Reply to hfy Meng from Chu Sifu

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
81

Yes it is a real photo. I’ve seen the actual photo in person, and I can attest to its authenticity. The only difference between the real photo and the one seen in MKF is a crease that was digitally erased from one of the corners. As it was stated on HFY’s official website, the photo is over 40 years old; taken sometime around the the 1960’s. Like I said, if you don’t believe me that’s on you. But this photo represents a glimpse into the existence of HFY’s ancestors; donated to the HFY from a generation of Buddhist practitioners of Dr. Wong Ming. There is no conspiracy on this topic.

Seriously… put the Kool-Aid down!

That is a computer generated picture. I could bring that “photo” to any photo proffessional and they would say the same thing. You either have very poor eye sight or you are indeed brain washed.

By the way… I have nice bridge to sell.

Please post a link of the picture here so we can all take a look at it.

82

on second thought… now I remember why I originally self banned myself from forums. Have fun with your politics… peace all…

83

“Anerlich, this is what I am getting at. Grandmaster Gee is the only one qualified to represent the position of the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun family. GM Gee has never stated that we are the original, purest, unadulterated source for all other Wing Chun. I’ve heard him on many occasions, even in public workshops, that he’s not interested in such a thing. He leaves that subject for researchers to decide.” (Savi)

***AND the number one researcher (in Gee’s mind) happens to be his number one student, Benny Meng.

So who the hell are you kidding with this garbage, anyway???

Let me answer that for you, Savi…

YOURSELF.

84

[QUOTE=Savi;733068]GM Gee has been teaching in the US since 1975 and has taught 5 different generations of students since then. I’ve actually met a couple of them. Some of whom are still training with him to this day, and have been since before your “1990” barrier. There’s even photos from those earlier years on HFY’s official website and those pictures are also displayed in the HFY Kwoon in SF for the whole world to see if anyone chooses to visit.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t doubt Gee has been “teaching in the US since 1975”, but he’s taught many martial arts (other than HFY) in that time. The question is about HFY. A poor attempt to muddy the waters. Was Gee teaching WCK while he shared space with Chris Chan?

“Proof” of Dr. Wong Ming’s existence has been shared with the public before, but was despicably (for lack of a harsher word) refuted as a computer-generated image by very crude characters. On the official HFY website, it is even stated who selflessly donated the personal photo of Dr. Wong Ming, acknowledging and giving credit to her personally.

The “photo” you refer to brings up three questions: 1) is it a genuine photo, 2) is it a photo of Wang Ming, and 3) did Wang Ming (if he existed and if this is his photo) teach WCK? You haven’t answered any of these with indepepdently verifiable evidence.

The HFY family did not have to share this private information with the public, but did so decidedly and still we can see how that information has been treated in the public eye by a select few. The HFY family is so grateful to Ms. Sung for providing it, and nobody should be surprised when we stand up in defense for her and for Dr. Wong Ming.

You don’t have to share anything with the public – why not keep all your claims to yourself! :wink: But if you want to make public claims, then you should expect to provide public proof of them. Do you think you can make any sort of claim to the public and that we should just accept it unquestionably?

Proof that HFY existed before GM Gee also exists. As some of you may have read online, contact with students of GM Gee’s sihing from China have been made in the last couple of years (Allen Kong’s thread here on KFO). This is something that I know the HFY family is joyous about! Developments are slowly but surely progressing with our extended family outside the USA. Personally, I cannot wait to meet them and I’m filled with wonder as to what the future holds for the HFY family. This goes without mentioning, but it would be an utter disappointment to the kung fu community at large to see another kung fu lineage fall to history as has happened in the past ~ and especially for it to happen in this era should be unspeakable.

More claims by HFY that support the lineage of HFY. Independently verifiable evidence is what proves these things, not more claims.

So, believe these things or not - that is up to you. I’ve seen it with my own eyes.

People claim to have seen bigfoot too.

BTW, lumping the VTM and the HFY family is getting very ridiculous. It has been stated time and time again by both parties that they are TWO separate entities.

Saying this doesn’t make it so. You can keep saying it until the cows come home but the reality of the connection of the two is blatantly obvious.

The HFY family has never stated that they are the original, the oldest, nor the best Wing Chun lineage. My Sigung Master Benny Meng has stated as such, but only as the representative of the Ving Tsun Museum and based on the research that they have done to date. Master Meng also stated that his position on the matter may change if new information proves otherwise. He has time and time again qualified his statements from the position of the VTM curator only. To say otherwise is without a doubt misleading to the general public and disrespectful to both the HFY family and the VTM. It needs to stop.

Respectfully,
Savi.

Andrew hit the nail on the head with his reply. The VTM is, by all accounts, an organization that has evolved into one made up of HFY practitioners whose goal is to market HFY as the “original WCK” and its origin myth as the “true history of WCK”.

Terence

85

Deeper in the hole…

I may be impartial but this soap opera is very amusing,

Terrence wrote -

"You don’t have to share anything with the public – why not keep all your claims to yourself! But if you want to make public claims, then you should expect to provide public proof of them. Do you think you can make any sort of claim to the public and that we should just accept it unquestionably? "

Im also finding the call for “independently verifiable evidence” most interesting.

I mean this POV must go down a treat at your local church… :rolleyes:

Its not an unreasonable request at face value but -
I dont recall William Cheung providing anything solid to back up his calls of getting the traditional VT from GM Ip :o

In fact i havent seen any evidence that Gm Ip was ever taught Kung Fu :eek:

The fact is evidence doesnt always make sence anyway - do you believe in the magic bullet, aliens that create crop cicles, the divinci code…

Any credible lie has a certain amount of verifiable truth and/or evidence attached to it…

My point is not to “join a side” here but merely to say - draw the line and agree to disagree for crying out loud :mad:

86

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkDz3pcwnuw

87

[QUOTE=leejunfan;733186]Seriously… put the Kool-Aid down!

That is a computer generated picture. I could bring that “photo” to any photo proffessional and they would say the same thing. You either have very poor eye sight or you are indeed brain washed.

By the way… I have nice bridge to sell.

Please post a link of the picture here so we can all take a look at it.[/QUOTE]

Ok genius… take it to your photo professional or whatever passes for one in Syracuse. Any experienced computer imager/animator can tell the difference between a photoshop’d pict and cgi.

88

[QUOTE=Liddel;733229]I may be impartial but this soap opera is very amusing,

Terrence wrote -

"You don’t have to share anything with the public – why not keep all your claims to yourself! But if you want to make public claims, then you should expect to provide public proof of them. Do you think you can make any sort of claim to the public and that we should just accept it unquestionably? "

Im also finding the call for “independently verifiable evidence” most interesting.

I mean this POV must go down a treat at your local church… :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]

Matters of faith (religion) are taken on faith. WCK and other martial arts are not religions.

Its not an unreasonable request at face value but -
I dont recall William Cheung providing anything solid to back up his calls of getting the traditional VT from GM Ip :o

You must be a newbie to WCK. There is do doubt Cheung learned WCK from Yip Man, but is it an open question as to the origin of TWC. These things have been discussed ever since he first began making the claims. There were some very heated discussions on the old WCML.

In fact i havent seen any evidence that Gm Ip was ever taught Kung Fu :eek

We have Yip Man on tape. We have class photos of him. We have the records of many of his sihings, students, etc. The evidence is overwhelming.

The fact is evidence doesnt always make sence anyway - do you believe in the magic bullet, aliens that create crop cicles, the divinci code…

Any credible lie has a certain amount of verifiable truth and/or evidence attached to it…

My point is not to “join a side” here but merely to say - draw the line and agree to disagree for crying out loud :mad:

It’s not a matter of “agreeing to disagree”. You might live in a world where evidence doesn’t matter (that being the case for you, I guess you just beleive whatever you want to), but some of us are interested in what is factual, what is opinion, what is marketing, what is utter nonsense, etc. It’s called discernment, and it typically a quality of an intelligent, educated, and critical mind. And if very useful in making intelligent decisions. To some of those people for instance, claims of being the “most efficient fighting method on the planet” might be interested in seeing some real evidence before spending their money. Others may not want to invest in learning the “original wing chun” if the evidence doesn’t back up that claim. These things may not be important in your world where “evidence doesn’t make sense”, but they are to some others. Perhaps you should stick to your world and let us worry about ours – where evidence counts for something.

Terence

89

[QUOTE=anerlich;732833]You’re entitled to your opinion, but to my mind the sole purpose was an attempt to somehow elevate HFY and CS to some exalted level of purity or quality, the case for which is not made in the book or elsewhere. With the limited evidence and conjecture you wrote about, it couldn’t be.

IMO (I’m entitled) this passage and the immature tirade about “internet historians” in MKF ruined what is otherwise a fairly good book by MA publication standards … though the bar is pretty low.

“Mastering Jujitsu” by Renzo Gracie and John Danaher in the same series is a far better treatment of a martial art’s history and philosophy. IMO (I’m entitled).

Where some people see “original” or “pure”, others see “obsolete” or “primitive”. Where some see “modified” or “impure”, others see “progressive” or “cutting edge”.

In nearly all fields of human endeavour, particularly the sciences, “scientific” being a label most WC people fall all over themselves in an attempt to embrace, progress comes through continual improvements, experimentation and discoveries. Anyone with a few year’s experience can contribute, you don’t need to work in the field for 30 years before you’re entitled to have an opinion and make real contributions.

It’s amazing that one of the few fields in which people claim with a straight face that this doesn’t need to, or shouldn’t, happen, is TCMA.[/QUOTE]

I can respect your opinion. Although the bit about calling an “internet historian” quote an immature tirade is pretty funny from someone who just told everyone on this thread they’re a punk on the internet with no life. (which was pretty funny, by the way). I think people around here pretty much live up to the billing stated.

I’ve read Renzo’s book. He has some interesting things to say. That is by no means anywhere near the best BJJ book around though. But if you think BJJ doesn’t promote itself as the best thing since sliced bread, you’re wrong. That is pretty much to be expected with any martial arts book I’ve read.

How do you expect it to read? “It’s a great WCK lineage but everyone on the Internet on KFO doesn’t like it?”

I can’t speak for everyone but how I study is learn the concepts and blend them in with my game and what works. Which for me personally is a blend of “science” and “improvement”.

90

[QUOTE=duende;733240]Ok genius… take it to your photo professional or whatever passes for one in Syracuse. Any experienced computer imager/animator can tell the difference between a photoshop’d pict and cgi.[/QUOTE]

duende,

are you still mad about making a fool of yourself with my sifu? You still haven’t answered any of the questions I asked. but no worries… I let that go…

“whatever passes for one in syracuse”??? So now you have something against the town I live in? You send me a copy of the picture… the absolute BEST resolution you can get… and I will take it to a photoshop the very day I get it.

“genius”? He who resorts to name calling ran out of intelligent things to say. This “genius” doesn’t believe every story he hears… unlike some people :smiley:

Anyway…send the picture to the address on my website linked below. Or should I take my copy of “Mastering Kung Fu” instead?

91

[QUOTE=leejunfan;733256]duende,

are you still mad about making a fool of yourself with my sifu? You still haven’t answered any of the questions I asked. but no worries… I let that go…

“whatever passes for one in syracuse”??? So now you have something against the town I live in? You send me a copy of the picture… the absolute BEST resolution you can get… and I will take it to a photoshop the very day I get it.

“genius”? He who resorts to name calling ran out of intelligent things to say. This “genius” doesn’t believe every story he hears… unlike some people :smiley:

Anyway…send the picture to the address on my website linked below. Or should I take my copy of “Mastering Kung Fu” instead?[/QUOTE]

Dude… take whatever you like.

Your little sideline cheerleader posts show that it is you who can’t let things go.

As far as answering questions you asked? Why should I? It won’t change the fact that I and many others at the seminar felt that John’s TWC skills displayed nothing to support his statement that TWC and HFY drills are the same.

92

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733196]The “photo” you refer to brings up three questions: 1) is it a genuine photo, 2) is it a photo of Wang Ming, and 3) did Wang Ming (if he existed and if this is his photo) teach WCK? You haven’t answered any of these with indepepdently verifiable evidence.
[/QUOTE]

You are such a pinhead. Have you tried to “independantly verify” any of this? If not, how do you know whether or not it’s “independantly verifiable”? Or are you just talking sh1t on the Internet?

You don’t have to share anything with the public – why not keep all your claims to yourself! :wink: But if you want to make public claims, then you should expect to provide public proof of them. Do you think you can make any sort of claim to the public and that we should just accept it unquestionably?

People are just researching and sharing their opinions. Nobody asked anyone to unquestionably accept it.

Andrew hit the nail on the head with his reply. The VTM is, by all accounts, an organization that has evolved into one made up of HFY practitioners whose goal is to market HFY as the “original WCK” and its origin myth as the “true history of WCK”.

Terence

My goal isn’t to maket HFY as the “original WCK” or any “true history”. My goal is to study the concepts and apply them in a pressure test environment. And to read and educate myself. Most of the HFY people I know have goals to learn and teach individuals. There are like 4 schools I know with people doing it full-time for a living. I’m sure all those probably do some marketing locally in the cities they are in.

The only people marketing anything around here I see is you - marketing BS and misinformation.

93

Did Ip Man really exist?

I don’t doubt Gee has been “teaching in the US since 1975”, but he’s taught many martial arts (other than HFY) in that time. The question is about HFY.

Once again Terence just because you are not aware of something does not mean it does not exist! LOL!

  1. is it a genuine photo, 2) is it a photo of Wang Ming, and 3) did Wang Ming (if he existed and if this is his photo) teach WCK? You haven’t answered any of these with indepepdently verifiable evidence.

This is very silly O.K. what independent evidence do you have that your Sifu finished the system under anyone? this brings up even more questions. 1. was he recognized by any credible Sifu to be qualified to teach? 2. why doesn’t he have anything good to say about other Wing Chun Sifus? etc… LOL!

Saying this doesn’t make it so. You can keep saying it until the cows come home but the reality of the connection of the two is blatantly obvious.

Some one has simply made up his own mind. So I guess I will be the first to say what’s the point. you already have your own answers. no one owes it to you to deliver you from your ignorance. It seems Chu sau li has a New Years resolution in place here. But once again the VTM members have no desire to bicker with those who lack respect or integrity. Those issues are yours I honestly hope you work through them.

Alot of people fail to realize that the MFK was only a snap shot of a portion of where the VTM’s research was at that time. Some have issues with that and that’s ok. Debate it all you want that’s fine. That’s healthy for discussion and discovery!

The HFY family has not made any “claims” of original or purest WCK. I know it may be hard for some to grasp but the HFY family and the VTM are not one in the same.

As a member of the VTM I have had the great honor of becoming a HFY member. However I can also say that this (being part of the VTM) has also presented me with many honors like training 1st hand with many different Grand Masters and lineages.

I personally felt a deep connection to the Moy Yat family and the Chi Sim family as well. I also really enjoyed my time with GM William Cheung. I can see why people feel very strong about learning these systems.

However I identified personally more with HFY. That does not mean that I loose any respect or put down these other lineages or the others that I did not mention down or in a lesser catagory. This was a personal choice. HFY’s path fit me better. But that’s just me. I would not trade those experiences for anything at this point!

I’ve been with Sifu Meng for many years and he has always taught with a open mind. If a person represents a lineage or honestly has dedicated his/her time to learning Martial arts (no matter what system) there is a certian amount of respect due. He has passed this attitude on to me as his student. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard Sifu Meng direct some one to train non-HFY lineages to people who call the VTM about WCK in thier area.

It seems that you did not recieve the same lesson in your training. It seems that Chu Sau li does not share this same point of view. From what I’ve seen it seems that there is alot of discussion on how X lineage does Y and this is where they have it wrong and Chu Sau Li does it etc… LOL! That being said I think you will understand why you will get nowhere demanding “evidence.”
If a street punk demands conversation do I really need to address what he ask of me?

94

[QUOTE=duende;733258]Dude… take whatever you like.

Your little sideline cheerleader posts show that it is you who can’t let things go.

As far as answering questions you asked? Why should I? It won’t change the fact that I and many others at the seminar felt that John’s TWC skills displayed nothing to support his statement that TWC and HFY drills are the same.[/QUOTE]

“sideline cheerleading”? WOW!:rolleyes:

BTW… learn the difference… I let the subject of you and my sifu go… doesn’t mean I don’t have anything to say about the OTHER minor subjects.

You and many others? I’m sure it’s just YOU. You clearly don’t understand martial etiquette. Go reread mine and Johns posts again… you are clearly in denial… so much so that you deleted it… but now because you aren’t getting your way you’re taking back your apology? hhmmm… telling… very telling.

