Some thoughts on the TJPM, MHPM and TJMHPM

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Northern Praying Mantis
1

In another thread Brad asked about the differences between TJPM, MHPM, and TJMHPM. I think I would share my view on the subject with you all.

First off, I am speaking only of my own understanding and it is by no means with any authority nor do I represent anybody but myself. So if there is any mistake whatsoever it will be solely mine.

Basically TJPM, MHPM and TJMHPM are from the same source namely, GM Liang XueXiang (1810 - ? ). Back then, Tanglangquan as we know was just that - Tanglangquan. It is believe that GM Liang opened up the system and taken a lot of students. This is very important in the development of GM Liang’s PM lines. Some of which were accomplished martial artists as well. He was based in Laiyang county in Shandong. Many people travelled to train under him and would later on teach at other locations. One of the popular locations was Yantai county which was the old capital (re: wealth) of Shandong was.

Among the many students that GM Liang had, there were Jiang Hualong, Sun Yuanchang, Hao Hun (?) etc… Jiang Hualong was one of the most famous students among them. He would then taught in Yantai county and he was among the first to give his branch a designation - Meihwa Tanglang. His other peers such as Sun Yuanchang would either go by Tanglangquan or Taiji Tanglang if they were originally learn from GM Liang in Laiyang. Hao Hun would later identify his branch as Taiji Meihwa Tanglang. Having said that it is a view that the Meihwa Tanglang name is mainly used by Jiang Hualong lineages in Yantai. Other lineages of GM Liang from Laiyang use the Taiji Tanglang name.

Then the question comes to why only “Taiji” , “Meihwa” or “Taiji Meihwa” ? but not other names are used in these lineages? It is believe that it has to do with GM Liang’s manuscripts (Quanpu). In the Quanpu, it is first defined in “Tanglang ji Ti” (Nature/body of Praying Mantis) that plum blossom grand ultimate hands (fist in one version) is consisted of winter roosters steps and monkey stance… So it is clear that the lineages are following the Quanpu

It is believe that later Jiang Hualong and Song Zide saw the need to “canonize” GM Liang’s teaching as a response to the trend that other GM Liang’s students “incorporating” their own training with GM Liang’s Tanglang. . As a matter of fact, Jiang himself had his own idea of development which resulted in his brain child - Babu Tanglang. So Taiji Tanglang would mean to some people as Liang Xuexiang to Jiang Hualong to Song Zide’s lineage(s)

There is a view that GM Liang might have knowledge of Taijiquan. it is said that in certain Taiji Meihwa tradition, one can find Taijiquan’s attributes. Note that that word “Taiji” came first as an accent which is different from order of the Quanpu. Personally, I haven’t come across anything substantial to support the theory that GM Liang did “incorporate” Taijiquan into his teaching. Having said that there is a curious point about the original character that was used for the Bengbu form. The word “Beng” (mountain on top of friends) today is “crash”. I have came across another “Beng” (a hand next to freinds as in Beng Jing) that is well known to the Taijiquan people. If this character was really used in the originally Quanpu, then it could be a good indication of GM Liang might have knowledge of Taijiquan. The meaning of Bengbu would change somewhat from “Crash and Fill” to roughly connecting to opponents’ “power structure” and fill (attack) the gap (weakness) of that structure. But as it stands, I would not thing that GM Liang’s Tanglang had anything to do with Taijiquan.

In the traditional Tanglang system’s view, there is a 3 folded approach to the practice. 1) fundamentals, 2) techniques and applications, and 3) special training (Soft and hard Qigong, etc..).
Different students of GM Liang holded different view about these. We have to remember that many have their own training other than Tanglang before. Some people today suggest that this Grandmaster was better at Tanglang’s Qigong and that Grandmaster was better at Tanglang’s Shoufa (applications), this is IMHO not a positive way to look at the issue because it suggests Tanglang system is somewhat a fragmented entity and that Tanglang can be taken in parts (not that this is not happening). Personally, the wisdom of traditional Tanglang is fascinating.

Anyway, I just wanted to share some thoughts that I have with you all.

Mantis108

2

Good coverage!

I have been told by Taijimeihua and meihua people that although there may be ‘taiji’ principles in their boxing, they are not principles from Taiji Quan. There is (as 108 already said), very little to indicate otherwise.

3

Agreed

Mantis 108,

Thank you for your distinguishing the different branches of Meihua.

From my training in Korea, over some twenty years ago, and from my short discussion with Sun De Yao on the topic, I have to agree with you on the Taiji and Tanglang relationship. Sun De Yao recommends Taiji, form and push hands to improve Tanglang and says that Zhan Nian, contact cling and other jings of Taiji and Tanglang are the same but that they are different arts and do not borrow from each other but that the cross training can help.

Again, thank you for the detailed information and perspective.

Steve Cottrell

4

that’s really interesting, thanks very much for sharing some insight into the origins of these different lines.

while we’re on the topic, i’ve heard sifu cottrell state on more than one occasion that the different lines of tanglang have more in common than not (correct me if i’ve misunderstood)…

having said that, i’d like to ask those on this forum that have had interactions with stylists of these different lines:

what then, are some of the DIFFERENCES between these 3 lines (taiji, meihwa, and taiji meihwa)???

for example, if we were to line up an advanced practioner (or several, it doesn’t really matter) from each of these lines and have lengthy conversations with each regarding performance, fighting ability, posture, power development, applications etc. (you know…all the stuff us mantis folk love talking about) what topics would they agree upon and what would topics would they respectfully ‘agree to disagree’ about??

as an aside, i feel priveleged to have a sifu that decided to incorporate taiji ‘push hands’ into the curriculum in an effort to help students understand balance, coordination and rootedness (amongst a myriad of other qualities, but you get the idea…). of course, this is not to say that you won’t understand these ideas if you don’t do push hands and practice in a more ‘pure mantis’ kind of way, it just seems like a useful tool (a ‘springboard’ of sorts) to assist in a student’s development (especially the long term students, not the ‘smile and sweat’ mcdojo types).

anyway, any thoughts on the differences??

sincerely

neil

5

Thank you all for the input…

I wrote this in reply to RAF’s thread related to the clip that I linked to.

<<<I Ching Paradigm…
First and foremost, Chinese culture and Chinese martial arts are inseparable because art imitate life or rather it expresses our inner most feeling toward life for communication purposes. This is the major difference between arts and sports. Sports mainly deal with the mechanics and the dynamics of a specific set(s) of skills. Arts take into consideration of our perceptions toward reality as well as our philosophies and our worldviews. Ethnic viability, which is the essence of the people, means nothing to sports; however, for arts that’s everything because that’s the total experience of the people.

Such a total experience exists in the form of a body of knowledge known as the I Ching (Book of Changes) to the Chinese people. Having said that the I Ching has a universal appear to other culture as well but Chinese people are perhaps the only people that apply it in all areas of daily life. Things like YingYang, 5 elements, 8 trigrams, etc… are means to experience or rather connect to the reality. That is to say how we relate ourselves to the space-time continuum.

Connection, relation, space-time continuum, etc… are all essential variables in eyes of mystics as well as pugilists. For many CMA practitioners, the final frontier is where the mystic-pugilists dwell.

It is not surprising to see that TLQ and TJQ being styles of CMA share similarity in theory (pun intended). Do we not fight within and take advantage of the 6 harmonies - Height, Width, and Depth? Do we not attack and defend the 8 directions and step in 5 ways? Yet, being formless to seeing the relationship between you and opponent being nothing but power systems or embracing the mindset of a predatory insect in nature (form), that is where the individuality emerges. Nontheless, both require great observations and insights. Futher, the mystic-pugilist knows the formless form paradox well enough that the only constant is converting form to formlessness or vice versa. The starting point is irrelevant. Whether it is Xingyi 5 element punches, Taiji 13 stances, Bagua 8 mother palms, or Tanglang numerous postures, they all lead to formlessness which will “return to form” (matter is energy that “ran” out of energy).

TJQ speaks of the trigger effect (linear) when it comes to fighting. This is the very same idea of water wheels and turning gears concepts (circular) in TLQ. Once the wheel of combat is set in motions all components are involved (one fires after another) so that the machine, whatever that is, just keep running. So there is as much linear thinking as circular thinking in both arts. Without sensitivity, how can the mantis stick close to its prey and control it for consumption? Without explosiveness, how can Taiji stylist like the garrison of a walled town blast its way to victory? TLQ is long powers (throws and takendowns) within the short powers(strikes and kicks) while the TJQ is the short powers within the long powers. No martial art is complete if it has only one focus.

Sorry about the long winded post.

Mantis108

PS all my usual disclaimers applied>>>

to be continued …

6

Continued…

Due to incomplete material availabe of the other lines, it is not possible for me to make a fair comparison at this point. The truth is I believe that all is in the applications. I also believe that if we can figure out “Zhan Nian” we have half the battle in our pockets already. It all boilds down to closing the gap efficiently, hopefully suffering minimal damage, and take the ball from there. Having said that I think that Zhan Nian is but one way to set up the follow through. Zhan Nian, Bang Tie, Lai Jiao, Shun Song, Ti Na, and Feng Bi, each can be proactive or reactive and each can be applied soft or hard, the math is clearly more than 6 ways to either close the gap or set up the follow through. We have on ocassion seen various PM styles demonstrating techniques but seldom do we see all 12 key words in actions. Mostly, we see Zhan Nian which most of the time set up for striking or kicking. What happen to the others? What happen to the techniques in the forms?

Anyway, I think we are seeing very little of Mantis. We are still far from getting near the core of Mantis at least public wise.

Mantis108

7

The Long Path

Mantis 108,

Indeed it seems that even among lines of our art, who even have well trained masters to lead them, Tanglang is being taught only in part if not at all.

I believe that the reasons for this is twofold:

First, many students, especially in the West, were only partially instructed in the art due to language barriers or because teachers hold back so that students would continue to follow them. Many of these partially taught students are now instructors and are propagating the error.

Second, teaching a traditional curriculum is difficult. It is easier to have students put on pads and “spar” according to safe kickboxing rules or to grapple using MMA techniques than it is to teach the traditional combinations and have students drill them countless times until effective. I believe that many good teachers have been seduced into this because of the ease of instruction, speed of developing new instructors and that it blends with today’s MMA fad.

I believe that opening the traditional art for view in the public media is the answer to this in both cases.

In the first case, teachers who’s training was incomplete, the open sharing of information will lead to better educated instructors and thereby raise the level of instruction and the reputation of the art overall. We traditional Tanglang practitioners must decide if the survival of the art is important enough for us to help each other. If it is, then we must be ready to share a great deal. You have always gone the extra mile in this regard.

In the second case, that of the MMA/ JKD mantis, making traditional practices public raises the understanding of students and the public at large so that a clear choice can be made. A person can then decide if they want the easier path of a MMA approach to Tanglang or a traditional one. I believe any traditional practitioner knows that unless one puts in the hours of training and conditioning necessary, a simple head knowledge of Tanglang techniques does little for any fighter. Making traditional Tanglang techniques available for view by the public will not degrade the effectiveness of the traditional practitioner.

I personally believe though that this watered down approach presenting itself as Tanglang has reached its zenith in popularity. The addition of sensitivity drills from Wing Chun, Taiji, Kali or even rudimentary teaching of Jing cannot raise this easily taught product to the level of sophistication in real Tanglang. As the art becomes increasingly known this will most certainly become undeniable.

A great example of this is on the mainland itself. In the face of modern Wushu’s endorsement by the government, the discouraging of traditional Tanglang and promotion of modern Sanda, the traditional path is now retaking the ground and enjoying new success. This was not done by holding back or by sealing themselves off from the public, however. Instead they have done public demonstrations, competitions, published books, put out VCDs and done seminars around the world.

Hence the importance of public forums, such as this one, and (insert ad here) Mantis Quarterly as well as all those in the past and present doing videos, seminars and articles that feature the traditional art.

Sorry to be so long winded.

Steve Cottrell

8

Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
[B]Indeed it seems that even among lines of our art, who even have well trained masters to lead them, Tanglang is being taught only in part if not at all.

I believe that the reasons for this is twofold:

First, many students, especially in the West, were only partially instructed in the art due to language barriers or because teachers hold back so that students would continue to follow them. Many of these partially taught students are now instructors and are propagating the error. [/B]

I agree unequivocally! There are too many persons unqualified and unauthorized to instruct in their specific martial art discipline.

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
Second, teaching a traditional curriculum is difficult. It is easier to have students put on pads and “spar” according to safe kickboxing rules or to grapple using MMA techniques than it is to teach the traditional combinations and have students drill them countless times until effective. I believe that many good teachers have been seduced into this because of the ease of instruction, speed of developing new instructors and that it blends with today’s MMA fad.

Lai Tat Chung Sifu (Brendan Lai Sifu) mentioned that you cannot teach true Praying Mantis and expect to make a living doing so. Traditional teaching structure must be modified to adapt to western society so there is compatibility and integration of cultures. “Life in the fast lane” of the western culture is not suitable to the traditional disciplinary training of the martial arts due to the fact that everyone is in a hurry to get nowhere. It’s not where you end up but how spectacular your journey is! Thus, teaching modification must be made to keep the students interested enough to consistently show up for class and consistently pay for their lessons.

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
[B]I believe that opening the traditional art for view in the public media is the answer to this in both cases.

In the first case, teachers who’s training was incomplete, the open sharing of information will lead to better educated instructors and thereby raise the level of instruction and the reputation of the art overall. We traditional Tanglang practitioners must decide if the survival of the art is important enough for us to help each other. If it is, then we must be ready to share a great deal. You have always gone the extra mile in this regard. [/B]

I believe that an instructors training is never complete. The sharing of information sounds productive but the corollary remains that egos are involved and then a debate ensues as whether one person’s information is misleading or true to fact. There are always the person/persons that need attention by indirectly stating “look at me! I know this and I know that etc.,” Where is the humility that is supposedly taught with the martial arts discipline? The final conclusion is that we as individuals make the decision on what to believe is correct for ourselves.

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
In the second case, that of the MMA/ JKD mantis, making traditional practices public raises the understanding of students and the public at large so that a clear choice can be made. A person can then decide if they want the easier path of a MMA approach to Tanglang or a traditional one. I believe any traditional practitioner knows that unless one puts in the hours of training and conditioning necessary, a simple head knowledge of Tanglang techniques does little for any fighter. Making traditional Tanglang techniques available for view by the public will not degrade the effectiveness of the traditional practitioner.

What makes the selection of either traditional or modern martial arts difficult is the question “how does one determine the authenticity of a “traditional” martial art? Do you just take that instructors/students word for it? Check on the internet on how authentic this particular martial art remains etc.? How?

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
I personally believe though that this watered down approach presenting itself as Tanglang has reached its zenith in popularity. The addition of sensitivity drills from Wing Chun, Taiji, Kali or even rudimentary teaching of Jing cannot raise this easily taught product to the level of sophistication in real Tanglang. As the art becomes increasingly known this will most certainly become undeniable.

It is fascinating that “all of a sudden” – Preying Mantis Kung Fu has become “In Vogue”! What was the sudden cause of interest – does anyone have any idea? Is it the recent passing of Mantis Sifu’s perhaps?

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
A great example of this is on the mainland itself. In the face of modern Wushu’s endorsement by the government, the discouraging of traditional Tanglang and promotion of modern Sanda, the traditional path is now retaking the ground and enjoying new success. This was not done by holding back or by sealing themselves off from the public, however. Instead they have done public demonstrations, competitions, published books, put out VCDs and done seminars around the world.

It is the basic marketing scheme, deprive to garner a demand. Depriving – not meaning to “take away” but in this martial arts context, meaning to focus one’s attention to something else as to become “popular” or “mainstream”. As it is well known, anything that is “mainstream” eventually becomes ordinary, while something that shows up to be “outre: out of the norm” becomes “extraordinary/fascinating” and people will flock to become followers of this “extraordinary” style.

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
Hence the importance of public forums, such as this one, and (insert ad here) Mantis Quarterly as well as all those in the past and present doing videos, seminars and articles that feature the traditional art.

Too many debates on open forums – accusations here and there - especially if moderators do not maintain some rule of diplomacy. Does make for interesting reading though!!

Sifu Cottrell, If you please, how does one acquire a subscription to the “Mantis Quarterly”?

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
Sorry to be so long winded.

Why apologize! Internal breathing practice requires one to be “long winded”! :wink:

Signed your SiHing (fellow student of Lai Sifu),

Shen Bao Rui

9

Re: Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by Albino_Mantis

Lai Tat Chung Sifu (Brendan Lai Sifu) mentioned that you cannot teach true Praying Mantis and expect to make a living doing so. Traditional teaching structure must be modified to adapt to western society so there is compatibility and integration of cultures. “Life in the fast lane” of the western culture is not suitable to the traditional disciplinary training of the martial arts due to the fact that everyone is in a hurry to get nowhere. It’s not where you end up but how spectacular your journey is! Thus, teaching modification must be made to keep the students interested enough to consistently show up for class and consistently pay for their lessons.

Not that Sifu Lai advocated this approach.

Originally posted by Albino_Mantis
Signed your SiHing (fellow student of Lai Sifu)

Do I know you??

N.

10

Re: Re: Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by -N-

Not that Sifu Lai advocated this approach.

it was not stated that Lai Sifu was an advocate of this, but he did mention to me in a personal conversation

Originally posted by -N-
[B]Do I know you??

N. [/B]

Whether or not you know me depends on what your “N” stands for, if stands for Norman, then yes you know me and have known me for almost 10 years. If it doesn’t stand for that, then you will need to provide me with more information.

11

Re: Re: Re: Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by Albino_Mantis
…if stands for Norman, then yes you know me and have known me for almost 10 years.

Hahaha… Norman it is.

N.

12

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by -N-
[B]
Hahaha… Norman it is.

N. [/B]

So when are you going to start coming back out to the park? We miss having you and the others.

13

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by -N-
[B]
Hahaha… Norman it is.

N. [/B]

So when are you going to start coming back out to the park?

14

Hi Sifu Cottrell,

Thank you for the candid post sharing your overall view about the general state of PM in North America.

<<<Indeed it seems that even among lines of our art, who even have well trained masters to lead them, Tanglang is being taught only in part if not at all.>>>

Agreed.

<<<I believe that the reasons for this is twofold:

First, many students, especially in the West, were only partially instructed in the art due to language barriers or because teachers hold back so that students would continue to follow them. Many of these partially taught students are now instructors and are propagating the error.>>>

Well, I think this issue is partly the teachers’ fault. Many old timer teachers don’t sought advice [re: lack of communication] from their students. I think the students’ needs are quite a high pirority. Yes, the system is important but teachers need to listen and observe what’s happening out there. One of the best way is to talk to the students because many students are pre-exposed to other MA due to the open attitude toward teaching and learning MA in North America. Their experiences IMHO serve as a mirror or a measuring sticks. Old timer teacher quite often discounted the students’ experiences. Some students leave prematurely because of miscommunication and/or feeling their needs are not addressed.

<<<Second, teaching a traditional curriculum is difficult. It is easier to have students put on pads and “spar” according to safe kickboxing rules or to grapple using MMA techniques than it is to teach the traditional combinations and have students drill them countless times until effective. I believe that many good teachers have been seduced into this because of the ease of instruction, speed of developing new instructors and that it blends with today’s MMA fad.>>>

Certainly, your point is well taken. At the same time, I believe in PM that drills and ling forms serve as a bridge toward sparring/fighting. This aspect is often neglected as students todays somehow becoming more and more form collectors. In a sense it is easy money for the teacher. BTW, I don’t think teaching a traditional curriculum is difficult. It is challenging but at the same time most rewarding. I think it would be more positive if we embrace the challenge and bring more of the PM teachers and students back into the fold. This can be achieved with quality publication such as the MQ. MMA uses interactive and creative drills in place of forms. In a way, I think it is productive that PM teacher rethink and retrain the use of training equipement (ie Thai pads, focus mitts, heavy bags, etc). Not that these should replace the traditional stuff but it would help to inspire students who have certain experiences with these tools. Once they can see they can relate their former training with PM, they will embrace PM more readily.

<<<I believe that opening the traditional art for view in the public media is the answer to this in both cases. >>>

Agreed whole heartedly. :slight_smile:

<<<In the first case, teachers who’s training was incomplete, the open sharing of information will lead to better educated instructors and thereby raise the level of instruction and the reputation of the art overall. We traditional Tanglang practitioners must decide if the survival of the art is important enough for us to help each other. If it is, then we must be ready to share a great deal. You have always gone the extra mile in this regard.>>>

First and foremost thank you for the kind words. I agreed that raising the awareness that traditional Tanglang should be learned and taught as a whole not fragmented is crucial. That is to say, we have to make clear that tanglang is not just a bunches of forms. As a system, all individual components contribute to the whole. I also agreed that it is vital for the survival of the traditional TLQ that knowledgeable teachers pull together and share. Hopefully, at all levels if not even higher degree of cooperation and support for events designed to promote PM would be great.

<<<In the second case, that of the MMA/ JKD mantis, making traditional practices public raises the understanding of students and the public at large so that a clear choice can be made. A person can then decide if they want the easier path of a MMA approach to Tanglang or a traditional one. I believe any traditional practitioner knows that unless one puts in the hours of training and conditioning necessary, a simple head knowledge of Tanglang techniques does little for any fighter. Making traditional Tanglang techniques available for view by the public will not degrade the effectiveness of the traditional practitioner.>>>

“I believe any traditional practitioner knows that unless one puts in the hours of training and conditioning necessary, a simple head knowledge of Tanglang techniques does little for any fighter. Making traditional Tanglang techniques available for view by the public will not degrade the effectiveness of the traditional practitioner.”

