Nice version of vinh xuan

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
101

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1254032]Luk Sao is an application which involve unique strategy , momentum, force flow handling.

The kuit has specifically tell one how to applied the force under what dynamic condition.

One needs to develop the Jin path and Jin flow before one can play that properly. It is an inner gate direct compete for center line play certainly not a chasing hand art.

The kuit describe what happen at listening to Jin , receive Jin, and issue Jin, and how. But if one taking a different translation instead of the ancient one , one will not be able to see what it is .

Luk sau is a center line capture play where both party face square and compete for center line. It is an inner gate play. Poon sau is a different story. Luk Sao is it not a drill of hand technics at is core . It is a play of how not leaving the inner gate and force the opponent out in the micro way at contact.

the kuit of Luk Sao

opponent soft I am soft
opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground[/QUOTE]

You STILL haven’t answered by request. Please describe for us the PHYSICAL ACTIONS involved in Luk Sao and Poon Sao so that we can all see what you are talking about, have an idea what they look like, and know what the difference between them is…according to the ancient descriptions. I have already done this (according to modern descriptions) for my understanding of Luk Sao and Poon Sao in my reply to Navin. I am trying to see what the difference is, but so far you have posted no descriptions at all, only Kuen Kuit!!!

102

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1254032]Luk sau is a center line capture play where both party face square and compete for center line. It is an inner gate play. Poon sau is a different story. Luk Sao is it not a drill of hand technics at is core . It is a play of how not leaving the inner gate and force the opponent out in the micro way at contact.
[/QUOTE]

so luk sao is an inner gate play, what’s the story for Poon sau?

103

[QUOTE=kung fu fighter;1254049]so luk sao is an inner gate play, what’s the story for Poon sau?[/QUOTE]

Navin,

If you look at these kuit and description from 1890.

[I][B]A. 24 chi sau key ponts kuit (Total Twenty four verses)

....... Come accept return send it back, meeting disengage thrust in, at opponent move.....

B, the kuit of Luk Sao

opponent soft I am soft
opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
Your center line needs to align center.
[/B][/I]

The above chi sau kuit is describing the poon sau type of play, which can be both outer or inner door but mostly outer door play. Where one move. And not that high density target into the inner gate center line.

The Luk sau kuit is describing the inner door play. It has to response there at center line at that instant per contact. Not moving away but take on spot play.

So these two platforms exist in the writing in 1890 or the platform exist before yks was born in 1889.

As we here in this forum or even in this thread often say "this is not Wck because this is not facing facing center line. " that is because one taking the Luk sau type as Wck. But in fact in 1890 both existed in Wck.

So, by these writing there is no question Luk sau type chi sau platform and poon sau type chi sau platform existed before 1890.

As for how Yks or Ipman implement their version is a different story.

104

I let kuen kuit tell the story.
It is very clear based on the kuit as I have just told Navin above.

[QUOTE=KPM;1254043]You STILL haven’t answered by request. Please describe for us the PHYSICAL ACTIONS involved in Luk Sao and Poon Sao so that we can all see what you are talking about, have an idea what they look like, and know what the difference between them is…according to the ancient descriptions. I have already done this (according to modern descriptions) for my understanding of Luk Sao and Poon Sao in my reply to Navin. I am trying to see what the difference is, but so far you have posted no descriptions at all, only Kuen Kuit!!![/QUOTE]

105

[QUOTE=KPM;1254041]
And I’ve explained that I’m not concerned about terminology. I asked before and you didn’t answer, so I’ll ask again and little more clearly. In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner’s Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?
[/QUOTE]

Our single handed Chi Sao contains transitions from 3 different types of Bong Sao, some go to Taan sao or Taan Kiu (different tools), some don’t. It depends if we fall into Chi Sao or Kiu Sao or free hand sparring type of leverage based on the contact.

We don’t follow the bong/taan exchange with a fook the way I learned in Moy Yat’s lineage, but often use a fook to neutralize a taan sao.

So again, HFY has the technology to play with the Luk Sao platform, but that’s not what we’re doing. Is that clear enough?

106

[QUOTE=KPM;1254038]Navin, that is simply not true!

First, as I have already pointed out…the DLT drill is ONE arm at a time and is a DRILL. It is not a rolling platform for free technique.[/QUOTE]

Keith I keep repeating myself, Luk sao platform is a variation of PSWC dai lim tao, where both partners hook up both arms at the same time doing bong, tan, and fook as in the luk sao of yip man and ykswc. You can’t comment on something you’ve never seen, in fact all the two-man sets of PSWC have more than one variations of how they are performed. I would bet that you only learnt one version of each of the two-man sets from Jim.

[QUOTE=KPM;1254038]Second, I have trained in the Pin Sun version of Chi Sao, with Jim Roselando! If you look closely, the roll has a coiling/circling nature and the energy goes side to side. They circle COMPLETELY around each other’s forearms very close to the wrist. In contrast, the YKS/YM roll is truly a “rolling” motion that goes more up and down and is centered closer to mid-forearm. The Bong/Tan hand STAYS on the inside of the partner’s hand and the Fook hand STAYS on the outside of the partner’s hand. There is a completely different energy and dynamic involved. Now granted, Jim does something much closer to a Bong Sao that you see others do in this rolling platform. For instance, just take a look again at the Vietnamese WCK clip that started this thread. But even in what Jim is doing, Bong Sao is not a prominent part of the roll as it is in the YKS/YM version. [/QUOTE]

Keith just to break it down for you

PSWC poon sao=cycling of bong, tan, fuk, huen, and a light under grab in transition

luk sao= cycling of bong, tan, fook (some linages pair fook with upper gan or kei jang)

double circling hands (sheung huen sao) =huen and a light under grab in transition

when you combine the techniques of luk sao with the tecniques and cycling of double circling hands, you end up doing the poon sao chi sao platform of PSWC.

Keith the PSWC Poon sao chi sao platform is not different, they just merged or re-packaged the two different chi sao platforms into one. Just my opinion, but I personally believe the PSWC poon sao is a much more efficient training method. But the other 2 chi sao platform are still valid in case one needs to develop the specific skill that those 2 platforms focus on.

107

Navin,

IMHO, here is the systemic picture

1.Wck philosophy , strategy, concept = capture center

  1. Platform to realized Wck strategy

A, Poon sau = out side gate play mainly = out gate in, in gate out play.

B, Luk sau = high density inner gate play = inner gate center line min moving play.

  1. Implementation derive from platforms: yks, Ipman, scwc, pin San…etc
    Different technics , hands shape…etc can be used. Many variation.

If you keeping look at technics you get into seeing threes not the forest.

[QUOTE=kung fu fighter;1254054]Keith I keep repeating myself, Luk sao platform is a variation of PSWC dai lim tao, where both partners hook up both arms at the same time doing bong, tan, and fook as in the luk sao of yip man and ykswc. You can’t comment on something you’ve never seen, in fact all the two-man sets of PSWC have more than one variations of how they are performed. I would bet that you only learnt one version of each of the two-man sets from Jim.

Keith just to break it down for you

PSWC poon sao=cycling of bong, tan, fuk, huen, and a light under grab in transition

luk sao= cycling of bong, tan, fook (some linages pair fook with upper gan or kei jang)

double circling hands (sheung huen sao) =huen and a light under grab in transition

when you combine the techniques of luk sao with the tecniques and cycling of double circling hands, you end up doing the poon sao chi sao platform of PSWC.

Keith the PSWC Poon sao chi sao platform is not different, they just merged or re-packaged the two different chi sao platforms into one. Just my opinion, but I personally believe the PSWC poon sao is a much more efficient training method. But the other 2 chi sao platform are still valid in case one needs to develop the specific skill that those 2 platforms focus on.[/QUOTE]

108

And just as an aside…he kept his Bong and Tan motion rather high…much like they do in TWC!!!

I was fortunate enough to spend a couple of hours with duende, an HFY guy from this forum, a few years back, when he visited Sydney.

Anyone who thinks there is more than a superficial resemblance between TWC and HFY knows very little about either.

The whole Robert Chu / HFY *****fest came about because of an ego clash between Robert Chu and Benny Meng, neither of whom could be described as anything other than amateur historians seeking undeserved academic legitimacy, same as Hendrik. And I’m being charitable in giving them that much.

109

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1254051]I let kuen kuit tell the story.
It is very clear based on the kuit as I have just told Navin above.[/QUOTE]

You are delusional Hendrik. You won’t describe the physical actions because you can’t! Those Kuen Kuit are not “descriptions.” The don’t “describe” anything. They are not “very clear.” They are guidelines, or concepts. You DON’T KNOW what physical form or expression those Kuen Kuit were providing guidelines for in 1890!!!

110

[QUOTE=Eric_H;1254053]Our single handed Chi Sao contains transitions from 3 different types of Bong Sao, some go to Taan sao or Taan Kiu (different tools), some don’t. It depends if we fall into Chi Sao or Kiu Sao or free hand sparring type of leverage based on the contact.

We don’t follow the bong/taan exchange with a fook the way I learned in Moy Yat’s lineage, but often use a fook to neutralize a taan sao.

So again, HFY has the technology to play with the Luk Sao platform, but that’s not what we’re doing. Is that clear enough?[/QUOTE]

Was that a “yes” or a “no”, because I can’t really tell!! I pulled my copy of “Mastering Kung Fu” by Garrett Gee, Benny Meng, and Richard Loewenhagen off the shelf tonight. I hadn’t looked at it in a long time. I flipped it open and almost immediately came to page 57. There is a photo showing Gee and Loewenhagen standing facing each other. Gee has his right hand in Taan, while Loewenhagen is in Fook. Gee’s left hand is in Fook on Loewenhagen’s Bong. Identical position to YKS/YM “Luk Sao Chi Sao.” Identical structure that I rolled with Garrett Gee. So I’ll ask again, since the above comment didn’t really seem to answer the question.

In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner’s Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?

111

[QUOTE=anerlich;1254068]I was fortunate enough to spend a couple of hours with duende, an HFY guy from this forum, a few years back, when he visited Sydney.

Anyone who thinks there is more than a superficial resemblance between TWC and HFY knows very little about either.

.[/QUOTE]

Good to know! Thanks for the feedback Andrew.

112

You issue is a common one ,
where one don’t know the body of the art or the engine, and fail to see what it is in a specific application platform such as Luk Sao .

Why is Navin right a way ask me if I am delusional?

[B]Quote:
Originally Posted by kung fu fighter
so luk sao is an inner gate play, what’s the story for Poon sau?

[/B]

It you don’t clean your cup. You will never taste my tea.

Wck is not as you think. You can’t see it when everything is reveal infront of your eyes, If you keep thinking your view is the unversal reference.

The kuit tell exactly precisely what to do

B, the kuit of Luk Sao

opponent soft I am soft
opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
Your center line needs to align center.

[QUOTE=KPM;1254075]You are delusional Hendrik. You won’t describe the physical actions because you can’t! Those Kuen Kuit are not “descriptions.” The don’t “describe” anything. They are not “very clear.” They are guidelines, or concepts. You DON’T KNOW what physical form or expression those Kuen Kuit were providing guidelines for in 1890!!![/QUOTE]

113

[B]The kuit tell exactly precisely what to do

B, the kuit of Luk Sao

opponent soft I am soft
opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
Your center line needs to align center.[/B]

Exactly? Precisely?

Opponent soft I am soft: Ok, that one is pretty straight-forward

Opponent hard I will receive and issue in the same time: receive with what? A Tan Sao? A Bong Sao? A Fook Sao? Issue with what? A palm? A Lan Sao? Doesn’t seem so “exact” or “precise” to me!

Clamping the yang I inject yin force down to the ground: Maybe a description of rooting with YGKYM? Again, not very “exact” or “precise.”

Your centerline needs to align center: Does this mean facing the opponent “square on” with my center directly in front of his? Or does this mean that regardless of the angling of my shoulders and his position I keep my technique or energy directed at his center of mass? Again, not very “exact” or “precise.”

Does anyone else think this is all “exact” or “precise” or an actual “description”?

114

[B]The kuit tell exactly precisely what to do

B, the kuit of Luk Sao

opponent soft I am soft
opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
Your center line needs to align center.[/B]

  1. Exactly? Precisely? ---------

Sure.

  1. Opponent soft I am soft: Ok, that one is pretty straight-forward ----

Ok

  1. Opponent hard I will receive and issue in the same time: receive with what? A Tan Sao? A Bong Sao? A Fook Sao? Issue with what? A palm? A Lan Sao? Doesn’t seem so “exact” or “precise” to me! -------

it is describing while facing each other square situation, bridge contact bridge for each arm, the center line is the war zone both side try to capture .

Once one side make a move. The othe side detect the force flow and at that contact point and location , response with force flow without needs much movements. Advance inch Jin means recieve and issue at that contact point. Otherwise if one move away ,one is giving up the center line . One inject force flow via contact point. It is a force flow play not a hand movement play. This is the game of inner gate center line play.

Chi sau is a game for playing with momentum and force flow. Inner gate play means one needs to stick at center line, response within one inch and one split second of that detection. It is force line and angle, the name of the game is stay in the center line and force him out with min movement and min time.

This is the key of Luk sau the core of the core of Wck center line capture inner gate ability .

  1. Clamping the yang I inject yin force down to the ground: Maybe a description of rooting with YGKYM? Again, not very “exact” or “precise.” -------

This describe how one use the snake engine to support
opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time in the spit of second.

one needs to inject the yin force down into the ground via clamping yang dynamic or loose yin.

Clamping yan means yin side of the particular part of the body is loose. Only yin side is loose the force can inject into ground.

Why inject to ground? Because one needs to dissipate the incoming action force and reuse its reaction force.

It is totally different then the usual rooting concept of nam kuen or holding structure. It is inject force flow into ground effectively.

  1. Your centerline needs to align center: Does this mean facing the opponent “square on” with my center directly in front of his? Or does this mean that regardless of the angling of my shoulders and his position I keep my technique or energy directed at his center of mass? Again, not very “exact” or “precise.” ------

This means when one perform the force flow receiving and issuing , one keep the center line position as it. It is like one don’t move the gun barrier at the instant of firing.

  1. Does anyone else think this is all “exact” or “precise” or an actual “description”? ------

This is common basic for anyone who play the inner gate center line game of Wck. This is ancient Wck development of capture center using center via Luk sau.

The name of this Wck concept is called not give up my center even if it is one inch, never move away from my the center line even if it is one inch. that is the Luk Sao is the test vehicle on this concept.

Welcome to 1850. It is not Kansas. It is the momentum and Jin flow play. One needs the snake engine as ticket for the game. There is no tan bong fok kie, but just receiving and issuing , can be in any technic . That is the game of Luk sau.

One can keep thinking not recognize things are describe clearly precisely in front of ones eyes.

115

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1254050]

The above chi sau kuit is describing the poon sau type of play, which can be both outer or inner door but mostly outer door play. Where one move. And not that high density target into the inner gate center line.

The Luk sau kuit is describing the inner door play. It has to response there at center line at that instant per contact. Not moving away but take on spot play.[/QUOTE]

thanks Hendrik, that makes sense, what you mentioned coincides with what YouKnowWho mentioned in the post below

[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1252453]When we talk about “centerline”, we have to talk about the Chinese spear technique. The spear is used to stab at your opponent’s heart (his center) more than any other weapon does.

The Chinese spear technique only has 3 major moves. the

  • stab,
  • clockwise circle,
  • counter clockwise circle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY4azsuTzhM&feature=youtu.be

All WC systems have the stab. Does all WC system also have the clockwise circle and counter clockwise circle? Apparently some WC system have it.

If you can move both of your arms in circle with your

  • left arm moving in a clockwise circle, and
  • right arm moving in a counter clockwise circle,

you can seal your center line (the intersection of both circles) tightly that no incoming attack can go through.

http://imageshack.us/a/img51/6126/tfep.jpg[/QUOTE]

116

[QUOTE=kung fu fighter;1254084]thanks Hendrik, that makes sense, what you mentioned coincides with what YouKnowWho mentioned in the post below[/QUOTE]

You are welcome. I have no secret and let the kuit tell the story of Wck.

Read my other post on the details explanation of the kuit

One thing I keep telling you before on baisee. You guys think I am joking or strange. I baisee to snake crane wing chun present grand master recently. To learn the secret note of 1890. Otherwise I am cheating and stealing. You want it you baisee to get the true transmission. Thus, I have many sifus from different areas of expertise. Learning is a continuous journey.

117

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1254087]You are welcome. I have no secret and let the kuit tell the story of Wck.

