding your bong laap drill is starting to make a lot more sense from that perspective...

AND THE MORE SECRECY SURROUDING THE ACTUAL APPLICATION OF ONE'S THEORIES AND CONCEPTS - YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT IT'S BECAUSE THE ACTUAL ABILITY TO APPLY BY USE OF SPECIFIC TECHNIQUES IS LACKING.

Which makes it easy to SELL as a "unique" and "special" system that has "so much more" than the next system.

LOL.

You put forward a not-so-vieled slam against HFY here, then follow with LOL, as if it was meant to be funny?? I fail to find the humor in your continued stupidity. One step forward two steps back. sounds like your bong lap drill you described

I am happy to see you'd rather ignore the concepts and principles of WC (the backbone to making everything work IMO) and focus on the techniques. If that's all you have, then that's all you have.
Good luck 'selling' that

[JPinAZ]

Phil,

I am curious to get your take on part of what victor described in his bon lap drill earlier. He said "....WITH THE MAN BEING ATTACKED now moving his lead leg back into the neutral side stance as he engages the punch with bong/wu near the opponent's wrist/forearm area - at which point he begins his lop with the wu hand and starts to convert the bong into a punch AS HE NOW STEPS up into the front stance..."

To me, voluntarily stepping back prior to or during bridging sound like giving up space and doesn't represent forward energy IMO. And I don't mean this as a slight toward any lineage or anyone. I am curious if you agree with Vic's view on this portion of the drill and if so, can you explain why this happens from a TWC perspective?

Also, the first engagement sounds/looks more like bridging with a kwan sau rather than bong lap. I realize this may be called a 'bong lap' drill because of the second part after engagement where you bong lap (action). Or am I looking at this wrong?

Thanks,

Jonathan

[Wayfaring]

I'm chiming in on the kiu sao topic here. IMO one of the problems with a standard chi sao based tan bong fuk approach is with range control. When you get skilled opponents, they are athletically and with attributes able to dance around a longer range with longer range punches, then find openings to bridge into clinch range. Controlling a range a little bit longer than standard chi sau range is crucial. Playing in chi sau range against an atheletic skilled opponent leaves you one step behind if you have no other skillsets - you are either responding to being picked off at a little longer range, or in combinations with that, having the gap closed too quickly to control. Kiu sau gives a structured approach to dealing with this issue.

[Wayfaring]

Followup - the one standard way I can see that the traditional tan bong fuk WCK deals with range is with the man sao ("asking hand"). The longer range "feeler" at the outer gate helps feed the inner gate response by touch control. People can develop skill with this. The problem is that this approach is attribute based. The question becomes - am I more skilled reacting to what's coming over the bridge by touch? Or is my opponent in bridging? This becomes a problem again against more atheletic and skilled opponents. Trained fighters bring it quickly. I don't want to be one step behind and reacting. Kiu sau offers a guard tower at the outer gate (maybe not at quite the reach of the man sau). You can get past the guard tower, but it will cost you to do so. That leaves me reaction time.

[Liddel]

IMO one of the problems with a standard chi sao based tan bong fuk approach is with range control. When you get skilled opponents, they are athletically and with attributes able to dance around a longer range with longer range punches, then find openings to bridge into clinch range. Controlling a range a little bit longer than standard chi sau range is crucial.

I agree, and most VT lines should have/train Gor and Lux Sao which incorporate the longer ranges....as well as if you actively spar with other styles like many do here.

Playing in chi sau range against an atheletic skilled opponent leaves you one step behind if you have no other skillsets - you are either responding to being picked off at a little longer range, or in combinations with that, having the gap closed too quickly to control. Kiu sau gives a structured approach to dealing with this issue.

I see it different.

I would disagree to a point, one thing i love about BJJ, the ability to force your opponent out of his comfort zone and into thiers...the ground.

Bottom line, any person fighting from Richard simmons to Chuck Liddel has to come into your space or you into his, to be able to have a strike connect........

This is Chi Sao range for me, simple and applicable. Chi Sao should be drilled in Gor and Lux Sao and has elements of close and long range 'VT sparring'...

I agree Chi Dan Sao has limited range control and inherent probles due to this. The way i see it is because its a BASE drill training a specific timeframe in a fight. Its not meant for anything but close range drilling, not even fighting cause its fixed not dynamic and is actions repeated.

Chi Sao however is any and all VT actions from where ever the hell you are......

I guess i just have a different view of Chi Sao/sticking.


Worst case senario = if a guy launches a quick punch at my head and all i do is cover. The punch connecting my cover is Chi Sao for me....its contact/feeling/awareness.....

DREW

[Liddel]

If one learns to apply and work under the theory, principles & concepts of WC, the techniques are a resultant. If you focus on only the techniques, well then, that's all you have. A bag of techniques. There's so much more to WC then techniques...

JPinAZ i agree with this but, Im kinda with Vic here. We need balance. But we differ on the percentages

We need theory to support what we do, we dont always need to be aware of it though...
the important part is the doing.......

