paulie zink and the tai shing pek kwar family conflict [Archive]

Doug

08-23-2004, 02:09 PM

Quite plainly, the controversy (at least at the time) was that Zink made claims in his version of the monkey kung fu family tree that conflicted with the original branch (Monkey King's as he is known more popularly). In addition, the claim was made that he used pictures from the original branch's collection that he did not have permission for.
While I try to stay objective on this matter, I find it difficult because Zink and company never returned any e-mail I sent that inquired about this. In fact, it was later that any contact information on his web site was removed. Someone who tries to appear honest and respectful probably would not try to hide, and this appears to be the case. There are other points that could be made, but these are the basics.

Sorry that this is a year late.

Doug M

David Jamieson

08-25-2004, 04:44 AM

i'd haven't no idea about the conflict between paulie zink , michael matsuda and the original tai shing pek kwar family branch in hong kong . i'v read about this in www.chinesekungfuonline.com/english ..

Now you know.

but this facts show by original tai shing pek kwar lineage don't stoped the career of paulie zink , who have a place in the american kung fu multimedia comunity ..

That is a curious thing isn't it?

i don't want start a conflictive topic with this . i only want hear new points of view about this matter .

I don't really have a point of view. Not being a student or comrade of either monkeys. I do like monkeys though, don't get me wrong, monkeys are cool.

Doug

08-25-2004, 12:27 PM

------------------------------------------------------------------------
but this facts show by original tai shing pek kwar lineage don't stoped the career of paulie zink , who have a place in the american kung fu multimedia comunity ..
------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is a curious thing isn't it?

Well, not really if you understand the way it happened in the first place. Zink made his claim to fame before the authentic school arrived in Canada. Much had been done at that time. Since there seems no easy way to contact Zink and crew because no contact exists online, one would need to find him. And given that capitalism promotes all sorts of people, including those who steal, there is a market for those interested in the unusual and mysterious. Monkey kung fu was such a mystery the, and it was available through Zink to the U.S. So his success may seem curious or strange, but adding up the progression of events shows that the strange is probable. Depending on who you choose to believe, the probable is either the result of popularity and success or the result of theft and misrepresentation.

Did I fail to mention that, after responding on his web site to claims made against his monkey style, Zink chose not to include contact information? Before the online response, one could contact him by e-mail.

Doug M

Starchaser107

08-25-2004, 05:03 PM

just out of curiousity ..why is this posted in the southern board ? , monkey kung fu is northern.
anyway
http://www.martialinfo.com/websites/monkeykungfu/monkey.htm

this has a chart of paulie zinks lineage, and on the left hand side you will notice that there is reference to gm chan sau chung.
I suppose this implies that they learned from seperate teachers...
I honestly don't know what to make of this situation.

iron_silk

08-25-2004, 09:42 PM

...looking at the site Paulie Zink's instructor was allegedly Cho Chat Ling. Why doesn't someone contact him to clear things up then?

Doug

08-26-2004, 04:23 AM

Originally posted by iron_silk
...looking at the site Paulie Zink's instructor was allegedly Cho Chat Ling. Why doesn't someone contact him to clear things up then?

That is the problem. Cho Chat Ling is not part of the authentic Tai Shing Pek Qwar lineage. Those who I talked to (sorry, but please do not ask me who) do not know who he is. From this is the confusion over why Zink claims to be a bearer of monkey kung fu. I have wondered if there is more to "not knowing him" than I was told, but the issue also goes beyond Ling. From using material without perrmission to misrepresenting the art, there are other things involved.

And I have tried to contact Zink numerous times before, and I received no replies.

Doug M

iron_silk

08-26-2004, 05:13 AM

Yeah he obviously ripped off stuff and questionable kung fu moves but I was wondering if any body tried to contact Cho Chat Ling and find out his background etc...or did Paulie Zink just got a pic of a guy and made up a Chinese "like" name?

Doug

08-26-2004, 11:06 PM

Who knows? He possibly could have met Cho Chat Ling, and this person may have taught him all this stuff. However, from the perspective of the standard bearers of authentic (meaning from Hong Kong) Tai Shing Pek Qwar, this person is not part of their family tree. Zink is also not there.

