# Yip Man - Yuen Kai San realtion



## zuti car (Apr 15, 2015)

Canada Vancouver Chinese newspaper

This article is on Chinese but basically ,a man claims he is the 8th and last Yuen Kai San's disciple ,he also claims Yip Man was Yuen Kai San's fourth disciple. I did't get everything well so, if someone can translate  this accurately I think it may be interesting


----------



## Marnetmar (Apr 15, 2015)

I thought Sum Nung was his only disciple and he only taught Yip Man informally.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 15, 2015)

Marnetmar said:


> I thought Sum Nung was his only disciple and he only taught Yip Man informally.


Me too but we may be wrong . This man said he never met Yip Man because he started his training after 1949 . Also he said he never learnt knives and some other thing . In the article there is something about wing chun records of YKS wing chun but I didn't understand are these records written by YKS or the person who is giving the interview .


----------



## futsaowingchun (Apr 16, 2015)

Since Ip Man stated his sifu was Chan wa shun then later Leung Bik its safe to say YKS Taught ip Man only a little if anything.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 16, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Since Ip Man stated his sifu was Chan wa shun then later Leung Bik its safe to say YKS Taught ip Man only a little if anything.


Leung Bik most probably never existed , on the other hand I don't believe in this story ether , at least not completely . Although I think Yip Man's wing chun was significantly influenced by YKS  I don't believe he was his formal disciple . What is possible and most probable YKS helped Yip Man to refine his  already complete art .


----------



## johnsimmons (Apr 16, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Leung Bik most probably never existed , on the other hand I don't believe in this story ether , at least not completely . Although I think Yip Man's wing chun was significantly influenced by YKS  I don't believe he was his formal disciple . What is possible and most probable YKS helped Yip Man to refine his  already complete art .




 I think you are asking the wrong question. It is not did Leung Bik exist. It should be was Leung Bik Leung Jans natural son.

At the time Leung Jan taught if you were accepted as  a close student or apprentice in an occupation you where often adopted into the family of your teacher hence several people may have had a teacher/son relationship with Leung jan and have been spoken of as Leung someone.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 16, 2015)

I am open to all possibilities but most probable thing is usually the closest to the truth. Yip Man and YKS belonged to same social class and even more same social circles , their families had good relationship , and they spent a significant amount of time together practicing . I am not saying they had teacher - student relationship in a formal way but YKS  was Yip Man's senior . It is possible that Yip Man had learned from someone else before or even after his time with YKS  but we don't that


----------



## futsaowingchun (Apr 16, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Leung Bik most probably never existed , on the other hand I don't believe in this story ether , at least not completely . Although I think Yip Man's wing chun was significantly influenced by YKS  I don't believe he was his formal disciple . What is possible and most probable YKS helped Yip Man to refine his  already complete art .




Yeah I agree. I don't believe there was a Leung Bik also,However I do believe Ip Man WC changed or improved quiet a lot when he move to HK. I believe Ip Man made up this Leung Bik to protect the identity of another WC sifu who might have exchange information with Ip Man in an informally. It's easy to figure out who this could have been..1.how many High level sifus where in HK around the time Ip Man was there 2. and who was more senior and knowledgeable then himself? There is not many..3. we know Ip Man knew the other WC sifus,so who do we know he was more likely to have traded information with? As a  teacher myself,most of my friends are WC sifus so its easy to see how easy it is to share knowledge with just over a conversation or at a tea house that we know Ip Man went to frequently.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 16, 2015)

This is the story that was passed on to me, I do believe that I have posted this once in the past. Liang Zan had a student known as Fang Hua. He was a classmate of Chen Hua Shun and had the nicknames of Liang Bi Hua and Mu Ren Hua . According to the story he was an adopted disciple of Liang Zan and given the Liang family name, hence, Liang Bi Hua. He was also known for breaking the arms off of the wooden man, hence the name, Mu Ren Hua (Wooden Man Hua). Chen Hua Shun used to affectionately tease him and refer to him as Liang Bi (Fat Liang). Ye Wen held Fang Hua in high regard, both of Ye Wen’s sons officiated at Fang Hua’s funeral. It was told that he was a private man and best known by the nickname he received from Chen Hua Shun……..Liang Bi. I do believe he still has relatives living in Hong Kong.

Personally I don't see the need for Ye Wen to lie about his teachers. Ye Wen Yongchun Quan is not all that different from any other line stemming from Liang Zan. It is a bit more refined in some ways, but Ye Wen also admittedly made some refinements, no different than an other teacher. To be honest I think a lot of the animosity towards Ye Wen is simply jealousy. These controversies didn't really exist when he was alive. After Ye Wen's death the popularity of Yongchun exploded and many have tried, or still are trying, to usurp his throne and claim the popularity title for themselves, by denouncing the legitimacy of his teacher, all the while adding there own suspect history to the fold and claiming it as legit.


----------



## kung fu fighter (Apr 16, 2015)

johnsimmons said:


> I think you are asking the wrong question. It is not did Leung Bik exist. It should be was Leung Bik Leung Jans natural son.
> 
> At the time Leung Jan taught if you were accepted as  a close student or apprentice in an occupation you where often adopted into the family of your teacher hence several people may have had a teacher/son relationship with Leung jan and have been spoken of as Leung someone.



Makes sense, some people believe Leung Bik was a code name for one of Leung Jan's student Fung Wah.

Does the Lo Kwai family have any records of who Leung Bik really was?



futsaowingchun said:


> I don't believe there was a Leung Bik also,However I do believe Ip Man WC changed or improved quiet a lot when he move to HK. I believe Ip Man made up this Leung Bik to protect the identity of another WC sifu who might have exchange information with Ip Man in an informally. It's easy to figure out who this could have been..1.how many High level sifus where in HK around the time Ip Man was there 2. and who was more senior and knowledgeable then himself? There is not many..3. we know Ip Man knew the other WC sifus,so who do we know he was more likely to have traded information with? As a  teacher myself,most of my friends are WC sifus so its easy to see how easy it is to share knowledge with just over a conversation or at a tea house that we know Ip Man went to frequently.



I agree! even Jiu wan said "When he was reunited with Yip Man in Hong Kong, Yip Man’s Wing Chun was very different from what Jiu Wan had known Yip Man's wing chun to be in Foshan."


