Blast From the Past

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
81

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;940988]We can do a chinese martial art but that doesn’t mean we should adopt silly cultural artifices from archaic, fuedal (and caste) societies.

This has nothing to do with “honor”. If someone – anyone – says X is true and he’s wrong, pointing that out isn’t dishonorable. I pointed out that Cheung’s words only showed he was ignorant of the lessons of chi gerk. And, not only that, his fight with Boztepe demonstrates that ignorance. Why do you believe that to criticize Cheung has to do with “honor”?
[/QUOTE]

Hi,

First of all, we Chinese have a saying “One day as Sifu, Lifetime as Father”.
It means my sifu is also my father. So is it honorable that someone criticizes your
sifu and you do not defend him?

Secondly, Yip Man taught Wing Chun to all his disciples but each one interprets
it differently. Perhaps Master William Cheung’s experience led him to believe
that the particular chi geuk drill is “useless” in his words.

Thirdly, Mo Duk:

·

Mo, is form by two separate words, “stop” and “weapons”, according to ancient chinese phonetics, the meaning is “using martial arts to stop violence, prevent chaos, calm war and bring peace, and not for destruction”.

Duk, consists of 2 words, “upright” and “heart”. In ancient chinese text, it was said “Duk, prospering people outside, prospering the heart within”.
Its meaning is “The thought is just and fair with no prejudice, benefiting people from the outside, and bring peace within the heart, and removing all chaotic thoughts”.

For martial arts practitioners, we should observe Mo Duk,

  • Be proper and decent
  • Treat others with respect
  • Seek peaceful resolution
  • Settle matters with fairness
  • Practice our art with earnest and hardworking
  • Uphold justice
  • Be righteous
  • Be loyal to where we belong, which is our country and our Wing Chun
  • Do not be violent and bully, and do useless things

So it is not a “silly cultural artifices from archaic, fuedal, and caste societies.”

82

[QUOTE=–;941466]Hi,

First of all, we Chinese have a saying “One day as Sifu, Lifetime as Father”.
It means my sifu is also my father. So is it honorable that someone criticizes your
sifu and you do not defend him?
[/QUOTE]

I don’t care if the “chinese have a saying”. I’m not chinese. And, I don’t live my life by following silly sayings either.

Secondly, Yip Man taught Wing Chun to all his disciples but each one interprets
it differently. Perhaps Master William Cheung’s experience led him to believe
that the particular chi geuk drill is “useless” in his words.

I agree with you. Trouble is, Cheung is just plain wrong. His own experience (Boztepe) demonstrated that.

Thirdly, Mo Duk:

·

Mo, is form by two separate words, “stop” and “weapons”, according to ancient chinese phonetics, the meaning is “using martial arts to stop violence, prevent chaos, calm war and bring peace, and not for destruction”.

Duk, consists of 2 words, “upright” and “heart”. In ancient chinese text, it was said “Duk, prospering people outside, prospering the heart within”.
Its meaning is “The thought is just and fair with no prejudice, benefiting people from the outside, and bring peace within the heart, and removing all chaotic thoughts”.

For martial arts practitioners, we should observe Mo Duk,

  • Be proper and decent
  • Treat others with respect
  • Seek peaceful resolution
  • Settle matters with fairness
  • Practice our art with earnest and hardworking
  • Uphold justice
  • Be righteous
  • Be loyal to where we belong, which is our country and our Wing Chun
  • Do not be violent and bully, and do useless things

So it is not a “silly cultural artifices from archaic, fuedal, and caste societies.”

I see you’re an avid wu xia reader. Isn’t fantasy wonderful.

83

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;941467]I don’t care if the “chinese have a saying”. I’m not chinese. And, I don’t live my life by following silly sayings either.

I agree with you. Trouble is, Cheung is just plain wrong. His own experience (Boztepe) demonstrated that.

