[QUOTE=Savi;1102241]From what I have seen and experienced in HFYWCK and Chi Sim Kung Fu, I have to say the similarities are VERY few. HFYWCK’s structure concept is not used in Chi Sim (and vice versa). Mechanically, they are practically unrelated. Conceptually, there are a handful of things shared on a surface level. Many southern MA’s have things in common.[/QUOTE]Yet the impression from ‘Inside Kung Fu’ was pretty much the opposite though? It seemed to draw may parallels between the 2 systems. It was almost HFY/CS WCK vs. Yip Man WCK.
[QUOTE=CFT;1102252]Yet the impression from ‘Inside Kung Fu’ was pretty much the opposite though? It seemed to draw may parallels between the 2 systems. It was almost HFY/CS WCK vs. Yip Man WCK.[/QUOTE]I’m not sure what the general impression is of the book to be honest. I know a section of the Mastering Kung Fu book was dedicated to the Chi Sim family for the history section, and that the shared term of “Tien Yan Dei” between the two families was emphasized.
From the time of the writing of MKF to today my personal experience in HFYWCK has taken me to quite a different place, which is a blessing. My comments still stand regarding my opinion on the respective arts.
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1102153]Wow. Says quite a lot about your previous Sifus.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, I consider it quite the opposite, it says more about the art. Frankly, it didn’t have much to do with the teacher, my first coach was a **** good one. (7th degree certified by the VTAA) and even he came over to HFY before personal matters took him away from training.
I enjoyed my time doing YM Wing Chun and do think people can be effective fighters with it, I just also believe that HFY suits me way better and makes a lot more sense.
was it physical aspects that fit you better with hfy? or mental/spiritual or all?
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1102441]Actually, I consider it quite the opposite, it says more about the art. Frankly, it didn’t have much to do with the teacher, my first coach was a **** good one. (7th degree certified by the VTAA) and even he came over to HFY before personal matters took him away from training.
I enjoyed my time doing YM Wing Chun and do think people can be effective fighters with it, I just also believe that HFY suits me way better and makes a lot more sense.[/QUOTE]
Hi Eric
Hypothetical here.
If the old Eric had a fight with the new Eric, how would new close down the old??
I suppose im asking what attributes HFY has given you over YM style?
Regards
GlennR
[QUOTE=GlennR;1103951]Hi Eric
Hypothetical here.
If the old Eric had a fight with the new Eric, how would new close down the old??
I suppose im asking what attributes HFY has given you over YM style?
Regards
GlennR[/QUOTE]
Hey Glenn,
Interesting question, I hadn’t thought about it in those terms before. For attributes, probably the top 2 are the ability to find someone’s center of gravity extremely quickly/with much greater influence, and the ability to apply body leverage/structural power much more consistently and easily.
I can also say that studying HFY has really changed how I approach engagements. When doing YM I found that when sparring I’d end up “trading” with my opponent a lot more than I’d like. With HFY, I find myself throwing less strikes but when I do, the opponent doesn’t have a comeback. (Better control) Were I able to fight me from my YM days, I imagine it would be a lot of new me locking down old me’s gravity and moving him about.
I do like to check my WC against YM guys in our area whenever the opportunity comes up, and most folks walk away saying that I’m very strong (because I’ve learned to apply leverage) and they’re worn out because I’m often moving them and forcing them to catch their balance. I’m no master by any means, but I know those are some things I do pretty well. 
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1102441]I enjoyed my time doing YM Wing Chun and do think people can be effective fighters with it, I just also believe that HFY suits me way better and makes a lot more sense.[/QUOTE]
Makes more sense? How so? Are you influenced more by the culture and language now than you was during your YM days? Or have you simply got a better teacher?
I find the HFY/JS stuffs really interesting because they’re touching on familiar ground to what I have trained, but the language itself seems far more buddhhist/cha’an than Wing Chun. Maybe closer to the northern Shaolin than the southern Martial arts?
Mind you, I’ve only seen it once first hand and the guy was more JS than HFY and he explained many reasons ‘why’ his way was more ‘authentic’! I do think we may be on the same page, but we have different writing styles! :D;)
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1104411]Makes more sense? How so? Are you influenced more by the culture and language now than you was during your YM days? Or have you simply got a better teacher?
[/QUOTE]
In terms of curriculum, HFY has a really awesome structural gauge called the Saap Ming Dim - in english we refer to it as the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun formula. It’s a surefire way to tell if/when you have structured a technique right. I think it’s one of the great strengths of the style.
I find the HFY/JS stuffs really interesting because they’re touching on familiar ground to what I have trained, but the language itself seems far more buddhhist/cha’an than Wing Chun. Maybe closer to the northern Shaolin than the southern Martial arts?
Can’t speak for JS, I missed GM Hoffman when he came to the US so I’ve never seen the style firsthand other than some youtube clips. Personally, I’d say HFY is southern because it has the 3 animal shape signature that all siu lam styles share. The shaolin “calling card” as it were. As someone who studies tibetan buddhism, I can see a lot of parallels but I’m not qualified to say what would be ch’an or not.
Mind you, I’ve only seen it once first hand and the guy was more JS than HFY and he explained many reasons ‘why’ his way was more ‘authentic’! I do think we may be on the same page, but we have different writing styles! :D;)
Hah, to ourselves what we do is always the most authentic, go figure :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1104439]In terms of curriculum, HFY has a really awesome structural gauge called the Saap Ming Dim - in english we refer to it as the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun formula. It’s a surefire way to tell if/when you have structured a technique right. I think it’s one of the great strengths of the style.[/QUOTE]
I find this very interesting, as I too learnt something similar that we referred to as ‘stages’ or ‘levels’. 10 were used to assess everything we drilled 
Why would anyone want to change their lineage when the Wing Chun bowl is so full! I see us as ALL one lineage. That lineage called Wing Chun/Ving Tsun etc 
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1104451]I find this very interesting, as I too learnt something similar that we referred to as ‘stages’ or ‘levels’. 10 were used to assess everything we drilled :)[/QUOTE]
Can you expand on that a little more? Is it like TWC’s 5 combat stages or something different?