And no one knows Zink's perspective (other than that silly Q&A session on his web site) because he does not leave any contact information around.

Doug M

Doug

08-26-2004, 11:17 PM

Funny enough, here is Zink with porn star Asia Carrera on a set (don't worry--nothing "porny" here):

Hermes3X

08-26-2004, 11:33 PM

so who then exactly is the authentic lineage holder of tai shing pek kwar in the United States?

phantom

08-27-2004, 02:29 AM

You guys do make a strong case against Zink. However, the guy has won some championships at kung fu tournaments. So if his stuff is not real monkey kung fu, then why didn't the judges at these tournaments notice it? As for tai shing pek kwar in the United States, I belive Sifu Chan Tai-shan used to teach it in New York, but he is no longer teaching. I believe one of his students, I think his name is Gus Kapros, teaches it in New York, but I believe he makes you master Lama Kung fu and Choy lif fut first, but I am not totally 100% sure about that, so please do not quote me on it. Peace.

Brad

08-27-2004, 07:41 AM

You guys do make a strong case against Zink. However, the guy has won some championships at kung fu tournaments.
I was thinking they were open tournements(Kungfu, Karate, etc. all thrown in together) in forms competition... I used to train at a fake kungfu school that had no less than 3 grand champs from these kind of competitions.

--->Deleted by me :p <--- :mad:

I'm sick of hearing about frauds and martial arts political crap, so I'm going to try not and take part in any more of these discussions(incase anyone read that last part and is wondering why I deleted it) :p

David Jamieson

08-27-2004, 07:41 PM

You guys do make a strong case against Zink.

really? nothing but hearsay I am reading.

However, the guy has won some championships at kung fu tournaments. So if his stuff is not real monkey kung fu, then why didn't the judges at these tournaments notice it?

Oh I don't know....maybe because the US knows jack about authentic chinese martial arts for the most part? They think leaping around like bruce in enter the dragon is enough.

I mean come on, I hear of guys who make up forms on teh fly at tournaments and win, and besides, america is home of the musical kata, so there you have it...in a sort of sardonic and bitter way :p

As for tai shing pek kwar in the United States, I belive Sifu Chan Tai-shan used to teach it in New York, but he is no longer teaching. I believe one of his students, I think his name is Gus Kapros, teaches it in New York, but I believe he makes you master Lama Kung fu and Choy lif fut first, but I am not totally 100% sure about that, so please do not quote me on it. Peace.

consider yourself quoted! lol. Ask Dave Ross about Chan sifu. I believe that was his Lama kungfu teacher and he might know whether or not Chan taught pek kwar, tai hsing pek kwar, et al.

Also, I think Abel does some monkey fist stuff, and then tehre is the new (well fairly new) shaolin monkey stuff which is not the same as pek kwar.

Then there's the contemporary wushu version of monkey style...

anyway, say whatever you want about paul zink, he's doing his thing and who cares. I think his detractors protest too much frankly and in trying to make paul lose face, they themselves have lost some for being a bit overboard on their complaining and moaning.

All kungfu did not come from hong kong after all and there are more than a few charlatans there as well.

anyway... just saying my p.o.v I really don't care much about it beyond that little bit of drivel.

cheers

iron_silk

08-27-2004, 08:54 PM

it is one thing to protest too much and to make another person lose face...maybe that is vendictive or mean spirited

BUT in this case it could be NOT! Assuming Chan is correct (especially given his long documented career and mentions even on Paul's chart) wouldn't it be wrong and insulting is someone else tried to mis-use the name of your style and lineage for their own benefit? Especially if the style is not true and potentially creating a bad name for your system? Even if they are making good PR for your system do you want any part of it since they have no right to even use the name?

I'm not starting a fight, I am just trying to give another perspective. Because is does matter what other's do if they try damage something you hold dear to. When something is wrong it is just wrong. If you want to go let it go and it's up to you then fine but otherwise..."evil prosper as long as good men do nothing" (or however it goes.)

Remember I don't really know what is what...that is why I brought up the whole find Cho Chat Ling person to clear up mess question ok?

David Jamieson

08-27-2004, 10:59 PM

I_S-

maybe...maybe not.

For instance, did Chan approach Zink personally and cross hands?

I never heard anything like that, what i did notice was that Chan came to the west, set up shop and set out to destroy any competition.

At least, that's how it appeared in print and on his site.

Also, what if the issue is a schism/politcal one in regards to Cho Chat? Maybe Cho Chat did learn in that lineage? Chan is teh only one who has stepped forward and decried it so far.

I mean it's all speculation. And it doesn't speak to either guys skills or credibility except that one does not like the other. Zink hasn't said anything really at his site or elsewhere so far.

It would be interesting for this to be settled in such a way that we could all know who teh monkey king is instead of the evasive one (zink) or the overt complainer (Chan)

anyway...

iron_silk

08-27-2004, 11:36 PM

well given how loud Chan is crying doesn't he make himself the bigger target if he was lying.

Place this in mind though...even if Paul was false
a) maybe his art can be used to fight anyway despite false claims
b) even if Chan was right...being right doesn't make an individual any less of a complainer...it just makes him a RIGHT cry baby instead of a wrong one

Right or wrong doesn't necessarily tie directly to fighting ability. A person with superior fighting skills for his own reasons lies about everything he is and other such. Well he still would be wrong even if he could win every fight thrown at him b/c he lied.

In anycase this can go on forever.

Doug

08-28-2004, 12:24 AM

Originally posted by Kung Lek
really? nothing but hearsay I am reading.

It is not hearsay. Contact the authentic line of Tai Shing Pek Qwar in Canada: http://tspk.com/english/index.htm . Here is their take on Zink: http://tspk.com/english/fake_monkey_kungfu.htm . Again, it is not hearsay.

The only reason this can be considered hearsay is if someone wants to make it more than it is. Someone has been and is misrepresenting another person's art. It is not a conspiracy; it is an institutional analysis.

Before you can dismiss this information, you need to investigate this situation further in order to boost your own understanding of all the whats and whys. I don't think you should take what I say at face value. Indeed, you should find out for yourself. In the process, you may be surprised by what you find. I know I was.

Doug M

David Jamieson

08-28-2004, 12:31 AM

Doug-

I've seen that site and it belongs to one side of the argument, IE: Chan. (btw, the so called "international tai shing pek kwar federation is also founded by Chan)

He and his son have a vested interest in the business of monkey kungfu, because that is what they sell and do.

There is no corroborating information anywhere else except through there...

so far.

so how is it possible to investigate further when all you have is Chan's own site making the accusations and Zink not answering.

so, if it ain't third party, it's hearsay in my books.

Place this in mind though...even if Paul was false
a) maybe his art can be used to fight anyway despite false claims
b) even if Chan was right...being right doesn't make an individual any less of a complainer...it just makes him a RIGHT cry baby instead of a wrong one

That's kinda what I was getting at I_S except that I am not 100% sure that Chan is indeed right. No one is corroberating with him that would know in detail what's going on. Say a si suk or a si hing of his that can confirm and that is known as part of the lineage yet has a seperate school from Chan?

That would satisfy the question I think.

David Jamieson

08-28-2004, 12:36 AM

I would also ad that their photos of zink and their pointing out that this posture or that posture as being wrong in itself is an egrigious thing.

One could say the same thing about anyones style of kungfu.

IE a hung gar school can say another hung gar school is doing it wrong. But they can both be from the same root.

In short it's neither here nor there. If it works it works period.

cheers

Doug

08-28-2004, 12:59 AM

Originally posted by Kung Lek
I_S-

maybe...maybe not.

For instance, did Chan approach Zink personally and cross hands?

When Grandmaster Chan arrived in California for seminars, Zink did not bother to accomodate him or meet him. Nothing was exchanged.

I never heard anything like that, what i did notice was that Chan came to the west, set up shop and set out to destroy any competition.

At least, that's how it appeared in print and on his site.