I see you’re an avid wu xia reader. Isn’t fantasy wonderful.[/QUOTE]

It is an explanation on the words Mo Duk, and the meaning behind it,
i do love Wu Xia though. :slight_smile:

Thanks for your reply

84

Terrence are there any good WC sifu’s who can actually fight that have videos on youtube…

If you want Terrence maybe You and I can strap on the gloves and fight and have someone video tape…that way we can post it on youtube showing WC as functional. But you may not care too since you said once before your not a good fighter…I guess your only as good as your training partners!

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;941467]I don’t care if the “chinese have a saying”. I’m not chinese. And, I don’t live my life by following silly sayings either.

I agree with you. Trouble is, Cheung is just plain wrong. His own experience (Boztepe) demonstrated that.

I see you’re an avid wu xia reader. Isn’t fantasy wonderful.[/QUOTE]

85

[QUOTE=Yoshiyahu;941469]Terrence are there any good WC sifu’s who can actually fight that have videos on youtube…
[/QUOTE]

Go see for yourself. Why don’t you search for wing chun sparring and then do a search for muay thai boxing – see what turns up.

If you want Terrence maybe You and I can strap on the gloves and fight and have someone video tape…that way we can post it on youtube showing WC as functional. But you may not care too since you said once before your not a good fighter…I guess your only as good as your training partners!

Here we go again.

When after all your bothering me with requests to see how we train, spar with us, etc. I relented and offered you a chance to come spar with guys from my group you told me that wouldn’t pay the $10 visitors fee to the YMCA! What, did your mother finally give you the $10?

But you’re right, you are only as good as your training partners. That’s why I train where I do. I train with good fighters. I told you to go train at a MT school – so that you could see and train with good fighters too.

86

I am not able to afford our fees.

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;941472]Go see for yourself. Why don’t you search for wing chun sparring and then do a search for muay thai boxing – see what turns up.

Here we go again.

When after all your bothering me with requests to see how we train, spar with us, etc. I relented and offered you a chance to come spar with guys from my group you told me that wouldn’t pay the $10 visitors fee to the YMCA! What, did your mother finally give you the $10?

But you’re right, you are only as good as your training partners. That’s why I train where I do. I train with good fighters. I told you to go train at a MT school – so that you could see and train with good fighters too.[/QUOTE]

87

“I think most here would agree that to fight with WCK, you should have a very good understanding of the principles and concepts (both mind and body). I don’t feel these disappear if we are not in trapping range. If someone advocates throwing jabs, crosses, probing kicks, etc from the outside to try to work our way in, that IMO turns into lucky fighting.” (JP)

***OH YEAH, I have a very good understanding of wing chun principles and concepts, alright.
34 years worth, and having trained during that period quite extensively with two of Yip Man’s students.

And I know from many years of experience that what I’m advocating has nothing to do with luck.

…

“You are giving up any advantage WCK has to offer and giving your opponent more chance to also get luck when you give up your identity. Further, you are now matching speed and skill of say, boxing, against your opponent.” (JP)

***NO, wrong again.

…

“Way I see it,
CL theory still applies at a longer range.
Certain bridging still applies and works.
Gate theroies apply.
Facing theories applies.
Positioning as well.” (JP)

***YES, they do. And what I have found is that by using longer range horizontal fist (boxing type) straight punches, along with a more mobile boxing type footwork that uses raised heels, broken rhythms, feints and jabs - ALL DONE WHILE UTILIZING TWO CENTERLINES that correspond to your shoulders (and your opponent’s shoulders)…so that you’'re now dueling, so to speak, with your right arm/hand vs. his left arm/hand FOR CONTROL OF ONE CENTERLINE…

and with your left arm/hand vs. his right arm/hand FOR CONTROL OF THE OTHER CENTERLINE…

until you reach close quarters to the point where you get to use your main centerline as the major point of reference, (and therefore less concerned about the 2 lines corresponding to the shoulders)…

AND ALL THE WHILE you can still use bridging, and the gates, and the facing, and certainly the positioning…

so that boxing and wing chun can come together quite seamlessly - as a number of future sparring vids I intend to post will show.