Read my other post on the details explanation of the kuit

One thing I keep telling you before on baisee. You guys think I am joking or strange. I baisee to snake crane wing chun present grand master recently. To learn the secret note of 1890. Otherwise I am cheating and stealing. You want it you baisee to get the true transmission. Thus, I have many sifus from different areas of expertise. Learning is a continuous journey.[/QUOTE]

Hendrik… if the truth is to be known about traditional/cultural martial Baisi, a Todai need only Baisi to ONE Sifu. Once this has happened there is no further Baisi to anyone else unless you are thrown out of such lineage or you leave of your own accord.

Either way, to then go on and Baisi to a ‘second/third/fourth’ is soley a monetary exchange for business UNLESS previous Sifus have agreed with your current Sifu and provided references that you are of a ‘Journey Man’ status of good character?? You would also normally be told to never discuss (publically) your previous learning! I think most people nowadays would have a problem with such old ways, including you sir. So I question your Baisi to the current S&C WCK Grandmaster and yours/his intentions.

I’m not playing anything down here, as I know many guys that have learnt from many Sifus mainly because they had never Baisi to anyone! Do you really think this type of student will be given access to any transmission that may have been keep hidden for so long?!

FWIW The one thing I agree with from all of your comments here so far is that Chisau and Looksau are two different platforms and need to be learnt in such a distinctive manner to understand the wide ranging interactions of our Martial Ancestors. What amuses me is those that are fighting the corner of others can not provide ANY evidence that they themselves even know what they are talking about… through VIDEO not through WRITINGS.

Maybe it is time to re-visit my own project at Flystudio?? I have quite a few clips that demonstrate the differences but very few where I give a verbal/kuit based narration… something for me to look into me thinks if nobody else here can provide anything more constructive?

118

baisee is not limit to one sifu.

One learn different things from different sifus is a common case in ancient china.
In fact ones sifu will send one to other sifu to learn different things. Since no sifu knows it all.

Look at this bio of Cheng Heng the founder of choy lee fut as real ancient china case, where choy lee fut is the main force of the taiping revolution of china which Wck also participate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choy_Li_Fut

Also,

Here is my late sigung Ma li Tang a famous Chinese medical doctor, qigong master and internal martial artist. See how many sifus he has to learn what he knows.

O——198952087

713
1931

Also how about the Ipman Leung bik story? That is Ipman second sifu .

In the west, some people get the distorted version of what is going on baisee. Baisee in Chinese custom means education, appreciation, and respect .

I have many sifus , I announce it so that there is no guessing and give credit to who the credit needs to go to.

In my case, now I fully see the two ancient document of red boat wing chun kuen, appreciation Must be given to yik kam lineage and snake crane lineage, without them I will not come this far.

[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1254097]Hendrik… if the truth is to be known about traditional/cultural martial Baisi, a Todai need only Baisi to ONE Sifu. Once this has happened there is no further Baisi to anyone else unless you are thrown out of such lineage or you leave of your own accord.

Either way, to then go on and Baisi to a ‘second/third/fourth’ is soley a monetary exchange for business UNLESS previous Sifus have agreed with your current Sifu and provided references that you are of a ‘Journey Man’ status of good character?? You would also normally be told to never discuss (publically) your previous learning! I think most people nowadays would have a problem with such old ways, including you sir. So I question your Baisi to the current S&C WCK Grandmaster and yours/his intentions.

I’m not playing anything down here, as I know many guys that have learnt from many Sifus mainly because they had never Baisi to anyone! Do you really think this type of student will be given access to any transmission that may have been keep hidden for so long?!

FWIW The one thing I agree with from all of your comments here so far is that Chisau and Looksau are two different platforms and need to be learnt in such a distinctive manner to understand the wide ranging interactions of our Martial Ancestors. What amuses me is those that are fighting the corner of others can not provide ANY evidence that they themselves even know what they are talking about… through VIDEO not through WRITINGS.

Maybe it is time to re-visit my own project at Flystudio?? I have quite a few clips that demonstrate the differences but very few where I give a verbal/kuit based narration… something for me to look into me thinks if nobody else here can provide anything more constructive?[/QUOTE]

119

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1254083]
3. Opponent hard I will receive and issue in the same time: receive with what? A Tan Sao? A Bong Sao? A Fook Sao? Issue with what? A palm? A Lan Sao? Doesn’t seem so “exact” or “precise” to me! -------

it is describing while facing each other square situation, bridge contact bridge for each arm, the center line is the war zone both side try to capture .

Once one side make a move. The othe side detect the force flow and at that contact point and location , response with force flow without needs much movements. Advance inch Jin means recieve and issue at that contact point. Otherwise if one move away ,one is giving up the center line . One inject force flow via contact point. It is a force flow play not a hand movement play. This is the game of inner gate center line play.

Chi sau is a game for playing with momentum and force flow. Inner gate play means one needs to stick at center line, response within one inch and one split second of that detection. It is force line and angle, the name of the game is stay in the center line and force him out with min movement and min time.

This is the key of Luk sau the core of the core of Wck center line capture inner gate ability .

  1. Clamping the yang I inject yin force down to the ground: Maybe a description of rooting with YGKYM? Again, not very “exact” or “precise.” -------

This describe how one use the snake engine to support
opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time in the spit of second.

one needs to inject the yin force down into the ground via clamping yang dynamic or loose yin.

Clamping yan means yin side of the particular part of the body is loose. Only yin side is loose the force can inject into ground.

Why inject to ground? Because one needs to dissipate the incoming action force and reuse its reaction force.

It is totally different then the usual rooting concept of nam kuen or holding structure. It is inject force flow into ground effectively.

  1. Your centerline needs to align center: Does this mean facing the opponent “square on” with my center directly in front of his? Or does this mean that regardless of the angling of my shoulders and his position I keep my technique or energy directed at his center of mass? Again, not very “exact” or “precise.” ------

This means when one perform the force flow receiving and issuing , one keep the center line position as it. It is like one don’t move the gun barrier at the instant of firing.

  1. Does anyone else think this is all “exact” or “precise” or an actual “description”? ------

This is common basic for anyone who play the inner gate center line game of Wck. This is ancient Wck development of capture center using center via Luk sau.

The name of this Wck concept is called not give up my center even if it is one inch, never move away from my the center line even if it is one inch. that is the Luk Sao is the test vehicle on this concept.

Welcome to 1850. It is not Kansas. It is the momentum and Jin flow play. One needs the snake engine as ticket for the game. There is no tan bong fok kie, but just receiving and issuing , can be in any technic . That is the game of Luk sau.

One can keep thinking not recognize things are describe clearly precisely in front of ones eyes.[/QUOTE]

Hendrik:

Thank you for the explanations! That does make better sense out of the Kuen Kuit. I think we have just been seeing past each other, talking about different things, or just trying to make different points.

You are seeing Luk Sao as a conceptual practice with guidelines from the Kuen Kuit has to how it should work. I was seeing Luk Sao as a very specific physical rolling action used by YKS & YM lineages. So it just seems to be a misunderstanding coming from how we are using the terms.

Anyway, thanks again for elaborating on the Kuen Kuit.

120

Now, just to show I have no “agenda”, I thought I would throw another theory out there. :wink: Again, this is just a theory, but it might also fit with what historical evidence is currently at hand.

Yip Man is said to have studied with Leung Bik when he went to Hong Kong for school as a teenager. He only became one of the “3 heroes of Foshan” in later adult life after he returned to China. It could be that Leung Bik was a cover story for the person that YM really studied with…someone from the HFY lineage! Maybe he used Leung Bik as a cover story because the real teacher was part of the secret societies. Maybe the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform was part of HFY all along. While YM kept what he had learned in Hong Kong pretty much to himself, maybe some small things naturally came out in his Wing Chun. Maybe he shared the LuK Sao Chi Sao rolling platform with YKS rather than the other way around! Maybe Sum Nun told the story that YKS shared it with YM to save face for his teacher since YKS was technically YM’s senior.

Then an aging Yip Man is back in Hong Kong. It could be that he did not completely learn the HFY method and had even forgotten some of it by the time he is teaching in Hong Kong. But he decides to share what he remembers with William Cheung. Then William Cheung (or possibly Yip Man himself) fills in the gaps by combining it with YM WCK. So TWC and HFY share some strong similarities, but are also quite different.

If a lineage emerged from China (as the Snake Crane system recently came to public awareness) that was essentially the same or a variation on Garrett Gee’s system, then this would certainly strengthen this theory. But right now I would say it is less plausible than what we have already been discussing.