 08-28-2010, 03:11 AM |
Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 45 |
|
|
09-16-2010, 07:47 AM |
Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 39 |
|
lots of smoke screen and noise. Lin is not giving credit to Ngo Cho Kun Lo Han Kung Fu.
This is the same teacher brought up in the Ngo Cho thread back in 2007. I hear lots of people say Lin has Lo Han Kung Fu mixed with Vikoga wing chun. Its clear that from Ngo Cho Kun that one of the 5 ancestors was Lo Han. In Indo styles are mixed, so maybe Lin sees nothing wrong with making up stuff and telling as truth.
http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=825600&postcount=27
Quote:
There are, of course, other teachers from different lineages. However, I don't know about them enough to recommend their instructions. These include (there could be more):
- Bonifacio Lim (Beng Kiam)- NJ area
- Ben Asuncion (Beng Kiam) - LA, CA area
- Mark Wiley (Bengkiam) - CO area if I am not mistaken.
- Jose Parman (I forgot) - San Jose, CA area
- John Graham (Chee Kim Tong) - Mobile, AL (more of his students in AL area)
- Kenneth Lim in VA area. He advertises more as a Wing Chun and Hokkian Eng Chun styles, but one of his teachers is from Gui In Lam lineage.
- Kam Lee (A Malaysian lineage that I forgot) in FL
- Lo Ban Teng group as represented by Lo Siauw Gok's lineage is ready to start teaching in USA. Lo Hak Lun, Lo Siauw Gok's son states that hopefully it will happen in less than a year.
It is unethical for me to comment on Bonifacio |
I dont buy it.
look at there family tree from 2005 which you maybe aware of.
http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58349  |
09-16-2010, 03:40 PM |
Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: USA Posts: 1 |
|
all that typing and still no ider what the seminar was about, or what was taught...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron McKillip  This system has been around since the 1600's and to have made it to 2010 is a true testimony to not only it's authenticity but to its true essence of Chan and the true nature of Shaolin Wing Chun. |
Are you sure this is right, or is someone rewriting history (again)? Does Aaron not understand the teaching at these seminars? Maybe that is why there is not talk of what was taught...
I thought Sifu Lin was very clear that HKB eng chun was NOT to be confused with Shaolin wing chun??
Per Sifu Lin: "The last word went to Sifu Lin, who stressed his role as current leader and the successor of the system; emphasizing on how HKB is its own unique identity, taking time to point out the importance of maintaining the HKB identity by not classifying it as something which it is not, and subsequently clarifying that HKB Wing Chun is not the same as Shaolin Wing Chun, in which HKB Wing Chun should never be called Shaolin Wing Chun.HKB Wing Chun is HKB Wingchun"
 |
09-16-2010, 09:03 PM |
Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 4 |
|
Aaron,
There are concerns in the martial arts world about the Black Flag Wing Chun stories. One of which was brought up on other forums. Why did your Sifu Benny Meng, VTM curator, Meng’s Martial Arts director, forum admin, forge a director’s workshop announcement and signature on February 25, 2010, 03:35:02 am? See forum threads below.
http://www.vt4um.nl/index.php?PHPSESSID=ol1ak58j641qdih23mernhbtd0&topic=859.msg4825#msg4825 reply #17 and
http://martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1318869&postcount=17
Aaron, as an individual standing in front of the Martial Arts/ Wing Chun world answer this:
Is this an ethical issue?
Is the VTM curator really incompetent and lacks the ability to present authentic information?
Are the VTM curator’s actions harmful to fundamental ethical principles and professionalism?
Does the VTM represent an institution or an individual acting on his own?
Does this action alone present a conflict of interest between Meng’s Martial Arts and the VTM?
Forgery is a crime. Fundamental ethical principles and professionalism is respect!
-Jeung |
09-18-2010, 11:14 AM |
Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 39 |
|
Black Flag Eng Chun's orginal family tree revealed and Ngo Cho Kun's Family tree
Ngo Cho Kun (5 ancestors) has a male/female history, like Black Flag Eng Chun. I'll show you how as best I can. Kenneth Lin's (Salim) martial arts background is known in Indo before he left. He learned Gui In Lam's Ngo Cho Kun lineage and then picked up Vikoga Wing Chun from Chung Che Man. When Lin came to America in 2005 he promoted Ngo Cho Kun and Vikoga Wing Chun as Ngo Cho Eng Chun Male/Female family tree. When he heard of VTM's promotion of Shaolin Wing Chun he started to change his story in the Indo forums and advertisement in America. He attached Shaolin Wing Chun stories that VTM promotes to make a transistion. Today Kenneth Lin is trying to erase his Ngo Cho Eng Chun male/female family tree and Gui In Lam's Ngo Cho Kun background by calling it Black Flag Wing Chun. He does this to declare himself grandmaster of Black Flag Wing Chun and promote his teacher Tio Tik Kwie's status. What does VTM gain from this? Money from magazine articles, books and Shaolin Wing Chun 3-halls program. There is always a motive. Sergio gains advertisement promotion for his large schools in Europe. But this is at the expense of Ngo Cho Eng Chun and maybe others.
Original Black Flag Wing Chun Male/Female branch:
Kenneth Lin called his kung fu "Ngo Cho Eng Chun USA Group" when he came to America but today in 2010 he has transitioned to Black Flag Wing Chun. His family tree had a male and female branch as he published originally. Lin promoted the male/female version of Ngo Cho Eng Chun USA Group. Lin himself at first stated to the VTM: “The system as it was passed down was preserved in two forms: a Male aspect and a Female aspect.” Today his orginal promotion has changed. Today he declares himself as the grandmaster of Black Flag Eng Chun while erasing the female side, Vikoga Wing Chun, from his family tree and Ngo Cho Kun from the male side.
Where did Lin come up with a story of male/female for his Ngo Cho Eng Chun? Lin used Ngo Cho Kun's family story for his self promotion and transistion to Shaolin Wing Chun Black Flag. You see Ngo Cho Kun has a story about a 6th ancestor who was female, I'll show soon. But first, here is Black Flag Wing Chun's orignal explaination in its transistion from Ngo Cho Eng Chun's male/female history.
Ngo Cho Eng Chun/Black Flag Eng Chun's male side (Lin's original):
For the male branch, Lin had Ngo Cho Kun 5 male ancestor family lineage and teachers. That's what he wanted us to believe. (Today this is Shaolin temple 5 Flag Wing Chun)
Ngo Cho Eng Chun/Black Flag Eng Chun's female side (Lin's original):
For the Female branch, he labeled Ng Mui & sometimes Yim Wing Chun. Lin learned various Wing Chun under Victor Leow's Vikoga Wing Chun family tree. (Today this is Shoalin Red Flag Wing Chun or some color)
So you see, Kenneth Lin originally married Ngo Cho Kun with Vikoga Wing Chun to call it Ngo Cho Eng Chun USA Group in 2005. This is where the Ngo Cho Kun's family story fits into his Black Flag Eng Chun promotion. You see Ngo Cho Kun is known to have a male/female story.
Ngo Cho Kun Male side:
Ngo Cho Kun has mixtures of 5 Ancestor styles: White Crane, Monkey, TaiZu(Grand Ancestor) and Lo Han (18 Immortals) and Tat Chun (Bodhidharma's method).
Ngo Cho Kun Female side:
Mysterious Female Fist (6th Ancestor)
Facts:
Kenneth Lin's Ngo Cho Kun family lineage is from Gui In Lam.
Kenneth Lin's Wing Chun family lineage is from Vikoga Wing Chun.
Kenneth Lin called the marriage of Ngo Cho Kun and Vikoga Wing Chun, Ngo Cho Eng Chun.
Kenneth Lin has never denied learning Vikoga Wing Chun or Ngo Cho Kun.
Ngo Cho Kun is known to have a 6th female ancestor, Mysterious Female Fist.
VTM promotes a super secret Shaolin Wing Chun 3-halls ("Dim" for Fukien dialect effect) program.
This is the male/female story of Ngo Cho Kun! May the truth shine over Black Flag Eng Chun and the changing stories of Kenneth Salim, Benny Meng and Sergio!!! |
09-23-2010, 04:38 AM |
Registered User | | Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO USA Posts: 4,738 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron McKillip I just wanted to take a minute to thank all of you for spending so much of your time advertising HKB Eng Chun!! Keep up the good work. Everything you write just helps us. Thank you.
Aaron McKillip |
That's an interesting perspective -- "everything you write just helps us".
It's funny because I have a similar view, the more you guys write, the more you expose yourselves and the fraud. So keep up the good work. Thank you. |
09-23-2010, 09:28 AM |
Junior Member | | Join Date: May 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 1,088 |
|
So what is really being said here?
Is Black Flag WCK a system created by Kenneth Lin combining VIKOGA WCK of Victor Leow, and Ngo Cho Kun and other Fujian Fist?
BTW, Mark Wiley is a Sifu in Ngo Cho Kun and resides and teaches in PA, not CO. |
09-23-2010, 10:38 PM |
Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 39 |
|
For the simple minded:
Kenneth Lin is really 5th or 6th generation Yip Man student. He is trying to be something he’s not. Wing Chun is Wing Chun.
Not for the simple minded:
There’s a difference between “creating and being honest” and “creating (stealing) and making up history as you go”. The power of Ngo Cho Kun (White crane, monkey, TaiZu, LoHan and TatMo) is in Lin’s mixed Kung fu. Wing Chun does NOT have Sam Chien Po. Ngo Cho Kun has Sam Chien Po. Ngo Cho Kun is a great system. The praises from Lin and Meng’s student is really about Ngo Cho Lohan. Yes it is exciting especially for westeners. But if you call it what it’s not and mix it with new terms, other lineage’s Kung Fu, it’s a lie, it’s fake. Black Flag Eng Chun says the nucleus is LoHan 18 hands, it true because it’s made with Ngo Cho Lohan Kung Fu, then Vikoga Wing Chun and then some Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun formula and maybe Sergio will add in some Chi Sim. Lin made himself grandmaster of a made up Wing Chun. Really he is a 5th or 6th a generation Yip Man student.
This is the power of Ngo Cho Kun, parallels what Lin’s /Meng’s students describe but they are blinded by the romance. GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE D@MIT! http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=827231&postcount=45
Quote:
NCK consists of 5 styles, sort of melded into 1. The 5 styles each contribute their respective characteristics, which include the physical movements/strokes, the footwork, power generation, internal Qi development & deployment.
for e.g.
White Crane, BaiHe whipping, explosive power, fluid & fast arm
techniques, some footwork, mostly long &
mid-distance, with some close-in techniques.
Strikes are mostly with open palms, fingers and
phoenix-eye.
Monkey, HouQuan quick, tight footwork, tight,close-in defense &
attack, locks & takedown, a lot of quick sneaky
techniques. Hands are in 'monkey paw' (open
hand with thumb tucked in). Has superior use of
body-mechanics, allowing smaller frame persons
to take larger opponents. We have low squat
stances, a few tumbles and somesaults, but far
lesser than other monkeys styles I've seen.
TaiZu very hard linear style (hardly any circular
movements), using the forearms & hands as
knives. Lots of power chops and slices, and
spearhand thrusts. Emphasizes a very upright
and 'face front' posture with very tight & solid
defences and attack, mainly at middle-distance,
with some long and short techniques.
LuoHan Similar to TaiZu with a very bold, upfront
posture, but with powerful but more 'looser'(less
close-in) movements, both circular and linear;
and a different power generation system. Mid to
long distance.
More use of fists.
TatMo Does not contribute physically to the forms, but
contributes the breathing, meditative and Qi
development aspects, to complement that of the
above arts. |
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment