# an old email from erle(shows what kinda guy he really is)



## bigfootsquatch (May 1, 2007)

Dear Brian,
My advice to you is to go with one of the versions of Yang Cheng-fu's form. That way you will not be confused and you will be doing something that everyone else is doing. The only reason that those 3 were never defeated is because they never actually fought anyone!
My advice to you is to go with Yang Jwing Ming's style or go and see Chu Gin-soon as he is the real deal because he can bounce people off walls without touching them, so he must be the real thing. Or perhaps take alook in the Tai Chi magazine put out from CA as there seems to be some really great teachers in that magazine and their shiny suits are so nice,
Kind regards
Erle



> Hello again,
>
> Everytime I get ready to buy a dvd from you; I just find something
> that keeps me from doing so.
> Don't take this as a personal attack; I believe you are a good
> person with great skill.... but how can you say Yang Cheng Fu, Fu
> Zhongwen, and Cheng Man Ching destroyed Tai Chi? I've always read
> none of these man were ever defeated! Sure Cheng Fu changed the
> form, and in one place you say he changed just enough to retain the
> original essence but then turn around and say he killed it! Cheng
> Man Ching's simplification, thus disrupting Chi Flow can no more be
> validated than Fu Zhongwen's statement of losing Chi by wearing
> short sleeve shirts when we practice, or can it?   I've also seen 4
> different people(counting you) claiming to teach the Old Yang
> Style, both Family forms and Imperial forms, and everyone does it
> differently! Surely, everyone else can't be wrong can they?   Best
> Wishes, Brian


----------



## dmax999 (May 1, 2007)

Hmm, sounded a bit sarcastic. I've heard the "They never fought anyone" claim many times. I believe William CC Chen was a Tailand full contact champion in his youth, taught from CMC since he was seven if I remember. His daughter and son both fight in tournaments, not just push hands either.

I also remember many commenting on CMC's push hands skill being truly gifted. I've never heard stories of CMC fighting.

I've also never heard of Erle fighting in any tournaments either, or any of his students. I'd be interested in hearing if he has though.


----------



## MA-Caver (May 1, 2007)

> <snip> ... he is the real deal because he can bounce people off walls *without touching them*...


Wait a second... don't we have a couple of threads about guys like _those_?


----------



## oxy (May 2, 2007)

The reason for his sarcasm, I'm guessing, is that he's giving bigfootsquatch the "brush off" answer. That last bit from his reply is a bit condescending as well: ie, about attacking people without touching them and shiny suits.

In the past, the great masters, when confronted with an over eager doubter, would tell them to continue what they're doing so that the doubter would go away thinking he has outwitted the great master.

Of course now that a long time as passed, people have inherited and are emulating the _behaviour_ of the great masters of the past, but do so without the same motivation. Furthermore, people of modern times often mentally exaggerate anything that merely questions them to being doubted. In their mind, behaving like a philosophically adept master equates to being a philosophically adept master.

Having said that however, you would expect Erle's type of answer from the email he read.

There's a certain way you approach people like Erle: specifically, act like a noob. People are more inclined to actually tell you what you want to know (in a not-so-direct way) if you act like a nice noob.

The format of the email sent is generally along the lines of trying to expose the contradicting statements made by Erle. That is too obvious a tactic which will generate a mental response along the lines of: "You think you're smart? Then I'll let you carry on thinking that." It is also encouraged by the over use of exclamation marks. That mental response is almost a stock response. It makes the person feel like they're on a morally higher ground, which is why it is so easy for people to condition themselves to brushing people off.

The best way to act the noob is to "become" the kid at the end of the story "The Emperor's New Clothes". People's contradictions get exposed a lot more easily that way. With some luck, they will actually see their contradictions.

And before anyone points it out, yes I am aware that people have been acting the noob when discussing things with me. Comes with the territory.

Conclusion:

After all that, I'm not sure it shows the guy he really is. It shows the guy he can be in certain classes of situation.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 2, 2007)

bigfootsquatch said:


> Dear Brian,
> My advice to you is to go with one of the versions of Yang Cheng-fu's form. That way you will not be confused and you will be doing something that everyone else is doing. The only reason that those 3 were never defeated is because they never actually fought anyone!
> My advice to you is to go with Yang Jwing Ming's style or go and see Chu Gin-soon as he is the real deal because he can bounce people off walls without touching them, so he must be the real thing. Or perhaps take alook in the Tai Chi magazine put out from CA as there seems to be some really great teachers in that magazine and their shiny suits are so nice,
> Kind regards
> Erle



Well thats not true. 

Cheng Manching was challenged and as far as I know not defeated, or at least he was not defeated in the challenges that were documented. Chengfu was also challenged and not defeated in at least the challenges that we know about.

Gin Soon Chu NEVER claimed nor demonstrated any such thing, nor does his son Vincent. However they are both incredibly talented when it comes to push hands. As for Taiji Magazine, I kind of agree with Erle there.

A very interesting part of Erle's response is he says go with Yang Jwing Mings style, which Yang Jwing Ming says comes from Yang Banhou who learned from Yang Luchan, which is the same style Erle claims to teach.



oxy said:


> After all that, I'm not sure it shows the guy he really is. It shows the guy he can be in certain classes of situation.



Actually, I think it does, see above comment.


----------



## bigfootsquatch (May 2, 2007)

Xue, Erle told me before that Yang Jwing Ming got most of his material from his(Erle's) videos. He also said that his style was a modification of Yang Cheng Fu, not Yang Ban Hou. Anytime I asked about anyone else, they were made a fraud. That email wasn't sent to start anything with Erle. He had discredited several other people, and was even threatening to sue someone selling THEIR OWN videos on ebay, because they claimed to teach a form of Yang Lu Chan.


--Oh, I forgot that Sun Lutang was terrible at Tai Chi--


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 2, 2007)

bigfootsquatch said:


> Xue, Erle told me before that Yang Jwing Ming got most of his material from his(Erle's) videos. He also said that his style was a modification of Yang Cheng Fu, not Yang Ban Hou. Anytime I asked about anyone else, they were made a fraud. That email wasn't sent to start anything with Erle. He had discredited several other people, and was even threatening to sue someone selling THEIR OWN videos on ebay, because they claimed to teach a form of Yang Lu Chan.


 
Yang Jwing Ming learned Taiji from a man by the name of Cao or Kao on Taiwan and if it were not for the fact that I did push hands once with a guy who learned from the same teacher at the same time and place as Yang Jwing Ming (and he almost ripped me into two pieces) maybe I would look into what Erle is saying but to be honest I do not beleive him. 

And explain to me how he can sue ANYONE that claims to or actually does teach the style of Luchan, does he own a patent on it? No. Can he prove the lineage beyond any doubt? No.

And there are a few in China and Hong Kong that likely do it, you see the stlye from Banhou or Shouhou is the style of Luchan. 

Erle doth protest too much, methinks.


----------



## Jade Tigress (May 2, 2007)

*Mod Note

Thread moved to Horror Stories.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Super Moderator*


----------



## East Winds (May 2, 2007)

East Winds defending Cheng Man Ching??? Now there is a first :rofl:

Here is a quote from Ch'en Wei-ming "*One day he (Cheng Man Ching) had a contest with fifteen American soldiers stationed  in China. After defeating six of them, the rest were too frightened to continue. this became a celebrated incident at the time"  Cyclical year ting-hai (1947) 4th month. *But then what would Ch'en Wei Ming  know about it in comparison to Erle's vast knowledge of the subject.

Very best wishes


----------



## bigfootsquatch (May 2, 2007)

East Winds said:


> East Winds defending Cheng Man Ching??? Now there is a first :rofl:
> 
> Here is a quote from Ch'en Wei-ming "*One day he (Cheng Man Ching) had a contest with fifteen American soldiers stationed in China. After defeating six of them, the rest were too frightened to continue. this became a celebrated incident at the time" Cyclical year ting-hai (1947) 4th month. *But then what would Ch'en Wei Ming know about it in comparison to Erle's vast knowledge of the subject.
> 
> Very best wishes


 

You better watch it. Erle IS a Tai Chi master. It even says so on his myspace page! Seriously though, Erle has so far ripped into
1. Yang Cheng Fu
2. Fu Zhong Wen
3. Cheng Man Ching
4. Sun Lutang(his tai chi is no good-from an email he sent me)
-------
Now for the modern people
5. Yang Jwing Ming who stole everything he knows from Erle's tapes
6. Any michuan or Imperial Yang practioner
7. Chu Gin Soon
-------

He also claims to have had his form corrected by Yang Sau Chung(right spelling?) Yet, Erle's form looks NOTHING like Chungs.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 2, 2007)

bigfootsquatch said:


> You better watch it. Erle IS a Tai Chi master. It even says so on his myspace page.


 
Impressive

My sifu, student of Tung Ying Chieh and training Taiji for longer than I have been alive doesn&#8217;t call himself a master&#8230;. Erle must be very good. 



bigfootsquatch said:


> Sun Lutang(his tai chi is no good-from an email he sent me).



But what does he think of his Xingyi and Bagua?



bigfootsquatch said:


> He also claims to have had his form corrected by Yang Sau Chung(right spelling?) Yet, Erle's form looks NOTHING like Chungs.



This is easy enough to check. My Sifu knew Chengfu's oldest son and I can ask him if he ever heard of Erle or Any non-Chinese having there form corrected by Yang Zhen Ming aka Shou Zhong or maybe he even knows Erle.


----------



## oxy (May 2, 2007)

Well, since everyone seems to be convinced of Erle's character...

Is there really a point for ripping into him or dissing him on a forum?

Isn't there some more effective way to do this?

This whole gossipping about Erle thing is really no more useful than Erle's gossipping about others. It's like a petition. They don't really work.



> Actually, I think it does, see above comment.



I still don't think it does. I still think, despite what was said, that was a very specific reaction to the way bigfootsquatch wrote his email. It only shows that Erle can be a bit of a ... when rubbed the wrong way.



> And explain to me how he can sue ANYONE that claims to or actually does teach the style of Luchan, does he own a patent on it? No. Can he prove the lineage beyond any doubt? No.



You know, now that you mention it, with the way the patent system is working in America, Erle could very possibly apply and get some form of Intellectual Propery protection on the whole "Yang Luchan" thing.

I mean, in the past few years, we've had software companies suing other software companies for using MENUS. Yes, MENUS. Something that is so ubiquitous in all graphical software was able to slip past the patent checks even though there are literally millions of prior-art examples.

It's a scary thing all these people trying to control the flow of knowledge to squeeze dollars out of it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 2, 2007)

oxy said:


> I still don't think it does. I still think, despite what was said, that was a very specific reaction to the way bigfootsquatch wrote his email. It only shows that Erle can be a bit of a ... when rubbed the wrong way..


 
And of course he has a bit of a problem with the truth. 



oxy said:


> You know, now that you mention it, with the way the patent system is working in America, Erle could very possibly apply and get some form of Intellectual Propery protection on the whole "Yang Luchan" thing.
> 
> I mean, in the past few years, we've had software companies suing other software companies for using MENUS. Yes, MENUS. Something that is so ubiquitous in all graphical software was able to slip past the patent checks even though there are literally millions of prior-art examples.
> 
> It's a scary thing all these people trying to control the flow of knowledge to squeeze dollars out of it.


 
He is in Australia


----------



## oxy (May 2, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> And of course he has a bit of a problem with the truth.



I don't doubt that for a second.

But I go back to Hanlon's Razor: never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance.

And by ignorance, in this context, I mean ignorant of his own thought processes as well as the facts. There reaches a point where someone who is constantly in search of something they think is "the real deal", the mind gets overloaded with "facts" about which is more correct and which is more original, but they never think of pruning the connections between facts. Contradictions arise due to cyclical connections and causes them to overlook them and see some kind of order in their thoughts which are non-existent.

The biggest alert for me is when people use the argument that predecessor >> descendant, as Erle does in arguing that Luchan's supposed form must be better than Chengfu's. That is only true when it is true. It can't be true if it's not. Seems a tautological definition, but it is frustrating for someone like me when people don't analyse the actual thing at hand but rather uses useless rules of thumb like the predecessor >> descendant as if it is a universal law. Of course, these same people do contradict themselves by not going higher up the ancestor chain than where they currently are.



> He is in Australia



Yes, but he can still (if he was really desperate) apply for a patent in the US.

Furthermore, Australia's patent system is slowly moving towards the US's because of the free trade agreement and what have you.

There are many ways one can apply for a patent to be effective in the US. The biggest effect would be to go through the international patent thingo which Australia, the US, Japan and many EU countries are a part of.

The only requirement for this is that Erle has to be really desperate.

But the other scary thing is that a person like Erle who is completely ignorant of patent laws can still silence others with threat of litigation if they do not know patent law either. It's been happening, most visibly, in the US. The right to free speech is supposed to be the most protected thing in the US, but many businessess have been able to threaten bloggers that have said bad things about them. It's happened in Australia too. People don't have to successfully sue someone to make their life miserable. Just the act of putting them through that process has the lion's share of the effect on the sued, even if you have a really good lawyer who knows his law well and is able to dismiss the claims before having to go to court.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 2, 2007)

oxy said:


> I don't doubt that for a second.
> 
> But I go back to Hanlon's Razor: never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance.
> 
> ...


 
I prefer Occam's razor here in my thinking about Erle

"entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity" or all things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one.

Ignorance or no, he is still wrong.


----------



## East Winds (May 3, 2007)

Just as a passing point. Erle moved to the UK (Wales) a couple of years ago and continues to live and teach there now.

Very best wishes


----------



## oxy (May 3, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> I prefer Occam's razor here in my thinking about Erle
> 
> "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity" or all things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one.



Hanlon's Razor is a corollary to Occam's Razor.



> Ignorance or no, he is still wrong.



That's not what I'm doubting. Although, only going by the reply he sent to bigfootsquatch, the only parts he was wrong about was that the three masters mentioned did actually responded to challenge. He was being sarcastic and condescending in the rest of it. There isn't really anything more substantial in his reply. Wrong or not, this whole thing is still pointless. There must be more effective ways to counter his claims which aren't just preaching to the choir.


----------



## oxy (May 3, 2007)

East Winds said:


> Just as a passing point. Erle moved to the UK (Wales) a couple of years ago and continues to live and teach there now.
> 
> Very best wishes



So he's also a pom, now...


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 3, 2007)

oxy said:


> Well, since everyone seems to be convinced of Erle's character...
> 
> Is there really a point for ripping into him or dissing him on a forum?
> 
> ...


 
I have to agree that this conversation is not really doing anyone any good.  Maybe we should move on to a more interesting topic.


----------



## clfsean (May 3, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> Gin Soon Chu NEVER claimed nor demonstrated any such thing, nor does his son Vincent.


 
DId you ever see the NYC Chinatown demo vids from 91 and/or 93??  They're available from Panther I think. Gin Soon Chu is on it... he puts on quite an "interesting" demo to be sure. ;-)


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 3, 2007)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I have to agree that this conversation is not really doing anyone any good. Maybe we should move on to a more interesting topic.


 
I could not agree more


----------



## bigfootsquatch (May 3, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> Impressive
> 
> My sifu, student of Tung Ying Chieh and training Taiji for longer than I have been alive doesnt call himself a master. Erle must be very good.
> 
> ...


 

Erle said that Sun's bagua was very good, but the context of the message was about some tai chi that my teacher taught. Erle thought it was Sun style, and then told me my teachers' tai chi was no good.
---
Do let me know what you find out from your teacher about Yang Shou Zhong!


----------