Now, that is new. I have never heard that before, nor do I believe it. Have you ever met the man? This image would change had you done so. But how do you come to this conclusion? What signals this perspective to you?

Also, what if the issue is a schism/politcal one in regards to Cho Chat? Maybe Cho Chat did learn in that lineage? Chan is teh only one who has stepped forward and decried it so far.

As stated, no Cho Chat Ling is in the original Tai Shing Pek Kwar lineage. Contact the above web site to ask the Monkey King for yourself.

Well, there is a response on Zink's web site, so it does represent his opinion if he allowed it on there.

Silence speaks for itself, so the fact that Zink has not even bothered to contact the authentic school says much about what has happened.

I mean it's all speculation. And it doesn't speak to either guys skills or credibility except that one does not like the other. Zink hasn't said anything really at his site or elsewhere so far.

No, it is not speculation. Contact the original Tai Shing Pek Kwar school to talk to them through e-mail: http://tspk.com/english/contact_us.htm .

And, yes, Zink has said plenty on his web site. However, trying to get you a link to the actual web page shows that it has been taken down. Still, he allowed text on his site to say that the authentic school is not true. Funny, this Zink: a guy comes from nowhere to claim historic heritage while a historically recorded school claims he is a fake. Hmmm.

In addition, the text on the front page that sates, "Click here to find out more about the official book of the Monkey," also is a product of theft. He used images that were not his to use, nor did he ask permission to use them. The claims he makes in his book are false too, according to the authentic school. I can say more, but I prefer not to name people. A face-to-face conversation on this matter would be far better.

It would be interesting for this to be settled in such a way that we could all know who teh monkey king is instead of the evasive one (zink) or the overt complainer (Chan)

Uh, there is really only one Monkey King: Grandmaster Chan Sau Chung. That was his title for quite some time before Zink got the same title in print.

And I think that calling a respected martial artist an "overt complainer" is mistaken and far from the point at hand.

If the desire is for these two to rumble, that would also be far from the mark: one guy is misrepresenting an art. You have to understand that this is a family's life, promoting and maintaining a tradition. Someone is misrepresenting that tradition. He is messing up the Tai Shing Pek Kwar name. That is the stuff of blood feuds (which, fortunately, is not happeneing).

Doug M

Doug

08-28-2004, 01:09 AM

Originally posted by Kung Lek
Doug-

I've seen that site and it belongs to one side of the argument, IE: Chan. (btw, the so called "international tai shing pek kwar federation is also founded by Chan)

He and his son have a vested interest in the business of monkey kungfu, because that is what they sell and do.

There is no corroborating information anywhere else except through there...

so far.

Yes, that argument belongs to the original school. That is not controversial. If much of the information that backs up their argument comes from them, that is no surprise.

Yes, they are selling kung fu as is Zink. That is a consequence of living in a capitalist society. However, that is their art, which is more than a business. It is a lifetime of learning, teaching, and being. It is not just a business that they are defending.

And, no, I believe that the failure of Zink and Matsuda to do a lot of things that fellow martial artists do for each other as well as respond to claims and allow proper responses supports the argument made. Hey, I tried many times to contact them. No one ever got back to me. These guys know what they are doing.

Doug M

Doug

08-28-2004, 01:13 AM

Originally posted by Kung Lek
I would also ad that their photos of zink and their pointing out that this posture or that posture as being wrong in itself is an egrigious thing.

One could say the same thing about anyones style of kungfu.

Except that this is the original school making the claim. Have you bothered to contact them yet?

In short it's neither here nor there. If it works it works period.

Yeah, as long as you don't mind learning from a fake.

Doug M

lkfmdc

08-28-2004, 01:23 AM

I am always amazed Zink is still around, or that anyone cares for what he does, but this IS the US :rolleyes:

As it happens, not only was my sifu (Chan Tai-San) a friend of one of Chan Sau Chung's students

I was friends with a guy who knew Paulie Zink.

I've heard quite enough. Enough to know that Zink is completely full of crap....

