Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun

[Jake104]

Boy, I'd almost take that for my new signature line!

Anyway, I find this whole thread kind of amusing, since I don't put too much stock in any of our origin myths. Including those of my lineage. They are not without value as stories that define the character of our art. But neither are they the literal, historical truth. I have not met Eric, but I did spar with a guy who took some private training with him. After a brief time working with Eric, he became much tougher to handle. That tells me that his kung-fu is real. The rest doesn't matter.

Thanks Steve I miss you too! Xoxoxo!

 

[Jake104]

Thanks Steve I miss you too! Xoxoxo!

Wow nothing changes around here. Same BS, different day.

As for HFY? Touch hands and see. That's all that mattered to me. I could care less about the history. It is human nature to embellish a bit. Is HFY's history embellished? I don't know I don't care. The proof is in the puddin. Eric's a good guy. He wasn't AFRAID to meet a stranger at a park and touch hands. I could of been a mass murdering wing chun master for all he knew.

I liked Wing Chun better in the 90's before the interweb made it into such a joke. This thread is stupid!

Hey Eric give me a call next time your in town? You owe me a beer remember? The broken nose and those beatings you gave me on the reg haha. You have my number. We are still FB BFF's.

 

[geezer]

...I liked Wing Chun better in the 90's before the interweb made it into such a joke. This thread is stupid!

Best post in a long time. Call me or Jeff -- it would be great to see you again!

 

[Hendrik]

It's interesting that you subscribe to the White crane as a direct Wing Chun ancestor theory, really the only guy pushing that these days is Hendrik Santos.


Even his formerly close associates have brought to light him signing on internet forums under multiple identities to have conversations with himself where he reveals "evidence" that has pretty much always turned out to be falsified. He's forged Kuen Kuit that the Cho family later discredited, had fallings out with the Snake and Crane WC people and multiple other groups.

Heck, he even got kicked out of KFO for being full of bologna (which, if you've spent any time over there, is a pretty tremendous accomplishment).

So while every history (including my line's) should be up for questioning... just be careful where your information comes from.

I have no interest on your HFY at all. And do not want to post here. But I would not take smearing.


Please do your home work before smear me.

I suggest you to visit Hong Kong Martial art community today, Find out what is the facts about those who try to smear me months ago .

As for KFO, I left at my own decision, never being kick out. Never being ask to leave.


As for Fujian white crane and emei 12 zhuang as the mother art of YKSLT, it is proven by evidence, on record. I suggest anyone who is serious to find out read wing chun illustrated magazine.


you can create your His-story as you like,

Just leave me out of your his-story

 

[Jake104]

Best post in a long time. Call me or Jeff -- it would be great to see you again!

I will. I'm still doing my thing. Mostly form work and solo stuff. I see the DTE get togethers on FB and have been meaning to reconnect. I see Tiny has a group. Does Jeff still have a group? Tiny's is to far. I'm cheap.

Let me know next time your down here. I'm on the Facebook.

 

[Jake104]

I have no interest on your HFY at all. And do not want to post here. But I would not take smearing.


Please do your home work before smear me.

I suggest you to visit Hong Kong Martial art community today, Find out what is the facts about me and those who smear me before your posting.

As for KFO, I left at my own decision, never being kick out. Never being ask to leave.


As for Fujian white crane and emei 12 zhuang as the mother art of YKSLT, it is proven by evidence, on record. I suggest anyone who is serious to find out read wing chun illustrated magazine.


you can create your His-story as you like,


but leave me alone.

I like your stuff too! I'm a subscriber of your delight1000 on the YouTube. I like your explanations.

 

[Hendrik]

I like your stuff too! I'm a subscriber of your delight1000 on the YouTube. I like your explanations.

Thanks you!

It is better to deal with facts in history by evidence and in a scientific way, instead of creat all kind of his-story, And then when one cannot back up with evidence, pull all kind of political smearing.

Public are not stupid, it is only a matter of time, they will find out what happen and everything will back fire.

 

[Jake104]

Thanks you!

It is better to deal with facts in history by evidence and in a scientific way, instead of creat all kind of his-story, then when one cannot back up with evidence, pull all kind of political smearing.

Public are not stupid, it is only a matter of time, they will find out what happen and everything will back fi

Thanks you!

It is better to deal with facts in history by evidence and in a scientific way, instead of creat all kind of his-story, And then when one cannot back up with evidence, pull all kind of political smearing.

Public are not stupid, it is only a matter of time, they will find out what happen and everything will back fire.

Sorry, You lost me after thank you!

History isn't going to help me when I'm getting my *** kicked. What I do in the present is what matters. Boom! How you like that. Fortune cookie wisdom!

The only way history may help. Is if I go to my happy place while I'm being beaten.

 

[dlcox]

Hey dlcox, you put out a bunch of interesting history tidbits, so I wanted to make sure I did my homework before I got back to you on this. Li Wen Mao was in fact a leader in the red turban uprising - that does not mean he was a member or a senior of the Hun Gun Wui organization that HFY claims an ancestor from.

The Red Turban rebellion is comparable to more modern history such as the civil right movement in the 1960's in the USA. Li Wen Mao is a figurehead much as Martin Luther King was here. However, there were other groups who were part of the same movement but in a different place (Black Panthers in Oakland, etc) who were independent of one another but considered part of the same struggle. It's from one of those independent cells in a different province that we claim an ancestor, not the organization of Li Wen Mao.

I can't speak to the creation of SNT/CK/BG, but we do have a training set credited to Hung Gun Biu himself which is a training module in between SNT and CK. If it's true, that means that the 3 forms existed as far back as Tahn Sau Ng, because the two lines didn't intermix after that point. Also, it may be not that Wong Wa Bo and Leung Yi Tai invented the forms so much as codified what belonged to each set as far as they knew before passing it on - I've heard conflicting stories on that one as well. As far as why other people don't practice our branch of the art, that horse has already been beaten to death, I'm not going to rehash what can easily be found with a search function.

It's interesting that you subscribe to the White crane as a direct Wing Chun ancestor theory, really the only guy pushing that these days is Hendrik Santos. Even his formerly close associates have brought to light him signing on internet forums under multiple identities to have conversations with himself where he reveals "evidence" that has pretty much always turned out to be falsified. He's forged Kuen Kuit that the Cho family later discredited, had fallings out with the Snake and Crane WC people and multiple other groups. Heck, he even got kicked out of KFO for being full of bologna (which, if you've spent any time over there, is a pretty tremendous accomplishment). So while every history (including my line's) should be up for questioning... just be careful where your information comes from.

From the stories I've heard Li Wen Mao was the founder of the Hong Guan Hui, this doesn't mean it's true though. I agree with you that there were most likely splinter branches united in the same cause. I can't get in line with the idea that the forms go all the way back to the time of Tan Shou Wu, there is simply no evidence to support it, doesn't mean it's not plausible, it's just that I haven't seen anything to convince me otherwise. I think it would be really interesting to see documented proof of such a thing. I am aware of some other branches that do not associate the standard forms with Huang and Liang, stating a different route of transmission, but when looking into their lineages further the truth comes out. As far as Hendrik is concerned, he was only pushing the White Crane thing in effort to gain support of the White Crane people, his agenda has been all along the Emei Shier Zhuang Qigong, I do not support him or his "Theories". The history of White Crane, in comparison to Yong Chun, is very well documented. There is some overlap in the ancestry, Li Wen Mao being a big one along with Bai Jie. Now please don't take my statements as putting your system down, that is not the case. I know very little of your art and from what I have seen and read, conceptually and visually it looks solid to me. History wise, as with a lot of Yong Chun branches, there are things that for me just don't gel, but as I stated earlier this doesn't mean it's not a legitimate branch of the art. Sometimes when we don't have all the necessary information about our ancestry we rely on stories and fill in the rest with what makes the most sense given the circumstances. If we believed every Yong Chun origin story we would have several methods developing independently of one another yet being nearly identical in construction. We know logically that this could not be the case, so it leaves us with an older, as of yet, unidentified root source or that the art as we know it today was codified in the early to mid 1800's and the splintering occurred shortly after. Since very little can be verified beyond a shadow of a doubt, we are simply left with has been passed down within are own lineages as well as are own deductions. I apologize if I came off as off putting, it wasn't my intention just adding in my 2 cents to the discussion. Best of luck in your training.

 

[Eric_H]

Wow nothing changes around here. Same BS, different day.

As for HFY? Touch hands and see. That's all that mattered to me. I could care less about the history. It is human nature to embellish a bit. Is HFY's history embellished? I don't know I don't care. The proof is in the puddin. Eric's a good guy. He wasn't AFRAID to meet a stranger at a park and touch hands. I could of been a mass murdering wing chun master for all he knew.

I liked Wing Chun better in the 90's before the interweb made it into such a joke. This thread is stupid!

Hey Eric give me a call next time your in town? You owe me a beer remember? The broken nose and those beatings you gave me on the reg haha. You have my number. We are still FB BFF's.