----------



## johnsimmons (Apr 16, 2015)

Does the Lo Kwai family have any records of who Leung Bik really was?


A long time ago our family made a decision to stay out of the politics and disputes. There are many claims out there that are claimed as gospel that we have written evidence to the contrary. If we called anyone on these claims it would accomplish nothing because a  zealot of any type does not care about facts or evidence.
I will say 2 things.Some Yip Man WC contains our signatures so we know YM WC has ties to LJ. Who he learned from we can say.
Second there are some student lists of Leung Jan that contain the name Leung Kwai. That is a reference to Lo Kwai.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 16, 2015)

johnsimmons said:


> Does the Lo Kwai family have any records of who Leung Bik really was?
> 
> 
> A long time ago our family made a decision to stay out of the politics and disputes. There are many claims out there that are claimed as gospel that we have written evidence to the contrary. If we called anyone on these claims it would accomplish nothing because a  zealot of any type does not care about facts or evidence.
> ...



I have heard that before but was never able to verify that with someone from Lo Kwai's lineage. Thank you!


----------



## johnsimmons (Apr 16, 2015)

I am very ignorant of wing chun outside of Lo Kwai's teachings. So I have a question. A while back I read Leung Tings Roots book. In it he stated that Leung Bik's grandson lived in Kolou and I though had a picture with him. Why is Leung Tings research on this doubted? 
Also has anyone visited Kolou to confirm this?


----------



## kung fu fighter (Apr 16, 2015)

johnsimmons said:


> Some Yip Man WC contains our signatures so we know YM WC has ties to LJ.


Thank you for the reply John!
which Yip Man wing chun contains your Lo Kwai LJ signatures?


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 16, 2015)

dlcox said:


> This is the story that was passed on to me, I do believe that I have posted this once in the past. Liang Zan had a student known as Fang Hua. He was a classmate of Chen Hua Shun and had the nicknames of Liang Bi Hua and Mu Ren Hua . According to the story he was an adopted disciple of Liang Zan and given the Liang family name, hence, Liang Bi Hua. He was also known for breaking the arms off of the wooden man, hence the name, Mu Ren Hua (Wooden Man Hua). Chen Hua Shun used to affectionately tease him and refer to him as Liang Bi (Fat Liang). Ye Wen held Fang Hua in high regard, both of Ye Wen’s sons officiated at Fang Hua’s funeral. It was told that he was a private man and best known by the nickname he received from Chen Hua Shun……..Liang Bi. I do believe he still has relatives living in Hong Kong.
> 
> Personally I don't see the need for Ye Wen to lie about his teachers. Ye Wen Yongchun Quan is not all that different from any other line stemming from Liang Zan. It is a bit more refined in some ways, but Ye Wen also admittedly made some refinements, no different than an other teacher. To be honest I think a lot of the animosity towards Ye Wen is simply jealousy. These controversies didn't really exist when he was alive. After Ye Wen's death the popularity of Yongchun exploded and many have tried, or still are trying, to usurp his throne and claim the popularity title for themselves, by denouncing the legitimacy of his teacher, all the while adding there own suspect history to the fold and claiming it as legit.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 16, 2015)

Good post.
Rather than accept Ip Man's own statements about his learning history- people do preposterous post mortems.
Shades of the old saying- success has a thousand fathers


----------



## KPM (Apr 16, 2015)

futsaowingchun said:


> Yeah I agree. I don't believe there was a Leung Bik also,However I do believe Ip Man WC changed or improved quiet a lot when he move to HK. I believe Ip Man made up this Leung Bik to protect the identity of another WC sifu who might have exchange information with Ip Man in an informally. It's easy to figure out who this could have been..1.how many High level sifus where in HK around the time Ip Man was there 2. and who was more senior and knowledgeable then himself? There is not many..3. we know Ip Man knew the other WC sifus,so who do we know he was more likely to have traded information with? As a  teacher myself,most of my friends are WC sifus so its easy to see how easy it is to share knowledge with just over a conversation or at a tea house that we know Ip Man went to frequently.



I agree.  I think Leung Bik was likely a cover story for a number of influences on Ip Man.  From Yuen Kay Shan to the Weng Chun guys at Dai Duk Lan to a possible Fung Wah as mentioned.  Ip Man had a passion for Wing Chun (like a lot of us) and likely would have sought out and investigated as much Wing Chun as possible (like a lot of us).  But back in those days it wasn't as acceptable to depart from your primary Sifu as in is in modern days.  People noticed that his Wing Chun being taught in Hong Kong has evolved and  was different from what he taught in Foshan.  Rather than disrespect his lineage by saying he had learned things from people outside of the family, he attributed his new knowledge to a Kung Fu uncle...Leung Bik.  Perfect cover story to save face amongst his lineage family and to avoid giving kudos to people outside the family.


----------



## KPM (Apr 16, 2015)

johnsimmons said:


> I am very ignorant of wing chun outside of Lo Kwai's teachings. So I have a question. A while back I read Leung Tings Roots book. In it he stated that Leung Bik's grandson lived in Kolou and I though had a picture with him. Why is Leung Tings research on this doubted?
> Also has anyone visited Kolou to confirm this?



That was a horribly inaccurate book from an historical perspective and I don't think anyone today gives it any credence.


----------



## KPM (Apr 16, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> Good post.
> Rather than accept Ip Man's own statements about his learning history- people do preposterous post mortems.
> Shades of the old saying- success has a thousand fathers



Well, that's an interesting statement Joy...given that Dave just stated that Leung Bik never existed as a real person or as Leung Jan's son and was actually a nickname for someone else.  That is not something that Ip Man ever stated.  It is....another "post mortem."  ;-)


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 16, 2015)

KPM said:


> Well, that's an interesting statement Joy...given that Dave just stated that Leung Bik never existed as a real person or as Leung Jan's son and was actually a nickname for someone else.  That is not something that Ip Man ever stated.  It is....another "post mortem."  ;-)




Look at DLCox's post again. about Leung Jan's adopted son.
The real evidence for me is that the details of Ip Man's wing chun is vastly diffrent from that of his first teacher.
You can think whatever you want.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 16, 2015)

A little more info into the story......I was told that Ye Wen referred to Fang Hua as Liang Bi out of respect for his want of privacy. Fang Hua was a very private person and did not want any publicity for himself or his family. He has living relatives to this day, during Ye Wen's time these individuals would have been exposed to seekers looking for details. So the full story of Fang Hua was never made public. Calling him by his nickname would make people assume he was a blood relative of the Liang family and not seek out the Fang family.

I can find no good reason to doubt the legitimacy of this story as told to me by my Shigong. It is not embellished with grand tales of heroism or magnificent conquests. Just a story about who Liang Bi really was. I have no documentation to verify any of it, but then again there is none to discredit it either. For me it is a believable and logical story and until it can, without a shadow of doubt, be proved otherwise, I will accept it as true.

Perhaps Mr. Simmons can add some clarification into Liang Zan's "adopted sons" (Disciples) if he is willing.


----------



## futsaowingchun (Apr 16, 2015)

KPM said:


> I agree.  I think Leung Bik was likely a cover story for a number of influences on Ip Man.  From Yuen Kay Shan to the Weng Chun guys at Dai Duk Lan to a possible Fung Wah as mentioned.  Ip Man had a passion for Wing Chun (like a lot of us) and likely would have sought out and investigated as much Wing Chun as possible (like a lot of us).  But back in those days it wasn't as acceptable to depart from your primary Sifu as in is in modern days.  People noticed that his Wing Chun being taught in Hong Kong has evolved and  was different from what he taught in Foshan.  Rather than disrespect his lineage by saying he had learned things from people outside of the family, he attributed his new knowledge to a Kung Fu uncle...Leung Bik.  Perfect cover story to save face amongst his lineage family and to avoid giving kudos to people outside the family.


excellent ...I believe this is exactly what happend. it makes perfect sense.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 16, 2015)

KPM said:


> I agree.  I think Leung Bik was likely a cover story for a number of influences on Ip Man.  From Yuen Kay Shan to the Weng Chun guys at Dai Duk Lan to a possible Fung Wah as mentioned.  Ip Man had a passion for Wing Chun (like a lot of us) and likely would have sought out and investigated as much Wing Chun as possible (like a lot of us).  But back in those days it wasn't as acceptable to depart from your primary Sifu as in is in modern days.  People noticed that his Wing Chun being taught in Hong Kong has evolved and  was different from what he taught in Foshan.  Rather than disrespect his lineage by saying he had learned things from people outside of the family, he attributed his new knowledge to a Kung Fu uncle...Leung Bik.  Perfect cover story to save face amongst his lineage family and to avoid giving kudos to people outside the family.


 
It very well could be this scenario, but lets look at it a little closer. Lets assume Fang Hua was actually Liang Bi and became a mentor to Ye Wen. It is well known that Ye Wen hung out and talked "shop" with several Yongchun practitioners, namely Ruan Qi Shan and Yu Cai. After all they were known as the "Three Heroes of Yongchun". He also hung out at Da Du Lan, which was an institute set up by Wai Yan as a means to research the art of Yongchun. He invited the best Yongchun practitioners of the day to train, share, develop and research without holding anything back from one another.

I beget to ask. Why does it have to be that all these different individuals had a profound influence on Ye Wen, so much so that he had to create a teacher, but he is not an influence on them. To me this doesn't make sense, Ye Wen was one of the "Three Heroes" and considered a prominent master by others such as Wai Yan. Didn't he influence them at all? It is true that Ye Wen's art is not drastically different from Ruan family, but why should it be, they come from the same lineage. What I see of Liang Bi's influence on Ye Wen is refinement. Undoubtedly he was influenced by others and I'm sure that some of those influences were implemented. Has anyone ever considered that perhaps Ruan family style is similar to Ye Wen's because he had influenced them? Why is it such a tough pill to swallow to consider that Liang Bi (Fang Hua) was real and had actually helped Ye Wen further refine his art more so than anyone else?


----------



## zuti car (Apr 16, 2015)

dlcox said:


> \. To be honest I think a lot of the animosity towards Ye Wen is simply jealousy. These controversies didn't really exist when he was alive. After Ye Wen's death the popularity of Yongchun exploded and many have tried, or still are trying, to usurp his throne and claim the popularity title for themselves, by denouncing the legitimacy of his teacher, all the while adding there own suspect history to the fold and claiming it as legit.


I agree , jealousy is of of the reasons why so many people are trying do denounce Yip man and his art and, yes, there was not  animosity while he was alive . We have to be aware of some other things , during his life ,Yip Mans just one of many wing chun teachers in HK , he was not famous , nor his art was considered superior or ,the only wing chun there is. After his death , he and his style became very popular , but popularity has nothing to do with the quality of his system or some superiority of his lineage  but has everything with Bruce Lee . After kung fu craze spread all over the world everyone with even remote connection to Yip Man capitalized immensely , while other styles and other teacher stayed in shadow . All people from Yip Man's lineage gave their best to convince the world that they are the only or the best . It normal that people from other styles feel the way they feel , some of them from pure jealousy but also many of them because of Yip Man's follows  behavior


----------



## dlcox (Apr 16, 2015)

zuti car said:


> I agree , jealousy is of of the reasons why so many people are trying do denounce Yip man and his art and, yes, there was not  animosity while he was alive . We have to be aware of some other things , during his life ,Yip Mans just one of many wing chun teachers in HK , he was not famous , nor his art was considered superior or ,the only wing chun there is. After his death , he and his style became very popular , but popularity has nothing to do with the quality of his system or some superiority of his lineage  but has everything with Bruce Lee . After kung fu craze spread all over the world everyone with even remote connection to Yip Man capitalized immensely , while other styles and other teacher stayed in shadow . All people from Yip Man's lineage gave their best to convince the world that they are the only or the best . It normal that people from other styles feel the way they feel , some of them from pure jealousy but also many of them because of Yip Man's follows  behavior


 
Hi Zuti,

I absolutely agree, with one exception, though he may not have been famous he was held in high regard by his peers. The rest is spot on and has to be taken into consideration when looking back. Especially the jealousy part, look at how many branches of Yongchun came out of the woodwork during the boom. Many using tales of magnificent histories and heroic escapades of past ancestors while claiming to be the original method with all the secrets as a means of crawling out of Ye Wen's shadow.

I wonder if Bruce Lee would of never became famous, would there be as many obscure branches of the art as there are, or would they just be known as some local village Hong Men style?