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1104439]In terms of curriculum, HFY has a really awesome structural gauge called the Saap Ming Dim - in english we refer to it as the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun formula. It’s a surefire way to tell if/when you have structured a technique right. I think it’s one of the great strengths of the style.[/QUOTE] Hi Eric, technically Sup Ming Dim () is translated in English as Ten Bright Points. The HFYWC Formula is a group of physical expressions that utilize the 10 points of reference when expressing the various (sets of) concepts in each of the formula drills.
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1104451]I find this very interesting, as I too learnt something similar that we referred to as ‘stages’ or ‘levels’. 10 were used to assess everything we drilled :)[/QUOTE] Hmmm…
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1104455]Can you expand on that a little more? Is it like TWC’s 5 combat stages or something different?[/QUOTE]THIS! LoneTiger108, I would like to know more about that too!
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1104451]Why would anyone want to change their lineage when the Wing Chun bowl is so full! I see us as ALL one lineage. That lineage called Wing Chun/Ving Tsun etc ;)[/QUOTE]In my view, the art is what we all have in common, and in that sense we are all one Wing Chun family. We shouldn’t, in my opinion, disregard lineage for art because it’s each and every lineage that helps us understand where our art comes from!
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1104451]Why would anyone want to change their lineage when the Wing Chun bowl is so full! I see us as ALL one lineage. That lineage called Wing Chun/Ving Tsun etc ;)[/QUOTE]In my view, the art is what we all have in common, and in that sense we are all one Wing Chun family. We shouldn’t, in my opinion, disregard lineage for art because it’s each and every lineage that helps us understand where our art comes from! Maybe we can just consider different Wing Chun lineages as all being related like cousins.
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1104148]Hey Glenn,
Interesting question, I hadn’t thought about it in those terms before. For attributes, probably the top 2 are the ability to find someone’s center of gravity extremely quickly/with much greater influence, and the ability to apply body leverage/structural power much more consistently and easily.
I can also say that studying HFY has really changed how I approach engagements. When doing YM I found that when sparring I’d end up “trading” with my opponent a lot more than I’d like. With HFY, I find myself throwing less strikes but when I do, the opponent doesn’t have a comeback. (Better control) Were I able to fight me from my YM days, I imagine it would be a lot of new me locking down old me’s gravity and moving him about.
I do like to check my WC against YM guys in our area whenever the opportunity comes up, and most folks walk away saying that I’m very strong (because I’ve learned to apply leverage) and they’re worn out because I’m often moving them and forcing them to catch their balance. I’m no master by any means, but I know those are some things I do pretty well. :D[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the explanation Eric
And for what i look for in qulaity WC (getting oponents COG & power through structure) sounds like youve found a good choice
Another question for you.
A lot of people draw comparisons bewtween TWC and HFY, and in my opinion TWC tends to fight at a slightly longer range than other WC styles (as i said, in IMO)… your thoughts on this in regards to HFY?
And flank or up the centre?
GlennR
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1104411]Makes more sense? How so? Are you influenced more by the culture and language now than you was during your YM days? Or have you simply got a better teacher?
Maybe its just a better style
[QUOTE=GlennR;1104617]Maybe its just a better style[/QUOTE]To each their own findings, but I would never state that as anything more than one’s experience and point of view.
[QUOTE=Savi;1104647]To each their own findings, but I would never state that as anything more than one’s experience and point of view.[/QUOTE]
Sure, and im not actually saying that HFY is the better style
But having said that, surely there are better lineages than others?
[QUOTE=GlennR;1104664]Sure, and im not actually saying that HFY is the better style
But having said that, surely there are better lineages than others?[/QUOTE]I’d chalk that up to differences in value, values, and culture/traditions + what one person prefers to accept.
[QUOTE=Savi;1104674]I’d chalk that up to differences in value, values, and culture/traditions + what one person prefers to accept.[/QUOTE]
I guess we all have different things we look at when we are judging the merits of a style.
Its 3 things for me
- Will i be a better fighter
- Will it increase my overall health and fitness
- Will i enjoy it
GlennR
[QUOTE=GlennR;1104615]Thanks for the explanation Eric
And for what i look for in qulaity WC (getting oponents COG & power through structure) sounds like youve found a good choice
Another question for you.
A lot of people draw comparisons bewtween TWC and HFY, and in my opinion TWC tends to fight at a slightly longer range than other WC styles (as i said, in IMO)… your thoughts on this in regards to HFY?
And flank or up the centre?
GlennR[/QUOTE]
Glenn,
As a caveat, I’ve never met a TWC practitioner, so my impression of them is solely based on video and a couple of discussions here on KFO. Though TWC and HFY forms look much more similar than HFY to YM, the operation in application seems to be pretty different. HFY doesn’t use blindside theory like TWC or the 5 stages of combat. (Which I understand are two of their main ideas)
From what I’ve learned so far, HFY’s employment for playing inside/outside is based on what we read off of the engagement and leverage, we don’t have a preference of one over the other.
FWIW, there’s a TWC school close to my hometown where I’ll be visiting later this year. If they’re not closed for the Holiday I’d look forward to meeting up with them and seeing how they work.