CHAPTER III

THE CHAN FAMILY PROPAGANDA

Much has been said and written about the history on Choy Lay Fut but the Chan Clan branch elders have always maintained that their story based on their CHAN family martial arts heritage (pertaining to the legacy of their great family ancestor Chan Heung) tells the only true story behind the founding of Choy Lay Fut because it has been documented in the CHAN family’s historical records and therefore cannot be disputed. In order to establish credibility so that Chan Heung would get full credit for the development of CLF martial arts and therefore be recognized as the founder, the Chan Family clan have scripted a scenario that would justify their claims – that their great ancestor created CLF and used the name “Hung Sing Gwoon”. (Read again “WHY WAS THE ‘HUNG SING’ NAME USED?”) for his school in the Chan Family Ancestral hall in King Mui village where he first began to teach martial arts to his fellow clansmen (of the same FAMILY NAME).

*The logical explanation on how, why and when the “Choy Lay Fut” name surfaced is explained on this website’s “The Choy Lay Fut Controversy” in Chapter IV – I don’t want to have to keep repeating it in detail so please read Chapter IV again. This will clearly explain the logic for using the name “CHOY LAY FUT” as told by the Chan Clan and the Hung Sing Clan historians. It is for you viewers (CLF and non-CLF) to come to your own conclusion as to what is logical, believable or truthful.

"Let the people be the judge of their own convictions.
Only the mind of ignorance needs to be set free!"

It is one thing to have stories published in martial arts magazines and books and on websites and another thing to use the internet’s PUBLIC FORUM to make unsubstantiated claims to misguide others, make unwarranted false accusations and to slander and insult others – all for the sake of inciting a “war of words” on the internet.

SEEK CLARIFICATION IN PERSON,
NOT ON THE NET!

I have already made it very clear TO MY CRITICS that I detest exchanging e-mails and that the Public Forum is NOT the place to vent one’s anger and frustration over “internal” matters that should be confined to private meetings between elders and authoritative spokesmen of the CLF fraternity – NOT DISGRACEFULLY BROADCAST THE FEUD TO THE WHOLE WORLD! Since it’s obvious you do not wish to seek clarification IN PERSON, don’t bother to seek it through my website as you have proved yourselves to be unworthy “opponents” in this personal conflict and “Regulator” was right when he told you – “what do you have to lose if you are so correct? You have the opportunity to prove Master Lacey wrong once and for all yet you decline his invitation to speak of this openly. If you have such good arguments, accept the invitation and settle this the old fashioned way, or do you think HONOR, INTEGRITY and COURAGE are ‘fabrications’ as well?”

Sifu Dave Lacey counter -attacking from the side with the
Buck Sing CLF's long range charp chui (pantherfist) punch :::: 1975

You smugs have no ethics and your “GUNG HO” tactics is nothing more than an “easy way out” to avoid confrontation by using the Kung Fu forum to conduct a dispute. This may be your agenda – not ours! My sifu Kong Hing and I don’t believe in playing pathetic mind games on the internet’s e-mail forum. We believe in proper protocol and that’s why we have “called you out”!

We are ready to face you but all you “internet warriors” are prepared to do is to hide behind your computer screen like the big mouthed backstabbers you are for you haven’t got the guts to confront us to defend your flimsy allegations against us. As “Regulator” said, “YOU CANNOT BACK UP YOUR WILD CLAIMS, YOUR ALLEGATIONS HAVE NO FOUNDATION, YOU HURL INSULTS FROM BEHIND YOUR COMPUTER SCREEN AND WILL NOT “FACE THE MUSIC!”

BOLD WORDS REQUIRE BOLD DEEDS

About 7 months ago I advocated that the Chan Clan representatives meet with my sifu, elders and myself in Hong Kong (the HUB of CLF martial arts) face to face to settle this ongoing dispute. I also stated that the meeting would be video taped and documented by reporters – that way no one can distort the truth in an attempt to conceal anything. Since joseph and others have repeatedly said that the Chan Family members have proof and evidences to support their claims to make us look like fools, then what are they waiting for? Why won’t joseph and his fellow elders agree to meet with us face to face?

It’s not surprising that everyone I’ve spoken to (those who have viewed my website) have come to the same conclusion as to why joseph or his supporters are not willing to meet with my Buck Sing and Hung Sing elders! Didn’t joseph tell us he’s not afraid of the Buck Sing and Hung Sing elders in Hong Kong?

HAIL THE NEW PROPHET OF CLF!

We all know how much joseph loves to read and study Doc Fei Wong’s book on the history of CLF and that he and his supporters are clutching to the book because they believe it to be the Choy Lay Fut bible! Could it be that they are finally looking up to this great CLF historian and “grandmaster” as their newfound spiritual leader and savior?! You mean to tell us that this messiah (who was born and raised in S.F?) of theirs knows more about the Hung Sing CLF history than the Hung Sing people in Futsan?! What makes Doc Fei Wong an authority of the history of CLF?

ADVOCATE FOR HISTORICAL REFORM

It is known that Doc Fei Wong’s first trip to Hong Kong was in the LATTER 1970’s and that he went there to seek martial arts tutoring from other CLF masters after his first teacher Lau Bun in San Francisco died in 1967. In Hong Kong he found his second teacher Wu Yuen Chou. It is known knowledge that Doc Fei Wong only became a student of Wu Yuen Chou in the latter 1970’s (Doc Fei puts it as 1976) and if this is true then Wu would have been 73 years old (he died in 1997 as age 91 according to Doc Fei Wong). By 1979 Master Wu Yuen Chou had basically retired from teaching CLF because of his age and had devoted himself to practicing and teaching Tai Chi. Doc Fei Wong has also told us (Sept. 2002 “Inside Kung Fu”) that besides CLF, his teacher had studied 10 OTHER KUNG FU STYLES - Northern Shaolin, Hop Gar, Lung Ying Mor Kiu, Gee Yim Moon, Preying Mantis (Tong Long) Hsing-I, Pagua and Tai Chi Chuan. So one must be curious as to just how much Choy Lay Fut did Doc Fei Wong really learn from his elderly teacher Wu Yuen Chou who also taught him Yang Tai Chi, Wudang Sword and Chi Kung.

Wu Yuen Chou also sent Doc Fei to learn more CLF forms from Masters Wong Ying Sum, Tong Sak and Wong Gong in Hong Kong and Wong Ha in Vancouver, Canada. Could it be that master Wu Yuen Chou was limited in his knowledge of CLF and sought to broaden his martial arts horizons by learning 10 other kung fu styles!? Doc Fei Wong admitted that his 2nd sifu Wu Yuen Chou only taught him the “practical part of CLF” so how much did Wong benefit from this elderly teacher (who had learnt 10 different kung fu styles) aside from being taught Yang Tai Chi, Wudang Sword and Chi Kung? Wasn’t it Doc Fei Wong’s ambition and wish to become Wu Yuen Chou’s student to further his knowledge of the CLF martial arts by learning more CLF forms from his 2nd teacher after his 1st Hung Sing CLF teacher Lau Bun passed away in San Francisco?

And what did Lau Bun tell him about the Hung Sing CLF history (or was it never revealed to him)? If Doc Fei’s si-hing (fellow senior student of Lau Bun) Jew Leung believes the Hung Sing CLF history to be true (that Cheung Hung Sing created CLF), how come Doc Fei dispels it as a “fictional” story?! They were both afterall senior students of Lau Bun so how can their account of the CLF history clash? Is it because after Doc Fei Wong had studied under Wu Yuen Chou and other Chan Clan CLF teachers he got brainwashed by their Chan Family propaganda and therefore “switched camps” in the hope of carving a notch for himself under the Chan Clan Family tree of hierarchy?

FACT OR FABLE?

It is not hard to guess where DFW (and other Chan Family CLF historians) gathered his collection of fabled stories on Chan Heung’s legacy – like the “Sinbad Journeys” (to America, Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaya in either 1839 or 1864, depending whose version you want to believe) and the amazing “Tiger Killer Saga” (depicting a tale of life defying feats performed by a 60 year old Chan Heung in which he “supposedly” killed a huge tiger with his bare hands and presented the tiger skin to the San Francisco Chinatown’s Chan Association!). From past conversations with the late elders of Hong Kong’s CLF fraternity we have managed to trace these “fables” to the late Wu Yuen Chou (Doc Fei Wong’s sifu after his visit to Hong Kong in the late 1970’s). It is known that Wu was a prolific writer belonging to the Chan clan and that he had traveled extensively to SE Asia. It was suspected that he had penned some of the “Sinbad” stories for Chan Heung’s journal to make it look like history!

INTERESTING NOTE

*It is very interesting however, to note that all their so-called “historical facts” derived from ONLY ONE SOURCE – the CHAN CLAN! Other than that, there’s been no “OUTSIDE” records or evidences to support their claims – WHY?!