----------



## KPM (Apr 17, 2015)

dlcox said:


> I beget to ask. Why does it have to be that all these different individuals had a profound influence on Ye Wen, so much so that he had to create a teacher, but he is not an influence on them. To me this doesn't make sense, Ye Wen was one of the "Three Heroes" and considered a prominent master by others such as Wai Yan. Didn't he influence them at all? It is true that Ye Wen's art is not drastically different from Ruan family, but why should it be, they come from the same lineage. What I see of Liang Bi's influence on Ye Wen is refinement. Undoubtedly he was influenced by others and I'm sure that some of those influences were implemented. Has anyone ever considered that perhaps Ruan family style is similar to Ye Wen's because he had influenced them? Why is it such a tough pill to swallow to consider that Liang Bi (Fang Hua) was real and had actually helped Ye Wen further refine his art more so than anyone else?


 
The story of Fung Wah being the legendary "Leung Bik" seems very plausible.  But that is a relatively recent idea to emerge and you seem to know more about it than anyone.  But there was a poster over in the "other forum" that said the same thing.  So maybe it all is just a matter of Fung Wah giving Ip Man some refinements and deeper knowledge and being the main "outside" influence on Ip Man.  With the different Wing Chun "researchers" out there traveling around the world and checking things out it does somewhat surprise me that none of them have tracked down members of Fung Wah's family to see if they could verify this.  As far as Ip Man influencing the others....sure its possible.  But he was the junior guy in almost every group.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 17, 2015)

KPM said:


> The story of Fung Wah being the legendary "Leung Bik" seems very plausible.  But that is a relatively recent idea to emerge and you seem to know more about it than anyone.  But there was a poster over in the "other forum" that said the same thing.  So maybe it all is just a matter of Fung Wah giving Ip Man some refinements and deeper knowledge and being the main "outside" influence on Ip Man.  With the different Wing Chun "researchers" out there traveling around the world and checking things out it does somewhat surprise me that none of them have tracked down members of Fung Wah's family to see if they could verify this.  As far as Ip Man influencing the others....sure its possible.  But he was the junior guy in almost every group.



I don't think that any of Fang's relations care. From what I understand it's only a couple of people, old now. Since none of them has ever publically confirmed the story, no one has bothered to look further. Most of this era in question and one generation after are deceased, we will probably never know for sure. 

Just because he was junior to most doesn't mean he wasn't respected or considered an authority on the art by his peers.

I've found in my experience, that people don't talk smack when a person is around out of fear of a whooping. Only when that person isn't around anymore does the smack talk begin. Ye Wen earned his place through his efforts, not through lineage claims. Lots of other branches claim patronage to obscure and unverifiable ancestors, yet I see no one debating them with the same convictions as the Liang Bi controversy, why? Some of these other claims are outright ridiculous when compared to Liang Bi.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 17, 2015)

dlcox said:


> Hi Zuti,
> 
> 
> I wonder if Bruce Lee would of never became famous, would there be as many obscure branches of the art as there are, or would they just be known as some local village Hong Men style?


Without Bruce Lee wing chun today would be totally unknown to the world, like many of the white crane styles here on taiwan ,almost every village has some unique , old crane style , but no one knows about them and they are only practiced by small number of locals .


----------



## KPM (Apr 17, 2015)

dlcox said:


> Lots of other branches claim patronage to obscure and unverifiable ancestors, yet I see no one debating them with the same convictions as the Liang Bi controversy, why? Some of these other claims are outright ridiculous when compared to Liang Bi.


 
Good point.  I think this may primarily be because of how William Cheung used the whole Leung Bik story to give legitimacy to his TWC.  The way he tells the story it just doesn't add up at all.  So that has tainted the whole idea of a Leung Bik connection.  But like I said, this whole idea of Fung Wah being nick-named Leung Bik and being an "adopted" son of Leung Jan is relatively new on the scene and seems more plausible.  This would explain why no one has ever found any historical record of an actual Leung Bik, no gravesite, no nothing.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 17, 2015)

KPM said:


> Good point.  I think this may primarily be because of how William Cheung used the whole Leung Bik story to give legitimacy to his TWC.  The way he tells the story it just doesn't add up at all.  So that has tainted the whole idea of a Leung Bik connection.  But like I said, this whole idea of Fung Wah being nick-named Leung Bik and being an "adopted" son of Leung Jan is relatively new on the scene and seems more plausible.  This would explain why no one has ever found any historical record of an actual Leung Bik, no gravesite, no nothing.



I agree. It will be interesting if anyone in Hong Kong or with a Hong Kong connection can reveal more about this.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 17, 2015)

KPM said:


> Good point.  I think this may primarily be because of how William Cheung used the whole Leung Bik story to give legitimacy to his TWC.  The way he tells the story it just doesn't add up at all.  So that has tainted the whole idea of a Leung Bik connection.  But like I said, this whole idea of Fung Wah being nick-named Leung Bik and being an "adopted" son of Leung Jan is relatively new on the scene and seems more plausible.  This would explain why no one has ever found any historical record of an actual Leung Bik, no gravesite, no nothing.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 17, 2015)

C'mon- other than Cheung's disciples-folks generally do not give much credence to Cheung's stories.


----------



## KPM (Apr 17, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> C'mon- other than Cheung's disciples-folks generally do not give much credence to Cheung's stories.



Exactly!  And since Leung Bik was a huge part of Cheung's stories, the Leung Bik story in general is discredited.


----------



## johnsimmons (Apr 17, 2015)

Perhaps Mr. Simmons can add some clarification into Liang Zan's "adopted sons" (Disciples) if he is willing

 I wam happy to answer what ever questions I can with out causing issues. Lo Kwai was Leung Jan Knife man and was LJ second when LJ had encounters. He formalized the knives with LJ. He liked and shared his Knife form with Fung Wah. I can see our knife work in some of the knife forms in YM wing chun. Problem is there is such variety inY M wing chun. My Si Pak ( I think that is the right term) is really the person to talk to . He has YM background and was taught all of our knife techniques by late master Chao Ng Kwai.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 17, 2015)

KPM said:


> Exactly!  And since Leung Bik was a huge part of Cheung's stories, the Leung Bik story in general is discredited.