I agreed with this statment 120%. two thumbs way up

the “JKDizing” of Tanglang is really a result of lack of understanding of the concepts of combinations and applications IMHO. This is partly to be blamed on the teachers who subscribe to “guarding the gate” BS and the original message got lost. Most of the student-teachers of those teachers have no choice but to look outside of the system to fill the gap especially in this utilitarian environment. In the information age, JKD and MMA alike have capitalized on technology capturing the imaginatons of MA community at large. We must take advantage of these oppotunities too. Most importantly, we must through sharing to illustrate that there is a significant difference in theories, concepts, practice, etc that other arts should not be confused with TLQ. Discipline Cross Training is one thing; Attribute Cross Training is another. There should not be any confusion at all.

<<<I personally believe though that this watered down approach presenting itself as Tanglang has reached its zenith in popularity. The addition of sensitivity drills from Wing Chun, Taiji, Kali or even rudimentary teaching of Jing cannot raise this easily taught product to the level of sophistication in real Tanglang. As the art becomes increasingly known this will most certainly become undeniable.>>>

I believe it is hopeful that traditional TLQ will shine through eventually because as you pointed out the level of sophistication is really unmatched. BTW, there is nothing wrong with Attribute Cross Training; however, it is only a supplimentry or compliment measure. It should not be viewed as the easy way out.

<<<A great example of this is on the mainland itself. In the face of modern Wushu’s endorsement by the government, the discouraging of traditional Tanglang and promotion of modern Sanda, the traditional path is now retaking the ground and enjoying new success. This was not done by holding back or by sealing themselves off from the public, however. Instead they have done public demonstrations, competitions, published books, put out VCDs and done seminars around the world.

Hence the importance of public forums, such as this one, and (insert ad here) Mantis Quarterly as well as all those in the past and present doing videos, seminars and articles that feature the traditional art.>>>

Agreed. I cannot stress the importance of this enough neither.

<<<Sorry to be so long winded.>>>

Not at all, I truely appreciate the candid post.

Warm regards

Robert

15

Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by MantisifuFW
First, many students, especially in the West, were only partially instructed in the art due to language barriers or because teachers hold back so that students would continue to follow them. Many of these partially taught students are now instructors and are propagating the error.

Sifu Cottrell,

I’ve also seen cases where the teacher doesn’t hold back at all, but the student “just doesn’t get it”. This can be due to the student’s own limitations or just needing to put more time into training. The student can have the wrong idea regarding the material, while the teacher is trying his best to “beat some sense” into the student :slight_smile:

N.

16

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by Albino_Mantis

So when are you going to start coming back out to the park?

Oops, sorry… didn’t see your post until just now.

I’ve been working with my own group on Saturdays and Sundays, and another group on Monday evenings. I’ve invited people to join us for weekends, but have not had any takers.

N.

17

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Long Path

Originally posted by -N-
[B]
Oops, sorry… didn’t see your post until just now.

I’ve been working with my own group on Saturdays and Sundays, and another group on Monday evenings. I’ve invited people to join us for weekends, but have not had any takers.

N. [/B]

I am glad to hear that your group is training that hard. I think after the first of the year I am going to start looking for something closer to home. I’ve grown tired of the attitude in the park and want to find a group to train with that is… well less dysfunctional in their training attitude. I might try to track down Sifu’s SiHing Raymond and see if I can train with his closed door group.

How was the Memorial Dinner for Sifu? I didn’t attend since I was never officially invited (in fact there was a day when Perry showed up at the park but didn’t even mention it while I was in ear shot, but I over heard him tell Mark that he’d shown to invite Wuelf). Left me with warm fuzzies, if you know what I mean.

18

Originally posted by Albino_Mantis
I didn’t attend since I was never officially invited…

Sorry the invitation didn’t make its way to you. Perry had emailed people on behalf of Simo, and asked those that were mailed to pass the word on to any of those that weren’t on the list. I expect he assumed that the others at the park had already let you know.

take care,
N.

19

Originally posted by -N-
[B]
Sorry the invitation didn’t make its way to you. Perry had emailed people on behalf of Simo, and asked those that were mailed to pass the word on to any of those that weren’t on the list. I expect he assumed that the others at the park had already let you know.

take care,
N. [/B]

He came to the park challenged me to this really long duel. we fought for over three hours, with lots of flying kicks, sommersaults, leaping into the air and then collapsed due to fatigue…oh wait, that was the movie I watch last night.. :wink:

alright maybe we didn’t fight, but we did talk about it and resolved the issue. :slight_smile: