Da_Moose
See, the best way to Screw up all Real Shao Lin is to propagate fault teaching on everything . Then, when a lie was repeat 100 times everyone believe in it. So, when the decendent of Chinese got stupid and can’t differentiate who is thier ancestors. The Qing Got them CONTROL. Slik isn’t it?
are you sure you are not the spy of Qing? who tries to Screw up all the Real Shao Lin? or you are starting to believe the Qing?
steve
Ernie,
If it is a general Wing Chun forum, as you stated, I am just wondering why Savi got so much grief for his post. It is about Wing Chun. All he did was to open a discussion about some of the HFY training concepts, nothing more.
Is not the study of history so we understand the present an experience? He also presented some historical data for others to consider and experience.
In no way did I see him try to impose his beleifs onto others.
Steve,
first of all hate to break it to you but I don’t care about history , or this or that religion, I don’t need to know how the first gun was created to use a modern day rifle , and I definitely don’t need to know what the original creators beliefs were to squeeze the trigger and pop a cap in some one a$$ today .
it simply doesn’t matter from a combative stand point , I understand that people get all nostalgic and want to relive some old kung fu movie were the cloths say all the fortune cookie proverbs and get a sense of security in being part of something bigger and older then themselves .
but when it comes to having to shut down some psycho the bum rushes out of nowhere and starts serving you a shoe job ,
don’t really have time to get philosophical .
no if you never plan on fighting or training in a intense environment and need to fill the void with all kinds of insignificant details then by all means go for it .
keep recites mantras and proverbs and sit under the water fall meditate and seek enlightenment ,
but if you ever want to come to the real world were things are ugly and dirty and people have no honor , and you want to discuss or share and discuss attribute development and training approaches with out all the fortune cookie mumbo jumbo , you know plan English
dude I’m all ears and would welcome it like a breath of fresh air.
another thing is you notice that many people here can contribute to conversations with constantly referring to there linage that might help take of the negative publicity you guys are getting , just step up as individuals with individual ideas and experiences
I’m sure many people would relate to that better I know that would.
If it is a general Wing Chun forum, as you stated, I am just wondering why Savi got so much grief for his post.
Yes maybe you have hit on something, Ernie why do so many people appear to go out of their way to post on some threads but not others when it would be much easier to just ignore Savi’s post if you find it not to be your cup of tea, lets think about that for a moment.
simple the same reason I give hendrik a hard time
I see glimpses of some thing good .
through all cryptic blah blah blah , there are some interesting possibilities for conversation .
now I may be a bit of a smart a$$ but I am honest and sometimes hit raw nerves to bring out raw truth .
even when I critiqued the book I never said I thought it sucked or the information offered was bad , I just said nothing new to me . and all of a sudden the flames began , like I was being disrespectful because I wasn’t overwhelmed or enlightened , but yet I went out of my way borrowed the book and took the time to read it twice , I think I gave that information a far and open shot .
but when guys got all wierded out it was freaky like single minded Borg type community and so I got the who scientology feeling from you guys .
and trust me I know the vibe one of my accounts was a scientology center in Hollywood and the type of singular minded approach , the who if you don’t get it then your not smart enough ego thing to .
not that being said understand were I come from , I have no interest in history so what ever you claim is true or not I just don’t care ,
I have interest in what ever you worship pray to or doctrine you follow that’s personal and should be left to the individual .
all I care about is combative application , can you fight , have you any accomplished fighters , if so how do you develop attributes and train them in a pressure environment , and are you achieving a level of consistency .
these questions remain to be answered and I can’t say anything negative or positive about this since it has not become a topic of discussion,
so I’m hanging in there and seeing what comes of it , kind of like watching a car wreck you know you shouldn’t stare but for some reason you keep looking
What or Why?
Ernie,
I appreciate your POV, and I’d like to add my own. When it comes to discussing technical things, there a two areas that are usually addressed: “What and How” to do things, and “Why” you do those things. Much of your comments, in my opinion have an arching emphasis on What, How, Where & When - but not too much on Why. In regards to real life combat, the survivor most oftentimes is the one who knows why things happened the way they did. If I am off target with how I read your posts, just let me know.