“Why should I” you ask?.. ummm… because you challenged him maybe? You put out this nonsense about him not “performing” and then when he and I ask you legitimate questions based on facts and not just our opinions you buckle? again… very telling…

Your verbal chi sau is not very good.

95

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733250]
Matters of faith (religion) are taken on faith. WCK and other martial arts are not religions. [/QUOTE]

:smiley: Religions are a belief IMO - Martial arts could also be seen as such, i believe in the theory and application of VT. If you believe in your style terrence why bother with what others say is thiers ?

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733250]
You must be a newbie to WCK. [/QUOTE]
Yeah i am, ive only learnt for the last Ten years not like some others here. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733250]
There is do doubt Cheung learned WCK from Yip Man, but is it an open question as to the origin of TWC. These things have been discussed ever since he first began making the claims. There were some very heated discussions on the old WCML. [/QUOTE]

Depends on who you talk to mate… and forget the old WCML, William and Leung Ting - Leung Ting and Lo Man Kam - i could list many more who in the past had arguments and wanted to fight while most here were in nappies, i see all this here as history repeated :o which is why i say drop it…

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733250]
We have Yip Man on tape.[/QUOTE]
Doing Forms he could have copied, not being TAUGHT as i mentioned. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733250]
We have class photos of him.[/QUOTE]
suggests but does not prove…

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733250]
We have the records of many of his sihings, students, etc. The evidence is overwhelming. [/QUOTE]

Youve got so caught up in being right you forget it doesnt prove he was ‘taught’ kung fu - people can lie/forget/ embelish, besides which, it only creates a perponderance of evidence which is basically saying its more PROBABLE…so therefore there is a level of FAITH involved…

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;733250]
These things may not be important in your world where “evidence doesn’t make sense”, but they are to some others. Perhaps you should stick to your world and let us worry about ours – where evidence counts for something.
Terence [/QUOTE]

Tisk Tisk man… Evidence is open to interpritation, that was my point, but im an idiot trying to stop other idiots repeating history…for what ?

Sorry Man ill but out. Hope you get what you want from all this, whatever that is ?

96

[QUOTE=leejunfan;733266]
You and many others? I’m sure it’s just YOU. You clearly don’t understand martial etiquette. Go reread mine and Johns posts again… you are clearly in denial… so much so that you deleted it… but now because you aren’t getting your way you’re taking back your apology? hhmmm… telling… very telling.[/QUOTE]

Martial arts ettiiquette?? Read some of your own posts. Btw, KUN FU ettiquette does not mean that I have to agree with your Sifu. (who’s the one drinking Kool-aid now?) It just means be mutually respectful. That’s why I deleted and rephrased my post on my own accord. That’s also why when I rephrased it, I didn’t change my POV.

If you want another person’s POV who was there at the seminar then call any of the other Sifu’s who were also there.

Heck, it’s your Sifu who brought up the whole reference to the seminar in question anyways.

[QUOTE=leejunfan;733266]

“Why should I” you ask?.. ummm… because you challenged him maybe? You put out this nonsense about him not “performing” and then when he and I ask you legitimate questions based on facts and not just our opinions you buckle? again… very telling… [/QUOTE]

There’s no maybe about it. I 100% disagree with John’s statement that the TWC and HFY drills are the same, and I’ve more than clearly stated why. Again, if you can’t handle that… then that’s your problem.

[QUOTE=leejunfan;733266]
Your verbal chi sau is not very good.[/QUOTE]

Definitely not as good as your verbal ‘patting yourself on the back’

97

This is all a bunch of nonsense. Type type type here on the internet but when it comes face to face people talk a different story. It will be a great conversation at the next friendship seminar between you and John.

Have fun with your recruiting drive… I’m done with this

98

[QUOTE=Liddel;733267]Evidence is open to interpritation, that was my point, but im an idiot trying to stop other idiots repeating history…for what ?[/QUOTE]Liddel, I do not know you, but just from your comment above I find that one to be one of the most level-minded things I’ve read on this thread. That comment alone encourages me to believe in this forum.

leejunfan, I do not know you nor have I ever held a discussion with you until now and like I said before, you are completely entitled to your opinions and observations - so far my impression of you doesn’t amount to a whole lot of anything meaningful. Of course, youre not here to impress anyone so my impression should mean absolutely nothing to you. When you spread your malicious thoughts about my ancestors, then it is a crude and disgusting thing to circulate about [anyones] family; which is ultimately none of your business. Read your own post:

“This is all a bunch of nonsense. Type type type here on the internet but when it comes face to face people talk a different story.”

Tell anyone in the HFY family in person that our ancestor is fake. Think you would do that? Here you are trying to tell me what my house looks like when youre on the outside looking in. Common sense isn’t your slice of pie, so be it. No point in holding a dialog with you. I’ve clarified my statements as you asked, and thats all thats going to happen between you and I.

Terence, if evidence is what you GENUINELY want on the legitimacy of HFY as a system - the best way is to study and learn it. If you GENUINELY want independently verifiable evidence as to HFY’s lineage, learn from Liddel’s comment above. In addition to verifying evidence, what credentials do you have to show that you are qualified to verify anything the HFY puts forth? The HFY has put forth a great deal of information in the past several years, yet how much of it have you independently verified? When it comes down to it in the big picture HFYs history is no different from any others. History is for historians/researchers and for those who are interested in it; you are neither and have stated as such. The fact is, you are not genuine which destroys any sense for integrity in your questioning.

Yet, none of those things matter, now does it Terence? So long as it works, right? You’ve professed to being all about “application being your sifu”. You should stick to that method, as you’ve got a long hard road ahead of you and these discussions will side track your trial and error progress. When it comes down to what matters as martial artists, it is all about our individual progress and skills in application.

After reading this thread, the one obvious thing is that there are several people who are here not to hold a productive dialog on any level, but to express themselves for the sake of expression. Like my Sibaak Chango said, they’ve already decided in their minds about what is and what is not so this discussion is pointless with those people. I am reminded of the time that Robert Chu told GM Gee “That’s not Tan Sau, this is Tan Sau!!!” There is simply no room for open discussion with those guys; no sense for consideration of others viewpoints and until the air is less polluted here were all going to go round in circles.

99

This is indeed that very last I will speak on this matter.

leejunfan, I do not know you nor have I ever held a discussion with you until now and like I said before, you are completely entitled to your opinions and observations - so far my impression of you doesn’t amount to a whole lot of anything meaningful. Of course, you’re not here to impress anyone so my impression should mean absolutely nothing to you. When you spread your malicious thoughts about my ancestors, then it is a crude and disgusting thing to circulate about [anyone’s] family; which is ultimately none of your business. Read your own post:

“This is all a bunch of nonsense. Type type type here on the internet but when it comes face to face people talk a different story.”

Tell anyone in the HFY family in person that our ancestor is fake. Think you would do that? Here you are trying to tell me what my house looks like when you’re on the outside looking in. Common sense isn’t your slice of pie, so be it. No point in holding a dialog with you. I’ve clarified my statements as you asked, and that’s all that’s going to happen between you and I.

Let me start off by saying that I never said your ancestor himself was fake… read again and please conprehend this… I said the photo looks to be a computer generated image. There are computer gen’ed images all over the world of different “real life” people. The people exist… the photo’s are fake. I don’t know if your ancestor existed or not. I’d like more evidence for my own personal reason… those reason… I happen to like the different histories on WCK. It fascinates me.

Yes I am entitled to my opinions… after all… opinions are: beliefs or judgments that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. I saw the picture… and think it’s CGI… until I’m proven wrong… I will continue to do so. And if someone from your camp wants to kick my ass for thinking so then the problem lays with them… not I. I mean really… you can come up to me and say that my ancestors didn’t exists and all I would do is pull out the actual, and very many photograph’s of Ip Man… futher then that I would just have to say “You are entitled to your opinion” :wink:

Of course you have no impression of me. But I do hope that when we do meet… and we will… that you don’t talk crap the minute I’m gone. I’d prefer it done to my face. Does that mean we’ll fight to prove something?.. no… but when you meet someone and then wait until AFTER the seminar when everyone is safely back home to start talking **** is when our impressions of YOU go down the toilet.

Sorry fro skipping around but… none of my business? YOU guys put this info out there… upon entering information on a forum you made it EVERYONES BUSINESS. We have every right to express our opinions as you have stated and it is not being crude and disgusting. No one ( at least not I) called you all a bunch of flipping hacks who’s mothers didn’t love them. Now THAT would be crude and disgusting… see the difference? All we are saying… and apparently it has happened ever since the photo has been released… is that it looks to be a computer generated image… nothing more… nothing less. Don’t put words in other peoples mouth.

Anyway… like I said… type type type… this I’m sure will all be duscussed in person again. Let me make a prediction. Everyone will be super nice and polite… it will be a great seminar filled with sharing of knowledge and skill… then everyone will go home and come to the forums to talk smack… and that is sad. When will the WCK family ( and that means all of us) stop fighting amongst ourselves and start working together?

In the end… Mo Gong Kau Gong Sau. God bless

Amitabha!

100

[QUOTE=Chango;733264]Once again Terence just because you are not aware of something does not mean it does not exist! LOL!
[/QUOTE]

Agreed. By the same token, people claiming something exists doesn’t make it so. This is why proof is so important.

This is very silly O.K. what independent evidence do you have that your Sifu finished the system under anyone? this brings up even more questions. 1. was he recognized by any credible Sifu to be qualified to teach? 2. why doesn’t he have anything good to say about other Wing Chun Sifus? etc… LOL!

The shift the burden dodge. The question is about the HFY/VTM’s claims.

But since you bring it up, the only way to know if anyone is qualified to teach is by the performance of their students. Why does Robert criticize so many in WCK? Simple, because there is so much to criticize. :slight_smile:

Some one has simply made up his own mind. So I guess I will be the first to say what’s the point. you already have your own answers. no one owes it to you to deliver you from your ignorance. It seems Chu sau li has a New Years resolution in place here. But once again the VTM members have no desire to bicker with those who lack respect or integrity. Those issues are yours I honestly hope you work through them.

Alot of people fail to realize that the MFK was only a snap shot of a portion of where the VTM’s research was at that time. Some have issues with that and that’s ok. Debate it all you want that’s fine. That’s healthy for discussion and discovery!

The HFY family has not made any “claims” of original or purest WCK. I know it may be hard for some to grasp but the HFY family and the VTM are not one in the same.

You can keep repeating it but the evidence - Benny being curator of the VTM while at the same time being Gee’s #1 “disciple” in HFY, the promotion of HFY’s oral myth as the "true history of WCK, etc. - speaks for itself.

As a member of the VTM I have had the great honor of becoming a HFY member. However I can also say that this (being part of the VTM) has also presented me with many honors like training 1st hand with many different Grand Masters and lineages.

I personally felt a deep connection to the Moy Yat family and the Chi Sim family as well. I also really enjoyed my time with GM William Cheung. I can see why people feel very strong about learning these systems.

However I identified personally more with HFY. That does not mean that I loose any respect or put down these other lineages or the others that I did not mention down or in a lesser catagory. This was a personal choice. HFY’s path fit me better. But that’s just me. I would not trade those experiences for anything at this point!

Bully for you! But it’s irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

I’ve been with Sifu Meng for many years and he has always taught with a open mind. If a person represents a lineage or honestly has dedicated his/her time to learning Martial arts (no matter what system) there is a certian amount of respect due. He has passed this attitude on to me as his student. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard Sifu Meng direct some one to train non-HFY lineages to people who call the VTM about WCK in thier area.

Telling us what a swell guy Benny is doesn’t answer the questions posed. And it is not surprising coming from one of his students.

It seems that you did not recieve the same lesson in your training. It seems that Chu Sau li does not share this same point of view. From what I’ve seen it seems that there is alot of discussion on how X lineage does Y and this is where they have it wrong and Chu Sau Li does it etc… LOL! That being said I think you will understand why you will get nowhere demanding “evidence.”
If a street punk demands conversation do I really need to address what he ask of me?

It amazes me how the VTM/HFY can one one hand spread their “message” (marketing) of “a true history of WCK”, that HFY oral myth is “fact”, that they have done all this “research”, yet in the same breath say things like “how dare you demand evidence that what we say is true!”. I know that I will get nowhere demanding evidence – for the simple reason that it doesn’t exist! And there is a very good reason it doesn’t exist.

Terence