15/09/2026
Le origini…
To Whom It May Concern,
The Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun Department of the Eternal Spring Institute wishes to clarify its position concerning Sifu Wayne Yung and his Snake Crane Wing Chun Association in Hong Kong.
Two distinct matters must not be confused: historical research concerning Wing Chun Kuen and the practical teaching and transmission of Snake Crane Wing Chun.
1. Regarding the History of Wing Chun Kuen
There is substantial common ground between the historical research of Sifu Wayne Yung and that of Sifu Sergio Pascal Iadarola. The Eternal Spring Institute has recognised the value of Sifu Wayne Yung’s historical work; indeed, Sifu Wayne Yung was invited to give a lecture at the Institute concerning the history of Wing Chun Kuen.
In this specific field, Sifu Wayne Yung’s research broadly aligns with a considerable part of Sifu Sergio Pascal Iadarola’s own historical research and understanding.
However, this historical common ground must not be interpreted as evidence of practical affiliation, technical agreement, shared transmission, teaching cooperation, or lineage connection concerning the practice of Snake Crane Wing Chun.
Historical agreement does not establish technical identity.
2. Regarding the Practical Art of Snake Crane Wing Chun
For the avoidance of doubt, the Eternal Spring Institute and its Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun Department have no practical, technical, organisational, teaching, or lineage affiliation with the Wing Chun taught by Sifu Wayne Yung.
Sifu Sergio Pascal Iadarola has known Sifu Wayne Yung since 2014. During that time, he has not studied Sifu Wayne Yung’s practical Wing Chun, nor incorporated Sifu Wayne Yung’s method into his own training or teaching.
Had Sifu Iadarola wished to study, adopt, or integrate that method, he would have had ample opportunity to do so. He chose not to do so for clear and well-considered reasons.
The practical understanding of Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun within the Eternal Spring Institute is fundamentally different from the practical interpretation presented by Sifu Wayne Yung.
Our Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun follows the teachings and transmission of Sifu Wong Kwong Lun, who studied during the 1960s and early 1970s under GM Law Chiu Wing and his sihing Lee Yuen and was part of a small and select group within this particular transmission.
Accordingly, any suggestion that the practical Snake Crane Wing Chun of the Eternal Spring Institute is the same as, derived from, affiliated with, represented by, or technically connected to Sifu Wayne Yung’s practical Wing Chun is incorrect.
At the same time, we have no difficulty acknowledging the area in which common ground does exist:
Historically, there is considerable overlap.
Practically, the two approaches are fundamentally different.
3. Our Technical Position
Based on our study, training, and understanding of the principles preserved within our transmission, we consider the practical material publicly demonstrated by Sifu Wayne Yung to differ substantially from the Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun taught at the Eternal Spring Institute.
In particular, based upon the practical material available to us, it is our considered opinion that Sifu Wayne Yung does not demonstrate a sufficient practical understanding of the following principles as they are preserved within our transmission:
諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging
彈勁 Taan Ging
發勁 Faat Ging
Our position is not merely that Sifu Wayne Yung uses different terminology or expresses these principles in a different style.
We do not recognise in his publicly demonstrated method the understanding, training, or functional expression of 諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging, 彈勁 Taan Ging, and 發勁 Faat Ging as these principles are preserved within our transmission.
These are not minor details, supplementary concepts, or optional interpretations. They are major structural, energetic, and functional components of Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun.
In our assessment, Sifu Wayne Yung’s practical expression of 諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging differs fundamentally from ours, and we do not believe his demonstrations show a sufficient grasp of 諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging as understood within our system.
Likewise, we do not recognise in his publicly available practical material the expression of 彈勁 Taan Ging or 發勁 Faat Ging as these principles are preserved, trained, and applied within our transmission.
These principles are assessed through structure, timing, body connection, issuing and receiving methods, control of force, and the ability to apply them under genuine contact, not merely through appearance, terminology, or theoretical explanation.
Our position is therefore that Sifu Wayne Yung’s practical Wing Chun does not demonstrate the 諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging, 彈勁 Taan Ging, and 發勁 Faat Ging that form essential parts of our Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun.
4. We Encourage Direct Comparison
We encourage anyone genuinely interested in Snake Crane Wing Chun to investigate the matter independently.
Watch Sifu Wayne Yung’s practical demonstrations and compare them carefully with the demonstrations and training material of the Eternal Spring Institute.
Examine the structure, body mechanics, movement principles, training methods, applications, generation and transmission of force, and overall technical approach.
In particular, consider whether 諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging, 彈勁 Taan Ging, and 發勁 Faat Ging are genuinely understood, trained, and expressed, rather than merely named or claimed.
Where possible, experience both approaches directly. Compare the practical methods, training principles, and applications through genuine contact with practitioners representing each approach.
We are confident that the practical differences will become apparent to experienced practitioners who make a genuine and informed comparison.
5. Why We Are Making This Statement
We would ordinarily have no reason to comment publicly on another practitioner’s method.
However, private messages written by Sifu Wayne Yung concerning Sifu Sergio Pascal Iadarola and the Eternal Spring Institute were subsequently made public by a third party in a YouTube video.
Those messages included direct criticism of our Chi Sau, our understanding of internal martial arts, the practical effectiveness of Sifu Sergio Pascal Iadarola’s methods, and aspects of our understanding of terminology and transmission.
Because these remarks are now in the public domain, they may create confusion regarding the nature of our relationship with Sifu Wayne Yung and may give the impression that our practical method derives from, depends upon, or should be understood through his interpretation of Snake Crane Wing Chun.
That impression would be incorrect.
We therefore consider it necessary to clarify our position openly and respectfully.
Our intention is not to reproduce private correspondence unnecessarily, nor to answer personal criticism with personal criticism. Our purpose is to make clear what we teach, where our transmission comes from, the technical principles upon which it is based, and the areas in which our understanding differs fundamentally from that of Sifu Wayne Yung.
The fact that historical research may overlap does not give any individual authority over another practitioner’s practical transmission, nor does historical agreement establish technical dependence.
Where criticism concerns the practical quality, technical understanding, or effectiveness of our method, we believe the most appropriate response is not personal argument, but transparent comparison.
The material of both sides can be examined.
The methods can be experienced.
The results can be judged.
6. Our Position
Our position is straightforward:
Historically, there is significant common ground between the research of Sifu Wayne Yung and Sifu Sergio Pascal Iadarola.
Practically, the Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun of the Eternal Spring Institute is fundamentally different from the Wing Chun taught by Sifu Wayne Yung.
The Eternal Spring Institute has no practical, technical, organisational, teaching, or lineage affiliation with Sifu Wayne Yung’s Snake Crane Wing Chun Association.
Based upon the practical material available to us, it is our considered opinion that Sifu Wayne Yung misunderstands 諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging as it is understood and preserved within our transmission. More importantly, we do not recognise 彈勁 Taan Ging or 發勁 Faat Ging within his publicly demonstrated method at all.
This distinction is particularly relevant because Sifu Wayne Yung has criticised Sifu Sergio Pascal Iadarola by suggesting that 彈勁 Taan Ging and 發勁 Faat Ging were taken from Tai Chi and Fujian White Crane. Our position is precisely the opposite. Within our transmission, 諸/堵勁 Jyu Ging, 彈勁 Taan Ging, and 發勁 Faat Ging are essential and integral concepts of Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun itself. They are not borrowed additions, but principles that must be correctly understood, preserved, trained, applied, and transmitted as part of the art.
These distinctions are not contradictory:
Historical research may overlap, while practical transmission remains fundamentally different.
We encourage everyone to investigate for themselves, compare the material objectively, experience the training directly where possible, and make their own informed judgment.
Sincerely,
The Eternal Spring Institute
Internal Snake Crane Wing Chun Department