When I address things I tend to gravitate to the why in addition to how and when.
but when guys got all wierded out it was freaky
ernie, can you please acknowledge the who what where why and how of this statement?
savi
now were talking
i do look at the why but maybe not the same you do ,
the why is why would I do this instead of that at this moment in time ‘’ training mindset ‘’
[ time , distance , spatial relationship to the opponent , I know you have a formula you follow for this ]
the how is simply the mechanical component ,
the refining of the motion by way of repetition and pressure and experience
the were and when goes back to the why , why would I use this tool at this time , and this is a combination of experience and applied concept .
but for the most important is adaptability and adjustability , to be able to flow with the unforeseen , this is real world
how do you train for this ,
I have stepped out of the wing chun curriculum and spent allot of time in front of boxers ,Thai fighter,bjj, athletes , wrestlers , weapons sparring and multiple attack scenario’s
this give me the experience to adapt when things don’t go my way , I still try to adhere to the wing chun concepts and strategies but find I have to often think out side the box to turn the tables on non favorable situation
I can then take this experience and plug it back into my wing chun training , in chi sau or perhaps I find a weakness I had or something I didn’t fully understand until I found myself in that situation ,
things take on new meaning , they become personal more then just words and ideas
nice to finally chat with you
tony
it’s a very long list of post do you want me to email to you , i would hate to put it here and have to rehatch everything all over again ,
your call , you can email me at mindzi@pacbell.net
Yuanfen,
So then If I know not what I say, please enlighten me as to what I am thinking and saying. I would be much obliged.
That is what Chan is? In this season- forgive him- in his groupthink amd enthusiasm- he knows not what he says!
Another voice in a noisy choir!!
Can you clarify this initial question please? Since you only took part of my post, it can be interpreted several ways.
Phenix,
I have no idea what you mean in your post to me. Are you implying that the Ching then created the HFY and that they tried to send spies to infiltrate Siu Lam and corrupt the Martial Arts there? Please clarify.
Ernie,
I did not use the example of history to imply that you need to know it to know how the gun works, to use your example. I merely used it to help illustrate that its study is an experience, which is what you wanted to have discussed here. If you recall, I also added that Savi had mentioned some of the HFY training methodologies, explained them in some detail for all to have a clearer understanding, and then was bashed for sharing his experience.
Steve
steve
Ernie,
I did not use the example of history to imply that you need to know it to know how the gun works, to use your example. I merely used it to help illustrate that its study is an experience, which is what you wanted to have discussed here. If you recall, I also added that Savi had mentioned some of the HFY training methodologies, explained them in some detail for all to have a clearer understanding, and then was bashed for sharing his experience.
i hear you ,
as i just gave my advise to steer things away from ''lineage , politics , and history that points back to linage ‘’ these are the tension points that seem to take every thread the wrong way . as you call bashing .
if some one really knows something and the concept is sound it will stand on it’s own with out family title or chinese terminology
just put it out there in a neutral way ,
if it has quality it can’t be denied
no need to flower it up
and once you personally start to experience things in a combative element beyond the school setting , you will find plenty of common ground and points of discussion.
The KFO of the WC kind can be viewed as a ancient replica of the battleground between the old “Injuns” and the “tenderfeet” during those wild wild West days. The messengers from both factions who came in peace for all their kind often ended up with a few arrows or thunder strikes for their gallant deeds. Hope this explains things humorously. Ernie, shut up!
Regards,
PH
o.k. paul
you make me:D
Ernie,
True! YOU made me! Ha! Ha!
You know you can shut me up with one hand anytime, so that is very sihing of you. It’s time to move on to something more interesting. Let not waste any more precious time running in circle.
Savi, Mike and Andy,
Thanks, guys for your replies!
Regards,
PH
Alright…
Originally posted by Ernie
i do look at the why but maybe not the same you do ,
the why is why would I do this instead of that at this moment in time ‘’ training mindset ‘’
I get the slight impression that you’re saying this questioning should happen during a combat moment and not a training moment. I don’t think that is what you meant, but just my impression…
This type of understanding I think should be addressed during your training in the classroom. Being able to recognize that (this technique vs that technique) in combat is dependant on how strong your ability is to maintain yourself in mind and body. Questioning (versus recognizing) things during combat should be minimal at most, I think. You probably agree, but I just wanted to clarify.
To be reflex-proficient with eye-to-hand or hand-to-hand / arm-to-arm response should be drilled in training like there’s no tomorrow. In other words, done until it’s natural. With the HFY training, the same considerations are obviously understood, but tends to focus on precisely WHY things are done the way they are - in energy, structure and time. The why, from my sense of context - points to the methods, concepts and theories behind the things that we do. So yes you were right in that you and I see “Why” a bit differently.
The “Why”, from my POV, is also “talked” about during training - and not intended to be part of the conscious thought process in combat. But one should still strive to strengthen their skills in sophistication and efficiency. I believe that can only be done with those of greater knowledge and experience, as opposed to just time and experience. Much of the technical talk on the internet from the HFY members primarily points to methods, concepts and theories - the “Why”. I like to give this type of background information (the “Why”) to people who also think on that kind of level.
Originally posted by Ernie
the how is simply the mechanical component ,
the refining of the motion by way of repetition and pressure and experience
Yes, also agree.
Originally posted by Ernie
the were and when goes back to the why , why would I use this tool at this time , and this is a combination of experience and applied concept .