Winning at open karate events and being in US based magazines means NOTHING... in Asia, everyone knows Chan Sau Chung and knows he inherited the Tai Sing Pek Gwa Myuhn system

For years, Paulie Zink's teacher was an "official secret". Then for a while he had a little Asian guy who was a friend of his that Zink used to claim was his teacher. My friend, who had known Zink for years, said the Asian guy was a buddy of Zink's and Zink started saying that was his teacher because so many questions popped up that Zink couldn't answer...

My friend also went back and forth to Hong Kong, studied with Chan Sau Chung and was actually the person who gave Zink a copy of Chan's book. Zink, not very bright or very ethical, copied the pictures out of the book and translated the text, adding in his mythical teacher Cho.....

A little prior to Zink's incredibly unethical copying of the book, Zink had actually tried to get certification from Chan Sau Chung. Chan was more interested in crushing Zink's head....

iron_silk

08-28-2004, 01:25 AM

After thinking about it for sometime I have come to the conclusion that since Chan is more than willing to place this entire "business" on the line in public to view it is ONLY up Paul Zink now. I mean anyone has the right to make an accusation but it is up to Paul Zink and his martial arts friends to defend it.

In truth Paul has just tried to shy away from the whole thing.

This isn't like the whole stupid CLF controversy argument and mythical evidence never to be produced by people on forums but rather an organization, no matter from which side since either side is recognizable.

In the end it's about who is willing to put their name in PUBLIC and on the line about specific issues and topics. Everything is point for point up for debate and that's it.

There is nothing to theorize or debate until somebody is willing to uphold Zink's side in such specific point for point manner.

Because for anybody else who has no relations or experience to either is merely theorizing and essentially making things up. Get what I mean?

Now what I just said doesn't take into account of individual character or whether they good or bad people or who is wrong. Only the facts please. I never critize anyone beyond what they state anymore would be presuming.

Doug

08-28-2004, 02:31 AM

Originally posted by lkfmdc
My friend also went back and forth to Hong Kong, studied with Chan Sau Chung and was actually the person who gave Zink a copy of Chan's book. Zink, not very bright or very ethical, copied the pictures out of the book and translated the text, adding in his mythical teacher Cho.....

That's right! Thanks for pointing this out. I completely forgot about this. In Zink's book, he has at least one photo that he took from the original Tai Shing Pek Kwar school's text that was altered (p 112). I know this because an individual directly involved showed me the original text photo and how Zink covered it (or tried to). To those who have not seen the original text, the alteration looks like a normal thing. But the areas are actually erased and filled in with grey fills (as in Photoshop) with different levels of darkness. It is totally modified. Why would he do this if not to hide something? Since the people who put it together were on the other side of the world, who would know or care about this fraud?

In fact, many, of the photos in Zink's book are from the original book. The guy used it without permission! He stole it!

And for anyone who has actually read the book, he or she will notice the surprising level of generality and "duh" level of working knowledge. When I read it, I felt that I had been insulted by the amount of extremely general information that could be learned from very general ideas about Chinese martial arts. This book is a joke, and it is not worth being in print. Other than seeing Zink hold his yoga positions for possible inspiration, it adds just about nothing to the limited available knowledge on Tai Shing Pek Kwar.

Doug M

David Jamieson

08-28-2004, 08:46 AM

doug-

you make some points. Ross has a story to include.

seems convincing.

However, you were wondering how i got the impression that Chan came here, set up shop and destroy the competition.

well, his supporters, whoever they were came to this very forum and advertised the website and school when it first started out not so long ago in Vancouver.

At that time. There was the same declarations about the falseness of Zink.

Seemed a bit quick out the gate.

The tspk school could have easily spread and what you are saying would become known.

Surely there must have been someone in America who knew about the tspk? Why didn't they speak up before?

GARRA DE TIGRE

08-28-2004, 02:21 PM

hello
i'd post this topic last year , i believe , and nobody answer . right now become a hot topic . i don't know why .
i'd read all the responses and i feel the only reason people defends zink is for they hate " kung fu big assosiations " .
i think zink have a great ability . and he must train hard . but the problem is stole something belong to other people . in my country i'd see kung fu people who learn a form from a wing lam videotape , perform better than someone from a original lineage . i think zink must be that case and is ok with the way he choose , but he is wrong when claim things he doen'st .
maybe he start with a little lie and then become a great ball of snow descending from a mountain . he can't stop it now .

Sow Choy

08-28-2004, 06:12 PM

I would like to say...

I am pretty close to GM Chan Sau Chung and many of his students in Hong Kong and his son too...

They are really good people and they have worked very hard at promoting their art in Hong Kong and now in the west. GM Chan who is now in his 60's is very concerned with his art as well as traditional chines kung fu.

I do not know Paulie Zink, so I have nothing to say about him, but I do know that GM Chan and many of his students have tried to contact P Zink privately for quite some time. In fact back in 2000 they were asking me about him and how to get in touch with him.

They were very angry about Paulie Zinks claims. The clain that he was Tai Shing Pek Kwar Moon, for those of you who dont know... GM Chans sifu is the one who fused the 2 systems together " TAi Shing" & "Pek Kwar". So GM Chan knew everything his sifu did, if I am not mistaken he lived with his sifu and took care of him.

For someone to learn a system and become a sifu of traditional kung fu... It would take quite a long time... So GM Chan obviously knows everyone who attained that level as well as all of his teachers students. IF I remember correctly GM Chan was a very early if not the 1st student of his teacher GM Kan Tak Hoi.

So its all there for everyone to decide, but I ask everyone just be a bit nicer about GM Chan, he is protecting his lifework... I will not saying bad about Mr Zink either, If is he real or fake is for his students or prospects to decide, there is room for everyone in the world...

But I know we would be quite upset if someone said the same about being a sifu under GM Lee Koon Hung...

Peace,

Joe

lkfmdc

08-28-2004, 06:12 PM

There are two main issues with Zink

1. He claims to be an important person in the lingeage and claims the title held by the universally recognized inheritor

2. What Zink does is circus tricks, bad gymnastics and has NOTHING to do with the actual system....

There is more than heaps of easily acquired information to prove Zink is a fraud.

Tai Sing Pek Gwa is a combination of two arts
1. Tai Sing (monkey)
and
2. Pek Gwa

(actually, there is a 3rd influence? Does Zink even know it? It is well known in Hong Kong)

Well, anyhoo, the first three sets taught are the Pek Gwa sets...

Extemely respected YC Wong of SF studied the Pek Gwa with Gan Duk Hoi (Chan's teacher) and still teaches the three Pek Gwa sets, I learned two of them from Sifu Wong....

Zink doesn't know them, in fact he does't teach anything resembling them at all.....

Royal Dragon

08-28-2004, 09:12 PM

You know, there are alot of frauds in the MA world. It seems today there are more frauds, than the real thing. It's hard for one to know who is real, and who is not anymore.

From personal experiance, I know Chung Moo Quan is fake, and I can gather Temple King Fu is fake, and Shaolin Do..............well, that is a family system masquerading as something it's not too, so it's Fake.

Me, I did a ton of research, made contacts all over the world exchanged videos, and learned forms from them. I went to real people I felt had the principals I needed to make this work, and I did the best I could to absorb them.

I bill myself as a researcher of my art. Those who come to me come to learn the results of my research, not to learn from a specific lineage. (When I was teaching that is). I offer a "Mad sampler" of Tai tzu from around the world, nothing more.

Am I fake? I don't think so for one simple reason, I'm open about how I did it, what I learned, and where it all comes from (Except when it come to certian promises I have made to keep certian sources quiet).

Yes, I may not have much more than a collection of forms, but my honesty and openness about how I am doing this is what keeps me from being a fraud. I don't claim to be a lineage holder, or have any rank or position in anyone's system outside my own (That I founded myself) If all these other guys could do the same, there would not be a problem so long as they have found a way to build the skills needed to do the job, can demostraight that, and effectively teach those skills.

Brad

08-29-2004, 02:35 AM

From the TSPK website:

3.They have used our pictures, which are exclusively used from our school book in Hong Kong, on their book without our permission. We reserve the legal right on this matter.
For people that say all evidence against Zink is hearsay, that you can't find our for sure that Zink is a fake, etc. This one claim should be pretty easy to check up on for anyone that's serious about fomring an educated opinion on the matter. It's pretty straightforward and doesn't require any background checks of who learned from who, or anything like that. If Zink stole material from Chan Sau Chung's book, then that's solid hard evidence that Zink is a fake. It seems more open and shut(for anyone who cares enough) than Shaolin-Do, Chung Moo Doe, or Temple Kungfu.

cerebus

08-29-2004, 05:33 AM

Yeah, but did Chan ever teach Kung Fu to porn star Asia Carrera? Ha! I didn't think so! :D :D :D

Doug

08-29-2004, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by GARRA DE TIGRE
hello
i'd post this topic last year , i believe , and nobody answer . right now become a hot topic . i don't know why .

Sorry about not getting to this sooner. I only discovered it this week. It may seem that I am being quite blatant with my criticism, but understand that I have tried to do a lot of the question work quietly for some time (since the, I think, 2000 seminars in Los Angeles). I never heard anything from Zink and crew, regardless of how I asked or how many times. My sources are direct sources in this matter, so I feel I am being fair here in providing information that has obviously not been made plain to everyone. It really bugs me that Zink has been able to get away with this for as long as he has. Well, I should say Zink and Matsuda since both of them are involved.

Anyway, I would have responded last year had I known about it.

Doug M

Doug

08-29-2004, 12:55 PM

Am I fake? I don't think so for one simple reason, I'm open about how I did it, what I learned, and where it all comes from (Except when it come to certian promises I have made to keep certian sources quiet).

Right. So much of this is about misrepresentation. For example, try getting the Disney empire to give you permission to use Mickey Mouse for anything. It will make sure you use that **** image as it sees fit as well as requiring payment and all that. So much effort goes into protecting a fake rodent. Protecting one's art is protecting one's very life, far, far more intense and, well, important that a cartoon character. Some guy says he is a member of a martial lineage (what really means a martial family) and claims to promote that system's art as authentic and true. Where are all the lawyer's and laws protecting a martial heritage?

Doug M

GARRA DE TIGRE

08-29-2004, 03:31 PM

sometyhing more i want to say :

grandmaster chan is one of the most loved and respected in hong kong kung fu community . his school always was in close contact with the hung gar schools from lam sai wing time who was a wong fei hung disciple . his great friendship ( like sow choy tell us ) with lee koon hung's choy lay fut kung fu association and another great schools is a prove about this .
i have a brazilian kung fiu magazine with one guy promoting is a heir of the fu jaw pai system from a student from master wong moon toy . i am not sure , but i think is case like zink's case . for wath i know fu jow pai association don't have another branches in brazil . master wai hong is the heir of the system . but maybe this guy from brazil think master wai hong never will know what he is promoting . maybe zink never believed master chan people would come to teach to united states .

Royal Dragon

08-29-2004, 05:20 PM

I'm sure that is it. They never thought anyone would know. HOWEVER, in my case, Tai Tzu is unsually rare in the US, and "I" could probably have gotten away with doing something like that too. I chose not to, not becase I thought I'd get caught, but because it's just plain wrong to misrepresent yourself.

I'm sure i have lost respect form members of the board here due to the way I choose to go about persuing my martial intrests, But I can guarentee that I have far more respect from everyone because I openly admit I learned alot of my Kung Fu from video exchanges with Tai Tzu players around the world. I've exchanged enough to build a complete system for the most part, in two major Tai Tzu classifacations (Southern Tai Tzu Quan, and the Northern Chang Chuan/Hong Chuan). I even have some sets of the Southern Monkey. It's public knowledge, because "I" made it that way. Infact, I've almost over done it just so no one can ever call me a fraud due to the way I went about this.

I "Could" Right now open a school, and claim lineage to some fake made up master like John C. Kim did with Chung Moo Quan. But I don't. I know that when it's time for me to open a school, and start teaching again I have what it takes to do it sucsessfully with out being a BS artist. I also know that all these other goofs could just as easily have done the same thing with out being huge frauds too.