-------------------------------------------------------------
 Cheung's story is a minor one.Cheung did not begin his stories till after IM's death.Others knew about IM's relationship with LB before that.
Ip man himself in a HK magazine interview talked about Leung Bik.
IM man had 3 books by Leung Bik. Ip Ching has them. I have seen one of them. Someone took HKM's copies.
Strange obsession with claims that Ip Man lied. Strange levels of jealousy!!


----------



## KPM (Apr 18, 2015)

You seem to miss the point Joy.  Cheung's story was not minor.  He used it to promote himself and his organization and HE is the one that retold the Leung Bik story widely and in print outside of Hong Kong.  Probably 1000x more people at the very least are aware of the Leung Bik story because of Cheung than were aware of it before Cheung. I wouldn't call that "minor."  But it matters not what was known before.  The fact is that the story has become discredited in current times due to Cheung's version.  That was the point.   And nothing else you said precludes the idea that "Leung Bik" was simply a code name or nickname for someone else.  And.....we have MANY instances in Chinese Martial Art circles were stories are not exactly historically accurate.  If you want to call it "lying", you go right ahead.  That kind of "lying" was certainly very very common!


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 18, 2015)

KPM said:


> You seem to miss the point Joy.  Cheung's story was not minor.  He used it to promote himself and his organization and HE is the one that retold the Leung Bik story widely and in print outside of Hong Kong.  Probably 1000x more people at the very least are aware of the Leung Bik story because of Cheung than were aware of it before Cheung. I wouldn't call that "minor."  But it matters not what was known before.  The fact is that the story has become discredited in current times due to Cheung's version.  That was the point.   And nothing else you said precludes the idea that "Leung Bik" was simply a code name or nickname for someone else.  And.....we have MANY instances in Chinese Martial Art circles were stories are not exactly historically accurate.  If you want to call it "lying", you go right ahead.  That kind of "lying" was certainly very very common!


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 18, 2015)

NONE of the major well known students of Ip Man paid and or pay much attention to William Cheung's "histories". They went about doing  IM wing chun.
Social media chit chat was not and is not part of that world....Folks vested in YKS and current Ku lo loyalties notwithstanding.


----------



## KPM (Apr 18, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> NONE of the major well known students of Ip Man paid and or pay much attention to William Cheung's "histories". They went about doing  IM wing chun.
> Social media chit chat was not and is not part of that world....Folks vested in YKS and current Ku lo loyalties notwithstanding.



Really?  And just where have you been for the last 2 decades Joy?  ;-)   William Cheung published that story in Inside Kung Fu magazine in the 80's and ticked off all of the "well known" students of Ip Man at the time.  It was a pretty major insult to all of them, saying they did "modified" Wing Chun and only he had learned the real "traditional" Wing Chun.  And the Leung Bik story was a key element of that.  There was bad blood between Cheung and all the other big name Ip Man Sifus for many years.    You want to talk about "folks vested in loyalties"....take a look in the mirror!


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 18, 2015)

KPM said:


> Really?  And just where have you been for the last 2 decades Joy?  ;-)   William Cheung published that story in Inside Kung Fu magazine in the 80's and ticked off all of the "well known" students of Ip Man at the time.  It was a pretty major insult to all of them, saying they did "modified" Wing Chun and only he had learned the real "traditional" Wing Chun.  And the Leung Bik story was a key element of that.  There was bad blood between Cheung and all the other big name Ip Man Sifus for many years.    You want to talk about "folks vested in loyalties"....take a look in the mirror!





KPM said:


> Really?  And just where have you been for the last 2 decades Joy?  ;-)   William Cheung published that story in Inside Kung Fu magazine in the 80's and ticked off all of the "well known" students of Ip Man at the time.  It was a pretty major insult to all of them, saying they did "modified" Wing Chun and only he had learned the real "traditional" Wing Chun.  And the Leung Bik story was a key element of that.  There was bad blood between Cheung and all the other big name Ip Man Sifus for many years.    You want to talk about "folks vested in loyalties"....take a look in the mirror!


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 18, 2015)

Sorry- you are not reading very well, The senior IM folks ina public rebuke were rejectiing-not the issue of Leung Bik's existence but Cheung's version of "real" wing chun from Leung Bik. Cheung claimed he was the inheritor-thats what the IM folks rejected. You may want to keep your eye on the ball- but  I dont think that will happen. Jiu Wan, WSL, Mak's  sifu, TST and HKM have not questioned IM's statement of his post Chan Wah Sun development. Per tradition , IM listed his first teacher as his sifu.And in the hK mag article he mentioned who is later teacher was-  Leung Bik.If you knew thed etails of IM's footwork whould see that it is vastly better than  Chan Wah Sun. Again, Ip ching  has the 3 books that Leung Bik gave him. Thre is more info-but-
I am not really interested in debating with you.


----------



## KPM (Apr 18, 2015)

I'm not reading well Joy?  Excuse me.  You said Cheung's story was minor.  It was not.  It had a significant impact. I never said that the seniors didn't deny Cheung's assertions but not the Leung Bik story.  What I said was  that the reason so many people seem to question the Leung Bik story (meaning people posting on forums and talking on the internet....which most of the senior IM folk do NOT do) is because the whole story became discredited by William Cheung's claims.  Is that so hard to follow?  And just how do you know what Chan Wah Shun's footwork was like?  You've turned a simple assertion on my part into a debate so far, so why are you now afraid to share any additional information you might have?  Makes me think that you don't really have anything significant to say and are just saying that to come off all knowledgeable.  And I will say...again...that just because Ip Ching may have books supposedly written by Leung Bik does NOT mean that Leung Bik was not a cover name for someone else....like Fung Wah.  Fung Wah may very well have written them and signed his nickname to them to preserve his anonymity.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 18, 2015)

johnsimmons said:


> Perhaps Mr. Simmons can add some clarification into Liang Zan's "adopted sons" (Disciples) if he is willing
> 
> I wam happy to answer what ever questions I can with out causing issues. Lo Kwai was Leung Jan Knife man and was LJ second when LJ had encounters. He formalized the knives with LJ. He liked and shared his Knife form with Fung Wah. I can see our knife work in some of the knife forms in YM wing chun. Problem is there is such variety inY M wing chun. My Si Pak ( I think that is the right term) is really the person to talk to . He has YM background and was taught all of our knife techniques by late master Chao Ng Kwai.