This I am not so much in agreement with. The “Where” and “When” points to ‘why’, but only on a surface level. “Why” as in obvious reasons OR “Why” as in don’t - really - know reasons. Do you see my point?
Why do you punch like that?
Because it’s stronger and faster.
OK… kind of know why.
Why do you punch like that?
Because there is a specific concept behind this type of structure called X, which also ties to the use of energy and influences the use of my/his timing…
OH, now I know why in so many different faucets. See my point? I’m not being partial to any one system with this example, its just a general example.
Originally posted by Ernie
but for the most important is adaptability and adjustability , to be able to flow with the unforeseen , this is real world
It most definitely is, and all types of combat training should be taking this into consideration. Those that don’t cannot possibly address this issue - from a standpoint of efficiency.
Originally posted by Ernie
how do you train for this ,
I have stepped out of the wing chun curriculum and spent allot of time in front of boxers ,Thai fighter,bjj, athletes , wrestlers , weapons sparring and multiple attack scenario’s
this give me the experience to adapt when things don’t go my way , I still try to adhere to the wing chun concepts and strategies but find I have to often think out side the box to turn the tables on non favorable situation
In our curriculum, we train for all ranges of combat as well; from long range kicking to ground fighting. This is done as a supplement to the actual HFY system. Why? Primarily the reasons are for the beginner who comes through the door with little or no experience in combat whatsoever, this really helps them. For the others with experience, it helps them better appreciate all types of fighting as well as allowing them to use their past training and test it against everything being taught, HFY or not. Once they get through to the Chum Kiu level of training, they will have attained a good foundation of HFY Siu Nim Tau and general combat defense and offense. They will know how to attack with and defend against kickers, boxers, trap/strikers and grapplers effectively.
Originally posted by Ernie
[B] I can then take this experience and plug it back into my wing chun training , in chi sau or perhaps I find a weakness I had or something I didn’t fully understand until I found myself in that situation ,
things take on new meaning , they become personal more then just words and ideas
nice to finally chat with you [/B]
This is also the need being addressed by our curriculum. The best way to understand and appreciate something for what it is (regarding combat), is to get in there and mix it up with all types of fighters. The greater experience you have in all areas, the stronger judgement you can make about what exactly it is you know (what is good or bad, effective or more efficient), as well as strengthening your own combat skills to boot. Nice chatting with you too.
savi
This I am not so much in agreement with. The “Where” and “When” points to ‘why’, but only on a surface level. “Why” as in obvious reasons OR “Why” as in don’t - really - know reasons. Do you see my point?
Why do you punch like that?
Because it’s stronger and faster.
i would answer from experience , because it was the effecient tool at the time and it fit the moment , the relationship between myself and the opponet , the door opened what ever door it my be kick ,punch, tackle , bite , pull hair , eyejab , etc,
i recognized it , adapted to it and filled the void ,
how does one know this ‘’ awareness ‘’ and adaptability to the living energy of a combative exhange , to sieze the sweet spot , the moment in time recognize it and use it .
this comes aftr you have developed your tools in class and then take them into the real world were things get sloppy distance expandes and contracts line of attack and elevation all change at a instant ,
then the why answers itself , why because i was told to do it this and have practiced it in a steril enviroment this way , the doctrine says it must be this way.
this puts a lot of pressure to perform in a kind of box ‘’ not talking about you just being general’’
or why because it just worked naturally at the given moment against that given person
no pressure here just free natural motion and response , an expression of what you trained .
savi [[They will know how to attack with and defend against kickers, boxers, trap/strikers and grapplers effectively. ]]
first of all it’s awsome that you do accept and adress all the different ranges and possibilites in your train ,
the question i have and please answer honestly do you really go up against highly skilled people from all the other disciplines , there is a big difference from having it seem to be sound and effecient against a class mate or a guy that used to box compared to a guy that is one his game and is very skilled ,
i had great revelations when i stepped out of the comfort of home and had to quickly adapt to getting dropped over and over again ,
savi
[[This is also the need being addressed by our curriculum. The best way to understand and appreciate something for what it is (regarding combat), is to get in there and mix it up with all types of fighters. The greater experience you have in all areas, the stronger judgement you can make about what exactly it is you know (what is good or bad, effective or more efficient), as well as strengthening your own combat skills to boot. Nice chatting with you too.]]
first of all very refreshing discussion , thanks for taking the high road savi , but hopefully in further discussions could we leave linage out of it i would love just to talk man to man , with out the ‘’ system hovering over the conversation , notice i next to never bring up my system , i take personal responsibility for my achievements or failure , as i am a work in progress , it would be cool to get to know you in that fashion.
what personal experiences have you had when applying your training against other stylist , that were turning points or inspirational .
i found that as soon as i got in the ring with a pro heavy wieght boxer for the first time all the things that had worked before didn’t , his range was much longer his speed was shockinly fast , he out wieghed my by 100 pounds and stood over a foot taller ,
his timing was far superior to mine and he had broken and slurred rythem
i had to make major adjustments and stradagy changes to even survive in there but i learned alot about not being stubborn and trying force some concept to work .
anything like that happen to you yet
thanks for the chat
Can I just say that until I started reading Ernie’s posts closely, I never realized how much alike we are.
I love it!!!
Politically incorrect Ernie rules the house!!!
And his Kung-fu IS better 
Seriosuly,…who cares about all that stuff? What can YOU do? Can ya use Wing CHun? How do you train TODAY? Are ya living in fantasy or reality?
Be real.
Dhira
dude you crack me up , thanks for the kind words ,
I’m sure you would mop the floor with me ,
as for being real , better to be a ‘’ real individual ‘’ responsible for your own gains and loses , the to be just another number in a collective with no identity
if that means being politically incorrect , so be it
but I will always be honest , no hidden agenda or doctrine to follow just plain old me straight up and down no special effects
There is definite value in having concepts, understanding the physics, yadayadayada, as opposed to just saying “hit the guy like this because it hurts him more.”
There is plenty of martial arts science out there, of varying quality. With the vast amounts of individual and national prestige involved, the sports of boxing, wrestling, and judo will have received enormous amounts of scrutiny, input and modification of technique and training method from scientists of various disciplines.
“These are only sports” … OK, but the same is true of police and other peacekeepers, whose methods have had much scrutiny and input along the same lines. People like Tony Blauer and his ilk have been advising such people for a long time.
Most grappling styles are WAY more technical than any style of WC, and their technical base much more complex.
If you want to see a really DEEPLY scientifically based combat system, check out ROSS.
My point? Scientific knowledge builds and increases over time. In these times, there is a plethora of information on every aspect of fighting out there.
It is debatable how deep one really has to go, just like to be a world champion race car driver you don’t have to know engines, fuels and the like. If you try to drive and concentrate on every little nunce of necessary movement, you will probably flood the motor or crash.
At the end a punch is just a punch, a kick is just a kick.
But it is IMO also scientifically invalid to assume that the zenith of fighting methodology sprung fully formed about 250 years ago, and the fact that it has remained unsullied (or unimproved, YMMV), for all that time is, to be kind, anomalous.
If I hav misunderstood someone’s claims here, I apologise. But if WC of any variety is scientifically based but the last 250 years (or whatever, does it really make a difference?) have been unable to improve WC at all, that flies in the face of the history and philosophy of science, as I understand it.
Understanding the “science” behind what you’re doing in the style or styles you practice is VERY important…but EQUALLY important is actually doing it…and in fact, doing it is MORE important in the final analysis - that is, at least two-thirds of class time should be spent actually doing the moves and no more than one-third discussing the moves, concepts, etc. (and in fact one-third is probably a very generous number) -
otherwise the outcome at the end of the day is a very cerebral martial artist whose fighting skills are just average at best…
and I suspect that given the amount of “cerebral” discussion around here by a certain group of folks is a major indicator of just how effective they really are as fighters - notwithstanding the fact that their system (HFY) is, in all probability - a very good one.
Just a hunch - based on my frequent observation (for many years now) that when the “theory” instead of the details (ie. - techniques used in various scenarios) is what’s emphasized - it usually means that applying the details is a weak point…the proverbial “weak link in the chain”.
The Funnies
Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
[b]Understanding the “science” behind what you’re doing in the style or styles you practice is VERY important…but EQUALLY important is actually doing it…and in fact, doing it is MORE important in the final analysis - that is, at least two-thirds of class time should be spent actually doing the moves and no more than one-third discussing the moves, concepts, etc. (and in fact one-third is probably a very generous number) -
otherwise the outcome at the end of the day is a very cerebral martial artist whose fighting skills are just average at best…[/b]
One-third is a very generous fraction. I agree with your assessment here.
Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
[b]and I suspect that given the amount of “cerebral” discussion around here by a certain group of folks is a major indicator of just how effective they really are as fighters - notwithstanding the fact that their system (HFY) is, in all probability - a very good one.
Just a hunch - based on my frequent observation (for many years now) that when the “theory” instead of the details (ie. - techniques used in various scenarios) is what’s emphasized - it usually means that applying the details is a weak point…the proverbial “weak link in the chain”. [/b]
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that your perception of the HFY family is all about talk. However, this is not the case, and the few HFY members who interact on this forum do not constitute the whole of our family, or our kung fu. This forum does not represent the training floor either, mind you.
I spend an average of 35 hours at the kwoon outside of work and home life, teaching and training. Though some might take your comments above as an attempt to provoke hostility, it makes me smile to see such humor in your posts. Keep at it.