# Six core elements



## Hendrik

the six core elements are the basic elements of the  pre 1850s   Chinese ancient martial art .


It is the basic common denominator from emei 12 zhuang internal art, 1840 wck SLT,  xing yi, .....etc


The six  are the :
physical, mind, breathing, Qi medirian flow, force flow , and momentum.
Everyone of this element has a clear definition and different level of depth.


Six core elements are now introduced into western wcners in a scientific and systematic way. Books and training programs from different authors will be surface within a few weeks.


Those who study wck and Chinese internal art will surely Benifit from this educational platform because this is the basic education platform which will be able to clearly tell what is going on with ancient Chinese internal art.

Once one understand what are these six, one will be able to know what exactly the ancient Chinese mean , no longer one needs to guess.


----------



## zuti car

No one know how martial arts looked like before 1850 'S . What we have today as a martial systems was created in second half of 19th century and it's final form got during first years of republican period. What we do know about kung fu before 1850's is that most if not all  the training was concentrated on weapon techniques , fighting in the organized groups and developing physical stamina . Focus of the training changed after 1850 , when fire arms  finally replaced old weapons , military tactics changed and most of the old systems were abandoned . Focus on the training changed and also social group which carried the practice and development of kung fu changed . All that stuff about , chi , mind , meridians , ect , all that was connected to martial arts for the first time by Sun Lu Tang in the early 1900's , he is the first who used Taoism and traditional Chinese medicine theories to explain his marital arts. How old martial arts really looked like and was practiced today can only be seen in Taiwan . There is something called ''Sung Chiang Battle Array" and it is a remnants of the way of martial training in 1600's , 1700's and 1800's until Japanese invasion in 1885 . Today ''Sung Chiang Battle Array" has religious , social and cultural meaning but core practice is still there . Also , there is well recorded history of the "kung fu" village , Xsilo village in central Taiwan and their training in the past and it supports what I said .


----------



## Hendrik

Please do your research with evidence and get an expert to study with before you draw any conclusions.

Your view obviously is very distorted , based less, and misleading.







zuti car said:


> No one know how martial arts looked like before 1850 'S . What we have today as a martial systems was created in second half of 19th century and it's final form got during first years of republican period. What we do know about kung fu before 1850's is that most if not all  the training was concentrated on weapon techniques , fighting in the organized groups and developing physical stamina . Focus of the training changed after 1850 , when fire arms  finally replaced old weapons , military tactics changed and most of the old systems were abandoned . Focus on the training changed and also social group which carried the practice and development of kung fu changed . All that stuff about , chi , mind , meridians , ect , all that was connected to martial arts for the first time by Sun Lu Tang in the early 1900's , he is the first who used Taoism and traditional Chinese medicine theories to explain his marital arts. How old martial arts really looked like and was practiced today can only be seen in Taiwan . There is something called ''Sung Chiang Battle Array" and it is a remnants of the way of martial training in 1600's , 1700's and 1800's until Japanese invasion in 1885 . Today ''Sung Chiang Battle Array" has religious , social and cultural meaning but core practice is still there . Also , there is well recorded history of the "kung fu" village , Xsilo village in central Taiwan and their training in the past and it supports what I said .


----------



## Xue Sheng

Well I see you haven't changed, go directly for the arrogance and condescension..... in true Hendrik style


----------



## Transk53

Guess someone once said "persistence is key"


----------



## Hendrik

Xue Sheng said:


> Well I see you haven't changed, go directly for the arrogance and condescension..... in true Hendrik style




Can you please focus on technical instead of making all kinds of off topic personal comments?


Go ask any real college engineering proffessor on technical, they will tell you straight what it is.
There is no room for ego and all kind of woo woo in engineering.

Here , I like to carry my thread in this manner . If you know you know, if you don't you don't, if you like to discuss stay technical. But if you trying to act like an expert on things you are clueless than expect to get straight reply.

It is not that I am arrogant, but for God shake, be proffesional. stick to the facts.

Zuti is totally cluleless on this topic and has many time trying to post as expert to give Vedic on things he don't know. That is the facts .

why can people just put down the I know it better then you ego and discuss something or learn something from each other's



Saying the above, I have never said I know it all or I am always right. 

I am saying, for God shake, can you guys be rational and reasonable to have a honest serious friendly  technical discussion. Instead of jumping around with all kind of ego attitude but knowing what the technical is about?


----------



## Xue Sheng

The thing is Hendrik, you are at times wrong and unwilling to except any proof to the contrary as well as unwilling to discuss any topic you post to see if there is a misunderstanding. You only except unconditional blind agreement with all things you post whether right or wrong

Now to this



Hendrik said:


> Can you please focus on technical instead of making all kinds of off topic personal comments?



as soon as you give other posters the same consideration...sure no problem



Hendrik said:


> Go ask any real college engineering proffessor on technical, they will tell you straight what it is.



Are you an engineering professor, is this a technical discussion of engineering? Nope, so why are you throwing engineering into this



Hendrik said:


> There is no room for ego and all kind of woo woo in engineering.



Exactly and you come with an ego bigger than the state of California. And again, this is not a discussion of engineering so the reference is useless



Hendrik said:


> Here , I like to carry my thread in this manner . If you know you know, if you don't you don't, if you like to discuss stay technical. But if you trying to act like an expert on things you are clueless than expect to get straight reply.



I have tried on multiple occasions to have a discussion with you, asked questions to see if we had any common ground, asked questions to try and figure out where you were coming from, tried to get into the technical and you never answered a single question and your only response were with arrogance and condescension. Much like this classic Hendrik response



> But if you trying to act like an expert on things you are clueless than expect to get straight reply





Hendrik said:


> It is not that I am arrogant, but for God shake, be proffesional. stick to the facts.



You seriously need to check yourself. I have tried to stick to facts with you and tried professionalism and your only responses have been arrogance and condescension



Hendrik said:


> Zuti is totally cluleless on this topic and has many time trying to post as expert to give Vedic on things he don't know. That is the facts .



And you don't think that is insulting or an ego centric comment



Hendrik said:


> why can people just put down the I know it better then you ego and discuss something or learn something from each other's



Good question, you may want to think about that one and apply it to yourself



Hendrik said:


> Saying the above, I have never said I know it all or I am always right.
> 
> I am saying, for God shake, can you guys be rational and reasonable to have a honest serious friendly  technical discussion. Instead of jumping around with all kind of ego attitude but knowing what the technical is about?



I have tried on multiple occasions to have a rational reasonable conversation with you. I have tried to be friendly I have approached you both openly on MT and by PM without ego and your responses have always been arrogant and condescending.

And I would ask questions now like, what is the source of your 6 core elements or exactly how much Xingyi have you trained, but I am fairly sure you would just plain ignore the questions, or tell me I couldn't understand or another Hendrik classic "find a teacher"


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

zuti car said:


> What we do know about kung fu before 1850's is that most if not all the training was concentrated on weapon techniques.


Agree! In the ancient time, the main purpose of TCMA training was to train how to use short weapon such as sword and knife, and long weapon such as staff, spear, and Guan Dao. The open hands training was just a path to lead to the weapon training.


----------



## Transk53

"glutton for punishment" Would be another.


----------



## Tez3

Hendrik said:


> Zuti is totally cluleless on this topic and has many time trying to post as expert to give Vedic on things he don't know.



What does 'give Vedic' mean?


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> What does 'give Vedic' mean?



Vegetable verdict maybe.


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> Vegetable verdict maybe.



I was hoping for something mystic and mysterious. I can't think why anyone would use a Sanskrit word that way


----------



## kung fu fighter

Hendrik said:


> the six core elements are the basic elements of the  pre 1850s   Chinese ancient martial art .
> 
> 
> It is the basic common denominator from emei 12 zhuang internal art, 1840 wck SLT,  xing yi, .....etc
> 
> 
> The six  are the :
> physical, mind, breathing, Qi medirian flow, force flow , and momentum.
> Everyone of this element has a clear definition and different level of depth.
> 
> 
> Six core elements are now introduced into western wcners in a scientific and systematic way. Books and training programs from different authors will be surface within a few weeks.
> 
> 
> Those who study wck and Chinese internal art will surely Benifit from this educational platform because this is the basic education platform which will be able to clearly tell what is going on with ancient Chinese internal art.
> 
> Once one understand what are these six, one will be able to know what exactly the ancient Chinese mean , no longer one needs to guess.



thanks for sharing!


----------



## KPM

Tez3 said:


> What does 'give Vedic' mean?



I think he meant "verdict."


----------



## geezer

KPM said:


> I think he meant "verdict."



Of course, KPM. But I find Tez's tongue-in-cheek response far more intriguing. Who knew that Hendrick's "research" had traced WC back so far! Like nearly 4,000 years to Northern India:

Vedic period - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Hendrik

KPM said:


> I think he meant "verdict."



K,

Yes. You are correct my opps!

Next week,

Alan Orr is releasing his new training series with six core elements platform.

Sergio is also starting his new training seminar based on the six core elements with his new wck book on six core elements will be released in April.

As  you can also read about the six core elements in Robert Chu WCI article in the past few months.


You will be happy with this six core elements information released and you can see deeper into the ancient wck and Chinese internal art. With the six core elements scientific and systematic way, learning become very clear and effective and efficient.

Many sifus Ie: Phil Romero, Jim Rosalendo ....are also using this platform now.

Six core elements has gone beyond the research stage. It is a proven facts in scientific and systematic process. A few days of seminar intensive can bring a wcners to gain decade of insight.


It is a reasonable claim to say six core elements is the best ancient Chinese internal art systematic educational approach up to date.

Check out with Alan and Sergio. Try it and see for yourself.


----------



## geezer

Hendrik said:


> Six core elements has gone beyond the research stage. It is a proven facts in scientific and systematic process. A few days of seminar intensive can bring a wcners to gain decade of insight.
> 
> Check out with Alan and Sergio.



I _will _check that out. If Alan Orr is using these elements to train his fighters, he must be convinced of their functionality. On the other hand, Sergio adopts some good stuff ....and some wacky stuff (IMHO). He has worked  closely with both my first WT Sifu and my Escrima instructor and I know the value of _their_ stuff. As for other things he's demonstrated ... well let's just say, "Not my cup of tea". 

But what does any of this have to do with "proven facts"?  The "historical research" you've presented here and on "that other forum" strikes me, and most of the rest of us, as fairly _sketchy_ at best. More like an interesting hypothesis. Not scientific facts. Certainly not engineering.

Please don't take personal offense. This is just how I see it at this point.


----------



## Kwan Sau

Hendrik said:


> ...pre 1850s   Chinese *ancient* martial art .



How do you define the term "ancient"?



Hendrik said:


> *Books and training programs* from different authors will be surface within a few weeks.



Do you stand to make a profit from these?



Hendrik said:


> Once one understand what are these six, one will be able to know what exactly the *ancient* Chinese mean , no longer one needs to guess.



How do you define the term "ancient"?


----------



## Kwan Sau

Hendrik said:


> *Many* sifus Ie: Phil Romero, Jim Rosalendo ....are also using this platform now.



So, "many" is two(?)



Hendrik said:


> It is a proven facts in scientific and systematic process. A few days of seminar intensive can bring a wcners to gain decade of insight.



Who or what has "proven" this "ancient" stuff via a scientific and systematic process? How was it proven?



Hendrik said:


> It is a reasonable claim to say six core elements is the best ancient Chinese internal art systematic educational approach up to date.



It is also a reasonable claim that Sam Adams beer is better (more ancient?) than Budweiser beer...



Hendrik said:


> Check out with Alan and Sergio. Try it and see for yourself.



Why don't you also recommend Jim R? Just curious.


----------



## Hendrik

geezer said:


> I _will _check that out. If Alan Orr is using these elements to train his fighters, he must be convinced of their functionality. On the other hand, Sergio adopts some good stuff ....and some wacky stuff (IMHO). He has worked  closely with both my first WT Sifu and my Escrima instructor and I know the value of _their_ stuff. As for other things he's demonstrated ... well let's just say, "Not my cup of tea".
> 
> But what does any of this have to do with "proven facts"?  The "historical research" you've presented here and on "that other forum" strikes me, and most of the rest of us, as fairly _sketchy_ at best. More like an interesting hypothesis. Not scientific facts. Certainly not engineering.
> 
> Please don't take personal offense. This is just how I see it at this point.



You are free to have your view as we all!


With the six core elements we are now able to decode and develop each element in a very effective and precise indepth way. We can decode the 1840 SLT and have the process to activate it. Even for those who Train in Taiji, and other internal art will Benifit from the six core elements platform because it is a common denominator of the ancient Chinese internal art. It present a much clear view then any of the internal art book present to the west up to date.

These can be done and get result within weeks and months , no longer need years or decades or guessing . We do have this technology today. In is a facts that many has realized it. It is a matter of days one will get the basic understanding solidly clear up. And we can get to deeper of the art.



I called it the vampire Lestat bite technology, once bitten one will never go back. 
Yes, we do have this now after almost 40 years of work by many people. It sure will change your wck . Lots of technics are no longer myth but can be reached , that is for sure.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hendrik said:


> The six  are the hysical, mind, breathing, Qi medirian flow, force flow , and momentum.


But power generation is only 1/5 of the total MA requirement such as:

1. timing,
2. opportunity,
3. angle.
4. power.
5. balance.

Can power generation alone be able to make you a better fighter? You may develop some powerful nuclear bomb but you still need to have a good deliver system.


----------



## zuti car

I am talking about things well known and proven by scientific society . I use historical literature written by professional historians . There isn.t much reference to martial arts , because no one researched that area seriously , but what can be found supports what I said before . Also it is not bad to read books written by real researchers like Tang Hao for example . Insulting me will not make you right my dear Hendrik , o  the other hand you are showing your true self and that is good. About these guys that supposedly use your theories , Sergio is not a fighter and that other guy , I saw his videos , he is using western boxing , wrestling and BJJ for fighting .So, from technical point of view , efficiency of your theories cannot be proven . From historical point of view , there isn't any evidence to support your claims. Now , you can insult me as much as you want , but these are the obvious facts .
P.S. What about that museum address ?


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Can power generation alone be able to make you a better fighter? You may develop some powerful nuclear bomb but you still need to have a good deliver system.


|
Is this a play on how far China has advanced since the OP's 1850s circa?


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> I was hoping for something mystic and mysterious. I can't think why anyone would use a Sanskrit word that way



Yeah. He meant verdict obviously. At first I read it as Vedic from DS9 lol


----------



## Transk53

Hendrik said:


> vampire Lestat bite technology



That was a great movie, nowt to do with technology. Unless of course Vampire teeth are ceramic


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> Yeah. He meant verdict obviously. At first I read it as Vedic from DS9 lol




LOL. The poor chap wasn't giving any 'verdict' though he was just giving his opinion, Hendrik was very harsh on him.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> LOL. The poor chap wasn't giving any 'verdict' though he was just giving his opinion, Hendrik was very harsh on him.



Oh really. Sorry I got bored again halfway through reading another thread. Bad habit of mine. Apologies if I have slighted someone.


----------



## PiedmontChun

I cringe when arguementative threads come about like this and some of the prior threads with Hendrik. I'm sure there are civilized ways things can be dealt with, or someone can be the bigger man and just walk away, figuratively speaking, but there is a part of me that wishes things could be settled via challenge fight, or at least some uncooperative chi-sau / lat-sau.

That's what is great about some arts. You think your boxing technique or theory is superior? Well put on the gloves and prove it! Your ___itsu or ___kido is better than my ___itsu or ___kido? Lets get on the mat or put forth a student to get on that mat and find out.


----------



## dlcox

Hendrik said:


> Even for those who Train in Taiji, and other internal art will Benifit from the six core elements platform because it is a common denominator of the ancient Chinese internal art.


 
Interesting, sounds very familiar. I had made mention awhile back on KFO about 6 ancient development exercises and Robert Chu was trying to get me to elaborate. I did give out some tidbits in a couple of unrelated threads about them here. Coincidence? Care to elaborate on exactly what these "6 Core Elements" are exactly with explanation? Or will it be left ambiguous and mysterious? Quite frankly this "Physical, Mind, Breathing, Qi Medirian Flow, Force Flow , and Momentum" doesn't detail anything. What are the particulars, and why is it so similar in composition to what I described? Which, by the way, you vehemently shot down. Did you do the research I asked you to do and come to the conclusion I was correct? Or is it just a ploy by you and the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" to try and squeeze a little more juice from my orange?


----------



## Hendrik

Make sure you know what I am refer to and based on before speculate.

I know your type of martial art.

You don't know and don't have the six core elements I refer to That is for sure.






dlcox said:


> Interesting, sounds very familiar. I had made mention awhile back on KFO about 6 ancient development exercises and Robert Chu was trying to get me to elaborate. I did give out some tidbits in a couple of unrelated threads about them here. Coincidence? Care to elaborate on exactly what these "6 Core Elements" are exactly with explanation? Or will it be left ambiguous and mysterious? Quite frankly this "Physical, Mind, Breathing, Qi Medirian Flow, Force Flow , and Momentum" doesn't detail anything. What are the particulars, and why is it so similar in composition to what I described? Which, by the way, you vehemently shot down. Did you do the research I asked you to do and come to the conclusion I was correct? Or is it just a ploy by you and the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" to try and squeeze a little more juice from my orange?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hendrik:

Will you be able to prove that your "power generation method" is superior than the power generation method used in Baji, XingYi Lu He, and Chen Taiji?

If someone who has trained in Baji, XYLH, or Chen Taiji, can you give that person a good reason to learn your power generation method instead?


----------



## Hendrik

You are a person who confuse your mind set and reality.


1. Emei 12 zhuang is a proven by evidence ancient Chinese internal system. Since you keep putting doubt on it.

I have asked you to go contact Jim a Rosalendo or even Gm Fu Wei Jong himself with his contact information on the museful you like to know in Beijing where the lotus canon is kept.

You claim you have connection in Taiwan and Main land China to check out...etc.  I have asked you to go a head to track it. 

But you can't come out with anything beside all claim.


2. You have a mind set trying to put down ancient Chinese tradition and culture. As above claiming Sun lu tang as the beginning of .....

Well, get your facts straight before talk. Get a real chinese internal art teacher to study what is reality instead of stuck in your mind set and thinking know it all. 



3. It is convenient to use the term scientific as mantra to down play everything . Please get real,  understand and know what others are refer to before jump gun.


I am not insulting you. I am just saying can you please get out of your mind and see the real world?




zuti car said:


> I am talking about things well known and proven by scientific society . I use historical literature written by professional historians . There isn.t much reference to martial arts , because no one researched that area seriously , but what can be found supports what I said before . Also it is not bad to read books written by real researchers like Tang Hao for example . Insulting me will not make you right my dear Hendrik , o  the other hand you are showing your true self and that is good. About these guys that supposedly use your theories , Sergio is not a fighter and that other guy , I saw his videos , he is using western boxing , wrestling and BJJ for fighting .So, from technical point of view , efficiency of your theories cannot be proven . From historical point of view , there isn't any evidence to support your claims. Now , you can insult me as much as you want , but these are the obvious facts .
> P.S. What about that museum address ?


----------



## Kwan Sau

Hendrik said:


> Make sure you know what I am refer to and based on before speculate.
> 
> I know your type of martial art.
> 
> You don't know and don't have the six core elements I refer to That is for sure.





Just a friendly reminder of what Hendrik wrote back on page 1 of this thread:



Hendrik said:


> Can you please focus on technical instead of making all kinds of off topic personal comments?



Seems to me, you just did that exact thing when you replied to dlcox...  



Hendrik said:


> But if you trying to act like an expert on things you are clueless than expect to get straight reply.



Read your own posts...or look in the mirror... you come off as the ancient secret sauce expert EVERY TIME YOU POST ON THESE FORUMS



Hendrik said:


> It is not that I am arrogant, but for God shake, be proffesional. stick to the facts.



See above!   



Hendrik said:


> why can people just put down the I know it better then you ego and discuss something or learn something from each other's



Again, read what you wrote in response to dlcox... seems you are the one with the 'better then you ego'     



Hendrik said:


> I am saying, for God shake, can you guys be rational and reasonable to have a honest serious friendly technical discussion. Instead of jumping around with all kind of ego attitude but knowing what the technical is about?



How do you know if God "shakes"?


----------



## Hendrik

I have never made claim that my power generation theory is superior then anyone.

But, I can tell you the six core elements educational platform is based on a common denominator of the basic elements of ancient Chinese martial art.

Thus, after you have a clear understanding on the six core elements, you will be able to understand and implement Baji, Xing Yi, Chen Taiji, Bagua.....etc better. Because now one can see what is the ancient Chinese presenting in a systematic way.





Kung Fu Wang said:


> Hendrik:
> 
> Will you be able to prove that your "power generation theory" is superior than the power generation method used in Baji, XingYi Lu He, and Chen Taiji?
> 
> If you think your power generation theory is superior, with today's technology, you can punch on a device to get the reading of the force that you can generate. After you can prove that your method is superior, all boxers on this planet will come to you and want to learn your power generation method.


----------



## Hendrik

I have replied you on what I think is appropriate. Please read my previous post.

The rest of your personal opinion. I am not interested in .





Kwan Sau said:


> Just a friendly reminder of what Hendrik wrote back on page 1 of this thread:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to me, you just did that exact thing when you replied to dlcox...
> 
> 
> 
> Read your own posts...or look in the mirror... you come off as the ancient secret sauce expert EVERY TIME YOU POST ON THESE FORUMS
> 
> 
> 
> See above!
> 
> 
> 
> Again, read what you wrote in response to dlcox... seems you are the one with the 'better then you ego'
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know if God "shakes"?


----------



## Hendrik

I am out of here.

Most of you guys are really strange.

Instead of asking me what the heck I am talking about, let me explain the details to you and have a good mutual Benifit discussion.

You guys are interested to 
address me wrong, adress you know better then me, address I took your information (extremely absurd)......etc

Thanks , I am not interested in these stuffs.


----------



## Kwan Sau

Hendrik said:


> I have replied you on what I think is appropriate. Please read my previous post.
> 
> The rest of your personal opinion. I am not interested in .



  whatever dude...but perception can be an awkward beast at times...  good luck with that!

One thing is certain, and readily observable about you and your posts: you have a pattern, the pattern repeats itself on each forum you infect.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hendrik said:


> Thus, after you have a clear understanding on the six core elements, you will be able to understand and implement Baji, Xing Yi, Chen Taiji, Bagua.....etc better. Because now one can see what is the ancient Chinese presenting in a systematic way.


If we look at Adam Hsu's Baji power generation method, we can see clearly that there is power behind his punch.






If we look at Liao Shi-Ren's Chen Taiji power generation method, we can also see the power behind the punch.






Can you provide a clip so we can compare the "common denominator" here?


----------



## Hendrik

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If we look at Adam Hsu's Baji power generation method, we can see clearly that there is power behind his punch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we look at Liao Shi-Ren's Chen Taiji power generation method, we can also see the power behind the punch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you provide a clip so we can compare the "common denominator" here?




Six core elements are indept science in a systematic way. If one has 48 hours of intensive training, one will be able to have the basic and carry out the basic elements analysis and emulation.

So yes, one will know a big picture on what is going on above.

Each element is very specific and come with different level of depth. Even one cannot do it but via the basic experience and knowledge they will know what is in the ball park. That is forsure.common denominator do exist.

Thus, instead of one train decades or life time,by keeping doing it, just do it. One will know the basic theory and implementation of what it is likely. So learning and development will be effective and efficient . Time will be cut short , sometimes many times shorter. A one year training might be a month .

However, one needs to learn the six core elements from guide who is train and experience. Cant learn these in forum or mental speculation


----------



## Hendrik

Good luck to all. So long, good bye!


----------



## Xue Sheng

toodles


----------



## Tez3

Hendrik said:


> Six core elements are indept science in a systematic way. If one has 48 hours of intensive training, one will be able to have the basic and carry out the basic elements analysis and emulation.
> 
> So yes, one will know a big picture on what is going on above.
> 
> Each element is very specific and come with different level of depth. Even one cannot do it but via the basic experience and knowledge they will know what is in the ball park. That is forsure.common denominator do exist.
> 
> Thus, instead of one train decades or life time,by keeping doing it, just do it. One will know the basic theory and implementation of what it is likely. So learning and development will be effective and efficient . Time will be cut short , sometimes many times shorter. A one year training might be a month .
> 
> However, one needs to learn the six core elements from guide who is train and experience. Cant learn these in forum or mental speculation




Do I not understand this because it's WC and I don't do it or don't I understand it because it's science stuff? Or is it just not understandable?


----------



## Transk53

Hendrik said:


> Make sure you know what I am refer to and based on before speculate.
> 
> I know your type of martial art.
> 
> You don't know and don't have the six core elements I refer to That is for sure.



Actually you are quite right. I have just one, lunacy  Quite frankly just put up, or just shut up. Belittling people is really quite sad!!


----------



## Flying Crane

Don't tempt him to come back.


----------



## Transk53

Why?


----------



## Dirty Dog

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the conversations polite and professional.


----------



## Kwan Sau

And...............................the pattern repeats again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

He shows up...
He insults everyone's intelligence...
He ply's his wares (i.e. "only HS has the secret tobacco sauce...and...it is ancient...and...one must be an engineer to discuss, and...oh you get the point)
He then refuses to answer any questions (technical or otherwise)...professing that our miniscule minds are incapable to grasping the special kool aid drink he is trying to impart upon our prehistoric grey matter...and obvious subpar wing chun
He then states that everyone else (besides himself) is rude, crude, and is out to get him...
He then states "so long everyone"
He then surfs the web for another forum to repeat the cycle...

Sad part is, the topic he is so passionate (arrogant?) about may actually be of interest to some here...but he ruins it each and every time and on every forum before the so-called technical discussion is even allowed to begin...


----------



## dlcox

Hendrik said:


> Instead of asking me what the heck I am talking about, let me explain the details to you and have a good mutual Benifit discuss.



Aside from my accusation, I thought I clearly asked you to explain in detail. Instead we get incoherent rambling. So once again I will ask you to please explain the "6 Core Elements" in full detail, so that we may all know what you are referring to. How is it different from or related to "Snake Engine" and "Force Flow"? Please no double talk, just plain simple explanation of what the "Elements" are and their purpose.


----------



## Danny T

Hendrik said:


> the six core elements are the basic elements of the  pre 1850s   Chinese ancient martial art .
> 
> It is the basic common denominator from emei 12 zhuang internal art, 1840 wck SLT,  xing yi, .....etc
> 
> The six  are the :
> physical, mind, breathing, Qi medirian flow, force flow , and momentum.
> Everyone of this element has a clear definition and different level of depth.
> 
> Six core elements are now introduced into western wcners in a scientific and systematic way. Books and training programs from different authors will be surface within a few weeks.
> 
> Those who study wck and Chinese internal art will surely Benifit from this educational platform because this is the basic education platform which will be able to clearly tell what is going on with ancient Chinese internal art.
> 
> Once one understand what are these six, one will be able to know what exactly the ancient Chinese mean , no longer one needs to guess.


Ok. This could be interesting.
You have listed 6 elements. Could you explain how these 6 interact with each other to make the individual a better martial artist?
What will the benefit be for me as a wing chunner? Why knowing and understanding ancient will make me a better person, martial artist, instructor?


----------



## kung fu fighter

dlcox said:


> I had made mention awhile back on KFO about 6 ancient development exercises and Robert Chu was trying to get me to elaborate. I did give out some tidbits in a couple of unrelated threads about them here. Coincidence? Care to elaborate on exactly what these "6 Core Elements" are exactly with explanation? Or will it be left ambiguous and mysterious? Quite frankly this "Physical, Mind, Breathing, Qi Medirian Flow, Force Flow , and Momentum" doesn't detail anything. What are the particulars, and why is it so similar in composition to what I described? Which, by the way, you vehemently shot down. Did you do the research I asked you to do and come to the conclusion I was correct? Or is it just a ploy by you and the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" to try and squeeze a little more juice from my orange?



To get you guys caught up, this ebook should give you guys a good idea of what Hendrik is speaking of YIK KAM TRANSFORM


----------



## Hendrik

Hendrik said:


> Good luck to all. So long, good bye!





Danny T said:


> Ok. This could be interesting.
> You have listed 6 elements. Could you explain how these 6 interact with each other to make the individual a better martial artist?
> What will the benefit be for me as a wing chunner? Why knowing and understanding ancient will make me a better person, martial artist, instructor?




Please read Robert Chu articles in WCI on six core elements.  There are a few recent articles mention and defined six core elements.

Every elements is by its own but the holistic is all elements working together.

So you can think of it as every element or two elements is a layer and the whole thing is a stack up of all layers , but one needs to know every individual clearly and develop it to get the full holistic function


----------



## Hendrik

Try this serious of my utube for some brief description


----------



## Hendrik




----------



## Hendrik




----------



## Hendrik




----------



## ShotoNoob

^^^
KUNG FU:
|
Why those who say WC or any other style of CHINESE traditional style of martial arts is ineffective, only shows why thOSE critics don't know what they are talking about.
|
Not your average kickboxing class.............................


----------



## zuti car

Hendrik said:


> You are a person who confuse your mind set and reality.
> 
> 
> 1. Emei 12 zhuang is a proven by evidence ancient Chinese internal system. Since you keep putting doubt on it.
> 
> I have asked you to go contact Jim a Rosalendo or even Gm Fu Wei Jong himself with his contact information on the museful you like to know in Beijing where the lotus canon is kept.
> 
> You claim you have connection in Taiwan and Main land China to check out...etc.  I have asked you to go a head to track it.
> 
> But you can't come out with anything beside all claim.
> 
> 
> 2. You have a mind set trying to put down ancient Chinese tradition and culture. As above claiming Sun lu tang as the beginning of .....
> 
> Well, get your facts straight before talk. Get a real chinese internal art teacher to study what is reality instead of stuck in your mind set and thinking know it all.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. It is convenient to use the term scientific as mantra to down play everything . Please get real,  understand and know what others are refer to before jump gun.
> 
> 
> I am not insulting you. I am just saying can you please get out of your mind and see the real world?


1. Emei 12 whatever cannot be found prior WWII . There is no evidence , not even one , you can repeat word"proven " as much as you want but without any record , any reference , any mention of such a system before WWII how can anyone take what you claim as a fact. 

I have asked Jim Roselando  and like you he never gave me an answer .

I have never claimed I have any connections anywhere , I just have friends who work in China and who are willing to go and check if you provide the museum address . 

Yes you told me to check , "there is some some book somewhere in Beijing , go find it " . Seriously ?

Actually you are the one who comes with nothing but claims , anything you said cannot be proven by any standard , not even a standard of common sense , you need to work more on your theories . Even more people proved you wrong so many times and you were caught in documents  forgery .

2. Talking about proven historical facts means that I putting Chinese traditional culture down? Chinese need no help from me to put their traditional culture down they did , they did pretty good job them self. It is a fact that Sun Lu Tang is the first who used Taoism and traditional medical theories to explain his arts . No one before him did such a thing , anyone who is willing to spend some time and do his own research can find same results , especially today when a lot old manuscripts are reprinted and can bough or even found on the internet . 
I have real Chinese teacher but i don;t understand the connection with Sun Lu Tang and history .


3. Scientific method is used to prove things right or wrong , I am not putting down anything  you are doing excellent job and you don't need my help .

From time to time it is very hard to know and understand what are you thinking and talking about . English is not my first language but I think there is a different kind of problem here , not language or cultural one .

Yes , you are trying to insult me and it is funny to watch that , every time when you are pressed with real evidence you loose your temper and it is obvious you want to say more , but you are afraid and then you stop ...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

I'm not sure "abstract" discussion such as "physical, mind, breathing, Qi medirian flow, force flow , and momentum" can truly help our MA development in any way. Also some threads will encourage people to express their different point of views. Apparently, this thread *discourages* different opinions instead.


----------



## Danny T

Ahh, This is all about Mind, Body, Spirit, Breathe control, and Martial Art.
Body must be conditioned physically. Strength, Cardio, Diet. Know your body, know your strengths, know your limitations.
Mind must be focused and deliberate upon the goals one is training for.
Spirit, your desire to attain your goals and the willingness to do everything one needs to do to attain it but with humility.
Breath control and body relaxation.Chi and controlling it.
Using the above to becoming the best martial artist you are capable of being.

Thanks.


----------



## zuti car

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I'm not sure "abstract" discussion such as "physical, mind, breathing, Qi medirian flow, force flow , and momentum" can truly help our MA development in any way. Also some threads will encourage people to express their different point of views. Apparently, this thread *discourages* different opinions instead.


Opinion must be based on something , facts or believe . In Hendrik's case is neither , he doesn't believe  and there are no facts , he invented everything . Even though everyone know he invented everything and he is aware of that  , he still demands complete  agreement with his theories and historical claims and he is very aggressive when people ask logical questions or offer different point of view .


----------



## dlcox

Here are the “6 Core Elements” of Hendrik’s Yong Chun as taken from his youtube channel and are discussed in Sergio’s new book. Supposedly these are based upon Emei Shier Zhuang Qigong and only found in Yik Kam Wing Chun.

1.  Physical Body (Joints, Muscle) Biomechanics

2.  Mind (Thinking, Intention, Visualizations, Awareness)

3.  Breathing (Lower Abdominal Breathing)

4.  Qi (Grow, Flow, Bio-Mechanical Bio-Electrical)

5.  Jin (Force Flow, Force Path, Action-Reaction Force)

6.  Momentum (Movement Handling, Tendency of Movement)

Here is part of a discussion Hendrik and I were having a while back, in particular posts #75 & #82,* Internal art observation Page 4 MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community*

This is not the first time this was mentioned to him. A couple of years ago I brought up the theory that Yong Chun was a distillation of Tibetan White Crane. In particular the concepts of Mian Li Zhen (Needle In Cotton), Dou Luo Shou (Gauze Wrapping Hands) and Chuo Mai Zhi (Vein Stabbing Fingers). These methods are directly influenced from the ancient 6 Tantric Yoga’s and exercises of Naropa and Niguma. I was dismissed saying I knew nothing, despite attempts of Robert Chu and others to get me to elaborate further. Well I decided I would throw out some cheese for the mice. Here are the 6 Exercises explained with brief tantric discourse as well. Decide for yourselves if there is any similarity to this newly revealed “6 Core Elements”. It is evident to me that it is a simple re-writing of ancient Tibetan practices and a theory that I put forth years ago.

*Ancient 6 Exercises of Naropa & Niguma*

*Chong Fu Ping - Full Like a Vase*

Sutra, Du Huo (Internal Fire) method also known as Bao Ping Qi (Precious Bottle Breath)

A type of diaphragmatic breathing that produces heat as a side effect. It is the foundation of all Yu Jia (Yoga) and subsequently Qi Gong. Chong Fu Ping encompasses both the Daofa (Daoist) and Fofa (Buddhist) methods of diaphragmatic breathing for concentrating Qi to bone marrow and drawing it to the skin respectively.

Tantric Attributes:

Qi (Energy) functions in the Du & Ren channels and therefore our Yi (Mind) conceives Qi. These two vessels represent subjective-objective activity and karmic activities. Qi represents the horse and Yi represents the rider. If Qi functions in the central channel it transforms into Zhi (Wisdom). The mind conceives the non-duality of things and realizes all Dharmas as unborn. When inner and outer Du Huo (Internal Fire) are synchronized (Mahamudra) with Qi, Jingluo and Yi this is known as the attainment of Jingang Shen (Vajra Body).


*Xuan Fu Lun - Revolve Like a Wheel*

Sutra, Huan Shen (Illusion Body)

Exercise:

A type of unique spine and waist movement used in the generation and root deployment of Qi (Energy). Xuan Fu Lun is a unique bio-mechanic developmental body method of action and reaction force based upon receiving and issuing and has direct correlation to Jin (Power).

Tantric Attributes:

The universe and its contents are nothing but illusions. They have no substance in their nature, they appear like illusory bodies, like dreams, like a mirror reflection. One is to cut off the mundane attachments and realize the ultimate truth. This practice transforms all the mundane thoughts into divine thoughts. The universe becomes a mandala of divine deities where the forms are gods and goddesses, sounds are mantras and thoughts are transcendental wisdom. Even this immaculate appearance is illusion as it has no substance. The Illusory Body still has a tinge of artificiality. The ultimate goal, however, is to achieve a spontaneous, natural experience born out of completely pure Qi and non-dualistic thought to achieve the Illusory Body.


*Wan Fu Gou - Bend Like a Hook*

Sutra, Hui Guang (Radiant Light)

Exercise:

A unique method of recognizing, controlling and subduing movement upon its interception and reception.

Tantric Attributes:

Hui Guang is believed to be the essence of the path. Radiant Light in tantra is spontaneous, self-illuminating enlightened Buddha nature which could only be seen with the ultimate intuitive perspective or the deepest meditation. Though a momentary flash of radiance appears when dying, fainting, yawning and copulating, it is not recognized as such. Through conscious awareness of recognition of Radiant Light, Dharmakaya and Sambhogaka can be experienced.


*Fang Fu Jian - Unleash Like an Arrow*

Sutra,_ Po Ba _(Soul Travel)

Exercise:

This is the method of Mei Hua (Plum Blossom). It is the “Opening of the petals (Jingluo) to release the perfume (Qi)”. This is the direct manifestation and release of Qi (Energy) as based upon its generation and path.

Tantric Attributes:

Po Ba is also known as the teaching to achieve Buddhahood without meditation. The purpose of these teachings is to be ready to die and avoid reincarnation in unfavorable situations. Po Ba is divided into three stages of practice as found in the Bardo. First is to transform into the Radiant Light. Second is to realize the divine nature and accomplish the Illusory Body. Last is to transfer one’s mind-body into the wisdom-mind these trainings are practiced during one’s life time and they are used when all the signs of death are manifest. An accomplished person can help another to a happy departing.


*Dou Fu Gou - Shake Like a Dog*

Sutra,_ Jie Dao _(Between Islands)

Exercise:

Dou Fu Gou is the use of Jin (Power) in all manners of manifestation and type. The major root type is known as Zong (Trembling) because of its natural approach and ability to lead into other methods.

Tantric Attributes:

Jie Dao is essentially the ritual of Chod. The journey through the Bardo. Marpa classifies it as three types, the immediate state between birth and death (Life), the intermediate state of dreams (Bardo) and the state of becoming (Birth). The practice of Bardo is the last stage. The immediate state after death is called the mind-body. It is an important stage as strong reactions occur during this period and consequently will have immediate effect in deciding the realm into which the person will be reborn. Focus, recognition, intent and concentration are required to destroy illusion that presents in the Bardo, whose purpose is to lure, direct, scare and tempt to make one stray from the true path of liberation.


* Zhan Fu Chi - Stretch Like Wings*

Sutra,_ Meng Lan _(Dream Perception)

Exercise:

This is the realm of the mind. It deals with recognition, understanding, visualization, intention, awareness and projection. It is the recognition of illusion, direction and focus of thought and will.

Tantric Attributes:

The first stage of dream practice is to recognize dreams during the time of dreaming. The next stage is to use the dream as a vehicle to practice various spiritual exercises including that of the Illusory Body. Dreams are then transformed into the practice of Radiant Light. Constant practice during dreaming will have great effect on waking hours. There will be a time when the practitioner will see no distinction between the dream, waking hours and death.


These exercises are thousands of years old and are considered the true ancient root of internal cultivation from which Qigong was undoubtedly influenced. It is not necessary that all six of these methods be practiced together. But they as a whole make a complete path. Du Huo, Meng Lan, Jie Dao and Po Ba are considered the four root methods and the other two as their parts. It is not necessary that the total be only six, some texts mention eight, ten or more depending on the branch of Tibetan Buddhism.

The methods mentioned here are specific to my lineage of Tibetan Crane, others my be composed differently depending on their Sangha and focus.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hendrik said:


> Go ask any real college engineering proffessor on technical, they will tell you straight what it is.
> There is no room for ego and all kind of woo woo in engineering.
> 
> Here , I like to carry my thread in this manner . If you know you know, if you don't you don't, if you like to discuss stay technical. But if you trying to act like an expert on things you are clueless than expect to get straight reply.
> 
> It is not that I am arrogant, but for God shake, be proffesional. stick to the facts.





Hendrik said:


> With the six core elements scientific and systematic way, learning become very clear and effective and efficient.





Hendrik said:


> Six core elements has gone beyond the research stage. It is a proven facts in scientific and systematic process.



I'm nowhere close to a Wing Chun expert, so I'm not going to offer any opinion on whose Wing Chun is better.

I'm also not an expert on Chinese history, so I'm not going to offer any opinions on what CMA training was like 150+ years ago.

I _am_ pretty knowledgeable about how _science_ works. If you tell me something has been scientifically proven, I can evaluate that claim with a bit of work. (I also know a little bit about how historians work.)

When scientists do research, they document the entire process and publish it so that their peers can evaluate their methods, attempt to replicate their results, or repeat the experiment while changing variables to see if the outcome is different. Despite the breathless headlines you sometimes see in the media, a single study never proves very much - it's the cumulative weight of dozens or hundreds or thousands of studies from different researchers coming at a problem from different angles that really validates a theory.

If a legitimate scientist tells you something has been "proven", they don't just throw around some pseudo-scientific jargon and tell anyone who questions them to shut up. They can _at least_ summarize how the research was carried out and point you to specific sources where you can read the exact details of the process should you choose to do so.

If you can't tell me how your research was carried out and provide independent sources to validate your claims, then your "facts" have not been scientifically proven. *Period.
*
(If you can give me that information, it doesn't mean the facts necessarily _have_ been proven. It just means that we can go look at the evidence and have a meaningful conversation about what it means.)

History is a rather different endeavor from science in a number of ways, but the above applies in this field as well. If you are going to make claims about what training was like 150 years ago, then you need to explain what your sources are that provide the basis for your claim. Otherwise we have no reason to value your opinion over that of a kid who just watched a kung-fu movie set in the 18th century.


----------



## Hendrik

May I suggest you find out what is it in depth before try to relate things?





dlcox said:


> Here are the “6 Core Elements” of Hendrik’s Yong Chun as taken from his youtube channel and are discussed in Sergio’s new book. Supposedly these are based upon Emei Shier Zhuang Qigong and only found in Yik Kam Wing Chun.
> 
> 1.  Physical Body (Joints, Muscle) Biomechanics
> 
> 2.  Mind (Thinking, Intention, Visualizations, Awareness)
> 
> 3.  Breathing (Lower Abdominal Breathing)
> 
> 4.  Qi (Grow, Flow, Bio-Mechanical Bio-Electrical)
> 
> 5.  Jin (Force Flow, Force Path, Action-Reaction Force)
> 
> 6.  Momentum (Movement Handling, Tendency of Movement)
> 
> Here is part of a discussion Hendrik and I were having a while back, in particular posts #75 & #82,* Internal art observation Page 4 MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community*
> 
> This is not the first time this was mentioned to him. A couple of years ago I brought up the theory that Yong Chun was a distillation of Tibetan White Crane. In particular the concepts of Mian Li Zhen (Needle In Cotton), Dou Luo Shou (Gauze Wrapping Hands) and Chuo Mai Zhi (Vein Stabbing Fingers). These methods are directly influenced from the ancient 6 Tantric Yoga’s and exercises of Naropa and Niguma. I was dismissed saying I knew nothing, despite attempts of Robert Chu and others to get me to elaborate further. Well I decided I would throw out some cheese for the mice. Here are the 6 Exercises explained with brief tantric discourse as well. Decide for yourselves if there is any similarity to this newly revealed “6 Core Elements”. It is evident to me that it is a simple re-writing of ancient Tibetan practices and a theory that I put forth years ago.
> 
> *Ancient 6 Exercises of Naropa & Niguma*
> 
> *Chong Fu Ping - Full Like a Vase*
> 
> Sutra, Du Huo (Internal Fire) method also known as Bao Ping Qi (Precious Bottle Breath)
> 
> A type of diaphragmatic breathing that produces heat as a side effect. It is the foundation of all Yu Jia (Yoga) and subsequently Qi Gong. Chong Fu Ping encompasses both the Daofa (Daoist) and Fofa (Buddhist) methods of diaphragmatic breathing for concentrating Qi to bone marrow and drawing it to the skin respectively.
> 
> Tantric Attributes:
> 
> Qi (Energy) functions in the Du & Ren channels and therefore our Yi (Mind) conceives Qi. These two vessels represent subjective-objective activity and karmic activities. Qi represents the horse and Yi represents the rider. If Qi functions in the central channel it transforms into Zhi (Wisdom). The mind conceives the non-duality of things and realizes all Dharmas as unborn. When inner and outer Du Huo (Internal Fire) are synchronized (Mahamudra) with Qi, Jingluo and Yi this is known as the attainment of Jingang Shen (Vajra Body).
> 
> 
> *Xuan Fu Lun - Revolve Like a Wheel*
> 
> Sutra, Huan Shen (Illusion Body)
> 
> Exercise:
> 
> A type of unique spine and waist movement used in the generation and root deployment of Qi (Energy). Xuan Fu Lun is a unique bio-mechanic developmental body method of action and reaction force based upon receiving and issuing and has direct correlation to Jin (Power).
> 
> Tantric Attributes:
> 
> The universe and its contents are nothing but illusions. They have no substance in their nature, they appear like illusory bodies, like dreams, like a mirror reflection. One is to cut off the mundane attachments and realize the ultimate truth. This practice transforms all the mundane thoughts into divine thoughts. The universe becomes a mandala of divine deities where the forms are gods and goddesses, sounds are mantras and thoughts are transcendental wisdom. Even this immaculate appearance is illusion as it has no substance. The Illusory Body still has a tinge of artificiality. The ultimate goal, however, is to achieve a spontaneous, natural experience born out of completely pure Qi and non-dualistic thought to achieve the Illusory Body.
> 
> 
> *Wan Fu Gou - Bend Like a Hook*
> 
> Sutra, Hui Guang (Radiant Light)
> 
> Exercise:
> 
> A unique method of recognizing, controlling and subduing movement upon its interception and reception.
> 
> Tantric Attributes:
> 
> Hui Guang is believed to be the essence of the path. Radiant Light in tantra is spontaneous, self-illuminating enlightened Buddha nature which could only be seen with the ultimate intuitive perspective or the deepest meditation. Though a momentary flash of radiance appears when dying, fainting, yawning and copulating, it is not recognized as such. Through conscious awareness of recognition of Radiant Light, Dharmakaya and Sambhogaka can be experienced.
> 
> 
> *Fang Fu Jian - Unleash Like an Arrow*
> 
> Sutra,_ Po Ba _(Soul Travel)
> 
> Exercise:
> 
> This is the method of Mei Hua (Plum Blossom). It is the “Opening of the petals (Jingluo) to release the perfume (Qi)”. This is the direct manifestation and release of Qi (Energy) as based upon its generation and path.
> 
> Tantric Attributes:
> 
> Po Ba is also known as the teaching to achieve Buddhahood without meditation. The purpose of these teachings is to be ready to die and avoid reincarnation in unfavorable situations. Po Ba is divided into three stages of practice as found in the Bardo. First is to transform into the Radiant Light. Second is to realize the divine nature and accomplish the Illusory Body. Last is to transfer one’s mind-body into the wisdom-mind these trainings are practiced during one’s life time and they are used when all the signs of death are manifest. An accomplished person can help another to a happy departing.
> 
> 
> *Dou Fu Gou - Shake Like a Dog*
> 
> Sutra,_ Jie Dao _(Between Islands)
> 
> Exercise:
> 
> Dou Fu Gou is the use of Jin (Power) in all manners of manifestation and type. The major root type is known as Zong (Trembling) because of its natural approach and ability to lead into other methods.
> 
> Tantric Attributes:
> 
> Jie Dao is essentially the ritual of Chod. The journey through the Bardo. Marpa classifies it as three types, the immediate state between birth and death (Life), the intermediate state of dreams (Bardo) and the state of becoming (Birth). The practice of Bardo is the last stage. The immediate state after death is called the mind-body. It is an important stage as strong reactions occur during this period and consequently will have immediate effect in deciding the realm into which the person will be reborn. Focus, recognition, intent and concentration are required to destroy illusion that presents in the Bardo, whose purpose is to lure, direct, scare and tempt to make one stray from the true path of liberation.
> 
> 
> * Zhan Fu Chi - Stretch Like Wings*
> 
> Sutra,_ Meng Lan _(Dream Perception)
> 
> Exercise:
> 
> This is the realm of the mind. It deals with recognition, understanding, visualization, intention, awareness and projection. It is the recognition of illusion, direction and focus of thought and will.
> 
> Tantric Attributes:
> 
> The first stage of dream practice is to recognize dreams during the time of dreaming. The next stage is to use the dream as a vehicle to practice various spiritual exercises including that of the Illusory Body. Dreams are then transformed into the practice of Radiant Light. Constant practice during dreaming will have great effect on waking hours. There will be a time when the practitioner will see no distinction between the dream, waking hours and death.
> 
> 
> These exercises are thousands of years old and are considered the true ancient root of internal cultivation from which Qigong was undoubtedly influenced. It is not necessary that all six of these methods be practiced together. But they as a whole make a complete path. Du Huo, Meng Lan, Jie Dao and Po Ba are considered the four root methods and the other two as their parts. It is not necessary that the total be only six, some texts mention eight, ten or more depending on the branch of Tibetan Buddhism.
> 
> The methods mentioned here are specific to my lineage of Tibetan Crane, others my be composed differently depending on their Sangha and focus.


May


----------



## Hendrik

If we don't have evidence and actually be able to evoke the technology to at least a basic way. Will we tell you about the six core elements and wck histories evidence?

As for scientific, we are now open for physics lab or , eeg, ekg , biofeedback , biothermal, biomechanics examination.

That is how far we know by facts




Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm nowhere close to a Wing Chun expert, so I'm not going to offer any opinion on whose Wing Chun is better.
> 
> I'm also not an expert on Chinese history, so I'm not going to offer any opinions on what CMA training was like 150+ years ago.
> 
> I _am_ pretty knowledgeable about how _science_ works. If you tell me something has been scientifically proven, I can evaluate that claim with a bit of work. (I also know a little bit about how historians work.)
> 
> When scientists do research, they document the entire process and publish it so that their peers can evaluate their methods, attempt to replicate their results, or repeat the experiment while changing variables to see if the outcome is different. Despite the breathless headlines you sometimes see in the media, a single study never proves very much - it's the cumulative weight of dozens or hundreds or thousands of studies from different researchers coming at a problem from different angles that really validates a theory.
> 
> If a legitimate scientist tells you something has been "proven", they don't just throw around some pseudo-scientific jargon and tell anyone who questions them to shut up. They can _at least_ summarize how the research was carried out and point you to specific sources where you can read the exact details of the process should you choose to do so.
> 
> If you can't tell me how your research was carried out and provide independent sources to validate your claims, then your "facts" have not been scientifically proven. *Period.
> *
> (If you can give me that information, it doesn't mean the facts necessarily _have_ been proven. It just means that we can go look at the evidence and have a meaningful conversation about what it means.)
> 
> History is a rather different endeavor from science in a number of ways, but the above applies in this field as well. If you are going to make claims about what training was like 150 years ago, then you need to explain what your sources are that provide the basis for your claim. Otherwise we have no reason to value your opinion over that of a kid who just watched a kung-fu movie set in the 18th century.


----------



## Marnetmar




----------



## Xue Sheng

Thought you left, or was this just for the day?



Hendrik said:


> Good luck to all. So long, good bye!



and I honestly have no idea what you are saying in this post because the sentence structure is making no sense to me at all



Hendrik said:


> If we don't have evidence and actually be able to evoke the technology to at least a basic way. Will we tell you about the six core elements and wck histories evidence?
> 
> As for scientific, we are now open for physics lab or , eeg, ekg , biofeedback , biothermal, biomechanics examination.
> 
> That is how far we know by facts



"evoke" makes no sense there



> "If we don't have evidence and actually be able to evoke the technology to at least a basic way." or in other words



If we don't have evidence and actually be able to <bring to the conscious mind> the technology to at least a basic way.



> Will we tell you about the six core elements and wck histories evidence?



what is "wck"? Also since you are talking evidence, where is your evidence or backup documentation to support anything you are saying here




Hendrik said:


> As for scientific, we are now open for physics lab or , eeg, ekg , biofeedback , biothermal, biomechanics examination.



What do unrelated things like Physic lab, eeg, ekg, biofeedback, biomechanics and biothermal have to do with any of this. And again, I am not exactly sure you know what many of those mean exactly



Hendrik said:


> That is how far we know by facts



nope, nothing you have said can be taken as fact, only speculation on your part since you have time and time again refused to produce any "real" verifiable supporting documentation or evidence.


----------



## zuti car

Hendrik said:


> If we don't have evidence and actually be able to evoke the technology to at least a basic way. Will we tell you about the six core elements and wck histories evidence?
> 
> As for scientific, we are now open for physics lab or , eeg, ekg , biofeedback , biothermal, biomechanics examination.
> 
> That is how far we know by facts


And we will see these research and results published when? Before or after you reveal that museum address ?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hendrik:


Hendrik said:


> If we don't have evidence and actually be able to evoke the technology to at least a basic way. Will we tell you about the six core elements and wck histories evidence?
> 
> As for scientific, we are now open for physics lab or , eeg, ekg , biofeedback , biothermal, biomechanics examination.
> 
> That is how far we know by facts


The word "style" has no meaning to me but I do believe some CMA systems has better "power generation method" than the others. For example, in the Baji system, I can just use 3 basic solo drills to train how to generate 3 different power (cross power, sinking power, twisting power). I don't see those training methods exist in some systems such as my favor long fist system. Will you be able to show some drills that a beginner can just spend 3 months training time and get good result from your suggested "power generation method"?

Will you be able to put up a clip to show that one can use your suggested "power generation method" to hit hard on a heavy bag (or just hit onto the thin air)? Some clips like this? Also what's the "common denominator" between your approach and CXW's approach?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hendrik said:


> If we don't have evidence and actually be able to evoke the technology to at least a basic way. Will we tell you about the six core elements and wck histories evidence?
> 
> As for scientific, we are now open for physics lab or , eeg, ekg , biofeedback , biothermal, biomechanics examination.
> 
> That is how far we know by facts



English is not your native language, right?

You might want to make another go at rephrasing all that, perhaps with the help of a native speaker, because it doesn't actually make any coherent sense in English.

I'm not one to nitpick about other people's grammar. I'm generally pretty good at figuring out what someone meant to say even if it didn't come out quite right in written form. In this case, I'm stuck. I can't agree with it, or disagree with it, or comment on it, because it doesn't actually mean anything. It's word salad.

(This isn't to pick on you. I would be even more incoherent trying to express myself in any language other than English. However we can't have a conversation if we can't understand what you are trying to say.)


----------



## dlcox

Hendrik,

I will go on record once again and state that I do not hold conflict with the theories presented by you, per say. I have issue with the manner in which it is all presented. I do not begrudge the likes of Jim Roselando or Sergio Iderola to make a living off the art, but I do not care for deception. I do not care for the manipulation and forgery used to achieve this deception. This has been discussed time and again by you and I and I do not care to beat a dead horse. I do not care if anyone creates their own method or version of an art, but I do not care for agenda that stands to defile my beliefs. You and your crew are like converted Christian missionaries storming over Pagan Europe denouncing the "False" gods while promoting the one "True" god. All the while laying waste to to the beliefs that reared you, simply for the sake of coin.

I too believe that the foundation of Yong Chun can and should be re-examined. That it's roots discovered, but I will not manipulate, alter, commit forgery, deceive or exploit others in efforts to do so. You have the right to present your "Findings" in any manner you see fit, but I would suggest that you give proper credit without agenda and promote within your own branch exclusively. What you present, contrary to your belief, does not hold true to all branches of the art.

There is an old saying that "you will attract more flies with honey than vinegar". It seems you have taken this concept to an extreme, you have flung sh!t at the wall to see what sticks, and we all know what sh!t attracts..........FLIES! You have misunderstood the concept. The idea is to catch flies to keep the fruit from spoiling, not to attract more.

Thank you for your time. I hope you take my suggestions under consideration.

As an FYI I did reference your videos and the booklet. I can say without a shadow of doubt that what I see presented is simply a reworking of Qi Xing (7 Stars), Bagua (8 Diagrams), Wu Xing (5 Patterns), Liu He (6 Harmonies) etc. as supported by Nei Gong and Wai Gong methodology. You can argue this all you want. You will not convince me otherwise simply because everything was re-worded with modern verbiage and reconstructed formats. I actually applaud you for the work put into it, you updated the method to modern standards. It is however nothing new, aside from it's presentation. I can also testify, that as a practitioner of Trulkhor, that the exercises presented in the booklet with their descriptions is undoubtedly a version of the 6 Exercises of Naropa.


----------



## Hendrik

Again, you like to draw conclusion based on terms. 

Please get the content straight before doing that.


You can believe what you like freely as anyone. I let the wcners who is Train in six core elements and 1840 YK SLT share with the world  what is it in the next few years to come.






dlcox said:


> Hendrik,
> 
> I will go on record once again and state that I do not hold conflict with the theories presented by you, per say. I have issue with the manner in which it is all presented. I do not begrudge the likes of Jim Roselando or Sergio Iderola to make a living off the art, but I do not care for deception. I do not care for the manipulation and forgery used to achieve this deception. This has been discussed time and again by you and I and I do not care to beat a dead horse. I do not care if anyone creates their own method or version of an art, but I do not care for agenda that stands to defile my beliefs. You and your crew are like converted Christian missionaries storming over Pagan Europe denouncing the "False" gods while promoting the one "True" god. All the while laying waste to to the beliefs that reared you, simply for the sake of coin.
> 
> I too believe that the foundation of Yong Chun can and should be re-examined. That it's roots discovered, but I will not manipulate, alter, commit forgery, deceive or exploit others in efforts to do so. You have the right to present your "Findings" in any manner you see fit, but I would suggest that you give proper credit without agenda and promote within your own branch exclusively. What you present, contrary to your belief, does not hold true to all branches of the art.
> 
> There is an old saying that "you will attract more flies with honey than vinegar". It seems you have taken this concept to an extreme, you have flung sh!t at the wall to see what sticks, and we all know what sh!t attracts..........FLIES! You have misunderstood the concept. The idea is to catch flies to keep the fruit from spoiling, not to attract more.
> 
> Thank you for your time. I hope you take my suggestions under consideration.
> 
> As an FYI I did reference your videos and the booklet. I can say without a shadow of doubt that what I see presented is simply a reworking of Qi Xing (7 Stars), Bagua (8 Diagrams), Wu Xing (5 Patterns), Liu He (6 Harmonies) etc. as supported by Nei Gong and Wai Gong methodology. You can argue this all you want. You will not convince me otherwise simply because everything was re-worded with modern verbiage and reconstructed formats. I actually applaud you for the work put into it, you updated the method to modern standards. It is however nothing new, aside from it's presentation. I can also testify, that as a practitioner of Trulkhor, that the exercises presented in the booklet with their descriptions is undoubtedly a version of the 6 Exercises of Naropa.
> 
> I have seen and heard all that I care to. Please continue to promote this "6 Core Elements" idea, it only gives validation to my belief that White Crane is the mother of Yong Chun and that Tibetan Qigong, not Emei, is the engine.


----------



## dlcox

Hendrik,

I fail to understand why you feel the need to denounce ancient Chinese, Tibetan and Indian theories. Only to reference them, re-organize them, re-write them, attach them to "Ancestral" Yong Chun and then refer to them as "Ancient" theories but ones not related to those from which they were obviously referenced.

You cannot continue to call them "Ancient' if they are new theories developed by you, and you cannot claim that they were not "Developed" by you but are indeed ancient, yet have no references beyond those exclusively known to you. 

I fail to see your logic. You are egotistic, ethnocentric, arrogant and beligerent. You respond with the same answer every time, "You don't know, you confuse, you don't understand, etc". Yet when anyone asks you to clairify and explain in detail how the methods are different so that we may clearly understand the difference, you refuse. 

You refuse to prove the effectiveness of this "Miraculous" method of generation and direct people back to lectures on youtube that still don't give clairification to their questions.

When a video illustrating applications of "Snake Engine", "Force Flow", "6 Elements", "7 Bows" etc. is presented, people ask how it is any different to what they do, aside from the renaming of terminology. Your reply that it is internal and can only be felt. When asked to clarify how that is different from commonly held understanding of traditional Chinese, Tibetan and Indian theories, you repeat "You don't know, you confuse, you don't understand, etc".

IMO what you present is not "Revolutionary" as you and others call it. It is simply a marketing ploy.

New Age mumbo jumbo that only drives a wedge further into the Yong Chun family. It does nothing to unite. I don't care that you want to be different from everyone else, let your freak flag fly. Don't expect me to acknowledge what you do as legitimate Yong Chun let alone the original ancient method from which all other lines descend.


----------



## Transk53

dlcox said:


> Hendrik,
> 
> I fail to understand why you feel the need to denounce ancient Chinese, Tibetan and Indian theories. Only to reference them, re-organize them, re-write them, attach them to "Ancestral" Yong Chun and then refer to them as "Ancient" theories but ones not related to those from which they were obviously referenced.
> 
> You cannot continue to call them "Ancient' if they are new theories developed by you, and you cannot claim that they were not "Developed" by you but are indeed ancient, yet have no references beyond those exclusively known to you.
> 
> I fail to see your logic. You are egotistic, ethnocentric, arrogant and beligerent. You respond with the same answer every time, "You don't know, you confuse, you don't understand, etc". Yet when anyone asks you to clairify and explain in detail how the methods are different so that we may clearly understand the difference, you refuse.
> 
> You refuse to prove the effectiveness of this "Miraculous" method of generation and direct people back to lectures on youtube that still don't give clairification to their questions.
> 
> When a video illustrating applications of "Snake Engine", "Force Flow", "6 Elements", "7 Bows" etc. is presented, people ask how it is any different to what they do, aside from the renaming of terminology. Your reply that it is internal and can only be felt. When asked to clarify how that is different from commonly held understanding of traditional Chinese, Tibetan and Indian theories, you repeat "You don't know, you confuse, you don't understand, etc".
> 
> IMO what you present is not "Revolutionary" as you and others call it. It is simply a marketing ploy.
> 
> New Age mumbo jumbo that only drives a wedge further into the Yong Chun family. It does nothing to unite. I don't care that you want to be different from everyone else, let your freak flag fly. Don't expect me to acknowledge what you do as legitimate Yong Chun let alone the original ancient method from which all other lines descend.



He is trying to satisfy his ego by going for the rise of others. Somewhat sanctimonious, but his belief.


----------



## Tez3

Who are the 'wcners in the train'?


----------



## Hendrik

欲加之罪，何患无辞。

Here on I leave this forum forever.


----------



## Transk53

Hendrik said:


> 欲加之罪，何患无辞。
> 
> Here on I leave this forum forever.



Buy and good luck with the perfidy


----------



## Tez3

Exit stage left pursued by bear.


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> Exit stage left pursued by bear.



Maybe not. Each has a voice!


----------



## zuti car

He'll be back


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> 欲加之罪，何患无辞。
> 
> Here on I leave this forum forever.



back at ya.... 他根本不懂艺术
对牛弹琴

And hopefully you are at last telling the truth


----------



## Tez3

I like to read other styles sections because I learn things which are either useful for my own training or  are just plain interesting. I don't expect to understand style specific technicalities but I have to admit I was left totally baffled by Hendrik's posts.


----------



## Danny T

I wish he would have given some answers to the questions. Might have been interesting to hear something logical and with real information.


----------



## yak sao

Tez3 said:


> Ibut I have to admit I was left totally baffled by Hendrik's posts.




Get in line sister


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> I have to admit I was left totally baffled by Hendrik's posts.


It's a bit too "abstract" for me too.

- physical (abstract),
- mind (abstract),
- breathing (inhale and exhale),
- Qi medirian flow (abstract),
- force flow (abstract) , and
- momentum (basic physics p = mv).

Why not just say:

- bend and then straight your leg,
- twist your hip,
- rotate your body,
- extend your arm, and
- ...

When Hendrik starts a thread, he should expect 50% of people who will agree with him, and 50% of people who will disagree with him. It's like when you open your window, the butterfly will fly in, but the mosquito will fly in too.

Since Hendrik did't ask

- What's your opinion on this?
- Your comment?
- Any suggestion?
- ...

May be we should not even get into this discussion in the first place. I hate those "I talk and you listen" type of threads. When someone didn't ask for your opinion and you give your opinion, it's called "to use your warm face to touch someone's cold butts".

Am I the only person who feel that way?


----------



## Kwan Sau

He just always comes across with a 'my tea cup is already full' mentality.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Kwan Sau said:


> He just always comes across with a 'my tea cup is already full' mentality.


It's difficult to have any friendly/meaningful discussion with full cup attitude. Of course you can start a thread just to "share information" such as "How to train iron palm". Even if you are an iron palm expert and assume that you know iron palm more than everybody on this planet, you will still need to answer people's question such as:

- Does iron palm has true combat value?
- Is iron palm bad for your health?
- Why is your iron palm training method better then my method?
- How can you prove that iron palm was invented by 1850?
- ...


----------



## Transk53

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It's difficult to have any friendly/meaningful discussion with full cup attitude. Of course you can start a thread just to "share information" such as "How to train iron palm". Even if you are an iron palm expert and assume that you know iron palm more than everybody on this planet, you will still need to answer people's question such as:
> 
> - Does iron palm has true combat value?
> - Is iron palm bad for your health?
> - Why is your iron palm training method better then my method?
> - How can you prove that iron palm was invented by 1850?
> - ...



Good questions. I don't have a clue, but what you post makes logical sense to me. Surely there is only one method. To me Iron Palm means good sword hand.


----------



## Kwan Sau

Transk53 said:


> Good questions. I don't have a clue, but what you post makes logical sense to me. Surely there is only one method. To me Iron Palm means good sword hand.



Transk53, I'm pretty sure KFW just meant it (iron palm example) as just that...an example. I don't think he meant to redirect or hijack the thread topic.  Perhaps this thread should fade into the background. 
But, if iron palm is of interest to you or kung fu wang...perhaps start your own new thread on that topic(?)


----------



## dlcox

My apologies to those that apparently found my last post (#72) offensive and innapropriate.


----------



## Transk53

Kwan Sau said:


> Transk53, I'm pretty sure KFW just meant it (iron palm example) as just that...an example. I don't think he meant to redirect or hijack the thread topic.  Perhaps this thread should fade into the background.
> But, if iron palm is of interest to you or kung fu wang...perhaps start your own new thread on that topic(?)



Noted and good point


----------



## Transk53

dlcox said:


> My apologies to those that apparently found my last post (#72) offensive and innapropriate.



Thought it was fair enough.


----------



## dlcox

Transk53 said:


> Thought it was fair enough.



Someone didn't.


----------



## Xue Sheng

dlcox said:


> My apologies to those that apparently found my last post (#72) offensive and innapropriate.



I had no issues with it


----------



## Kwan Sau

dlcox said:


> My apologies to those that apparently found my last post (#72) offensive and innapropriate.



I thought it was spot on, truthful, tactful, and completely relevant given the individual it was addressing. Well done Sir.


----------



## Vajramusti

dlcox said:


> Hendrik,
> 
> I fail to understand why you feel the need to denounce ancient Chinese, Tibetan and Indian theories. Only to reference them, re-organize them, re-write them, attach them to "Ancestral" Yong Chun and then refer to them as "Ancient" theories but ones not related to those from which they were obviously referenced.
> 
> You cannot continue to call them "Ancient' if they are new theories developed by you, and you cannot claim that they were not "Developed" by you but are indeed ancient, yet have no references beyond those exclusively known to you.
> 
> I fail to see your logic. You are egotistic, ethnocentric, arrogant and beligerent. You respond with the same answer every time, "You don't know, you confuse, you don't understand, etc". Yet when anyone asks you to clairify and explain in detail how the methods are different so that we may clearly understand the difference, you refuse.
> 
> You refuse to prove the effectiveness of this "Miraculous" method of generation and direct people back to lectures on youtube that still don't give clairification to their questions.
> 
> When a video illustrating applications of "Snake Engine", "Force Flow", "6 Elements", "7 Bows" etc. is presented, people ask how it is any different to what they do, aside from the renaming of terminology. Your reply that it is internal and can only be felt. When asked to clarify how that is different from commonly held understanding of traditional Chinese, Tibetan and Indian theories, you repeat "You don't know, you confuse, you don't understand, etc".
> 
> IMO what you present is not "Revolutionary" as you and others call it. It is simply a marketing ploy.
> 
> New Age mumbo jumbo that only drives a wedge further into the Yong Chun family. It does nothing to unite. I don't care that you want to be different from everyone else, let your freak flag fly. Don't expect me to acknowledge what you do as legitimate Yong Chun let alone the original ancient method from which all other lines descend.


----------



## Vajramusti

Xue Sheng said:


> I had no issues with it




Ditto.
It's unproductive to discuss things with Hendrik in a sustained way.
He apparently has a problem. The compassionate thing is to just let him go.
Hi monologues will show up on the net. There could be bits and pieces of insight in them.


----------



## Vajramusti

dlcox said:


> My apologies to those that apparently found my last post (#72) offensive and innapropriate.


--------------------------------------------------------
It was  ok with me.Fair.


----------



## Argus

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It's a bit too "abstract" for me too.
> 
> - physical (abstract),
> - mind (abstract),
> - breathing (inhale and exhale),
> - Qi medirian flow (abstract),
> - force flow (abstract) , and
> - momentum (basic physics p = mv).
> 
> Why not just say:
> 
> - bend and then straight your leg,
> - twist your hip,
> - rotate your body,
> - extend your arm, and
> - ...



It's not so much the quality of being "too" abstract, but rather the underlying definitions and assumptions that determine whether or not an abstracted principle is sound, useful, or has any basis in reality. Without a doubt, abstractions -- even very abstract ones, can be useful, or even vital for accomplishing certain tasks.

I am a programmer, but thank goodness I don't have to write all of my programs in binary. Thankfully, I can code using more the more abstract languages of English and Mathematics. In fact, whenever I write a program, I am utilizing abstractions of abstractions of abstractions, built upon yet more abstractions. And I use these abstracted languages to build my own abstract architecture.

I notice that you're fond of very specific lists, and so I think these examples might be interesting for you. Let's consider that I want to write a program dealing with a number of animals. I have, perhaps, a cow, horse, chicken, bird, dog, cat, fish... and who knows what other animals I might like to add. Now, I could write code defining every single one of these animals, and every single function and characteristic they have, but imagine how much work that would be? And what if I have to compare them, or place them in the same list? It's comparing apples and oranges, and I would have to treat each and every "animal" individually.

So instead, what I can do is create an abstract class of "animal." Now, this isn't a thing that can exist in the real world (-- I mean, what would a generic, abstract animal look like anyway?). So in fact, I can't have an instance of an "animal." But I can have an "animal" that is a dog, and an "animal" that is a cat, etc., and they can all be compared in like terms. I can also save myself a ton of work by making abstract hierarchies of animals based on families that share similar characteristics and functions, so that I don't have to redefine the same characteristics of each and every new animal that I add. So, for example, I can define:
Animal -> Bird -> Sparrow
Animal -> Bird -> Seagull
Animal -> Bird -> Chicken
All birds share many of the same characteristics and functions. So this way, I only need to redefine the look and sound of each bird, and deal with any minor exceptions (for example, over-ride Chicken's "fly" function). That saves me a lot of work, and we also have a useful "Bird" class that we can also use to categorize (or compare) different kinds of animals or birds.

Now, what relation does this have to martial arts? Well, abstract principles, concepts, and ideas can be very useful here too. I believe that many martial artists, and sometimes entire arts, fall into the trap of having a specific response for every kind of specific attack that might come one's way. A "if he does this, you do that" mentality. On the surface, it sounds nice and simple, but it can create a lot of problems -- both specific, and more general. For example:

I might practice responding to a hook with a tan-sau and a punch, because that's what my teacher taught me. But will that work for every hook punch, and is that the only viable response to all hook punches, or even the best response to any specific hook punch given in any specific situation? Absolutely not. Some "hooks" might resemble wild, blunt, extended haymakers. Another hook might come more squarely from the outside. Yet another hook might come in on a tighter line. Some might be aimed high, some might be aimed low. Some might be delivered at a distance, while others might try to pass around one's guard at extremely close distance. Some might be directed at the target, while others are aimed sideways past it. Now, you could try to come up with a response for every single kind of hook punch one might encounter, or you can come up with a more generalized approach that simply recognizes the angle of the incoming attack, and intercepts it in whatever way happens to be most direct or convenient for you, using any number of tools at your disposal to accomplish your goal of deflecting or evading that punch and countering with your own. You might also consider yet broader, and more abstract goals that your art utilizes, such as keeping forward pressure on, filling in the gaps, covering one's centerline, and applying simultaneous attack and defense by utilizing every hand as a potential attacking hand, regardless of what it, or the other, is doing. That kind of big picture thinking, utilizing a more flexible approach and focusing on more general, bigger-picture goals during the course of a fight can be vital to applying your art effectively -- especially in the context of an art such as Wing Chun, which is often trained and applied too "narrowly" or "technique centric" in my opinion.

These are just some examples of how abstract thinking can be useful, and even vital to applying your art. But as with anything, abstractions can be misapplied, unnecessary, or even so poorly (or vaguely) defined as to be meaningless. In the case of Hendrick's abstractions, I find them to be the latter -- too vaguely defined -- at least, as they are presented -- to carry any meaning or provide useful insight.

Of course, he's welcomed to provide more informative definitions if he likes. He may have some good points somewhere, but most of his content is just too vaguely presented for me to judge.


----------



## dlcox

Argus said:


> It's not so much the quality of being "too" abstract, but rather the underlying definitions and assumptions that determine whether or not an abstracted principle is sound, useful, or has any basis in reality. Without a doubt, abstractions -- even very abstract ones, can be useful, or even vital for accomplishing certain tasks.
> 
> I am a programmer, but thank goodness I don't have to write all of my programs in binary. Thankfully, I can code using more the more abstract languages of English and Mathematics. In fact, whenever I write a program, I am utilizing abstractions of abstractions of abstractions, built upon yet more abstractions. And I use these abstracted languages to build my own abstract architecture.
> 
> I notice that you're fond of very specific lists, and so I think these examples might be interesting for you. Let's consider that I want to write a program dealing with a number of animals. I have, perhaps, a cow, horse, chicken, bird, dog, cat, fish... and who knows what other animals I might like to add. Now, I could write code defining every single one of these animals, and every single function and characteristic they have, but imagine how much work that would be? And what if I have to compare them, or place them in the same list? It's comparing apples and oranges, and I would have to treat each and every "animal" individually.
> 
> So instead, what I can do is create an abstract class of "animal." Now, this isn't a thing that can exist in the real world (-- I mean, what would a generic, abstract animal look like anyway?). So in fact, I can't have an instance of an "animal." But I can have an "animal" that is a dog, and an "animal" that is a cat, etc., and they can all be compared in like terms. I can also save myself a ton of work by making abstract hierarchies of animals based on families that share similar characteristics and functions, so that I don't have to redefine the same characteristics of each and every new animal that I add. So, for example, I can define:
> Animal -> Bird -> Sparrow
> Animal -> Bird -> Seagull
> Animal -> Bird -> Chicken
> All birds share many of the same characteristics and functions. So this way, I only need to redefine the look and sound of each bird, and deal with any minor exceptions (for example, over-ride Chicken's "fly" function). That saves me a lot of work, and we also have a useful "Bird" class that we can also use to categorize (or compare) different kinds of animals or birds.
> 
> Now, what relation does this have to martial arts? Well, abstract principles, concepts, and ideas can be very useful here too. I believe that many martial artists, and sometimes entire arts, fall into the trap of having a specific response for every kind of specific attack that might come one's way. A "if he does this, you do that" mentality. On the surface, it sounds nice and simple, but it can create a lot of problems -- both specific, and more general. For example:
> 
> I might practice responding to a hook with a tan-sau and a punch, because that's what my teacher taught me. But will that work for every hook punch, and is that the only viable response to all hook punches, or even the best response to any specific hook punch given in any specific situation? Absolutely not. Some "hooks" might resemble wild, blunt, extended haymakers. Another hook might come more squarely from the outside. Yet another hook might come in on a tighter line. Some might be aimed high, some might be aimed low. Some might be delivered at a distance, while others might try to pass around one's guard at extremely close distance. Some might be directed at the target, while others are aimed sideways past it. Now, you could try to come up with a response for every single kind of hook punch one might encounter, or you can come up with a more generalized approach that simply recognizes the angle of the incoming attack, and intercepts it in whatever way happens to be most direct or convenient for you, using any number of tools at your disposal to accomplish your goal of deflecting or evading that punch and countering with your own. You might also consider yet broader, and more abstract goals that your art utilizes, such as keeping forward pressure on, filling in the gaps, covering one's centerline, and applying simultaneous attack and defense by utilizing every hand as a potential attacking hand, regardless of what it, or the other, is doing. That kind of big picture thinking, utilizing a more flexible approach and focusing on more general, bigger-picture goals during the course of a fight can be vital to applying your art effectively -- especially in the context of an art such as Wing Chun, which is often trained and applied too "narrowly" or "technique centric" in my opinion.
> 
> These are just some examples of how abstract thinking can be useful, and even vital to applying your art. But as with anything, abstractions can be misapplied, unnecessary, or even so poorly (or vaguely) defined as to be meaningless. In the case of Hendrick's abstractions, I find them to be the latter -- too vaguely defined -- at least, as they are presented -- to carry any meaning or provide useful insight.
> 
> Of course, he's welcomed to provide more informative definitions if he likes. He may have some good points somewhere, but most of his content is just too vaguely presented for me to judge.



Nice post, well defined. I like how you used what you understand as a reference for explanation. It was easily followed and understood and I find myself in agreement with your analysis.


----------



## mograph

Argus said:


> It's not so much the quality of being "too" abstract, but rather the underlying definitions and assumptions that determine whether or not an abstracted principle is sound, useful, or has any basis in reality. Without a doubt, abstractions -- even very abstract ones, can be useful, or even vital for accomplishing certain tasks.


Yep. Abstractions are models, and models are useful, as are heuristics (shortcuts) ... as long as we don't mistake the model for the phenomenon, or the map for the territory. Thanks for the post, Argus.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Nothing wrong with abstraction. The object model that the decedent inherits the parent/parents attributes are physical clear. But 

- physical,
- mind,

are just too abstract and carry no concrete meaning at all.


----------



## Argus

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Nothing wrong with abstraction. The object model that the decedent inherits the parent/parents attributes are physical clear. But
> 
> - physical,
> - mind,
> 
> are just too abstract and carry no concrete meaning at all.



They can have meaning, and that meaning itself can be concrete or abstract/conceptual. The problem is that they need to be defined. My point is that it's the lack of definition that makes them meaningless, rather than the level of abstraction.


----------



## Marnetmar

Jesus Christ is this discussion really still happening?


----------



## Shajikfer

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Hendrik:
> 
> The word "style" has no meaning to me but I do believe some CMA systems has better "power generation method" than the others. For example, in the Baji system, I can just use 3 basic solo drills to train how to generate 3 different power (cross power, sinking power, twisting power). I don't see those training methods exist in some systems such as my favor long fist system. Will you be able to show some drills that a beginner can just spend 3 months training time and get good result from your suggested "power generation method"?
> 
> Will you be able to put up a clip to show that one can use your suggested "power generation method" to hit hard on a heavy bag (or just hit onto the thin air)? Some clips like this? Also what's the "common denominator" between your approach and CXW's approach?


 

Correct me if wrong but the power generation comes from strong rooting and how the physical energy is channeled up through the core and expressed outwardly by the hands. Those that follow a straighter line instead of curve should generate more power? If that IS the case, then wouldn't wing chun systems which maintain more linear technique be technically stronger with power generation?

I'm still a novice with the art, I only ask for the sake of better understanding and seeing if I can modify my techniques to have that better power generation.


----------



## Danny T

Marnetmar said:


> Jesus Christ is this discussion really still happening?


No one posted anything for the past couple of days until now. Thanks for keeping it going.
 Did I just do that?!!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Shajikfer said:


> Correct me if wrong but the power generation comes from strong rooting and how the physical energy is channeled up through the core and expressed outwardly by the hands. Those that follow a straighter line instead of curve should generate more power? If that IS the case, then wouldn't wing chun systems which maintain more linear technique be technically stronger with power generation?
> 
> I'm still a novice with the art, I only ask for the sake of better understanding and seeing if I can modify my techniques to have that better power generation.



Teachers from many systems (such as long fist, praying mantis, ...) may say that if you have good foundation (how good foundation is good?) and train long enough (how long training is long?), you will be able to generate power. Some styles such as Baji, Chen Taiji, and XingYi Liu He all have a set of power generation drills that if you just keep training those drills, you will get your power generation in a short period of time. Those styles don't have to use abstract terms such as "physical, mind, breathing, Qi medirian flow, force flow, and momentum" to be associated with the "power generation". Instead, those styles just use simple physics such as "*compress and release*". Actually if you just know how to "compress", the "release" is just come natural.

Will it be better to "do by drills" than to "talk by theory"? I did ask Hendrik to put up some "drills clip" so we can compare the difference and similarity between his approach and other style's approaches.

- Baji,
















- Chen Taiji,






- XingYi Liu He


----------



## Hendrik




----------



## Hendrik




----------



## Hendrik




----------



## Minghe

Good God Hendrik, you really look sick in those Video's! Are you okay? You really don't look well ..... well!


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> 欲加之罪，何患无辞。
> 
> Here on I leave this forum forever.



So apparently this was not true either...


----------



## geezer

Kung Fu Wang said:


> ...Will it be better to "do by drills" than to "talk by theory"? I did ask Hendrik to* put up some "drills clip" so we can compare* the difference and similarity between his approach and other style's approaches.


 
I'm a little confused. I read this post by John followed by three clips of people physically demonstrating methods of movement and issuing force, exactly as stated above. Then Hendrick replies with three clips of nothing but lecture. What gives?

Interestingly, about half way through the first clip, Hendrick is_ dismissive _of the old saying, "Mo gung kau, gung sau." (Don't work your mouth, work your hands.) Well I can certainly see why.


----------



## Xue Sheng

geezer said:


> I'm a little confused. I read this post by John followed by three clips of people physically demonstrating methods of movement and issuing force, exactly as stated above. Then Hendrick replies with three clips of nothing but lecture. What gives?
> 
> Interestingly, about half way through the first clip, Hendrick is_ dismissive _of the old saying, "Mo gung kau, gung sau." (Don't work your mouth, work your hands.) Well I can certainly see why.



Best thing to say as far as Hendrik is concerned 自相矛盾 (zìxiāngmáodùn)...does not surprise me at all [contradicting himself]


----------



## Flying Crane

Shajikfer said:


> Correct me if wrong but the power generation comes from strong rooting and how the physical energy is channeled up through the core and expressed outwardly by the hands. Those that follow a straighter line instead of curve should generate more power? If that IS the case, then wouldn't wing chun systems which maintain more linear technique be technically stronger with power generation?
> 
> I'm still a novice with the art, I only ask for the sake of better understanding and seeing if I can modify my techniques to have that better power generation.


I do not agree that linear necessarily generates more power than circular.  In my system (not wing chun), even linear is circular.  And it's all very powerful.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Flying Crane said:


> I do not agree that linear necessarily generates more power than circular.  In my system (not wing chun), even linear is circular.  And it's all very powerful.



Many look at Xingyiquan and say it is "linear" as well. However there are a lot of small circles in it that are very hard to see. Chen Taijiquan Silk reeling is all about circular movements and that is how they generate a whole lot of power too


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Flying Crane said:


> I do not agree that linear necessarily generates more power than circular.  In my system (not wing chun), even linear is circular.  And it's all very powerful.


The praying mantis "waist chop" is a good example. When your hand is so close to your opponent's body, in order to be able to generate enough power to achieve your goal, you will need to move your hand in a small circle.

Here is a "big circular power generation with full body rotation".


----------



## kung fu fighter

Minghe said:


> Good God Hendrik, you really look sick in those Video's! Are you okay? You really don't look well ..... well!



What do you hope to accomplish with these types of personal attacks??? Hendrik never personally attacked anyone on this thread, he is just sharing his view free of charge to try and help other chuners to get a different perspective on what they are practicing. Take it or leave it, but please no personal attacks.


----------



## dlcox

Flying Crane said:


> I do not agree that linear necessarily generates more power than circular.  In my system (not wing chun), even linear is circular.  And it's all very powerful.


 
Bingo


----------



## dlcox

Xue Sheng said:


> Many look at Xingyiquan and say it is "linear" as well. However there are a lot of small circles in it that are very hard to see. Chen Taijiquan Silk reeling is all about circular movements and that is how they generate a whole lot of power too


 
Again, Bingo. Centrifugal force can generate more than linear force when propelled with the same amount of energy from the root source. Centrifugal force requires a small amount constant generation to create big force build up. Linear force is projected, if propelled with the same amount of initial generation the impact will not be equivalent.


----------



## dlcox

Shajikfer said:


> Correct me if wrong but the power generation comes from strong rooting and how the physical energy is channeled up through the core and expressed outwardly by the hands. Those that follow a straighter line instead of curve should generate more power? If that IS the case, then wouldn't wing chun systems which maintain more linear technique be technically stronger with power generation?
> 
> I'm still a novice with the art, I only ask for the sake of better understanding and seeing if I can modify my techniques to have that better power generation.


 
Think AC/DC, one has the ability to travel over distance while maintaining the force generated, the other loses the generated force over the distance travelled. You must keep in mind that as the force is directed through the "Governors" and "Chancellors" body movement is responsible for the maintenance of the generated force. The wave form of a whip is a good example. How the power is generated and how it travels to its directed destination. Also Yong Chun is more circular than it appears.


----------



## Danny T

Shajikfer said:


> Those that follow a straighter line instead of curve should generate more power? If that IS the case, then wouldn't wing chun systems which maintain more linear technique be technically stronger with power generation?
> 
> I'm still a novice with the art, I only ask for the sake of better understanding and seeing if I can modify my techniques to have that better power generation.


In wing chun most movement is circular, Force is linear. Huge difference. Proper movement to proper position (alignment) at the proper time is what is important.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

dlcox said:


> Centrifugal force can generate more than linear force when propelled with the same amount of energy from the root source.


Both the praying mantis and the CLF systems have a punch called "哈拳 (Ha Quan) - parry and punch back with the same arm" which is a spiral punch. The nice thing about that spiral punch is it can be used to hit your opponent's body that a straight line punch cannot reach. It can also be used as block/deflect and punch back by using the same arm.


----------



## Shajikfer

Trying to delete post lol.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

kung fu fighter said:


> he is just sharing his view free of charge to try and help other chuners to get a different perspective on what they are practicing. Take it or leave it, ....


Someone said in another thread as the following.

"I love the comment one teacher gave when asked why he wouldn't talk on internet forums. 'Why argue... with students?' "

Why do you want to get into online discussion if you have "Why argue... with students?" attitude?


----------



## kung fu fighter

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Someone said in another thread as the following.
> 
> "I love the comment one teacher gave when asked why he wouldn't talk on internet forums. 'Why argue... with students?' "
> 
> Why do you want to get into online discussion if you have "Why argue... with students?" attitude?



Then it would just be the blind leading the blind on this forum. lol

I for one am glad when teachers from different WCK linages share a different perspective on a subject, as I can gain more from the discussions. This include Hendrik, KPM, geezer, Kwan Sau etc, I also enjoyed reading dlcox's insights into "Gross Motor Skill vs. Combined Motor Skill vs. Fine Motor Skill" in the thread entitled "Rambling Ruminations" even though I have my own take on the subject. If every one always agrees this would be a boring place to visit. lol


----------



## Hendrik




----------



## kung fu fighter

Hendrik said:


>


Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Transk53

Okay. What is so ground braking here?


----------



## dlcox

Transk53 said:


> Okay. What is so ground braking here?


 
Nothing, basic White Crane sensitivity drills done with compliant partners standing square to opponent. Exactly the same as the last few videos put out illustrating "7 Bows", "Snake Engine" and "Force Flow". Just marketing for the new book that details this recently discovered "Revolutionary" method.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


>





Hendrik said:


> 欲加之罪，何患无辞。
> 
> Here on I leave this forum forever.



So this was not true either.....why am I not surprised


----------



## zuti car

Yup, Tai Chi and White Crane , nothing new , nothing original . It would be interesting to touch hands with this Sergio guy ...


----------



## Hendrik




----------



## Hendrik

I have read Sifu Sergio's book on the "6 Core Elements" and found it wonderfully interesting.It is a book that I highly recommend.

And I can clearly see how Hendrick's research has greatly contributed to the knowledge of the art as mentioned in the book.

I think part of the issue Hendrick Had on this board had was we could not understand your way of expressing this knowledge but after reading Sifu Sergio's book I see it as very clear!

I would like to offer Hendrik my very sincere apologies. It is my sincere hope that you will accept my apology and that we can become friends well into the future.

Please accept my apology.




Ron Goninan 
China Fuzhou Zhenlan Crane Boxing Australia
White Crane Research Institute Inc
http://www.whitecranegongfu.info
_A seeker of the way_


----------



## dlcox

Funny that those that could not comprehend what taught, once explained to in a new format believe the information to be profound. IMO all that this promotion does is highlight the lack of knowledge held by those impacted by it.

I wish the IWKA and all of its supporters and affiliates much success! The promotion is paying off.

This just goes to prove IMO that many "Masters" of Yong Chun today have very little knowledge of the art, but what do you expect when so many of them only trained for 2 or 3 years and never fought anyone. 

Maybe we should all jump on the band wagon and share in the profits!


----------



## Transk53

dlcox said:


> Nothing, basic White Crane sensitivity drills done with compliant partners standing square to opponent. Exactly the same as the last few videos put out illustrating "7 Bows", "Snake Engine" and "Force Flow". Just marketing for the new book that details this recently discovered "Revolutionary" method.



Thanks. While the vid was interesting watch, I did get a little confused on what was being practised.


----------



## Hendrik

Transk53 said:


> Thanks. While the vid was interesting watch, I did get a little confused on what was being practised.




Get his book or attend his seminar. 

It is much more then what most think. Lots of details beyond the external looks


----------



## Transk53

Hendrik said:


> Get his book or attend his seminar.
> 
> It is much more then what most think. Lots of details beyond the external looks



I'll do some reading up.


----------



## zuti car

I recommend Marvel's comics , they are much more realistic


----------



## Transk53

zuti car said:


> I recommend Marvel's comics , they are much more realistic



Prefer the Commando ones myself.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> I have read Sifu Sergio's book on the "6 Core Elements" and found it wonderfully interesting.It is a book that I highly recommend.
> 
> And I can clearly see how Hendrick's research has greatly contributed to the knowledge of the art as mentioned in the book.
> 
> I think part of the issue Hendrick Had on this board had was we could not understand your way of expressing this knowledge but after reading Sifu Sergio's book I see it as very clear!
> 
> I would like to offer Hendrik my very sincere apologies. It is my sincere hope that you will accept my apology and that we can become friends well into the future.
> 
> Please accept my apology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ron Goninan
> China Fuzhou Zhenlan Crane Boxing Australia
> White Crane Research Institute Inc
> http://www.whitecranegongfu.info
> _A seeker of the way_



Ron use to post here.....so why did he not post this here himself and why did you post it...... if you like, I could post something similar from Ron that says he thinks you like puppies and dance the mambo every Thursday night...... so to sum up, that post, since it was not from Ron and there is no way to verify it...means nothing


----------



## kung fu fighter

Xue Sheng said:


> Ron use to post here.....so why did he not post this here himself and why did you post it...... if you like, I could post something similar from Ron that says he thinks you like puppies and dance the mambo every Thursday night...... so to sum up, that post, since it was not from Ron and there is no way to verify it...means nothing


Here it is from the horse's mouth himself
An Apology Recommendation


----------



## Tez3

kung fu fighter said:


> Here it is from the horse's mouth himself
> An Apology Recommendation




I like the post after it  "I recommend you burn the book and find a real teacher"  oops.


----------



## KPM

kung fu fighter said:


> Here it is from the horse's mouth himself
> An Apology Recommendation



!!!!!!!!!  ;-0   Never thought I would see the day!  ;-)


----------



## Xue Sheng

Ron Goninan comes with his own controversies but I don't feel he is in the same category of controversy as the OP


----------



## Tez3

kung fu fighter said:


> Here it is from the horse's mouth himself
> An Apology Recommendation



As I read it though that apology has nothing to do with this site, it was referring to another site and another 'conversation' which we weren't party to so it really doesn't mean anything does it?


----------



## Minghe

I made that post on the KFO Forum and I stand by it. As for my "controversies ... Matter of opinion really.

I am enjoying my exploration of the Taiwan Penghu Huang Yixiong Minghe and Taiji of the Huang Xingxian lineage of which Iaam a direct disciple.and very happy within same.

I have nothing to prove to anyone least of all those who post here or anywhere else for that matter

Plainly put ... I am sick of the oh so usual bickering and back-stabbing seen on so many forums which is why I post very little anymore and anyhow as I said, I'm far to busy within my own explorations of White Crane.

I'm happy to answer questions about that and I have produced a number of DVD's on our approach to White Crane should anyone be interested: 



 .... Apart from that I wish all the very best!


----------



## KPM

For those that don't know, Ron and Hendrik (and me at times) have gone head to head and not seen eye to eye on many occassions on that  "other" forum.  For Ron to post what he did and apologize and support Sergio's book and Hendriks work means a lot.  Thanks Ron!  Good luck and good studies to you!


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> As I read it though that apology has nothing to do with this site, it was referring to another site and another 'conversation' which we weren't party to so it really doesn't mean anything does it?



Flame wars often need credence else where. Comes down to the fact that some people can't let things go, or at the very least are unwilling to.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Minghe said:


> I made that post on the KFO Forum and I stand by it. As for my "controversies ... Matter of opinion really.
> 
> I am enjoying my exploration of the Taiwan Penghu Huang Yixiong Minghe and Taiji of the Huang Xingxian lineage of which Iaam a direct disciple.and very happy within same.
> 
> I have nothing to prove to anyone least of all those who post here or anywhere else for that matter
> 
> Plainly put ... I am sick of the oh so usual bickering and back-stabbing seen on so many forums which is why I post very little anymore and anyhow as I said, I'm far to busy within my own explorations of White Crane.
> 
> I'm happy to answer questions about that and I have produced a number of DVD's on our approach to White Crane should anyone be interested:
> 
> 
> 
> .... Apart from that I wish all the very best!



Ron

I know any controversy that you are part of is a matter of opinion, which is why I said it was a different level as compared to the OP. I however do not doubt the things you talk about or your legitimacy, I cannot say the same for the OP.

No insult, attack or back stabbing was intended in my post, if it sounded as if it was any of those to you I apologize


----------



## Hendrik

KPM said:


> For those that don't know, Ron and Hendrik (and me at times) have gone head to head and not seen eye to eye on many occassions on that  "other" forum.  For Ron to post what he did and apologize and support Sergio's book and Hendriks work means a lot.  Thanks Ron!  Good luck and good studies to you!




Agree!

It is facts we are searching for. Nothing personal


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Anybody who publish books or DVDs should deserve our respect. In some MA systems, after you have reached to your 3rd degree black belt, the rest of your ranking promotion will depend on your

- books/DVDs that you have published,
- workshops that you have taught,
- fighting teams that you have trained,
- MA tournaments that you have supported and judged,
- ...


----------



## Xue Sheng

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Anybody who publish books or DVDs should deserve our respect.
> - ...



one name Ashida Kim



Kung Fu Wang said:


> Anybody who publish books or DVDs should deserve our respect. In some MA systems, after you have reached to your 3rd degree black belt, the rest of your ranking promotion will depend on your
> 
> - books/DVDs that you have published,
> - workshops that you have taught,
> - fighting teams that you have trained,
> - MA tournaments that you have supported and judged,
> - ...



Interesting... but I do not agree (see above post) I know a few rather good, very well trained MAist who have not



> - books/DVDs that you have published,
> - workshops that you have taught,
> - fighting teams that you have trained,
> - MA tournaments that you have supported and judged,



Nor do they care too, one of the best MA fighters I know has done none of this but he is damn good

I also know a few that have



> - books/DVDs that you have published,
> - workshops that you have taught,
> - fighting teams that you have trained,
> - MA tournaments that you have supported and judged,



Who don't know jack and in the case of one he is a bit of a Charlatan, he has copious DVDs, many of which he learned the style from a DVD, taught multiple workshops, been on a fighting team in his youth, and judged several MA tournaments.....

I know another (who I will not name) who is highly thought of by many but I disagree with just about everything he has ever written because it tends to be jaded by nationalism in the face of actual history. Know a TKD person who have done all you listed as well...but it is his tournaments he sets up for only his students

So no I do not think anyone deserves respect just because they published a book or two, held some workshops, trained on a fight team, and/or supported or judged an MA tournament


----------



## kung fu fighter

Ron should be commended for his public apology to Hendrik, this is the true spirtit of kung fu.
It take alot of courage to do what he did especially since most people on here are more concerned with their ego and being right rather than the truth Thanks Ron!


----------



## JPinAZ

Didn't read past the first page, so sorry if the conversation has gone elsewhere or this has already been covered..



Hendrik said:


> Next week,
> 
> Alan Orr is releasing his new training series with six core elements platform.
> 
> Sergio is also starting his new training seminar based on the six core elements with his new wck book on six core elements will be released in April.
> 
> As  you can also read about the six core elements in Robert Chu WCI article in the past few months.
> 
> You will be happy with this six core elements information released and you can see deeper into the ancient wck and Chinese internal art. With the six core elements scientific and systematic way, learning become very clear and effective and efficient.
> 
> Many sifus Ie: Phil Romero, Jim Rosalendo ....are also using this platform now.



Sounds like an infomercial to me! So much for all of Henrik's years of his 'humble' 'I have nothing to gain or sell, I am just openly sharing for all who wish to learn' spiel. 



Hendrik said:


> Six core elements has gone beyond the research stage. It is a proven facts in scientific and systematic process. A few days of seminar intensive can bring a wcners to gain decade of insight.



So, if all of this had to be recently researched, it must not have been an integral part of any lineage that exists today. Basically, Henrik wasn't even taught this by his own sifu or this wouldn't have had to been so extensively researched for the past 8-10 years - it would have been his common knowledge. So, what he's been doing is 'researching' other art's information (without any amount of good formal trainig in the other arts) and mixing it in with his own few years of WC training... No wonder even Cho Family elders and lineage holders don't back up this Hendrik character!




Hendrik said:


> It is a reasonable claim to say six core elements is the best ancient Chinese internal art systematic educational approach up to date.
> 
> Check out with Alan and Sergio. Try it and see for yourself.



I feel like I just turned on the TV at 3AM and ran into another cheesy infomercial... All sales pitch, no facts of verifiable evidence that this wasn't just patchworked in from Other arts. Oh wait, there is - Hendrik continuously tells us this came from other arts!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

We all know that if you move your body from one extreme to another extreme, your punch will travel through the maximum distance, and you will have chance to generate the maximum power (as shown in the following clip).






Since the WC punch does not go from one extreme to another extreme (your punching arm and your chest are not in a perfect straight line), in order to be able to generate the maximum power, a special power generation method will be needed. Hope the "6 core elements" principle can be the solution for the WC power generation issue.


----------



## Xue Sheng

kung fu fighter said:


> Ron should be commended for his public apology to Hendrik, this is the true spirtit of kung fu.
> It take alot of courage to do what he did especially since most people on here are more concerned with their ego and being right rather than the truth Thanks Ron!



The truth according to who? Hendrick.... sorry I don't think that is truth... as for ego..... for me it is not part of it.... however for Hendrick.... sorry but I think that is a big part of it


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> *Anybody who publish books or DVDs should deserve our respect*. In some MA systems, after you have reached to your 3rd degree black belt, the rest of your ranking promotion will depend on your
> 
> - books/DVDs that you have published,
> - workshops that you have taught,
> - fighting teams that you have trained,
> - MA tournaments that you have supported and judged,
> - ...



Why should we respect someone just because they wrote a book or two, the writing might be rubbish, full of inaccuracies and just worthless. There's a reason for 'vanity publishing'. DVDs these days can be made easily, look as You Tube, full of the things.

Workshops are often held to make money so having respect for people who teach, who more often than not get paid to do it, is again not necessary. Respecting someone for being a good teacher would be right but not for holding a money making workshop/seminar.

Respect because you train a fight team, well, what if the fight team was rubbish, the coach picked the wrong matches for his team and was generally pants why would you respect him just because he was training a fight team?

Respect for supporting a tournament, it could be that those supporting/judging were paid or it could be their school/gym/whatever who were competing so of course they have to be there, no respect for that, it's their job.


----------



## Vajramusti

Kung Fu Wang said:


> We all know that if you move your body from one extreme to another extreme, your punch will travel through the maximum distance, and you will have chance to generate the maximum power (as shown in the following clip).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since the WC punch does not go from one extreme to another extreme (your punching arm and your chest are not in a perfect straight line), in order to be able to generate the maximum power, a special power generation method will be needed. Hope the "6 core elements" principle can be the solution for the WC power generation issue.


-----------------------------------------------------
Some kung fu lines don't know all the coordinated with structure and hands.For those that do- there is plenty of power- without looking at Hendrik's and Sergio's videos.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> Why should we respect someone just because they wrote a book or two?


I prefer to look at the world from the "positive" side. If someone is not my enemy, he is my friend.



Vajramusti said:


> here is plenty of power- without looking at Hendrik's and Sergio's videos.


At least that's the 1st "WC power generation" book that I have seen so far.


----------



## Vajramusti

Xue Sheng said:


> one name Ashida Kim
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting... but I do not agree (see above post) I know a few rather good, very well trained MAist who have not
> 
> 
> 
> Nor do they care too, one of the best MA fighters I know has done none of this but he is damn good
> 
> I also know a few that have
> 
> 
> 
> Who don't know jack and in the case of one he is a bit of a Charlatan, he has copious DVDs, many of which he learned the style from a DVD, taught multiple workshops, been on a fighting team in his youth, and judged several MA tournaments.....
> 
> I know another (who I will not name) who is highly thought of by many but I disagree with just about everything he has ever written because it tends to be jaded by nationalism in the face of actual history. Know a TKD person who have done all you listed as well...but it is his tournaments he sets up for only his students
> 
> So no I do not think anyone deserves respect just because they published a book or two, held some workshops, trained on a fight team, and/or supported or judged an MA tournament


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree. The Shaolin do folks and their offshoots are other examples.


----------



## kung fu fighter

Xue Sheng said:


> The truth according to who? Hendrick.... sorry I don't think that is truth... as for ego..... for me it is not part of it.... however for Hendrick.... sorry but I think that is a big part of it



How would you know whether what Hendrik shows is truth or not if you never touched hands with him or experience it directly. You are speaking from a perspective of ignorance rather than experience. I had first hand experience with it, not only by touching hands with him, but also being able to do it myself.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I prefer to look at the world from the "positive" side. If someone is not my enemy, he is my friend.
> .




What's that got to do with respect? I don't make people my friends just because they wrote a book, that would be weird and a bit creepy.


----------



## Xue Sheng

kung fu fighter said:


> How would you know whether what Hendrik shows is truth or not if you never touched hands with him or experience it directly. You are speaking from a perspective of ignorance rather than experience. I had first hand experience with it, not only by touching hands with him, but also being able to do it myself.



Based on his videos and my experience he does not know what he is talking about when it comes to things qi and internal. He may be very good at Chi Sau, but he has no idea what he is saying in those videos. And his refusal to discuss as well as condescending answers to any questions certainly do not help his position


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> What's that got to do with respect? I don't make people my friends just because they wrote a book, that would be weird and a bit creepy.


It's "1/2 cup full" attitude vs. "1/2 cup empty" attitude. Assume people are good until prove otherwise. As long as someone is interested in MA (any style I don't care), I would always treat that person as my friend with respect.


----------



## Hendrik

Xue Sheng said:


> Based on his videos and my experience he does not know what he is talking about when it comes to things qi and internal. He may be very good at Chi Sau, but he has no idea what he is saying in those videos. And his refusal to discuss as well as condescending answers to any questions certainly do not help his position



LOL

Lets go to biofeedback lab and see who is full of it.

Anytime, anyplace . Set it up and I will be there be it Harvard, UCLA, Boston Univ Lab.

If you not agree with me

Made my day, book up harvard or UCLA biofeedback lab, let see if you really can get result under machine.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It's "1/2 cup full" attitude vs. "1/2 cup empty" attitude. Assume people are good until prove otherwise.



That's nothing to do with respect though, that's treating people properly. It doesn't mean you have to have respect for them until they prove to be or to do something that deserves respect.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> That's nothing to do with respect though, that's treating people properly. It doesn't mean you have to have respect for them until they prove to be or to do something that deserves respect.


To me,

"treating people properly" = "respect others"


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> "treating people properly" = "respect others"



Sorry, respect is earnt. You can respect someone's privacy, space, belongings etc but to have respect for someone means they have to earn it first.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> LOL
> 
> Lets go to biofeedback lab and see who is full of it.
> 
> Anytime, anyplace . Set it up and I will be there be it Harvard, UCLA, Boston Univ Lab.
> 
> Just make sure you can deliver.
> 
> 
> I do have ego because I am not a buddha yet. However, what's wrong to tell the truth what one can do and coach others to be able to do it?
> 
> Stop playing sour grape guy, you don't have it. You might go study chinese literature but clueless on kungfu especially internal art and Qi kung.
> 
> If you not agree with me
> 
> Made my day, book up harvard or UCLA biofeedback lab, let see if you really can get result under machine.



deliver what, is that a challenge, because if it is it is expressly against MT policy, and yes I reported it.

And what am I delivering, you are the one making claims about internal and qi that are incorrect.... so please explain for once and not go for your typical insults and condescension. You are also the one that said you were leaving this forum forever only to keep coming back over and over again.

But I will say at least this time you admitted to your ego, prior to this you always said you had none. And please go back through all of our posts and you will see there are multiple occasions I have tried to discuss this with you and tried to see if there was a misunderstanding and even tried a PM or two and you ignored the PMs and\or responded with insults and condescension in open posts, much like your most recent post.

I will admit I have not watched your last two videos thoroughly, but I will watch them later. I am however wondering why you seem to now have a different position based on what I quickly looked at in your Zhan Zhuang video, that one you seem to actually be correct, but I will watch it later fully


----------



## Tez3

Xue Sheng said:


> You are also the one that said you were leaving this forum forever only to keep coming back over and over again.



Deja Moo?


----------



## Hendrik

Xue Sheng said:


> deliver what, is that a challenge, because if it is it is expressly against MT policy
> 
> And what am I delivering, you are the one making claims about internal and qi that are incorrect.... so please explain for once and not go for your typical insults and condescension. You are also the one that said you were leaving this forum forever only to keep coming back over and over again.




Lol.

Please do not get politic or use MT policy as mantra for your protection.

Since you speak like a pro  it is obvious you need Scientific study to back your claim.

btw. There is a different between challenge and asking you to show proof from the legit scientists as I did.



Correct? Incorrect? Get the scientific data to tell what it is. Otherwise, you are wasting our time here playing words game


----------



## Xue Sheng

You've been wasting our time for awhile now, even said you were leaving a couple times, only to return. And what scientific data are you looking for and what scientific data do you have? Have you been studied by UCLA, Harvard, BU lab, why not throw in Beijing University of TCM since they do actually study this stuff.

And I have never once said I am a pro, you have pushed that on me multiple times and I have on multiple posts told you I am not, but I have also said I think I know more than you on the topic.....


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> Lol.
> 
> Please do not get politic or use MT policy as mantra for your protection.
> 
> Since you speak like a pro  it is obvious you need Scientific study to back your claim.
> 
> btw. There is a different between challenge and asking you to show proof from the legit scientists as I did.
> 
> 
> 
> Correct? Incorrect? Get the scientific data to tell what it is. Otherwise, you are wasting our time here playing words game



FINALLY, you answered a direct question.... and I am not looking for protection, I was asking a question, like I have done multiple times and until now you have never answered one of them.... and what proof do you have


----------



## Vajramusti

Xue Sheng said:


> Based on his videos and my experience he does not know what he is talking about when it comes to things qi and internal. He may be very good at Chi Sau, but he has no idea what he is saying in those videos. And his refusal to discuss as well as condescending answers to any questions certainly do not help his position


----------------------------------------------------------------
Reluctantly bring it up again. I  actually did  chi sao with Hendrik in his home and was quite unimpressed. Since then he ignores critiques and goes on and on claiming  it's not based on ego


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik

Since you threw this in I am now going to ask this question and I will likely ask it again

Have you ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by UCLA, Harvard or BU lab? Also Have you ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by any reputable university or college? And if so, where can we find proof of, or read, this study?


----------



## jks9199

Ladies & gentlemen...

Scientific investigation and friendly meet ups can always be interesting.  But we're not in the business of proving claims here, and challenges to fight are absolutely forbidden.  Let's try to keep the discussion on a friendly and polite basis, OK?

jks9199
Administrator


----------



## Transk53

Hendrik said:


> Lol.
> 
> Please do not get politic or use MT policy as mantra for your protection.
> 
> Since you speak like a pro  it is obvious you need Scientific study to back your claim.
> 
> btw. There is a different between challenge and asking you to show proof from the legit scientists as I did.
> 
> 
> 
> Correct? Incorrect? Get the scientific data to tell what it is. Otherwise, you are wasting our time here playing words game



Read on how to start a flame war lol


----------



## KPM

Tez3 said:


> Sorry, respect is earnt. You can respect someone's privacy, space, belongings etc but to have respect for someone means they have to earn it first.


 
Sorry, but that's a load of BS and goes against the rules of polite society.  You have basic respect for someone until they prove that they are NOT deserving of it.  When you interact with a stranger in public do you not treat them with manners and respect?  If a stranger asks you for the information, do you ignore them and walk away because they have not yet earned your respect and therefore willingness to take time to help them?  If you are standing beside a stranger in line and they are speaking their mind about a particular topic do you politely acknowledge what they are saying, or so you tell them to shut the fxck up because you don't respect them enough to listen to what they have to say?


----------



## Hendrik

Xue Sheng said:


> Hendrik
> 
> Since you threw this in I am now going to ask this question and I will likely ask it again
> 
> Have you ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by UCLA, Harvard or BU lab? Also Have you ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by any reputable university or college? And if so, where can we find proof of, or read, this study?





For the record,

I have many sifus in qigong and internl art. This is one sifu of mine participate in scientific study of qigong  where I witness and have talked to the researchers from university who visit my sifu.

Please read the following report

Untitled Document


As for me, eeg, ekg, biofeedback machine are tools of my training.
I share partial of my biofeedback machine in this utube. Those who had visited me know my machines 






Thus, I am not challenge anyone but addressing please have your data before you made claim


----------



## Hendrik

Article 1


----------



## Hendrik

Article 2


----------



## Hendrik

Article 3


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> For the record,
> 
> I have many sifus in qigong and internl art. This is one sifu of mine participate in scientific study of qigong .
> 
> Please read the following report
> 
> Untitled Document
> 
> 
> As for me, eeg, ekg, biofeedback machine are tools of my training.
> 
> Thus, I am not challenge anyone but addressing please have your data before you made claim



thank you for the info but that is not the question I asked

I asked

_*Have you* ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by UCLA, Harvard or BU lab? Also Have you ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by any reputable university or college? And if so, where can we find proof of, or read, this study?_

Not if your teacher ever took part in a study and not what tools you use


----------



## Xue Sheng

The attached articles are interesting but _*Have you* ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by UCLA, Harvard or BU lab? Also Have you ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by any reputable university or college? And if so, where can we find proof of, or read, this study?

I_


----------



## Hendrik

Xue Sheng said:


> thank you for the info but that is not the question I asked
> 
> I asked
> 
> _*Have you* ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by UCLA, Harvard or BU lab? Also Have you ever been part of a scientific study of qi done by any reputable university or college? And if so, where can we find proof of, or read, this study?_
> 
> Not if your teacher ever took part in a study and not what tools you use




I was a subject for my friends master degree research  thesis in Iowa state university PE dept. around 1987. His research is on how internal art training effect on the practitioner. He is a taiji sifu from Hong Kong .


So?

Have you have similar experience?


----------



## Hendrik

I love to be PC. 
But not to the point to let those who pretend to be expert mislead the public.

Often some people just study some chinese literature and words then thinking they know qigong and internal art. 

I avoid those people, but if they keep challenge me in my thread. I would ask for data . And sure those who keep playing words game and defocus. I know they don't have anything real.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> I was a subject for my friends master degree research  thesis in Iowa state university PE dept. around 1987. His research is on how internal art effect on the practitioner. He is a taiji sifu from Hong Kong .
> 
> 
> So?
> 
> Have you have similar experience?



nope, never claimed to or brought it up either, but then my taiji sifu has never been part of any study either nor have any of the people I studied Qigong with, although one of them was a university professor and my taiji sifu is a doctor (retired) trained both in old school TCM and western medicine. However I believe my wife has been part of a few studies, not the subject but the one of the people doing the study, when she was in China.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> I love to be PC.
> But not to the point to let those who pretend to be expert mislead the public.
> 
> Often some people just study some chinese literature and words then thinking they know qigong and internal art.
> 
> I avoid those people, but if they keep challenge me in my thread. I would ask for data . And sure those who keep playing words game and defocus. I know they don't have anything real.



Another question, is this directed at me? 

And to data I have never once read anyplace where you asked for data on any site you have been on, however I have seen it asked of you many times and it has never been given. As to your friends masters thesis, is there a copy of it available anywhere that can be read? Nothing personal but anyone can make any claim they want but without proof it is just that a claim


----------



## Hendrik

Vajramusti said:


> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Reluctantly bring it up again. I  actually did  chi sao with Hendrik in his home and was quite unimpressed. Since then he ignores critiques and goes on and on claiming  it's not based on ego




Joy,

As usual,
You are free to have your opinion on anything.


I have never ignored claim. But I don't kow tau to those who play politics instead of present facts.


Btw. It is not ego, but tell the world what exist. And sure those who got obsoleted will not like it but keep play politic. So, who is based on ego?


----------



## Hendrik

Xue Sheng said:


> nope, never claimed to or brought it up either, but then my taiji sifu has never been part of any study either nor have any of the people I studied Qigong with, although one of them was a university professor and my taiji sifu is a doctor (retired) trained both in old school TCM and western medicine. However I believe my wife has been part of a few studies, not the subject but the one of the people doing the study, when she was in China.




So,  take back your comment on me in term of internal Art and qigong.  You obviously is not in the level of involvement and has the experience .


What is th point to mislead western world on the field you are not expert in?


----------



## Minghe

I made the apology. It was my decision.

With the advent of a emerging global economy and an ever-shrinking world due to the Internet, travel etc it is now more important than ever that we as people (forget "Martial Artists" ... as I don't view anyone posting on forums to be one) learn to get along with each other or at least agree to disagree and move on.

This forum should be viewed as a virtual school where you would honour yourself and others by your own behaviour.


----------



## Hendrik

Six core elements comes from details decades of studying with many top sifus. Examine with scientific biofeedback tools and experiments with momentum in sparring  and Newtonian force trajectory simulation.

It is a fact, one can be transform within 16 hours or so, because with scientific and systematic process one can lead to aware of the key elements and thus improve ones performance drastically.

Yes, this systematic process technology exist today in the west. It cut down the old ways of one has to take years or decades or even life time to guess .

Read the feedback from those who has trained with this science.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> So,  take back your comment on me in term of internal Art and qigong.  You obviously is not in the level of involvement and has the experience .
> 
> 
> What is th point to mislead western world on the field you are not expert in?




No, not being part of a study does not mean anything at all. Like I said, my taiji sifu has never been part of any study either, but I am absolutely certain he is much better trained than you,and my wife is as well. I have trained many years as have many and claiming, and that is all it is at the moment a claim, to be in a master's thesis is not a university level study and it is not proven since you haven't produced ay proof to back up the claim. I still do not think you have a understanding of qigong you claim to have and you have made many claims in multiple sites and have yet to produce any proof to back up your claims. I still believe I have more training here than you. As to your post saying



> Often some people just study some chinese literature and words then thinking they know qigong and internal art.



That is exactly what you have done in other threads, claimed superior knowledge because you read Chinese texts.

And how many times must I tell you this, I have never claimed to be an expert, and you are not either. But I do believe I know more about it than you and I am not misleading anyone, however I feel you are.


----------



## Hendrik

Xue Sheng said:


> No, not being part of a study does not mean anything at all. Like I said, my taiji sifu has never been part of any study either, but I am absolutely certain he is much better trained than you,and my wife is as well. I have trained many years as have many and claiming, and that is all it is at the moment a claim, to be in a master's thesis is not a university level study and it is not proven since you haven't produced ay proof to back up the claim. I still do not think you have a understanding of qigong you claim to have and you have made many claims in multiple sites and have yet to produce any proof to back up your claims. I still believe I have more training here than you. As to your post saying
> 
> 
> 
> That is exactly what you have done in other threads, claimed superior knowledge because you read Chinese texts.
> 
> And how many times must I tell you this, I have never claimed to be an expert, and you are not either. But I do believe I know more about it than you and I am not misleading anyone, however I feel you are.




Great answer !

Sorry, I am not willing to waste my time further


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> Great answer !
> 
> Sorry, I am not willing to waste my time further



ahh there is the Hendrik condescension and avoidance of answering questions we all have come to expect. Still not backing up your claims with any concrete proof. 

But I think we can agree on one thing this is a waste of time... there is a great passage from Zen in the martial arts by Joe Hyams



> On one such occasion we talked about the difference between wasting time and spending time. Bruce was the first to speak.
> 
> “To spend time is to pass it in a specific manner” he said. “We are spending it during lessons just as we are spending it now in conversation. To waste time is to expend it thoughtlessly or carelessly. We all have time to either spend or waste and it is our decision what to do with it. But once passed, it is gone forever.
> 
> “It is the most precious commodity we have, “agreed Sterling. “I always view my time as divided into infinite moments or transactions or contacts. Anyone who steals my time is stealing my life because they are taking my existence from me. As I get older, I realize that time is the only thing I have left. So when someone comes to me with a project, I estimate the time it will take me to do it and then ask myself, ‘Do I want to spend weeks or months of what little time I have on this project? Is it worth it or is it wasting my time?’ If I consider the project time-worthy I do it.
> 
> 
> “I apply this same yardstick to my social relations. I will not permit people to steal my time. I have limited my friends to those people with whom time passes happily. There are moments in my life - necessary moments - when I don’t do anything but what is my choice. The choice of how I spend my time is mine, and it is not dictated by social convention”
> 
> After Sterling finished talking, Bruce looked into space for a few moments. When he finally spoke, it was to ask if he could make a telephone call.
> 
> When he came back, Bruce was smiling. “I just cancelled an appointment.” he said. “It was with someone who wanted to waste my time and not help me spend it”



You want to waste my time not help me spend it so..... we're done here.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

KPM said:


> You have basic respect for someone until they prove that they are NOT deserving of it.


Agree! If we can all send out "positive" energy and let people around us to feel positive, the world will be a much pleasant place to live.


----------



## Tez3

Hendrik said:


> Great answer !
> 
> Sorry, I am not willing to waste my time further




Are you leaving the site forever...again?


----------



## Transk53

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! If we can all send out "positive" energy and let people around us to feel positive, the world will be a much pleasant place to live.



Nice idea. What happens to the negative energy?


----------



## Tez3

Transk53 said:


> Nice idea. What happens to the negative energy?




Politicians gather it up and save it for General Elections...


----------



## Transk53

Tez3 said:


> Politicians gather it up and save it for General Elections...



Yep, just as plausible as Timothy Leary.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hendrik said:


> Lets go to biofeedback lab and see who is full of it.
> 
> Anytime, anyplace . Set it up and I will be there be it Harvard, UCLA, Boston Univ Lab.



Okay, you've got my interest again. What hypothesis would you be testing in this lab? What procedures would you be using and what results would you looking for?

Just being in a lab doesn't make what you are doing scientific. You need to make some sort of falsifiable prediction. What is your falsifiable prediction?



Hendrik said:


> Article 1



This would indeed be an impressive result if it could be backed up. Was it ever published in a peer-reviewed journal? If such results could be consistently obtained, then Dr. Neely would have a good shot at winning a Nobel Prize for being in the forefront of research on the topic. Seems strange that he wouldn't publish the results and then continue doing more studies.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Transk53 said:


> Nice idea. What happens to the negative energy?



beginner level - inhale "positive" energy and exhale "negative" energy (you only care about yourself and just make yourself happy).
intermediate level - inhale "positive" energy and exhale "positive" energy (help others, not only make yourself happy, you make other happy too).
advance level - inhale "negative" energy and exhale "positive" energy (let all the negative energy to come to you, you have to reach to God's level to do this).


----------



## Transk53

Kung Fu Wang said:


> beginner level - inhale "positive" energy and exhale "negative" energy (you only care about yourself and just make yourself happy).
> intermediate level - inhale "positive" energy and exhale "positive" energy (help others, not only make yourself happy, you make other happy too).
> advance level - inhale "negative" energy and exhale "positive" energy (let all the negative energy to come to you, you have to reach to God's level to do this).



I don't disagree, I would be at intermediate level. I worked very hard at my social skills on that count, with a lot of help of course. I no longer piss everybody off at work with my "whatever you do don't piss him off)(my workmates viewpoint primarily) as soon as I walk in the door. Still though, my negative energy is still there for myself. Without it, I would be able to calm myself as it were. Nice answer though


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tony Dismukes said:


> Just being in a lab doesn't make what you are doing scientific. You need to make some sort of falsifiable prediction. What is your falsifiable prediction?


In science, first you come up your "assumption", you then try to prove it. Hendrik came up a "WC power generation assumption - 6 core elements". Now it's time for him to prove whether his "assumption" is as good as (or better than) other power generation method that exist in the CMA. This is why I would like to ask Hendrik to put up similar clip as the following clips (those 3 styles are famous in CMA power generation) so we can compare the similarity or the difference.

If we look at the following 3 clips, we can find something in common such as:

- compress your body and then release,
- stretch yourself to the maximum in one side then release yourself to the other side,
- use a soft slow move to create a hard fast move,
- ...

Please notice that all those power generation will take at least "1 full second". When you deliver your WC "chain punches", you may throw 6 punches within 1 second. Can you truly be able to generate your maximum power within that 1/6 second? 

Can the "6 core elements" be able to solve the "power vs speed" problem that one can generate the maximum power within 1/6 second, also repeat the same process such as 6 punches in 1 second?

Baji power generation method:






Chen Taiji power generation method:






XingYi Liu He power generation method:


----------



## Hendrik

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In science, first you come up your "assumption", you then try to prove it. Hendrik came up a "WC power generation assumption - 6 core elements". Now it's time for him to prove whether his "assumption" is as good as (or better than) other power generation method that exist in the CMA. This is why I would like to ask Hendrik to put up similar clip as the following clips (those 3 styles are famous in CMA power generation) so we can compare the similarity or the difference.
> 
> If we look at the following 3 clips, we can find something in common such as:
> 
> - compress your body and then release,
> - stretch yourself to the maximum in one side then release yourself to the other side,
> - use a soft slow move to create a hard fast move,
> - ...
> 
> Please notice that all those power generation will take at least "1 full second". When you deliver your WC "chain punches", you may throw 6 punches within 1 second. Can you truly be able to generate your maximum power within that 1/6 second?
> 
> Can the "6 core elements" be able to solve the "power vs speed" problem that one can generate the maximum power within 1/6 second, also repeat the same process such as 6 punches in 1 second?
> 
> Baji power generation method:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chen Taiji power generation method:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> XingYi Liu He power generation method:




John,

You have totally missing my points which i have many times explain to you


----------



## Vajramusti

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In science, first you come up your "assumption", you then try to prove it. Hendrik came up a "WC power generation assumption - 6 core elements". Now it's time for him to prove whether his "assumption" is as good as (or better than) other power generation method that exist in the CMA. This is why I would like to ask Hendrik to put up similar clip as the following clips (those 3 styles are famous in CMA power generation) so we can compare the similarity or the difference.
> 
> If we look at the following 3 clips, we can find something in common such as:
> 
> - compress your body and then release,
> - stretch yourself to the maximum in one side then release yourself to the other side,
> - use a soft slow move to create a hard fast move,
> - ...
> 
> Please notice that all those power generation will take at least "1 full second". When you deliver your WC "chain punches", you may throw 6 punches within 1 second. Can you truly be able to generate your maximum power within that 1/6 second?
> 
> Can the "6 core elements" be able to solve the "power vs speed" problem that one can generate the maximum power within 1/6 second, also repeat the same process such as 6 punches in 1 second?
> 
> Baji power generation method:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chen Taiji power generation method:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> XingYi Liu He power generation method:


----------



## Vajramusti

Hi John- difficult to generalize across wing chun lines. There are differences in developing a punch and applying ina situation.
In application only 1 to 3 may be necessary.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hendrik said:


> You have totally missing my points which i have many times explain to you


You have explain your assumption/theory quite well in the past. It's time to prove it. In order to compare the "similarity" and "difference", will you be able to put up a clip similar to those 3 clips that I had put up?

Even Einstein needed to prove his "theory of relativity".



Vajramusti said:


> Hi John- difficult to generalize across wing chun lines. There are differences in developing a punch and applying ina situation.
> In application only 1 to 3 may be necessary.


A movie clip comparison should be an interested discussion.


----------



## Vajramusti

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You have explain your assumption/theory quite well in the past. It's time to prove it. In order to compare the "similarity" and "difference", will you be able to put up a clip similar to those 3 clips that I had put up?
> 
> Even Einstein needed to prove his "theory of relativity".
> 
> 
> A movie clip comparison should be an interested discussion.





Kung Fu Wang said:


> You have explain your assumption/theory quite well in the past. It's time to prove it. In order to compare the "similarity" and "difference", will you be able to put up a clip similar to those 3 clips that I had put up?
> 
> Even Einstein needed to prove his "theory of relativity".
> 
> 
> A movie clip comparison should be an interested discussion.


------------------------------------------------------------
Hi John- I dont do movies or videos- dont even now how.. BTW-Einstein was not a lab scientist- others tested his ideas.
I can show   things to anyone I chose to when I want to.


----------



## Vajramusti

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In science, first you come up your "assumption", you then try to prove it. Hendrik came up a "WC power generation assumption - 6 core elements". Now it's time for him to prove whether his "assumption" is as good as (or better than) other power generation method that exist in the CMA. This is why I would like to ask Hendrik to put up similar clip as the following clips (those 3 styles are famous in CMA power generation) so we can compare the similarity or the difference.
> 
> If we look at the following 3 clips, we can find something in common such as:
> 
> - compress your body and then release,
> - stretch yourself to the maximum in one side then release yourself to the other side,
> - use a soft slow move to create a hard fast move,
> - ...
> 
> Please notice that all those power generation will take at least "1 full second". When you deliver your WC "chain punches", you may throw 6 punches within 1 second. Can you truly be able to generate your maximum power within that 1/6 second?
> 
> Can the "6 core elements" be able to solve the "power vs speed" problem that one can generate the maximum power within 1/6 second, also repeat the same process such as 6 punches in 1 second?
> 
> Baji power generation method:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chen Taiji power generation method:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> XingYi Liu He power generation method:


----------



## Vajramusti

CXW's fajin is awesome- ditto for members of his family imcluding  CXX and his son.

WC punch  with the right structure is also awesome.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Vajramusti said:


> CXW's fajin is awesome- ditto for members of his family imcluding  CXX and his son.
> 
> WC punch  with the right structure is also awesome.


In your opinion, what's the similarity and difference between the WC's power generation method and the CXW's power generation method?


----------



## Minghe

Man oh man oh man! I don't get it.I really don't. I offer Hendrick Santo a perfectly open and honest apology for my views of his writings as contributed to Sifu Sergio's book which I still regard as an interesting read.

Despite  him telling me via Private Messages on Facebook that he accepts the apology and then in the next breath gets all "shirty" and arrogant because I asked him for his research and opinions as I wanted to apply some to my own direction and try to get my own art looking back to its origins!!! In brief I had wanted to work with the guy to see, perhaps even learn  more accurately where he was coming from.

I mean WTF?

I am not going to divulge the content of those Private Messages as that would be unethical and unprofessional... but I just cannot get this guy? I mean he basically agreed with me, accepted my apology fully and then turned around in a very short space of communications and said I was not sincere in my apology (Despite me giving him no reasons to think otherwise!) and that I was somehow "Baiting Him" Man, it's just crazy!

The level of mistrust and negativity he holds within must be terrible consuming and personally damaging to him.

I myself have grown tired of the type of debates of the mature I contributed to in the past on this matter. I had wanted and god knows tried to move on from that point but he just can't see beyond what must be his own arrogance. I mean, honestly I have no ill feelings towards the guy. I only know of him from his posts on this and other forums and of course some of the ideas that Sergio has expanded upon and wrote more clearly in his book (which I had though did some good for Hendrik) and yet he is imprisoned in some sort of self-indulgent paranoia and negativity. Wow!, what a way to live.

I'm sorry Hendrick, I truly am but your arrogance and paranoia do you and your research no favours.


----------



## Vajramusti

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In your opinion, what's the similarity and difference between the WC's power generation method and the CXW's power generation method?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many similarities and differences- using the dan tien is a similarity- how used is different-for a start- the differences between silk reeling and chum kiu.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In science, first you come up your "assumption", you then try to prove it. Hendrik came up a "WC power generation assumption - 6 core elements". Now it's time for him to prove whether his "assumption" is as good as (or better than) other power generation method that exist in the CMA.



I'm not sure that is his hypothesis, though. His challenge was to meet up in a biofeedback lab. If he wants to test  power generation, a biofeedback lab is not the place to do it. They would not have any tools for measuring power/force/impact.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm not sure that is his hypothesis, though. His challenge was to meet up in a biofeedback lab. If he wants to test  power generation, a biofeedback lab is not the place to do it. They would not have any tools for measuring power/force/impact.


If you think that your

- head lock is strong enough to tap people out. you should roll against BBJ guys on the mat.
- rhino guard is safe enough to protect your head. you should box against boxers in the ring.

You then measure your successful/failure rate.

If you think that your "power generation method (such as the 6 core elements)" is as good as (or better than) other existence power generation methods, how will you test it? After you can "prove" your "assumption", people in the future will apply your "proved theory" without any doubt.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

The following clip also show "power generation method" similar to those 3 clips posted before

- move body from one extreme to another extreme.
- punching arm and chest are in a perfect straight line.
- use soft/relax to achieve hard/fast.
- ...

Just a simple drill, it shows how to train and how to achieve your goal (spin your body, punch out your arm).


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you think that your
> 
> - head lock is strong enough to tap people out. you should roll against BBJ guys on the mat.
> - rhino guard is safe enough to protect your head. you should box against boxers in the ring.
> 
> You then measure your successful/failure rate.
> 
> If you think that your "power generation method (such as the 6 core elements)" is as good as (or better than) other existence power generation methods, how will you test it? After you can "prove" your "assumption", people in the future will apply your "proved theory" without any doubt.


Well, yes, that would make sense to a sensible person. However none of that is what Hendrick seems to be proposing. He's talking about proving his claims in a biofeedback lab, which has nothing to do with power generation of any sort. That would seem to leave a couple of possibilities:

1) He is interested in proving some sort of unspecified theory on some subject other than methods of hitting hard.
or...
2) He is spouting meaningless pseudo-scientific technobabble in an effort to appropriate the authority of science for whatever theory of martial arts practice he is trying to promote.

Unless he chooses to clarify what point he is trying to make with his references to scientific proof and laboratories, we'll just have to guess which of the two apply.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Minghe said:


> Man oh man oh man! I don't get it.I really don't. I offer Hendrick Santo a perfectly open and honest apology for my views of his writings as contributed to Sifu Sergio's book which I still regard as an interesting read.
> 
> Despite  him telling me via Private Messages on Facebook that he accepts the apology and then in the next breath gets all "shirty" and arrogant because I asked him for his research and opinions as I wanted to apply some to my own direction and try to get my own art looking back to its origins!!! In brief I had wanted to work with the guy to see, perhaps even learn  more accurately where he was coming from.
> 
> I mean WTF?
> 
> I am not going to divulge the content of those Private Messages as that would be unethical and unprofessional... but I just cannot get this guy? I mean he basically agreed with me, accepted my apology fully and then turned around in a very short space of communications and said I was not sincere in my apology (Despite me giving him no reasons to think otherwise!) and that I was somehow "Baiting Him" Man, it's just crazy!
> 
> The level of mistrust and negativity he holds within must be terrible consuming and personally damaging to him.
> 
> I myself have grown tired of the type of debates of the mature I contributed to in the past on this matter. I had wanted and god knows tried to move on from that point but he just can't see beyond what must be his own arrogance. I mean, honestly I have no ill feelings towards the guy. I only know of him from his posts on this and other forums and of course some of the ideas that Sergio has expanded upon and wrote more clearly in his book (which I had though did some good for Hendrik) and yet he is imprisoned in some sort of self-indulgent paranoia and negativity. Wow!, what a way to live.
> 
> I'm sorry Hendrick, I truly am but your arrogance and paranoia do you and your research no favours.



Hendrik is good at paranoia-zhang, Insult-quan and condescension-fu


----------



## zuti car

If this  is representation of "6 core elemnts " I would have to say a thing or two.
First , the title of the video "1700 wing chun" , Hendrik changed the year of his wing chun sevral times , it was 1850, then 1848,after that 1845 , 1800, and now is 1700, His wing chun becoming  older and more original by day .
Second , there is no  wing chun shown on this video, mostly tai chi mixed with some white crane
Third , what sergio is showing are cheap tricks , I can teach anyone to do that in 30 minutes . these things are just for show and work very well against cooperative partner , I would like to see him do these stuf on me .
Last but not the least , if someone take a good look on the people in this "seminar" it is obvious non of them is a real fighter , jut a bunch of people who search some miracle way to become strong and achieve the fighting skill but without hard work , so they fall easily on this kind of "soft, original , internal whatever " crap. There is only one way to prove is some martial approach is valid or not , and I am sure neither Hendrik , sergio, jim or their students will participate in any  kind of full contact competition


----------



## mograph

Now if we're talking biofeedback, we may want to talk to this fellow. He studies Chen style. 
Nice chap, by the way.

UC Irvine - Faculty Profile System

He studies "physiological changes in mind/body functions and bioenergy fields associated with mind-body practices and acupuncture therapy, two major modalities of complementary and alternative medicine."


----------



## Minghe

I just thought lets make peace and move on, I asked him about his research as pertained to White Crane as it may have had some merit and he went all "nutso" on me, claimed I was baiting him etc. So I told him not to flatter himself that much! 

Secondly, Sifu Sergio's book is an interesting read. Do I think it's right and correct? No, it is an interesting read but nothing of any real substance comes out of it other than a bit of an extended promo for him and the IWKA. I found the way he explained Hendrik's stuff to have more merit than Hendrik's explanations but again nothing is proven as historically accurate.

As for Hendrik, Well I have learned my lesson!


----------



## Hendrik

This is exactly the type of person . Pretend to be nice but with an agenda of wanting something from me.

When i told him exactly as the folllwing . Look how he behave  now.


"Go study with some one who is the real master.  That is the only advise i can give you. You idea above is non realistic because you were never train to handle this job yet.

Face it. You want my assessment i have given it to you proffesionally. The rest is your freedom of choice

I woud not be able to help you

I dont practice white crane."

I Encourage Ron to post the message record between him and me. 









Minghe said:


> I just thought lets make peace and move on, I asked him about his research as pertained to White Crane as it may have had some merit and he went all "nutso" on me, claimed I was baiting him etc. So I told him not to flatter himself that much!
> 
> Secondly, Sifu Sergio's book is an interesting read. Do I think it's right and correct? No, it is an interesting read but nothing of any real substance comes out of it other than a bit of an extended promo for him and the IWKA. I found the way he explained Hendrik's stuff to have more merit than Hendrik's explanations but again nothing is proven as historically accurate.
> 
> As for Hendrik, Well I have learned my lesson!


----------



## Minghe

Hendrik,

Thank you for posting above, It now allows me to address the actual facts!

1/. It was you, not I who copied and posted my apology from the KFO Forum here on Martial Talk. You did this. Not I.

2/. You did so because you wanted people here to know and because you thought it served your own agenda to do so.

3/. I reached out to you to apologise and to be your friend. 

4/. You fully accepted this apology in writing!

5/. At no time did I "Bait" you. I did however ask you for your opinion and sharing of your research that applied to the link between White Crane and Wing Chun. I did so as a friend and stated that I would give you credit where credit was due .... this is hardly "Baiting" you!

6/. You fully accepted my apology only to state later on that I was _"Not sincere in my apology"_ and that I had in your opinion an _"Hidden Agenda"._This would indicate and lead most normal people to then look upon your actions as not being sincere i.e "Accepting my apology" only to go back on your word, in brief a liar!

You then strongly stated words to the effect _"that Lee Kong was not all that skilled at White Crane Gongfu" _(This is not a direct quote but summerizes what you had written) and Hendrick,I did screen capture what was said as you have a strong history of "deleting" things once written!

You also went on state words to the effect of along the lines of: _"Information (Research) does not help as one needs as one needs solid indepth kungfu"._ (This is not a direct quote but summerizes what you had written)

At no time have I repeated or posted what was stated exactly via the Facebook Private conversation we had. I told you that to do so would be unethical, unprofessional and wrong.

I have however summarized the above to show the level of you obvious hubris, paranoia and outright insincerity.

I did want to work with you as both a friend and as professional but you are unable to get beyond the past, your problem not mine I will no longer defend you either as you are just plain arrogant and think you are above other people.


----------



## Minghe

Hendrik: I repeat: 



> At no time have I repeated or posted what was stated exactly via the Facebook Private conversation we had. I told you that to do so would be unethical, unprofessional and wrong.


----------



## Vajramusti

Minghe said:


> Hendrik,
> 
> Thank you for posting above, It now allows me to address the actual facts!
> 
> 1/. It was you, not I who copied and posted my apology from the KFO Forum here on Martial Talk. You did this. Not I.
> 
> 2/. You did so because you wanted people here to know and because you thought it served your own agenda to do so.
> 
> 3/. I reached out to you to apologise and to be your friend.
> 
> 4/. You fully accepted this apology in writing!
> 
> 5/. At no time did I "Bait" you. I did however ask you for your opinion and sharing of your research that applied to the link between White Crane and Wing Chun. I did so as a friend and stated that I would give you credit where credit was due .... this is hardly "Baiting" you!
> 
> 6/. You fully accepted my apology only to state later on that I was _"Not sincere in my apology"_ and that I had in your opinion an _"Hidden Agenda"._This would indicate and lead most normal people to then look upon your actions as not being sincere i.e "Accepting my apology" only to go back on your word, in brief a liar!
> 
> You then strongly stated words to the effect _"that Lee Kong was not all that skilled at White Crane Gongfu" _(This is not a direct quote but summerizes what you had written) and Hendrick,I did screen capture what was said as you have a strong history of "deleting" things once written!
> 
> You also went on state words to the effect of along the lines of: _"Information (Research) does not help as one needs as one needs solid indepth kungfu"._ (This is not a direct quote but summerizes what you had written)
> 
> At no time have I repeated or posted what was stated exactly via the Facebook Private conversation we had. I told you that to do so would be unethical, unprofessional and wrong.
> 
> I have however summarized the above to show the level of you obvious hubris, paranoia and outright insincerity.
> 
> I did want to work with you as both a friend and as professional but you are unable to get beyond the past, your problem not mine I will no longer defend you either as you are just plain arrogant and think you are above other people.


----------



## Vajramusti

My advise FWIW- just leave Hendrik alone.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Vajramusti said:


> My advise FWIW- just leave Hendrik alone.



Agreed, he is It the perfect example of someone who wants to waste our time and not help us spend it....


----------



## seasoned

jks9199 said:


> Ladies & gentlemen...
> 
> Scientific investigation and friendly meet ups can always be interesting.  But we're not in the business of proving claims here, and challenges to fight are absolutely forbidden. * Let's try to keep the discussion on a friendly and polite basis, OK?*
> 
> jks9199
> Administrator



*As a reminder for those that missed it, this warning was placed a short time ago and still stands. Any further disruptions will result in ignoring Moderator warnings.*
*
The Moderator Team.*


----------



## Hendrik

1. You come to me asking for my forgiveness , help, and information. Instead of me contacting you.

2.  I give you my proffesional reply be it in public or private it will be the same.

3. I post my advise to you that is mine.

4. We have never sign any non disclosure agreement. And I am not interested in your information.



You just don't like it that I don't go with your plan and satisfy your demand. You recent posts and private message just exactly prove by evidence that in your mind, there is only demand and blaming others.

There is no common between you and me. So, it is time to drop all of this " you dont satisfied my demand so I am going to punish you " mentality.


I don't mind , in fact, I would like you to publish all our message record to the public . Please make my day. Published it. If you like to. Let even Lee kong see what is my view on him.  I am free to have my view . And not shy to open it to the public. As anyone are free to have their view on me





Minghe said:


> Hendrik,
> 
> Thank you for posting above, It now allows me to address the actual facts!
> 
> 1/. It was you, not I who copied and posted my apology from the KFO Forum here on Martial Talk. You did this. Not I.
> 
> 2/. You did so because you wanted people here to know and because you thought it served your own agenda to do so.
> 
> 3/. I reached out to you to apologise and to be your friend.
> 
> 4/. You fully accepted this apology in writing!
> 
> 5/. At no time did I "Bait" you. I did however ask you for your opinion and sharing of your research that applied to the link between White Crane and Wing Chun. I did so as a friend and stated that I would give you credit where credit was due .... this is hardly "Baiting" you!
> 
> 6/. You fully accepted my apology only to state later on that I was _"Not sincere in my apology"_ and that I had in your opinion an _"Hidden Agenda"._This would indicate and lead most normal people to then look upon your actions as not being sincere i.e "Accepting my apology" only to go back on your word, in brief a liar!
> 
> You then strongly stated words to the effect _"that Lee Kong was not all that skilled at White Crane Gongfu" _(This is not a direct quote but summerizes what you had written) and Hendrick,I did screen capture what was said as you have a strong history of "deleting" things once written!
> 
> You also went on state words to the effect of along the lines of: _"Information (Research) does not help as one needs as one needs solid indepth kungfu"._ (This is not a direct quote but summerizes what you had written)
> 
> At no time have I repeated or posted what was stated exactly via the Facebook Private conversation we had. I told you that to do so would be unethical, unprofessional and wrong.
> 
> I have however summarized the above to show the level of you obvious hubris, paranoia and outright insincerity.
> 
> I did want to work with you as both a friend and as professional but you are unable to get beyond the past, your problem not mine I will no longer defend you either as you are just plain arrogant and think you are above other people.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Lets see post #40



Hendrik said:


> Good luck to all. So long, good bye!



and then post #75



Hendrik said:


> 欲加之罪，何患无辞。
> 
> Here on I leave this forum forever.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tony Dismukes said:


> Well, yes, that would make sense to a sensible person. However none of that is what Hendrick seems to be proposing. He's talking about proving his claims in a biofeedback lab, which has nothing to do with power generation of any sort. That would seem to leave a couple of possibilities:
> 
> 1) He is interested in proving some sort of unspecified theory on some subject other than methods of hitting hard.
> or...
> 2) He is spouting meaningless pseudo-scientific technobabble in an effort to appropriate the authority of science for whatever theory of martial arts practice he is trying to promote.
> 
> Unless he chooses to clarify what point he is trying to make with his references to scientific proof and laboratories, we'll just have to guess which of the two apply.


I though we could have a deep level discussion on "WC power generation method" in this thread.


----------



## Hendrik

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I though we could have a deep level discussion on "WC power generation method" in this thread.



1. Not the way how everyone wants march their own direction

2. Does biofeedback related to force flow element one of the six core elements? Yes. All the six core elements are interelated and with the modern biofeedback equipment one can monitor to some degree.


----------



## Hendrik




----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hendrik said:


> 1. Not the way how everyone wants march their own direction
> 
> 2. Does biofeedback related to force flow element one of the six core elements? Yes. All the six core elements are interelated and with the modern biofeedback equipment one can monitor to some degree.


But why does *Biofeedback *have anything to do with MA? If "health" is the only thing that you care about, why do you even care about "power generation" at all?

I thought "6 core elements" has something to do with "fist meets face", am I wrong?







----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Biofeedback* is the process of gaining greater awareness of many physiological functions primarily using instruments that provide information on the activity of those same systems, with a goal of being able to manipulate them at will.[1][2] Some of the processes that can be controlled include brainwaves, muscle tone,skin conductance, heart rate and pain perception.[3]

Biofeedback may be used to improve health, performance, and the physiological changes that often occur in conjunction with changes to thoughts, emotions, and behavior. Eventually, these changes may be maintained without the use of extra equipment, for no equipment is necessarily required to practice biofeedback.[2]

Biofeedback has been found to be effective for the treatment of headaches and migraines.[4][5]


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> But why does *Biofeedback *have anything to do with MA?



I'm so glad you said that! I was wondering that and thought it was just me. As it's a WC thread I thought there was something I was missing!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> I'm so glad you said that! I was wondering that and thought it was just me. As it's a WC thread I thought there was something I was missing!


When combat/self-defense discussion mix with 

- health, 
- self-cultivation, and 
- inner peace, 

the discussion can get lost very quickly.


----------



## Transk53

If I get this right, @Hendrik has a beef about the article not outwardly giving enough credit. Then come on MT for the purpose of moaning about that. Moaning tends to illicit the "shut the #### up" as usually required. So why bother


----------



## geezer

Tez3 said:


> I'm so glad you said that! I was wondering that and thought it was just me. As it's a WC thread *I thought there was something I was missing! *


 
Hmmm. IMO you haven't missed anything worth your time here.

Power generation is an interesting topic. When dealt with _practically_. Too much woo-woo here for my tastes. And too much pointless  bickering. I'll go away now. Might check back in on this in a couple of days ...or might not.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Will we ever be able to see a clip that used the "6 core elements" principle to punch on a heavy bag, or even punch into the thin air? Someone who trains in "6 core elements" should produce that clip and put up online so we can end this discussion nicely.


----------



## Minghe

I have some screen captures (Proper and real ones) that has Sifu Sergio stating that he does not work with one Hendrik Santo yet claims that Hendrik Santo  is his "Yik Kam Source"???

In this same series of screen captures Sergio states that the “6 Core Elements are ancient and that Hendrick Santo did not come up with them"

Sergio also states that he trained directly in person with Hendrick Santo and that Hendrik Santo is his Sifu.

When asked to produce one photo of he and Hendrik together he could not. Hendrik Santo was also asked to produce one single photo of him and Sergio together and could not.

Hendrik Santo states that he taught the 8 Core Elements to Sergio in direct contradiction to what Sergio has stated above.

Sifu Sergio stated that he learnt the Siu Lim Tau form from Hendrik Santo in person but could not provide any proof.

Hendrik Santo stated he taught the Siu Lim Tau form to Sifu Sergio in person but could not provide any proof.

Hendrik Santo boasted that he told eminent White Crane Master Lee Kong that he (Lee Kong) was not as good as the ancients in the art of White Crane.

Hendrik Santo stated he does not do or has done any White Crane.

I post this here as a matter of public record regarding the statements of Hendrick Santo and Sergio Iadarola on the matters pertaining to the Six Core Elements.


----------



## KPM

Just because no one took a picture doesn't mean it didn't happen!  Heck, I have trained with several people through the years on a one to one basis and never had a picture taken of us together.   I've trained with Randy Li and John Clayton, etc.....but how would I "prove" that to you?  We  didn't take any pictures.


----------



## Minghe

Read the above:

* Hendrik says he discovered the 6 core elements, Sergio says no, they existed before Hendrik and he knew them (who is telling the truth?)

* Sergio says he doesn't "work" with Hendrik yet then goes on to say Hendrik taught him and is his Sifu!!! (Which is true?)

* Hendrik states he taught Sergio Siu Lim Tau and the 6 core elements. (Again Sergio states he never worked with Hendrik so how did he learn the form?)

Inconsistency after inconsistency.


----------



## Hendrik

KPM,

Lol. 

It is better to ignore a rejected woman on what she says and what proof she wants.


----------



## Hendrik

Ron,

Sergio has my six core elements details and process including the yik kam set with the insigh in kuen kuit , anyone who participate in Sergio recent seminars in Europe know. Read the feedback from them.

Also, check out some of Sergio close students call me sigung as one can see in my utube channel.

So, you can keep continous on to twisting words and think with your logic as much as you like. 

You simply cannot take it that I don't want to help you and fulfill your demand on my information. And thus, generate all kind of stories. Lol.

Well, thanks for your help, any publicity exposure for sergio and me is good publicity. You help us to get the people to curious and examine on me. That safe my energy for marketing.  Thanks!


----------



## Transk53

Hendrik said:


> KPM,
> 
> Lol.
> 
> It is better to ignore a rejected woman on what she says and what proof she wants.



You are trying to be evasive. Look I could careless what is what other than honesty. Maybe photos do not exsist, but a trail always does, hence the inconsistency. From my outsiders view, you are biggin yourself up.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Hendrik said:


> . That safe my energy for marketing.  Thanks!



So this is all marketing and getting free sales help from MT then..... does MT know your advertising for free..... hey, didn't you say you were leaving forever before?


My suggestion to MT is to lock this train wreck of a thread now and save yourself a lot of trouble in the long run


----------



## Hendrik

For record


----------



## Xue Sheng

> Xue Sheng, I have studied with Yip Man in person, with Yang Shou Zhong  in person, But they don't have the real art! I believe you are closer than they are. Chen Zhanglei is miles away from the real art. I need you!



Interesting thing about that statement is that there is no person named that can verified that they said it....it is of course false and I made it up.... so what you have posted Hendrik is absolutely meaningless, like most of what you post, since you never give a source that can be verified


----------



## jks9199

Thread locked pending staff review.

jks9199
Administrator


----------