Hi John thanks for replying. I noticed you made mention that Lo Kwai was also referred to as Leung Kwai. Does that disciple list of Leung Jan also list who Leung Bik was? Also I have heard that Lo Kwai was a master of some Iron Finger art prior to studies in Wing Chun. My question would be what is that art called and was it the source of his knife work?


----------



## kung fu fighter (Apr 19, 2015)

johnsimmons said:


> Some Yip Man WC contains our signatures so we know YM WC has ties to LJ.



Who's version of Yip Man wing chun contains your Lo Kwai LJ signatures and knife work?


----------



## Kwan Sau (Apr 19, 2015)

dlcox said:


> ...Also I have heard that Lo Kwai was a master of some Iron Finger art prior to studies in Wing Chun. My question would be what is that art called and was it the source of his knife work?



This is interesting.  Looking forward to reading the responses.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Apr 19, 2015)

kung fu fighter said:


> Who's version of Yip Man wing chun contains your Lo Kwai LJ signatures and knife work?



Hmmm. Question: how big is a signature? Is it something overt or more sublime? Are there more than one? Fascinating discussion gents!


----------



## KPM (Apr 19, 2015)

I think an equally interesting question is how does Joy know what Chan Wah Shun's footwork was like?  Or is that part of the "more info" that he is unwilling to share?


----------



## zuti car (Apr 19, 2015)

KPM said:


> I think an equally interesting question is how does Joy know what Chan Wah Shun's footwork was like?  Or is that part of the "more info" that he is unwilling to share?


I particulary like these kind of things when people claim they possess some knowledge but they are unwilling to share it .I like more only one thing ,"underground , secret fights" that all grandmaster won without loosing any .


----------



## Marnetmar (Apr 19, 2015)

It's probably safe to assume to say that CWS used triangular footwork since Pan Nam's WC seems to be based primarily on CWS's.


----------



## KPM (Apr 20, 2015)

Still an assumption though.  Pan Nam had multiple influences and his own innovations as well.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 20, 2015)

KPM said:


> Still an assumption though.  Pan Nam had multiple influences and his own innovations as well.


Pan Nam learned from Yip Man as well . Yip Man corrected his forms , or something connected with empty hand forms , i cannot remember it well


----------



## JPinAZ (Apr 21, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Cheung's story is a minor one.Cheung did not begin his stories till after IM's death.Others knew about IM's relationship with LB before that.
> Ip man himself in a HK magazine interview talked about Leung Bik.
> IM man had 3 books by Leung Bik. Ip Ching has them. I have seen one of them. Someone took HKM's copies.
> Strange obsession with claims that Ip Man lied. Strange levels of jealousy!!



Yes, my first sifu has had several in-person conversations with both of the Ip brothers, Moy Yat, CST, etc and they have all affirmed the LB story and that he was a 'real person' (whether it was a knickname or not) - as well as confirming the existence of the books you've mentioned. Being the closest to Ip Man, if all say he was a real person and also affirm that Ip Man did indeed learn from him (as told to them by Ip Man himself), I can't understand why anyone would chose to believe otherwise - unless out of jealousy or personal gain.


----------



## geezer (Apr 21, 2015)

KPM said:


> I think an equally interesting question is how does Joy know what Chan Wah Shun's footwork was like?  Or is that part of the "more info" that he is unwilling to share?



I get the impression that Joy says the he "isn't interested in debating with you" *not* because he's keeping "secrets", but rather because he gets tired of all the endless, pointless arguing and frankly just  _....isn't interested in debating with you _(or anybody else)!

I mean, _honestly_ KPM, will we ever _really_ know if Leung Bic, or _someone else,_ was the later influence on Yip Man, or if Shakespeare really authored his attributed work, ...or if there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll,  ...or if the US actually blew up the World Trade Center as an excuse to go to war, ...or if we all need to wear tinfoil hats to keep aliens from reading our minds, ....or.....

Personally, I'll settle for the Leung Bic story _as related by GM Yip_ until solid evidence to the contrary can be presented. And William Cheung's outrageous claims do nothing to discredit that version.


----------



## KPM (Apr 22, 2015)

I get the impression that Joy says the he "isn't interested in debating with you" *not* because he's keeping "secrets", but rather because he gets tired of all the endless, pointless arguing and frankly just  _....isn't interested in debating with you _(or anybody else)!

---That would be a fair enough assessment Steve.  But the fact is I made a simple assertion that William Cheung's version of the Leung Bik story is what has discredited the entire Leung Bik story for a lot of people.  Joy chose to turn that simple assertion into a debate and then signed off of that debate with saying he had more info but wasn't going to share it because he didn't want to get into a debate.  Don't  you think that's just a bit off?  Don't you think he could have just said "you make some good points but I don't entirely agree"?  But no, he wants to come off all knowledgeable, being the authority, whether he as any real information to share or not.


I mean, _honestly_ KPM, will we ever _really_ know if Leung Bic, or _someone else,_ was the later influence on Yip Man, or if Shakespeare really authored his attributed work, ...or if there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll,  ...or if the US actually blew up the World Trade Center as an excuse to go to war, ...or if we all need to wear tinfoil hats to keep aliens from reading our minds, ....or.....

---No we won't.  And I've said as much in the past here.  But I do think that William Cheung's retelling of the story as a way to give legitimacy to his version of Wing Chun, as a way to try and say he should be "grandmaster" of all Ip Man lineages, and to say that his method is the "real" thing and everything else is "modified"......a story that was written up for an international magazine that was widely read....a story that has been retold to thousands of people within his organization and that gets repeated still....this was not "minor" and had a big influence on how people view the whole Leung Bik story today.  That we CAN know!  That was what Joy was denying.


Personally, I'll settle for the Leung Bic story _as related by GM Yip_ until solid evidence to the contrary can be presented. And William Cheung's outrageous claims do nothing to discredit that version.

---For you!  But you don't think it has been a big influence on a lot of people?   I still think that if not for William Cheung, that Leung Bik would likely have been forgotten long ago.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 22, 2015)

KPM said:


> I   I still think that if not for William Cheung, that Leung Bik would likely have been forgotten long ago.


I agree , without william , no one would pay any attention on leung bik


----------



## geezer (Apr 22, 2015)

zuti car said:


> I agree , without william , no one would pay any attention on leung bik


Well, _before_ William Cheung made up that story, _my old sifu_ was implying that _his_ Wing Tsun was the best because Grandmaster Yip had privately emphasized to him aspects of his WC that reflected Leung Bik's contribution.  So Cheung wasn't the first or the last to milk that cash cow!  Heck I tell that one to my students. It's almost as good a story as the Ng Mui - Yim Wing Chun fable.


----------



## KPM (Apr 22, 2015)

geezer said:


> Well, _before_ William Cheung made up that story, _my old sifu_ was implying that _his_ Wing Tsun was the best because Grandmaster Yip had privately emphasized to him aspects of his WC that reflected Leung Bik's contribution.  So Cheung wasn't the first or the last to milk that cash cow!  Heck I tell that one to my students. It's almost as good a story as the Ng Mui - Yim Wing Chun fable.



Yet another reason to question the whole validity of the Leung Bik story!  ;-)


----------



## geezer (Apr 23, 2015)

KPM said:


> Yet another reason to *question the whole validity* of the Leung Bik story!  ;-)


 
Here's the deal in a nutshell: Throughout his lifetime, GM Yip Man made a lot of adjustments and refinements to the original system he learned as a youth from Chan Wah Shun and Ng Chun So. In traditional Chinese culture it would not be considered proper to brag about making such changes, so the most descrete solution would be to attribute them to this personage of "Leung Bik".

Now Leung Bik may well have actually existed and indeed may have tutored the young Yip Man. Or he  may have been a contrivance. The truth will never be known. So I accept the story as a way of acknowledging that GM Yip's Wing Chun developed certain unique qualities that might not be apparent in some other lineages.

For me the name "Leung Bik" becomes associated with the most sophisticated elements of Yip Man's art ....the stuff that a refined, older fighter would use to easily control a brash young man. In this sense, I feel the story takes on a _special validity_. That's why it really is a good story, and why I re-tell it to my students just like the fables of Ng Mui and Yim Wing Chun, or Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yee Tai. We may not be able to verify them historically, but they do encapsulate a deeper truth about the practice of this art at it's most sophisticated level.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 23, 2015)

geezer said:


> Here's the deal in a nutshell: Throughout his lifetime, GM Yip Man made a lot of adjustments and refinements to the original system he learned as a youth from Chan Wah Shun and Ng Chun So. In traditional Chinese culture it would not be considered proper to brag about making such changes, so the most descrete solution would be to attribute them to this personage of "Leung Bik".
> 
> Now Leung Bik may well have actually existed and indeed may have tutored the young Yip Man. Or he  may have been a contrivance. The truth will never be known. So I accept the story as a way of acknowledging that GM Yip's Wing Chun developed certain unique qualities that might not be apparent in some other lineages.
> 
> For me the name "Leung Bik" becomes associated with the most sophisticated elements of Yip Man's art ....the stuff that a refined, older fighter would use to easily control a brash young man. In this sense, I feel the story takes on a _special validity_. That's why it really is a good story, and why I re-tell it to my students just like the fables of Ng Mui and Yim Wing Chun, or Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yee Tai. We may not be able to verify them historically, but they do encapsulate a deeper truth about the practice of this art at it's most sophisticated level.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 23, 2015)

Ip Man's mature wing chun was indeed superior to anything else around.
Questioning his own explanation of his evolution is pointless. People have been piggy backing on his achievements.
Most people who  claim they have learned from him were with him 1 to 3 years
and learned irregularly.
Before memories fade- Sigung Ho Kam ming was with him daily in his intense period of learning and then met with him often even upto the day Ip man's death. But HKM now is 90 years old and his teaching days are over.
While Ip Man had good hands- his feet before his decline were amazing...
according to HKM.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 24, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> Ip Man's mature wing chun was indeed superior to anything else around.
> .


How do we know this is true ? Any official records about his fights , a movie recoding , anything that can checked and verified ? Or we have to believe the story where Yip Man broke a handgun with his fingers ?


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

My judgment call-
based on what I know of Ip man's wing chun and other cotemporary arts.
If I did not think very highly of his art, I would not do it. Simple.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 24, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> My judgment call-
> based on what I know of Ip man's wing chun and other cotemporary arts.
> If I did not think very highly of his art, I would not do it. Simple.


So it is just your opinion . It would be fair to say that you state your opinion , because I totally do not aggree with what you said and I  base my opinion on available information .


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

zuti car said:


> So it is just your opinion . It would be fair to say that you state your opinion , because I totally do not aggree with what you said and I  base my opinion on available information .


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

It's ok- I was not looking for your opinion though I respect your right not to agree.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 24, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> It's ok- I was not looking for your opinion though I respect your right not to agree.


Neither do I looked for yours but you still shared it and you did it in such a 
Manner like it is a fact ,  not a personal opinion .


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Neither do I looked for yours but you still shared it and you did it in such a
> Manner like it is a fact ,  not a personal opinion .


---------------------------------------
ok let's move on.


----------



## geezer (Apr 25, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> ---------------------------------------
> ok let's move on.



Nah. I still have to put in my 2 cents.

My old sifu, who trained with GM Yip Man, may have said some stuff to us which was pure BS, but _he also told us things that ring of common sense._ One was that GM Yip _really was_ as good as he was made out to be.

One time he related to us a story about a personal friend of his, a reporter who sometimes wrote for Hong Kong martial arts magazines, who continually sought out obscure lineages of WC, always looking for something more "pure", "original", "internal" and "effective". Sifu said it was kind of a sad story, since this man was very sincere and worked hard, but never really achieved a very high level of skill, or found the "magic" he was looking for.

Basically, Sifu told us, so many people are looking for magic, something like the "secret tecniques" or the "hermit master" you find in all the wuxia stories and cheesy kung fu movies. _"I tell you"_ Sifu said, _"Not even one of these so-called Wing Chun masters would have dared to show his face when Grandmaster Yip was alive!"_

Now in my opinion (yes it's just an _opinion _guys), those words ring true!



BTW any similarity between the description of the poor guy above who was looking for some "pure and original" form of WC and either Hendrick or Sergio is pure coincidence. Really.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 25, 2015)

I have mentioned this before. There is a well known yoga teacher here in the valley who learned some wing chun from me. He knew a Chinese girl- now back in Asia. The girl's father was learning wing chun from Ip Man- he could afford private lessons in his courtyard. Some martial artists used to come to watch. They laughed at the old sifu and said that their kicks would break through IM's defense. So IP stood in the center and the visitors began kicking at him from different directions- they all went flying and falling.
When HKM opened his Macao school on a high rooftop of a tall building., IM came occasionally... to watch the proceedings. He has corrected my sifu and even later asked him to show proper moving ma bo footwork to a sifu who learned a short time in HK before moving to Canada. There are lots of people with first hand experience of Ip Man' skills. Trivializing his achievements is plain silly.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 25, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> I have mentioned this before. There is a well known yoga teacher here in the valley who learned some wing chun from me. He knew a Chinese girl- now back in Asia. The girl's father was learning wing chun from Ip Man- he could afford private lessons in his courtyard. Some martial artists used to come to watch. They laughed at the old sifu and said that their kicks would break through IM's defense. So IP stood in the center and the visitors began kicking at him from different directions- they all went flying and falling.
> When HKM opened his Macao school on a high rooftop of a tall building., IM came occasionally... to watch the proceedings. He has corrected my sifu and even later asked him to show proper moving ma bo footwork to a sifu who learned a short time in HK before moving to Canada. There are lots of people with first hand experience of Ip Man' skills. Trivializing his achievements is plain silly.


There are similar stories in every lineage , in every art. Yi quan founder had 1000 fights and never lost , Huo Jing Jua was undefeated fighter , Wong shun leung a king of underground fights. There are two things common for this kind of stories, all of them put their main protagonist above all others and non of them can be proved


----------



## KPM (Apr 26, 2015)

I also tend to believe what is said about Ip Man's skills.  Wong Shun Leung had some experience boxing and remained a "no nonsense" kind of guy throughout his life by all accounts.  He was impressed with Ip Man's skills and stayed with him.  Bruce Lee was no slouch when it came to fighting and recognizing what is practical.  He always spoke highly of Ip Man's skills.  I don't doubt Ip Man's skills at all.  I think Ip Man was an intelligent, skilled, and experienced martial artist.  Now... the sticking point is all of the stories about how Ip Man acquired that skill.  I'm willing to give his own intelligence and ingenuity the benefit of the doubt and attribute a lot of his advancement in skill beyond his peers to his own hard work, in-depth understanding of Wing Chun and his own innovations that came from that.  Why do we even need to keep emphasizing a Leung Bik connection?  It seems some of Ip Man's followers made a far bigger deal out of it than did Ip Man himself.  He even forgot to mention it in a history of Wing Chun that he wrote himself!!! 

 I also believe that Ip Man was passionate about Wing Chun and would have checked out other Wing Chun guys as much as possible.   He would have trained with Yuen Kay Shan, Ng Chun So, Chu Chong Man, Fung Wah and any other Wing Chun guys that were available and friendly.  Who here wouldn't do that?   Who here wouldn't be willing to pick up a thing or two that looked good from someone from another Wing Chun lineage other than his own?  So I think it is also just plain silly and against common sense to deny those kinds of contacts and connections as being a probability.....and yet to put so much stock in the Leung Bik story!


----------



## zuti car (Apr 26, 2015)

I don't doubt his skill , just don't believe in stories where he had super human powers . I mean really , fight how many people at once ? Break a handgun with his fingers ? I think Yip Man doesn't need this kind of marketing .


----------



## geezer (Apr 26, 2015)

KPM said:


> I also believe that Ip Man was passionate about Wing Chun and would have checked out other Wing Chun guys as much as possible.   He would have trained with Yuen Kay Shan, Ng Chun So, Chu Chong Man, Fung Wah and any other Wing Chun guys that were available and friendly.  Who here wouldn't do that?   Who here wouldn't be willing to pick up a thing or two that looked good from someone from another Wing Chun lineage other than his own?  So I think it is also just plain silly and against common sense to deny those kinds of contacts and connections as being a probability.....and yet to put so much stock in the Leung Bik story!



This is absolutely true. I have no doubt the Grandmaster Yip crossed bridges with many other skilled practitioners and applied whatever was useful. Bruce Lee didn't invent that concept! But whereas Bruce lee was brash and not at all private about his own changes and contributions to the art, GM Yip by all accounts was a more modest and proper gentleman. Perhaps you are right, KPM. Perhaps GM Yip used the Leung Bik story as a cover for modifications to his WC that were either of his own invention, or borrowed from others including YKS. Or perhaps the Leung Bik story is all true. Or a little of both.

So when I discuss WC history with advanced students and colleagues, I share these thoughts. With beginning students, I simply relate the story as told in GM Yip's own written history of the system. And I let them know that is as much legend as fact.

BTW _KPM_, why this obsession over Leung Bik? Nobody I know except a few "true-believers" in the William Cheung fantasy even care!


----------



## Danny T (Apr 27, 2015)

Stories are often embellished. What is most important is how skilled are you within your art. Ip Man was very good. Great even. That does absolutely nothing for me or you. WC has evolved, no art is pure. Train, get better, compare yourself to yourself. All else is really unimportant.


----------



## jhexx (Apr 27, 2015)

Great post^^^

in my own experience, I think there is a great benefit to learning different aspects of application from different lineages, it only adds more choices in your own arsenal. My stance is definitely influenced by both Wong Sheung Leung (modified by my father a bit) and Jiu Wan stances. As of now learning Wang Kiu's version from Chum Kiu on. As I study more about them, I see a lot of connections and variations of the same applied theories, which in turn helps me have a broader understanding of that one hand (in general for example the tan sao, gan sao, etc, whatever I am working on at that time.)


----------



## KPM (Apr 27, 2015)

Sifu Sergio says some good stuff here and it is pertinent to the thread:


----------



## geezer (Apr 28, 2015)

KPM said:


> Sifu Sergio says some good stuff here and it is pertinent to the thread:


Yeah, I'd say it's one of Sergio's better clips. He's got some good ideas and has quite a talent for mimicking and picking stuff up. Definitely a faster learner than I ever was or will be.

On the other hand he has also jumped on a lot of trendy bandwagons and put out a lot of more questionable stuff. After all he is promoting his _business_ just like a lot of other people. So in general I take it all with a grain of salt.


----------



## KPM (Apr 28, 2015)

Could be Steve.  I'm just going by what he says on this particular video.   And what he says matches up to a lot of other things I have seen and read.


----------