If you know more about the history of golf than tiger woods and you are a physics major to boot, it doesnt mean you can beat Tiger at golf though does it....

We need theory to support what we're doing sure, but if i need to break theory to get the job done....

This is the essence of Bill Jee IMO.

Sometimes the end, justifies the means.....

DREW

[JPinAZ]

Drew, not sure what you mean. Are you saying that you break away from WC principlesw/concepts if you need to? I'm not sure I follow.

IMO, if we internalize the concepts/principles and opperate by them, we don't really have to 'focus' on them - they are part of our every action. It's not like in a fight I say "wait, occupy space, oops, also need fwd. energy.. hmm, 4-gate or 6- gate...." you get the point.
These things you develop into your body through the drilling, then you test them out in sparring. But I don't follow (nor really agree) that we turn these things on or off once we have absorbed them into our being. It becomes a part of us, doesn't it? To focus on technique alone without these things doesn't make sense from a WC perspective.

And I would never suggest you just read all the theory and history concepts/principles and then you can fight like a pro - it doesn't work like that. I would think this is something we wouldn't even have to be discussing. I guess I am really missing the point here (?)

[Alan Orr]

If one learns to apply and work under the theory, principles & concepts of WC, the techniques are a resultant. If you focus on only the techniques, well then, that's all you have. A bag of techniques. There's so much more to WC then techniques... but if that's what you want to focus on, good luck to you!



What are you even talking about?? You sound like a **** idiot. RC's right (for once), you're sinking down to T's level. Maybe you weren't that far off to begin with.

How does any of this have to do with the first quote regarding techniques vs. concept/principle/theory? So, are you saying that during sparring (which is what I assume you are talking about here) that one should forgo the concepts and principles of WC and just focus on technique??
Again, if that's your focus, more power to you. But your post regarding your bong laap drill is starting to make a lot more sense from that perspective...



You put forward a not-so-vieled slam against HFY here, then follow with LOL, as if it was meant to be funny?? I fail to find the humor in your continued stupidity. One step forward two steps back. sounds like your bong lap drill you described

I am happy to see you'd rather ignore the concepts and principles of WC (the backbone to making everything work IMO) and focus on the techniques. If that's all you have, then that's all you have.
Good luck 'selling' that

I think you find that was a compliment to Victor about sounding like Terence!

[Alan Orr]

As this thread is about HFY. Let me ask a few question to you guys.

Lets see if one can ask HFY members simple questions on the art they follow without them taking it as a personal attack. So far what ever I have asked anything I end up with a attack on my teachers background and skill. All fine, but the question never get answered. These questions are just the things that don't add up for me so far. Its not a personal attack on HFY, just points of interest on the background of what we have seen or even not seen!

So my few questions are:

If HFY is so unique,

1) why is it that the SNT set and the TWC ASLT set are so similar?
2) The Chum Kiu sets are almost the same?
3) They have the same entry technique?
4) they cross hands at the same height?
5) The MYJ of the HFY system is so close the the TWC MYJ? Especially the section in the book MKF...
6) The Bai Jong of the knives (like a V) is so similar?
7) The body structure looks the same?
8) Wang Ming and William Cheung look so similar? LOL
9) The Biu Jee has the TWC opening trademark of finger jabs...
10) The keywords of the pole matches Lui Yon Sang's Fei Lung Fu Gwun methods?
11) The punch is the same in both systems
12) The Tan Sao is the same height as TWC
13) It has a big Huen Sao just like TWC's
14) The history is so similar to TWC's alleged destruction of the Shaolin Temple, with 5 elders surviving
15) If it is allegedly so old, why is it that it has som much in common with the Yip Man system?
16) Both systems have the cross arm Chi Sao methods

Bottom line is HFY is too similar to TWC; it would be too much to be coincidence. Someone must have studied from someone. There are too many trademarks and signature moves.

The big questions - My thought is the secrecy.


G Gee says there is HFY in China, but no one has heard of it. If it was a big Secret then why did he start to teach it? and who said he could do so? Why has no one else learned it other that Gee? HFY have suggested that William Cheung must have learned some HFY back in the day. If that was true then why did he not run in to touble with this secret Society? A lot of the terms used have said to be from translated HFY secrets. But no one has seen any of these documents. Can they be shown? That would be a good way to show its not just Gee making things up each week. A lot of the language used seems very modern?

Regards

Alan


These are just questions that come to mind. Again not an attack on HFY, just points that don't add up unless explained.

Regards

Alan

[CFT]

G Gee says there is HFY in China

Also, why have they remained in obscurity? Even Kulo/Gulao which seems to be relatively rare has more than one outside-of-China representative.

The Qing dynasty has been over for nigh-on 100 years, the Republic established in 1912. I'm sure all the fall out is over. So unless HFY-China took part in anti-Communist activity it is hard to see why they are so secretive.