88

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;941463] . . . . We see forms, drills, demos, explanations, etc., everything except the “final product.” Do you think that I’m the only guy in the world to see this pattern? That’s partly why WCK people are laughed at by most fighters. [/QUOTE]
Well all I can say is that we do have clips of some amateur Lei Tai fights. I have no clips of my fights but at least a few people in NYC know about my fights. I’d like to add that anyone who has come to out school has left with a different impression of WC.

89

[QUOTE=JPinAZ;941454]If someone advocates throwing jabs, crosses, probing kicks, etc from the outside to try to work our way in, that IMO turns into lucky fighting.
[/QUOTE]
Some boxers are luckier than others. Yet it appears this is through training not winning the lottery. Actually the jab, both hand and foot, is kind of the tool here for gauging distance, and hovering right around the “go point” to try and draw someone into their space to counter punch. The MT inside and outside leg kick here is another tool that is at the outside of range and offers a challenge.

You are giving up any advantage WCK has to offer and giving your opponent more chance to also get luck when you give up your identity. Further, you are now matching speed and skill of say, boxing, against your opponent. If your opponent is more skilled in boxing, or quicker than you, you are going to have a harder time - the opposite of what you said earlier.

If someone is coming after you with committed punches then the jong is easier to deal with that from structure. The problem is hovering on the edge, with broken rythym and skills to draw you out at the “go point”. Then it very much becomes skill on skill. If you go and overextend, you’re vulnerable. If you don’t go and the jab is entered on, you get your space eaten up. Training the go point is hardest. Even in bai jong training.

Way I see it,
CL theory still applies at a longer range.
Certain bridging still applies and works.
Gate theroies apply.
Facing theories applies.
Positioning as well.
I don’t agree that we have to go to a 3 gate type stance with long/short reach problems in our hands just because we are outside of trapping range. If anyting, Bai Jong still exists right?

Do you realize good Muy Thai boxers approximate a 6 gate stance mostly? Without all the exact reference points? But they look closer to 6 than typical 3.

Size and skill of your opponent makes a difference regardless what ‘style’ you are fighting with. That’s a no brainer. But I don’t buy into the idea that if your opponent is bigger or more skilled that WCK can’t work or you need something else. My experience tells me otherwise. WCK is what give me the edge in this case! I’m not going to try to match speed and strength with a younger faster bigger opponent like I did when boxing. Doesn’t make sense.

I agree.

Sorry to butt in your convo with Vic, but a couple of these points I was interested in and have some input.

90

[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;941507]I’d like to add that anyone who has come to out school has left with a different impression of WC.[/QUOTE]

I’d drop by and train with you guys / Vic if I’m out east. Travel for me is bad in this economy though.

91

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;941509]Some boxers are luckier than others. Yet it appears this is through training not winning the lottery. Actually the jab, both hand and foot, is kind of the tool here for gauging distance, and hovering right around the “go point” to try and draw someone into their space to counter punch. The MT inside and outside leg kick here is another tool that is at the outside of range and offers a challenge.

If someone is coming after you with committed punches then the jong is easier to deal with that from structure. The problem is hovering on the edge, with broken rythym and skills to draw you out at the “go point”. Then it very much becomes skill on skill. If you go and overextend, you’re vulnerable. If you don’t go and the jab is entered on, you get your space eaten up. Training the go point is hardest. Even in bai jong training.

Do you realize good Muy Thai boxers approximate a 6 gate stance mostly? Without all the exact reference points? But they look closer to 6 than typical 3.
[/QUOTE]

Excellent points Dave! I must say I agree with you wholeheartedly. Though I think JP was referring to the Lucky punch timeframe after range is already gauged and set-up.

92

“If someone is coming after you with committed punches then the jong is easier to deal with that from structure. The problem is hovering on the edge, with broken rythym and skills to draw you out at the ‘go point’. Then it very much becomes skill on skill. If you go and overextend, you’re vulnerable. If you don’t go and the jab is entered on, you get your space eaten up. Training the go point is hardest. Even in bai jong training.”

***EXCELLENT point, Wayfaring.

And it’s after eating quite a few punches at the “go point”, as you put it, against someone with a longer reach and excellent boxing skills, that resulted in my starting to experiment with the longer range horizontal boxing punches and footwork about 3-4 years ago…and putting it together with the “two centerline” concept that I described in my previous post - as well as going to cross position if necesary (instead of the parallel position matched leads) if such a boxer type (and again, especially if he has a size and reach advantage)…starts to dominate the parallel “line”.

…

“I’d drop by and train with you guys / Vic if I’m out east. Travel for me is bad in this economy though.” (Wayfaring)

***ANYTIME!

93

t_niehoff said
Go see for yourself. Why don’t you search for wing chun sparring and then do a search for muay thai boxing – see what turns up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM57M8LBJqg

I may be wrong but i think this is what T is saying, if you type in the link above it goes to kamon wing chun, and kamon (ive forgot his real name) is cross training, then it goes to his students doing wing chun. which one would you want to do if you were in a scrape?

94

I’d want Terence watching my back if there’s a scrap. :rolleyes:

95

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;941650]I’d want Terence watching my back if there’s a scrap. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Oh, poor Victor, still hurting over my cricitism of Cheung. Maybe, just maybe, you might stop and think that before you post a clip of Cheung talking nonsense or before go over to bullshido and post a nonfighting clip of yourself explaining how you would fight. Neither seemed a particularly bright move.

96

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;941783]Oh, poor Victor, still hurting over my cricitism of Cheung. Maybe, just maybe, you might stop and think that before you post a clip of Cheung talking nonsense or before go over to bullshido and post a nonfighting clip of yourself explaining how you would fight. Neither seemed a particularly bright move.[/QUOTE]

***THERE’S nothing you, Terence Niehoff, could ever do that’s going to hurt me. Nothing at all. Because you’re a total non-entity when it comes to fighting. Any kind of fighting. Including what goes on here on this forum with words. You know it. And everyone else around here knows it. So stop the bull5hit.

You’re just a two-bit shiester lawyer who can’t back up anything he says. And that’s been your m.o. for years now.

And as for William Cheung, he’s forgotten more wing chun than you could ever possibly hope to know.

Which is one of the biggest reasons why you take every opportunity you get to try and degrade him. And you do the same to Garrett Gee. And Moy Yat. And Wong Shun Leung. And Yip Man. And this one. And that one.

Because your jealousy of other people’s achievements/knowledge/skill in wing chun knows no limits. If you s-u-c-k at it…then everyone else has to s-u-c-k at it.

That’s why you post e n d l e s s l y month after month, year after year…and why virtually…

EVERY SINGLE POST is meant to try and tear someone else down. Because you’re miserable.

And a pathetic coward and liar, Terence Niehoff.

97

Aw, Terence is just a sensationalist. He likes to run down a lot of people including WCK masters to stir things up. Stirring things up at least makes for interesting conversation, although it can get heated at times.

I like his views on pressure testing WCK through the same “aliveness” Matt Thornton and SBG promote (although I don’t see anything unique about Matt or his students tearing up the BJJ tournament circuits anywhere). I like his views on fighting being your teacher (although I don’t necessarily agree on what he calls fighting - I think it’s hard sparring).

I don’t like all the running people down, especially elders who have put some time into arts. It makes me wonder if he’d push a 75 yr old man into cereal boxes at the grocery store to get ahead in line. I don’t like the one track discussions with all the logic repeated. I don’t think he has a realistic view on “proving” history of anything anthropology / sociology related.

But it is what it is. People are who they are. I take it with a grain of salt.

98

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;941888]Aw, Terence is just a sensationalist. He likes to run down a lot of people including WCK masters to stir things up. Stirring things up at least makes for interesting conversation, although it can get heated at times.

I like his views on pressure testing WCK through the same “aliveness” Matt Thornton and SBG promote (although I don’t see anything unique about Matt or his students tearing up the BJJ tournament circuits anywhere). I like his views on fighting being your teacher (although I don’t necessarily agree on what he calls fighting - I think it’s hard sparring).

I don’t like all the running people down, especially elders who have put some time into arts. It makes me wonder if he’d push a 75 yr old man into cereal boxes at the grocery store to get ahead in line. I don’t like the one track discussions with all the logic repeated. I don’t think he has a realistic view on “proving” history of anything anthropology / sociology related.

But it is what it is. People are who they are. I take it with a grain of salt.[/QUOTE]

***BASICALLY this is true. But here’s the thing with this guy: his views on “pressure testing” can be expressed in one sentence. But he uses this one truism as a battering ram to crash into everyone in sight. Endlessly. And if you read his posts through the years - you cannot fail to come to the realization that his own personal knowledge and skill level with wing chun is extremely limited.

One reason, for example, why he tries to degrade things like SLT, chi sao, kiu sao, wooden dummy, etc. on every thread these things are discussed. Because he knows very little about the real meaning and skills that can come from these things.

Furthermore, when push-came-to-shove a few years ago about just how much time he actually did spend training in wing chun (ie.- how much time he actually spent with Robert Chu)…after quite a bit of stalling, evasion, and double talk - when he did respond - it finally came out that he had spent very little time learning wing chun with Robert.

So who is this guy anyway, to criticize virtually everything and everyone connected with wing chun? What are his credentials to do that? He’s the first one to tell you (and he’s done it numerous times) that he himself is not very skilled (in anything)…

and he clearly is not very knowledgable and skilled in wing chun…so then why should we on this forum allow ourselves to be subjected to his endless onslaughts without calling him out on it?!

And of course there’s the basic “internet problem”: people can sometimes have unlimited access and opportunity to say anything - true or false and never pay a price for telling lies, for committing slander, for outrageous insults based upon falsehoods and unverifed innuendo, for trying to pass off half truths for whole truths, for trying to pass off their own personal prejudices (and ignorance) for truth…

and this can go on for years because they can always hide behind false names, or the fact that they live thousands of miles away from those whose reputations they try to injure, hide behind legalities if they are challenged, etc. etc. (Or all of a sudden they play the “why don’t you grow up” game if they are challenged…the same person who cuts people so childishly over-and-over)…talk about cowardly hypocrisy!

Do you think that it’s an accident that this guy doesn’t even want people to know what he looks like? Forget any chance of his ever posting a clip of himself actually “doing something” connected with martial arts…but he has made sure that he’s completely unrecognizable, ie.- to my knowledge not one photograph of Terence Niehoff has ever made it’s way onto the internet.

Here’s a for instance. If you google his name, this is one of the things that come up:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=55064

The guy is an arrogant loudmouth joke - with nothing to back up his posturing. And it’s my belief that although it’s impossible and unfeasible to try and respond to everything people like him post - given how much rubbish he posts (and re-posts)…

every so often it becomes necessary to confront, expose, and beat down people like this - so that the damage they do with their garbage (not to mention all the hi-jacking of interesting and useful discussions)… gets mitigated and neutralized somewhat.

99

I have to agree with Victor.

It would be one thing to share an opinion. But the guy obviously has some agenda to simply spread insults, disrespect elders, and cause heated internet flame wars. We are literally talking 10 years of crap on the internet. From the sh1t he wrote on WCML to here on KFO.

Plus… who has the time to write as much as he does. Endless paragraph after paragraph of repeated egotistical close-minded rhetoric. And then more paragraphs of slimey insults and sleazy inuendo’s.

The guy is sick in the head. Seriously.

100

Oh goody, the HFY and Victor agree that I am a bad guy! LOL! I have to say that if the HFY guys and Victor hate me, then it just proves I must be doing something right. :slight_smile: Thank you for the support.