I'll be in the 21st, I haven't forgotten that I owe you - don't worry

 

[Eric_H]

From the stories I've heard Li Wen Mao was the founder of the Hong Guan Hui, this doesn't mean it's true though. I agree with you that there were most likely splinter branches united in the same cause. I can't get in line with the idea that the forms go all the way back to the time of Tan Shou Wu, there is simply no evidence to support it, doesn't mean it's not plausible, it's just that I haven't seen anything to convince me otherwise. I think it would be really interesting to see documented proof of such a thing. I am aware of some other branches that do not associate the standard forms with Huang and Liang, stating a different route of transmission, but when looking into their lineages further the truth comes out. As far as Hendrik is concerned, he was only pushing the White Crane thing in effort to gain support of the White Crane people, his agenda has been all along the Emei Shier Zhuang Qigong, I do not support him or his "Theories". The history of White Crane, in comparison to Yong Chun, is very well documented. There is some overlap in the ancestry, Li Wen Mao being a big one along with Bai Jie. Now please don't take my statements as putting your system down, that is not the case. I know very little of your art and from what I have seen and read, conceptually and visually it looks solid to me. History wise, as with a lot of Yong Chun branches, there are things that for me just don't gel, but as I stated earlier this doesn't mean it's not a legitimate branch of the art. Sometimes when we don't have all the necessary information about our ancestry we rely on stories and fill in the rest with what makes the most sense given the circumstances. If we believed every Yong Chun origin story we would have several methods developing independently of one another yet being nearly identical in construction. We know logically that this could not be the case, so it leaves us with an older, as of yet, unidentified root source or that the art as we know it today was codified in the early to mid 1800's and the splintering occurred shortly after. Since very little can be verified beyond a shadow of a doubt, we are simply left with has been passed down within are own lineages as well as are own deductions. I apologize if I came off as off putting, it wasn't my intention just adding in my 2 cents to the discussion. Best of luck in your training.

No insult taken, you made me do some more research - people that make you think are a rare thing on internet forums. Best to you as well.

 

[Eric_H]

As for Fujian white crane and emei 12 zhuang as the mother art of YKSLT, it is proven by evidence, on record. I suggest anyone who is serious to find out read wing chun illustrated magazine.

Garbage.

 

[Marnetmar]

OH GOD I'VE CREATED A MONSTER

 

[VT_Vectis]

Garbage.

I have no interest on your HFY at all. And do not want to post here. But I would not take smearing.


Please do your home work before smear me.

I suggest you to visit Hong Kong Martial art community today, Find out what is the facts about those who try to smear me months ago .

As for KFO, I left at my own decision, never being kick out. Never being ask to leave.


As for Fujian white crane and emei 12 zhuang as the mother art of YKSLT, it is proven by evidence, on record. I suggest anyone who is serious to find out read wing chun illustrated magazine.


you can create your His-story as you like,

Just leave me out of your his-story

I'm not familiar with the ins and outs of this topic, nor the back story but I have read the Emei etc articles in Wing Chun Illustrated and I have to say that imho they didn't go anywhere or give any real conclusions, after rereading them I'm still left scratching my head wondering how they are meant to prove what the intro says they do... Maybe it's just me...

 

[Marnetmar]

IIRC every other Opera WC family (Tang family, Lo family, etc. No, not the fruitcake psuedo-Hung Gar Andreas Hoffmann garbage) says that the three hand forms were derived, possibly by Leung Jan, from techniques seen in Sap Yat Sau and Sam Pai Fut, and neither of those forms were actually very long (I'll link some proper videos when I get home)

I don't know about anyone else but I find that theory easier to believe than the three forms and modern Wing Chun coming from a twenty minute long Chi Kung set of all things. Also, how did we get from HFY to this?

 

[dlcox]

IIRC every other Opera WC family (Tang family, Lo family, etc. No, not the fruitcake psuedo-Hung Gar Andreas Hoffmann garbage) says that the three hand forms were derived, possibly by Leung Jan, from techniques seen in Sap Yat Sau and Sam Pai Fut, and neither of those forms were actually very long (I'll link some proper videos when I get home)

I don't know about anyone else but I find that theory easier to believe than the three forms and modern Wing Chun coming from a twenty minute long Chi Kung set of all things. Also, how did we get from HFY to this?

It's interesting the the 3 sections of Xiao Lin Tou are:

1. San Bei Fo - 3 Prayers to Buddha
2. Shiyi Shou - 11 Hands
3. Hua Quan - Flower Fist

This corresponds to 3 of the major "Weng Chun" hand forms. Begs to question, which came first the chicken or the egg?

 

[Marnetmar]

That's interesting, I didn't know that. Changes my perspective a bit!