William E
06-28-2004, 01:28 AM
Recently questions have been raised by Victot Parlati concerning the commonality between HFY and TWC and a possible connection.
Here is one of Victor's recent posts....
canglong posted the following:
"Saam Dim Yat Sin Dihng Yuhn Sahn
quote:
(originally posted by Victor)
"I've also seen some big similarities in recent years between TWC and HFY in terms of footwork and many other principles and strategies....(and many other people have made the same observation)"
"Parlati Sifu, in an effort to get to a more substanative discussion can you be more specific about what you perceive as similiarities between the systems you mention?"
Let me start here...hopefully...most of you have a copy of the book I referred to on the opening post on this thread (Complete Wing Chun)...because sometimes pictures can be worth a thousand words. On page 87...GM Gee is doing a move from chum kiu...The photo in question depicts EXACTLY what is also done in TWC's version of the form...(notice the side-body position, and even the way the bong arm/hand/fingers are held)...
and nowhere in any non-TWC Yip Man lineage Wing Chun chum kiu will you find a move like this...Another example is on the Friendship seminar video, wherein Benny Meng performs SLT...there are a number of moves that are duplicated in TWC's SLT (or very close to being duplicated)...that don't appear ANYWHERE within the non-TWC Yip Man lineage SLT...including (but certainly not limited to) the footwork that is part of the form...whereas, as I'm sure you know...this too exists nowhere within non-TWC Yip Man lineage SLT...which is always done completely stationary.
Another example from the book....On page 88...there is a four-photo sequence wherein GM Gee demos an application from the Butterfly Swords....TWC has an almost EXACT sequence of moves...and again...This type of "movement" is not found (to my knowledge) within non-TWC Yip Man lineage butterfly sword application (certainly not within the sword applications taught by Moy Yat)...And what I'm referring to MOST OF ALL is the location of GM Gee's centerline to the point-of-contact...
And on the very next page (89)...look carefully at figure 6 and figure 7...and again you will see GM Gee (in an empty hand situation) doing some centerline placement (facing) that TWC also uses that is not found in non-TWC Yip Man lineage wing chun. (Just a FEW examples).
Canglong also wrote:
quote:
originally posted by desertwingchun2
"Another similarity is Kiu Sao concept. When experiencing CSWC Kiu Sao/Chi Sao one finds it is nothing like the Chi Sao from Yip Man family Wing Chun. However, for the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kuen family (HFYWCK) the concept of Kiu Sao is very familiar. One major aspect of Kiu Sao is it's relationship to grappling. Well anyone who has experienced CSWC knows what a role grappling has in that system"
"Parlati Sifu, what role does the Kiu Sau concept play in training and preparing TWC practictioners for Chi Sau?"
As to grappling...again, the same book in question (on page 94) Chi Sim Weng Chun Master (Grandmaster?) Way Yan demonstrates an arm lock that TWC uses in the same EXACT way.
William Cheung has also, upon occasion, taught some kiu sao (bridging) concepts that finish up in choke holds...and some that end in sweeping takedowns...armlocks...and wristlocks.
As to the rest of Canglong's questions about kiu sao...TWC uses "bridging" drills that are done at longer range than double arm, cross arm, or parallel arm chi sao...
but both sets of drills - chi sao (in all it's phases)...and longer range (which start from a non-contact range) "bridging drills" are learned together...neither one is considered pre-requisite to the other...
they simply represent fighting skills in two different ranges (distances).
Also...on the Friendshipseminar tape - GM Gee does what he calls a chum kiu concept/technique..."destroying the opponent's structure" is how he termed it...wherein...(after making a block against an incoming punch)...he turned the block into a lop sao on the INSIDE of the opponent's elbow area that dislodged and unbalanced him...as he was moving AWAY from the opponent's other hand/arm...
...EXACTLY the kind of thing that GM Cheung teaches and places quite a bit of emphasis on;and again - not something found in non-TWC Yip Man lineage wing chun.
And then there is the TWC Entry technique (also used in HFY)...This is, technically speaking, a kiu sao technique and concept...and not found within non-TWC Yip Man lineage wing chun.
And then there is the TWC five stages of combat:
1) Non Contact
2) Contact (but not quite close enough yet for a strike to the head or torso of your opponent)
3) Exchange stage (you are close enough for the above - and are usually in the midst of attempting to control your opponent's balance and sealing off areas wherein he cannot counter or escape - while you may be striking the head/torso
4) Pursuit (when he attempts to retreat)
5) Retreat (when you find that you need to back up and re-group).
I understand that HFY has something very similar to the 5 stages of combat as described above.
These are just a FEW examples - there are many others I won't get into right at this moment.
__________________
Victor Parlati
And the HFY Response...
Victor, I must agree that this is a very interesting thread and that you may be onto a connection between TWC, HFY and Weng Chun. IMHO, that connection is Shaolin plain and simple. How, when and why the connection exists is what is intriguing to me although any answer is highly speculative. On the surface level there seems to be a connection between HFY, TWC and Weng Chun which I believe is Shaolin BUT on a deeper level the training methodologies and curriculums are TOTALLY different with their own unique identity.
Thank you for taking the time to reply to Canglong with your understanding from the exposure that you’ve had with HFY (mainly photos and second hand knowledge). Please allow me to explain that we’ve had many TWC students and sifu’s who have had first hand experience with GM Gee and the HFY system so my comments are based on their feedback and observations… nothing more, nothing less.
The video that you make reference to when Master Meng is performing SLT is what we refer to as the San Sau version and not the standard version. I’ve also heard that there are several versions within TWC as well. One example would be in the opening move where the punch comes from the center. Most WC lineages next move is a Huen Sau before retracting the arm. In the HFY standard form we perform a Chum Sau after the punch before retracting the arm.
It is very difficult, IMO, to analyze movements from photos which represent a moment in time… but if that is all you have it’s better than nothing. Although the SLT versions have been said to be very similar those in the know who have seen the HFY Chum Kui say that it is totally different. Are there some moves that may be the same or look similar, sure there can be. But I would have to point to the training philosophies that are much different.
In an attempt to provide some substance I would like to point out some of the differences that I see in both systems.
Kui Sau
HFY teaches Kui Sau based on the Mo Ying Di Yeng theory (no shape hit the shadow theory) with many different drills and exercises as part of its standard curriculum.
Chi Kui
From Kui Sau we move into Chi Kui which deals with Sui Sing and Dai Sing Tin Yan Dai which shows the connection to the Shaolin Temple and Weng Chun. Both Weng Chun and HFY have Heaven, Human and Earth concepts although their manifestations are a little different.
Chi Sau
In HFY Chi Sau is another progression and not the end all WC exercise. In fact, there are many different concepts and principles behind the HFY Chi Sau like Centerline and 5-Line Chi Sau.
The 5 stages of combat has more meaning than the 5 stages themselves and involves the understanding of the Sam Mo Kui concept. Sam Mo Kui allows a student to progress from the wondering stage to a stage of awareness to a final stage of focus.
In the first level (SLT - Wondering) the training methodologies focus on time, space and energy allowing the student to understand the HFYWC formula.
In the second level (CK - Awareness) the training methodologies focus on Tin Yan Dei (Heaven, Human and Earth) concept. HFYWC Tin Yan Dei focus on Deiu Ying (facing) and Jeui Ying (tracing) on the surface level. The deeper understanding comes with the knowledge of Sui Sing (little wheel) and Dai Sing (big wheel) Tin Yan Dei. Chi Sim WC, according the VTM, also used the Tin Yan Dei concepts although with a little different focus. Their focus is on the Da Sam Sing concept.
In the final level (BJ – Focus) the training deals with not only the five stages of combat, which is considered surface level and not an accurate definition but at a deeper level, trains us how to deal with the 5 elemental energies (water, fire, wood, metal, earth). In addition to the standard WC weapons HFY also has the “Bamboo Needles” which come from the time of the Red Bandana Boxer Society (Hung Gun Biu) and is typically taught only to disciples.
In regards to a secret school in Hong Kong, I can tell you about an incident that happened over 4 years ago when a group of Wing Chun practitioners from a non-YM lineage came from China to pay their respects to GM Garrett Gee. They claimed to come from Red Boat Wing Chun in Hong Kong and wanted more information at that time from our Grandmaster.
Why is it that some people on this forum (no need to mention names) continue to deny that Chi Sim is really Wing Chun? HFY accepts Chi Sim as its Wing Chun cousin with the commonality of in depth Kui Sau training methodologies, the Tin Yan Dei (Heaven, Human, Earth) concept as well as Chan philosophy from Shaolin. From my hands-on experience you cannot deny the connection. There are some that want to play word games but to the HFY family, Wing Chun = Weng Chun. The words might be different but the Shaolin background and the integrity of the art is the same to our HFY family.
For once and for all I would like to state that the so called “entry technique issue” is foolish and created by certain cowardly individuals who were only interested in deliberately stirring up Wing Chun politics in the past. For us, we use the Saam Dim Yat Sim concept associated with Deui Ying and Jeui Ying along with Jong Sau theory which defines how HFY engages it’s opponent. It’s not about a single technique but the consistent use of concepts and principles which define our action. In order to really understand HFY you need to understand “saam dim yat sin dihng yuhn sahn ngh douh lihk muhn fa kihn kwan” or Three points one line, establish the original nature; 5 Ways and 6 Gates, influence the universe.
The intent of my post is not to derail your thread but to provide some insight into your quest. As you know from your meeting with the Weng Chun sifu, there is nothing better than hands-on experience from someone in the know. My I suggest that you speak with your friend Miguel Hernandez who has had first hand experience with HFY as I’m sure you respect his unbiased opinions as he actually spent 3 days with GM Garrett Gee in NYC last month.
Good luck on your quest.
Here is one of Victor's recent posts....
canglong posted the following:
"Saam Dim Yat Sin Dihng Yuhn Sahn
quote:
(originally posted by Victor)
"I've also seen some big similarities in recent years between TWC and HFY in terms of footwork and many other principles and strategies....(and many other people have made the same observation)"
"Parlati Sifu, in an effort to get to a more substanative discussion can you be more specific about what you perceive as similiarities between the systems you mention?"
Let me start here...hopefully...most of you have a copy of the book I referred to on the opening post on this thread (Complete Wing Chun)...because sometimes pictures can be worth a thousand words. On page 87...GM Gee is doing a move from chum kiu...The photo in question depicts EXACTLY what is also done in TWC's version of the form...(notice the side-body position, and even the way the bong arm/hand/fingers are held)...
and nowhere in any non-TWC Yip Man lineage Wing Chun chum kiu will you find a move like this...Another example is on the Friendship seminar video, wherein Benny Meng performs SLT...there are a number of moves that are duplicated in TWC's SLT (or very close to being duplicated)...that don't appear ANYWHERE within the non-TWC Yip Man lineage SLT...including (but certainly not limited to) the footwork that is part of the form...whereas, as I'm sure you know...this too exists nowhere within non-TWC Yip Man lineage SLT...which is always done completely stationary.
Another example from the book....On page 88...there is a four-photo sequence wherein GM Gee demos an application from the Butterfly Swords....TWC has an almost EXACT sequence of moves...and again...This type of "movement" is not found (to my knowledge) within non-TWC Yip Man lineage butterfly sword application (certainly not within the sword applications taught by Moy Yat)...And what I'm referring to MOST OF ALL is the location of GM Gee's centerline to the point-of-contact...
And on the very next page (89)...look carefully at figure 6 and figure 7...and again you will see GM Gee (in an empty hand situation) doing some centerline placement (facing) that TWC also uses that is not found in non-TWC Yip Man lineage wing chun. (Just a FEW examples).
Canglong also wrote:
quote:
originally posted by desertwingchun2
"Another similarity is Kiu Sao concept. When experiencing CSWC Kiu Sao/Chi Sao one finds it is nothing like the Chi Sao from Yip Man family Wing Chun. However, for the Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kuen family (HFYWCK) the concept of Kiu Sao is very familiar. One major aspect of Kiu Sao is it's relationship to grappling. Well anyone who has experienced CSWC knows what a role grappling has in that system"
"Parlati Sifu, what role does the Kiu Sau concept play in training and preparing TWC practictioners for Chi Sau?"
As to grappling...again, the same book in question (on page 94) Chi Sim Weng Chun Master (Grandmaster?) Way Yan demonstrates an arm lock that TWC uses in the same EXACT way.
William Cheung has also, upon occasion, taught some kiu sao (bridging) concepts that finish up in choke holds...and some that end in sweeping takedowns...armlocks...and wristlocks.
As to the rest of Canglong's questions about kiu sao...TWC uses "bridging" drills that are done at longer range than double arm, cross arm, or parallel arm chi sao...
but both sets of drills - chi sao (in all it's phases)...and longer range (which start from a non-contact range) "bridging drills" are learned together...neither one is considered pre-requisite to the other...
they simply represent fighting skills in two different ranges (distances).
Also...on the Friendshipseminar tape - GM Gee does what he calls a chum kiu concept/technique..."destroying the opponent's structure" is how he termed it...wherein...(after making a block against an incoming punch)...he turned the block into a lop sao on the INSIDE of the opponent's elbow area that dislodged and unbalanced him...as he was moving AWAY from the opponent's other hand/arm...
...EXACTLY the kind of thing that GM Cheung teaches and places quite a bit of emphasis on;and again - not something found in non-TWC Yip Man lineage wing chun.
And then there is the TWC Entry technique (also used in HFY)...This is, technically speaking, a kiu sao technique and concept...and not found within non-TWC Yip Man lineage wing chun.
And then there is the TWC five stages of combat:
1) Non Contact
2) Contact (but not quite close enough yet for a strike to the head or torso of your opponent)
3) Exchange stage (you are close enough for the above - and are usually in the midst of attempting to control your opponent's balance and sealing off areas wherein he cannot counter or escape - while you may be striking the head/torso
4) Pursuit (when he attempts to retreat)
5) Retreat (when you find that you need to back up and re-group).
I understand that HFY has something very similar to the 5 stages of combat as described above.
These are just a FEW examples - there are many others I won't get into right at this moment.
__________________
Victor Parlati
And the HFY Response...
Victor, I must agree that this is a very interesting thread and that you may be onto a connection between TWC, HFY and Weng Chun. IMHO, that connection is Shaolin plain and simple. How, when and why the connection exists is what is intriguing to me although any answer is highly speculative. On the surface level there seems to be a connection between HFY, TWC and Weng Chun which I believe is Shaolin BUT on a deeper level the training methodologies and curriculums are TOTALLY different with their own unique identity.
Thank you for taking the time to reply to Canglong with your understanding from the exposure that you’ve had with HFY (mainly photos and second hand knowledge). Please allow me to explain that we’ve had many TWC students and sifu’s who have had first hand experience with GM Gee and the HFY system so my comments are based on their feedback and observations… nothing more, nothing less.
The video that you make reference to when Master Meng is performing SLT is what we refer to as the San Sau version and not the standard version. I’ve also heard that there are several versions within TWC as well. One example would be in the opening move where the punch comes from the center. Most WC lineages next move is a Huen Sau before retracting the arm. In the HFY standard form we perform a Chum Sau after the punch before retracting the arm.
It is very difficult, IMO, to analyze movements from photos which represent a moment in time… but if that is all you have it’s better than nothing. Although the SLT versions have been said to be very similar those in the know who have seen the HFY Chum Kui say that it is totally different. Are there some moves that may be the same or look similar, sure there can be. But I would have to point to the training philosophies that are much different.
In an attempt to provide some substance I would like to point out some of the differences that I see in both systems.
Kui Sau
HFY teaches Kui Sau based on the Mo Ying Di Yeng theory (no shape hit the shadow theory) with many different drills and exercises as part of its standard curriculum.
Chi Kui
From Kui Sau we move into Chi Kui which deals with Sui Sing and Dai Sing Tin Yan Dai which shows the connection to the Shaolin Temple and Weng Chun. Both Weng Chun and HFY have Heaven, Human and Earth concepts although their manifestations are a little different.
Chi Sau
In HFY Chi Sau is another progression and not the end all WC exercise. In fact, there are many different concepts and principles behind the HFY Chi Sau like Centerline and 5-Line Chi Sau.
The 5 stages of combat has more meaning than the 5 stages themselves and involves the understanding of the Sam Mo Kui concept. Sam Mo Kui allows a student to progress from the wondering stage to a stage of awareness to a final stage of focus.
In the first level (SLT - Wondering) the training methodologies focus on time, space and energy allowing the student to understand the HFYWC formula.
In the second level (CK - Awareness) the training methodologies focus on Tin Yan Dei (Heaven, Human and Earth) concept. HFYWC Tin Yan Dei focus on Deiu Ying (facing) and Jeui Ying (tracing) on the surface level. The deeper understanding comes with the knowledge of Sui Sing (little wheel) and Dai Sing (big wheel) Tin Yan Dei. Chi Sim WC, according the VTM, also used the Tin Yan Dei concepts although with a little different focus. Their focus is on the Da Sam Sing concept.
In the final level (BJ – Focus) the training deals with not only the five stages of combat, which is considered surface level and not an accurate definition but at a deeper level, trains us how to deal with the 5 elemental energies (water, fire, wood, metal, earth). In addition to the standard WC weapons HFY also has the “Bamboo Needles” which come from the time of the Red Bandana Boxer Society (Hung Gun Biu) and is typically taught only to disciples.
In regards to a secret school in Hong Kong, I can tell you about an incident that happened over 4 years ago when a group of Wing Chun practitioners from a non-YM lineage came from China to pay their respects to GM Garrett Gee. They claimed to come from Red Boat Wing Chun in Hong Kong and wanted more information at that time from our Grandmaster.
Why is it that some people on this forum (no need to mention names) continue to deny that Chi Sim is really Wing Chun? HFY accepts Chi Sim as its Wing Chun cousin with the commonality of in depth Kui Sau training methodologies, the Tin Yan Dei (Heaven, Human, Earth) concept as well as Chan philosophy from Shaolin. From my hands-on experience you cannot deny the connection. There are some that want to play word games but to the HFY family, Wing Chun = Weng Chun. The words might be different but the Shaolin background and the integrity of the art is the same to our HFY family.
For once and for all I would like to state that the so called “entry technique issue” is foolish and created by certain cowardly individuals who were only interested in deliberately stirring up Wing Chun politics in the past. For us, we use the Saam Dim Yat Sim concept associated with Deui Ying and Jeui Ying along with Jong Sau theory which defines how HFY engages it’s opponent. It’s not about a single technique but the consistent use of concepts and principles which define our action. In order to really understand HFY you need to understand “saam dim yat sin dihng yuhn sahn ngh douh lihk muhn fa kihn kwan” or Three points one line, establish the original nature; 5 Ways and 6 Gates, influence the universe.
The intent of my post is not to derail your thread but to provide some insight into your quest. As you know from your meeting with the Weng Chun sifu, there is nothing better than hands-on experience from someone in the know. My I suggest that you speak with your friend Miguel Hernandez who has had first hand experience with HFY as I’m sure you respect his unbiased opinions as he actually spent 3 days with GM Garrett Gee in NYC last month.
Good luck on your quest.