Printer Friendlier Version

Introduction
Should I attend an Anthony Robbins Seminar?
Sid Sofos, Martial Arts Instructor
Andrew Sofos, Martial Arts Instructor

 



Introduction:

What is a cult? Wikipedia defines it as the following. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult

BlackSpy would describe a cult as a group of people, club, society, organisation or company that conditions, grooms, manipulates people and which also brainwashes people into non-mainstream views (to make their leaders feel better about themselves) or whatever values they claim to represent. Which gives people half truth and does not tell the truth; which has a powerful leader or central figure who all members aspire to be. Who condition members or attendees to hold the same world view for the benefit of the continuation of the cult; who often use their control, pressure, bullying or influence over members to extract sums of money, which is really what many cults are all about, and to do what they say; and who make it difficult to leave. Cults tend to prey on those that are naive, easy influenced, weak willed or those partially indoctrinated already. They may well lure in members with 'carrots' and promises of great things and power or enlightenment and promises of boosting confidence etc. Cults often give the impression to members that they are there to help you and they are if anything doing you a favour. Examples include Christian cults such as The Branch Davidians, Children of God, The Church of Christ. Other examples include The Church of Scientology and Freemasonry. Freemasonry is examined in the Religion - Other section. Clearly some groups are more clearly 'cults' than others, but many groups display cultish characteristics. Not cult ever admits to being a cult. Clearly cults must have some redeeming features or attractive aspects or no one would join them to start with.

The International Cultic Studies Association's web site is shown below. It contains reference material and support groups for ex-members of a wide variety of national and international cults.

http://icsahome.com

London's Cult Information Centre (CIC) web site is shown below.

www.cultinformation.org.uk/faq.html

Below are some other miscellaneous web sites about cults, secular and religious.

www.religioustolerance.org/cultmenu.htm

www.howcultswork.com

Below are two examples of cultish groups of varying degrees, that BlackSpy has personal experience of.

The first, Anthony Robbins and his self-development seminars, are clearly not a 'cult', but have certain manipulative qualities and encourage participants to part with large sums of cash when they are at their most vulnerable and 'conditioned'. Perhaps this is done with good intentions! One may regard intensive self-help conditioning as a great learning tool or brainwashing depending on which way you want to look at it. BlackSpy lists the pros and cons of the seminar below.

Also mentioned are two instructors of a now defunct martial arts school in London, The Wing Chun Boxing Academy, which was most definitely a cult. BlackSpy is merely relaying his personal experiences of these two. The detail regarding The Wing Chun Boxing Academy covers both flaws in techique, cultish type behaviour and also information relating to both Sid and Andrew Sofos and their character and exploits. It is not intended to be small minded, petty or bitchy, but is included to provide an insight into how they were, good and bad, and why things were the way they were, and why things escalated and got out of hand.

It is clearly a grey area, but the spirit of the information here is not point scoring and personal vendetta, but to point out facts that people may want to consider when evaluating these organisations and individuals. This page is clearly at odds with the positive (hopefully!) theme and concept of the rest of the web site, and BlackSpy may take a view to removing it completely in the future.

BlackSpy respects people's right to make up their own minds and that they may not agree with everything written on this page, but has tried to be as impartial as possible, mentioning both positive and negative characteristics. It could be argued that by writing about these examples, BlackSpy is doing them a favour by focussing everyone's attention on them and providing free advertising, which is not of course what BlackSpy wants to achieve. If you focus on a person in this way, what may often happen is that rather than question them, you may actually give them significance, and perpetuate their power over people and fear amongst people (which gives them power). It could be argued that it is 'bad karma' or the last thing you want to do if you subscribe to the concept of the 'law of attraction' (i.e. focus on what you don't want, then you get what you don't want rather than what you actually want!) And for victims of such cults, focussing on them and continually reminding oneself of them can be extremely negative and prevent closure. This is the trouble with the conspirazoid movement, it perpetuates notions of governments being all powerful, and makes readers of these theories feel helpless and disempowered, which is supposedly the opposite of what they intend to achieve. Whether the actual theories in question are true or not is an entirely different matter! If these cultish people were just ignored and not mentioned, and therefore not talked about, then it might be better for everyone. But where such people are widely praised, then it is one's duty to inform others of both sides of the story. The purpose of this section as stated is to just state the facts for those with an academic interest in these areas, current members, those thinking of joining, and ex-members who wish to share personal experience and affirm their suspicions and feel listened to.

BlackSpy does not intend this page to be interpreted as an attack on those people who are members of these cults or organisations, or who are affiliated with them or associate with them in any capacity. People are entitled to their own beliefs, ideas and values. It is really intended to take a stark look at the organisations themselves, that present themselves inconsistently or dishonestly. BlackSpy personally wishes any member of a 'cult' the strength to break away and do his own thing and not be controlled, conditioned or influenced by anyone in this manner. BlackSpy respects the right of people to belong to whatever club or organisation that they want to, as ultimately it comes down to freedom of choice.

back to top

 
Should I attend an Anthony Robbins Seminar?

BlackSpy thinks so. Unleash The Power Within (aka UPW) is an excellent seminar with many useful tools. However, it is far from perfect. Is it possible to give a perfect seminar covering both psychology and health issues? Is it indeed possible to create a perfect web site covering both areas?! With 6000-8000 people attending each seminar, BlackSpy believes that people should take in some other views on the seminar and make up their own mind. BlackSpy lists the pros and cons below (based on 2002-2006 course content) based on his own values, beliefs, observations, knowledge and experiences. This is a general discourse raising some points that could perhaps improve the seminar and reduce its weak or questionnable areas.



PROS:

• Excellent psychology teaching, you cannot afford to miss out on this! Much of this can be learnt from reading Tony Robbins' books or listening to his CDs, which is far cheaper than attending a seminar. However, the spirit and enthusiasm behind the writing does not come across so strongly in the books if you are not familiar with Tony Robbins' style. This is where the CDs have an added benefit. But attending a seminar is the full immersion and intensive learning experience. For those lacking motivation it helps to you practice what you are learning, whilst in an optimum frame of mind for maximum impact.



• Great atmosphere



• Fun



• Terrific enthusiasm and energy



• Great and convenient way to learn



• Great sense of unity amongst crowd, not experienced in many other places



• Tony does his best to connect with all kinds of people of all beliefs and backgrounds and largely succeeds

CONS:

• The need for rest and mental calm (focusses on left brain controlling and rushing around completing tasks and goals to attain happinness - a western/american/neurotic philosophy. Of course, achieving tasks and goals is very constructive, and this really has to be emphasised for those unmotivated members of the audience, but too much energy in this one area can burn a person out and plunge them into ill-health. It is important to instill beliefs that one is happy with oneself and accepts oneself the way one is at all times, to be at peace with oneself, but simultaneously motivating people to help them get what they want and to be who they want to be. Clearly it is a very fine balance in terms of core beliefs, and this distinction is not really made very well in the seminar. A Taoist or Buddhist would be in horror at many aspects of the bias of this seminar! Tony Robbins himself has destroyed his own voice through overdoing his seminar circuit. This is clearly not balanced! And he is telling you how to be a balanced person supposedly! Perhaps Tony is the way he is on account of insecurity from his youth, having been very poor and striving wealth and success, and later on having been very overweight and feeling bad about it.



• Although there is a great deal of content in terms of material in the seminar, it is barely scratching the surface in terms of personal development and spiritual growth (which the seminar at points refers to and purports to represent). There are many other speakers out there who cover slightly different material, but go much deeper into concepts of the ego and spiritual development. Tony's seminar presents methods of self-development that rely mainly on goal setting and the ego. The concepts of ego are not presented clearly or made clear to the audience.



• Tendency not to give sufficient examples. Tony has a tendency to on occasion give an example 'so and so', which is not exactly a specific example of a point he is trying to illustrate. Often this may occur when he is making a crucial or important point, and after giving a non-example, will move onto the next point. We of course put this down to enthusiasm. But when making an important point it can lead to confusion or misunderstanding, resulting in perhaps instilling of negative beliefs in a certain area. Theory is all very well, but it is very important to apply it to everyday circumstances, and to give enough examples for each point that the audience fully understands it and its application, and does not apply limits to the idea or concept or indeed totally misunderstand it!



• The approach to learning is 'total immersion' of seminar attendees, hence seminar sessions lasting all day and all evening, sometimes going on into the early hours of the morning. Whilst this may be useful in terms of a learning tool, it is a form of conditioning using repetition of concepts over many hours. Whilst this may be considered a form of positive conditioning, it is conditioning nethertheless. Some may consider this type of training much better than self-conditioning, where the level of excitement is not high enough to achieve good results. This type of 'total immersion' was used to great effect by Adolf Hitler in his long speeches to huge crowds, which were highly repetitive and which would go on all day. Hitler would whip crowds of 100s of thousands into a frenzy. Hitler's speeches achieved a high level of success in terms of getting the audience to think how he wanted them to think (i.e. brainwashing and conditioning).



• Hugely expensive seminars. Is this a way of making you motivated to attend (so you really appreciate it when you have scraped the money together), or is it cynical capitalism? BlackSpy once had a letter in the post offering exclusive front row seats at his seminar for several THOUSAND pounds! Their sales staff use every cheap sales trick in the book to get you to attend. It is good sales technique on their part, up to a point, but hard selling techniques show a lack of respect for your prospective customers intelligence. It is selling at the lower end of the sales spectrum, where the customer feels 'closed'. You expect to be treated with respect and not pushed into anything or to be taken advantage of when it comes to matters of the mind, one's emotions and feelings, and psychology products in general. One likes to think one has made an educated and informed purchase and has not been closed as if one was purchasing double glazing.



• Manipulative. After hyping up everyone in the crowd, at certain intervals in the seminar he tries to sell you further seminars. Now, although this is probably in your best interest, as the additional seminars are often very good, they are also very expensive! And taking advantage of people at their most vulnerable and impressionable, when they hang on your every word, and using your sense of trust to cynically sell them more of your products and to make money out of them is highly cynical! It is not respectful. Most people can see through this and they tend to raise their guards somewhat, which is the exact opposite of what Tony Robbins wants to achieve in the seminar. In the ideal world, one should trust the leader of the seminar 100% and be comfortably and fully engrossed in the seminar experience gaining maximum benefit and not have to worry about him playing mind games with you. Some attendees are however sold on further seminars this way. We are not denying that Tony Robbins other seminars have benefit in them. They are probably excellent. However, they tend to become increasingly more expensive as you 'graduate' through the 'mastery university', especially those seminars held at private health resorts and Tony Robbins' own resort on Fiji. This provides Tony Robbins with increasingly more profit (admittedly from few attendees per event) from his hard core of seminar faithful, who pay virtually any amount of money for further coaching. What value can you put on improving your life? It is a philosophical question indeed. The mindset that this kind of sales technique promotes however is dependency and passivity, that you will be happy/even happier once you attend ANOTHER seminar, and you become reliant on Tony Robbins a little like a crack cocaine user becomes reliant on his continuous drug supply. The diversity of courses and training available is sold in such a way that it provides a 'turn key' solution to every area of your life. It is almost as if you need not read anything else that isn't on the reading list of Tony's seminar notes or attend anyone else's seminars apart from Tony's to learn everything you need to know in life and to be happy. People come to see Tony Robbins as the sole source of figuring out life and being happy. Whilst he may indeed help, there is a great deal of information, tools and experiences out there if you talk to enough people, read enough good books, use your initiative and learn from your mistakes and discover for yourself. There is life outside Tony Robbins! During UPW, you were perhaps confident and certain that what you were learning was really the core skills you needed to further your life and to break out of patterns of unhappiness. You were perhaps quite happy before he mentioned further seminars. Now that you know that you might be 'missing out' on even better teaching if you don't attend some of these additional seminars, you are unlikely to feel quite so good about yourself, what you have achieved and the seminar you are taking part in here and now. There is enough to focus on in the seminar that is of profound importance without distracting and confusing people. Why spoil someone's seminar? Tony Robbins is creating a pain in you, a pain that wasn't there before he started talking about his other seminars. The pain of not attending other seminars and gaining even more benefit. The idea is to motivate you to attend more of his seminars, which directly translates into profit to fund his helicopter and island purchases. BlackSpy is not convinced that selling additional seminars in this way encourages people to think for themselves and to really value and focus on what they are actually at the seminar to learn. It should really be left up to the individual whether he or she wants to attend further seminars, and attendees could respectfully be informed (as opposed to sold) about the seminars at the END of the seminar, not every few hours through the days of the seminar. Or perhaps better still, no mention could be made at all, and information could just be available at a stand only. If you don't focus on the here and now of what you are learning, you may not value it as much or may create beliefs about what you are learning which may limit their effectiveness. Or you may not believe that the seminar you are attending is going to be enough to make you happy. Simplicity is nearly always the key to fundamental principles of the mind. The seminar is there to focus on the basics. Let people do this without distracting them with a sales pitch on future seminars! A sales pitch is what you expect at a free seminar, not at a seminar where you have paid a large amount of money for. If you are conducting a participatory psychological therapy/coaching session (which is what UPW really is, it isn't strictly speaking just a seminar where information is imparted), then you shouldn't be trying to sell someone a service or product during your session. Any psychiatrist or psyho-analyst who did this during his patients' appointments would be highly unethical. Clearly the whole way Tony practices psychological treatment on the spot (one of the core concepts of NLP) has changed greatly from his grass roots way of treating and helping people, to his seminars and corporate businesses today.



• Not enough thinking for oneself. Tony Robbins thought for himself to get where he is today and to develop his ideas, and conditioned himself, but then most people he is teaching are being groomed to be like him and share his ideas, not to formulate their own thoughts and ideas, and figure out things for themselves, without being pressured or conditioned by someone else. This isn't what made Tony Robbins who he is. Tony Robbins indeed wants to share his ideas and techniques with his audience, so inevitably there will be an element of 'learning from Tony' and adopting his techiques. The whole idea of the seminar is not to teach attendees a series of dry techniques and not practice them. His philosophy is to get you to practice them there and then in a peak state for maximum effect, and in many places inserting your own content/beliefs/values. So whilst there is an element of thinking for yourself and learning about yourself promoted, he is in a sense grooming you to have a particular spread of personality characteristics and accepting his values, beliefs, priorities and techniques. Different NLP seminars have different styles and ways of teaching the audience techiques and getting them to practice them and feel them and experience them in action, and getting people to loosen up and lose their inhibitions. Tony has one way of doing it. The optimum teaching method is clearly very difficult. But there are many other methods and styles out there. Attend some other seminars and compare the experience, the techniques learnt, how well you retain them and how well you retain your own sense of independence, identity and values.



• Hero worshipping. Every seminar you go to, you always find a significant number of hero worshippers, who really love Anthony Robbins. Tony often invites members of the audience to ask him a question. When these people ask him a question, shamelessly in front of 8000 people, they say that their life problems will be over if they move to California and live really close to Anthony. This is not a joke! This kind of thing happens at nearly every event. Now, any great teacher is bound to get a few lonely, insecure people lacking confidence and better judgement, who hero worship him. What an decent person should do is to dispell their image of him being 'the Christ' and to say that he's just like any other guy, and to cut it out! But he doesn't say that. He never quite spells it out! He makes a half hearted attempt to dispell his hero image, but at the same time, when he tries to connect with the crowd and have fun with them during his water pistol session, people go crazy and want to touch or get as close to him as possible as he is 'so cool'. Perhaps what Tony is getting out of this exercise isn't quite the same as what the members of the crowd are getting from the experience. He needs to be less naive. Perhaps he is trying to be respectful. Perhaps not. He almost encourages hero worshipping with pictures of him all over the place and his entourage get the crowd going as if he's a superstar, and treat him like he's a pop star when he comes on stage. At the end of the day he is looking to promote his business and his business is all about him. Showbiz and psychology don't mix. Of course, everyone likes a little attention. But I don't think any other serious psychologist would encourage fans and hero worshipping in the same way. It is highly dubious in BlackSpy's opinion.



• The flip side of his attempt to create religious unity is that he creates a wishy washy 'religious' experience, encouraging the faithful to thank God, but the faithless to thank themselves or life generally. For many people, attending the seminar has many things in common with attending an excellent religious service, except that each person inserts the crucial religious beliefs themselves into the blanks. This is a way of focussing people on common ground, but it also creates a wishy washy, ecumenical type experience, which ignores all fundamental tenets of belief that do not conveniently fit in to this experience. Is watering down faiths a good idea? Perhaps. Perhaps not. That is for you to decide. Clearly there is too much division between people of different and similar faiths. People often focus on the differences rather than what they all have in common. But then again, faith is faith! You can't pick and choose the parts you like and don't like! You can't have your cake and eat it. So every approach will have its flaws. Sure, it's great having muslims, hindus, sikhs and christians all praying together, and who exactly are they all praying to? It's like having a group of teenagers, each talking about their favourite group, and none of them listening to what the others are saying, but all agreeing with each other. Have you ever had one of those conversations when you were young?



• Tendency to gloss over core NLP theories, give flippant references to NLP without explaining very much about it at all, and to not encourage participants to study current NLP theory, from where Tony's ideas originated and developed.



• Extremely bad dancing by 'cheerleaders' on the stage before Tony appears. You are unlikely to get 'served' by dancing like this! (BlackSpy is just teasing here!) The dancing and music is great and encourages people to feel upbeat before the seminar starts. Many people are too reserved, grumpy or inhibited to get up and just dance at 9am! But it's worth letting go occasionally, preferably more often the better, but not necessarily on demand like a tap whenever you are 'told/instructed/socially pressured' to do so!



• One other significant part of the seminar that is highly dubious is the final day, with Joseph McClendon III. He is a nice guy, highly entertaining and funny. And BlackSpy assumes he has little leeway in the content of the Living Health lecture he presents, but it really is a mixture of useful and incorrect information. Tony Robbins takes the approach where he talks to the best of the best in all fields, and comes up with universal principles that apply to all people. His ideas have changed over time, they have evolved. This is a great approach when it comes to psychology, but when it comes to 'health mastery', there is no one diet that is perfect for everyone. This is the fundamental difference between the two areas, which isn't quite understood by Tony or seminar attendees. People attending this seminar are hearing Tony's current thinking on diet which might well change in a few years time as he has more experience. Who knows! The word on the street is that the content of Living Health hasn't gone down that well during the first half of the millennium, and that the content is being significantly revised for the fall of 2006 onwards. Tony's entourage seem to be required to have exactly the same views as him in all areas, including health. Whatever happened to using one's brain? BlackSpy would advise anyone attending the UPW seminar to simply skip the last day, or conversely attend but put him on the spot and talk to other attendees and try to educate them. BlackSpy summarises his views on this part of the seminar below. The trouble with the seminar is that because you have spent 3 days building up a high level of trust with Tony Robbins and being hyped up, you will believe every word Joseph tells you during his presentation on the fourth day, whether it is good or bad advice. Tony Robbins may be a genius at psychology, but would you ask a soldier for romantic advice? Would you ask your doctor for recommendations about pop music? Would you ask a mechanic about dieting? You cannot be an expert in all things. Seek out the wise and experts in their area of expertise, don't expect them to have wisdom in all areas of life! The patterns of the mind are quite simple really. However, the body is a completely different kettle of fish and is extremely complex. Living Health is well intentioned (probably) but is in specific areas highly irresponsible. Let's hope the course content is improved.

'Living Health' - Health Mastery or Health Destruction?


The useful parts of the presentation are:

• Food combining - balancing food types for optimum digestion



• Proper hydration



• Proper diaphragm breathing for oxygenation



• Cardiovascular exercise tips for health



• Toxic components of vaccines



• Dangers of overeating and undereating



• Toxicity being a major contributing factor in diseases in general

The erroneous parts of the presentation are:

• Heavy focus on raw food and the consumption of large quantities of raw green vegetables every day. This approach clearly does not work for everyone. For every person who thrives on this diet, there is someone else who has had their health destroyed by such a diet. Particularly those with a poorly functioning digestive system to start with, which is perhaps half the population in varying degrees. Tony and many Western nutrition 'scientists' have studied nutrition for a very short period of time, relatively speaking. The Chinese and Indians on the other hand have studied the human body for 5000 years. Why not ask them? Perhaps it might be a bad idea to try to reinvent the wheel without consulting their expertise and flagrantly ignoring it. Any good Chinese acupuncturist or herbalist will tell you that consuming much raw food is bad for the body. Of course, everything should be in moderation! Ayurvedic Medicine will tell you the same thing. Perhaps a pattern is emerging here!



• All fats are bad for you. This is NOT correct. The body REQUIRES a balance of Omega 3, 6 and 9 fatty acids, which are essential for proper bodily functioning. Avoiding fats and eating plenty of carbohydrates will make you fat in any case, and will encourage an unhealthy digestive system. The living health booklet does mention that a diet too high in fat is bad, but doesn't really go into what fats are better than others in the amount of fat that is 'healthy'.



• All dairy products are bad for you. Everyone is different, to make such a blanket statement is ridiculous. Of course, a person's exact diet depends on their overall health and specific issues they may or may not have (e.g. candida etc), allergies and intolerances. Raw milk is shown to be very beneficial in many people. A difference could have been explained between raw milk, quality whey products and natural yoghurt, and pasturised milk, sugary yoghurts and cheap whey products.



• Emphasis on low protein diet (see below under 'glaring omissions').



• Joseph said that he did not have time to discuss any of the health supplements he was taking (presumably quite an important part of his regime?), but he had plenty of time to show overly emotional repetitive videos about the meat industry. Arguments against eating meat or dairy products used gross generalisations, emotional arguments and somewhat incorrect facts in places. For examples, eating beef was compared to eating excrement on account of the type of bacteria present in tenderised meat - which perhaps constitutes a very small proportion of beef actually consumed. In addition, just because a beef burger is brown does not equate it to being like 'sh*t'. Joseph also compares chicken to drinking urine or 'p*ss' as it contains uric acid. What he in fact means is purine, which the body converts to uric acid. However, he prefers to use the term uric acid as he can compare it to the term 'urine' for those lacking in imagination. He also states that eating eggs is bad for you as you are eating something that comes out of a 'chicken's ass'. Sure, he was joking, and he means the hen's vagina, but clearly he should avoid exaggeration to make a point, and focus on presenting the facts and letting people make up their own minds. Some of the less educated may believe that eggs come out of the anus. Misinformation as above only detracts from the credibility of the speaker and actual genuine information being imparted - if you can't believe one part, it casts doubts on other areas. Vaccines are criticised for their toxin content, but also because of the method of preparation as it is considered 'gory'. Whilst this may be a valid reason for avoiding vaccination, preying on people's conditioned squeamishness and baby-like nature (and inability to see carcasses and corpses), for some people, not everyone is so squeamish and emotional about this subject. For them, solid scientific reasons about what it is bad for THEM are valid. Joseph's arguments for avoiding meat and dairy products are based on these foods having a 'face'. Graphic pictures of slaughter houses are all very well but this assumes that they are all the same. Whilst he tries to shock people into giving up meat and dairy, the Living Health booklet does not and states that one should cut down on one's meat intake to a moderate level. Overemphasising is not clever. Consistency leads to a greater level of uptake and comprehension. Joseph also shows pictures of the fat content of blood after eating a beef burger. As described below, certain fats are 'good' and others are 'bad', and if one was to eat a meal with beneficial fats, e.g. oily fish or coconut oil, then the appearance of the blood would be similarly 'oily'. Being 'oily' temporarily is part of the digestion process and is not necessarily bad just because it looks gross. If one was to open up the average person's body, then most people would find it distasteful, despite the fact that one carries it around with them all the time and it is part of you. That does not mean the human body should be avoided or that it is 'bad' because there is blood and guts! It would be wiser to show what a healthy body looks like inside, and what an unhealthy one looks like (with fat covering major organs and displacing organs from their normal position, fur lined arteries, bloated colon etc.) Being scared of what the human body actually is is rather childish. One has to differentiate between the ceasing of life from a sentient being and what one is doing to a sentient being whilst alive, and the actual physical form of a carcass or body which is a thing.

The glaring omissions of the presentation are:

• The dangers from eating too many grains (especially processed cereal based foods, like white flour/bread), i.e. (simple carbohydrates)



• The dangers of eating too little protein (not for dietary needs but to keep up high levels of stomach acid which are needed to eliminate parasites and bad bacteria from enering the GI tract.



• Seminar focusses on getting people to eat less meat/fish and protein in general (i.e. promoting vegetarianism or veganism, which there is nothing wrong with if done properly, but many of the dietary pitfalls amongst, non-vegetarians, vegetarians and vegans are not mentioned or highlighted).



• Describes one very severe way of detoxing only and does not mention any others. No naturopath would assume one detox method works for everyone, and certainly would not recommend starving oneself for 10 days on a diet of raw green vegetables (especially in cases where individuals may already be very slim or may have impaired digestive systems). Perhaps people detoxed like this in the stone age! It seems that the 10 day detox programme is geared mainly towards weight loss (for more obese people).



• Risks of mercury amalgam fillings.



• Vitamin or mineral deficiencies.



• Digestive problems such as low enzyme/stomach acid production, bad bacteria, parasites and candida. These things affect everyone to an extent, but more severely people with ME and fibromyalgia etc.



• Probiotics (not mentioned at all -only scaring people off natural yoghurt as it is an evil dairy product)



• General conditions like ME and MS and what can be done to help them using natural methods - this affects up to 10% of the audience to greater or lesser extents.

BlackSpy has been reliably informed that Tony Robbins has decided to update the Living Health part of the seminar, which unofficially has been due to the increasing number of complaints about this section of the seminar. A revised Living Health seminar is scheduled for Q3 2006 onwards. The UPW seminar may not however be continuing for very much longer in any case. Catch the seminar whilst you can!


A Final Word on Anthony Robbins Europe:

The promotion and ticket sales company in Europe for Tony Robbins company seminars is Medwestern Lifestyle Events Ltd (formerly known as Tree Event Management Ltd (www.TonyRobbinsEurope.com), based in Cyprus. This company is just like any other, it is selling you a product. There is nothing wrong with commerce and selling good products to people who want them. This is what drives the world's economy. Contrary to what their sales people tell you however, they are not there to be your friend and they don't love you, even if they say they are. They just want to sell you as many seminars as possible and maximise their profits. Indeed, some level of real friendship may develop or exist or coincide, but ultimately the core goal is to make moeny. If their sales people don't make enough money, they get fired, just like anywhere else. And when they make a sale, they get a commission. Unfortunately, any good sales organisation should be familiar with its own products and embody the values of it products. Whatever the brochure or catalogue says, they should honour. This is being professional.

This can't be said however about Medwestern Lifestyle Events Ltd in many cases. They do not share the values stated by Tony Robbins in his own seminars. They certainly are not aware of the sales techniques and 'genuine, sincere and caring salesmanship' espoused by Tony Robbins in his Power to Influence Seminar as a whole, although there are exceptions (sales people who are nice guys and give you good customer service, even if they don't quite practice what they are selling). As you can see in the influence section, which certain parts BlackSpy can credit to Tony Robbins ideas in his now defunct Power To Influence (PTI) seminar, a good sales person builds rapport with his potential customers and embarks on a lifelong, sincere friendship. He is there to genuinely help the customers by fulfilling a genuine need with a good product or service, and meeting real needs in a caring and genuine manner.

A bad sales person is not sincere and allows the customer see through their words and feigned sincerity. He allows his greed for commission and desire to retain profits to be visible to the customer. He reveals that he is not really interested in helping you, but just making as many sales as possible and maximising profits, regardless of who you are and what you really want.

Medwestern Lifestyle Events have chosen their sales model, and instruct their sales staff on what deals and packages they should offer, and how the tickets can be sold. Buy one, get one 'free' is often their chosen style, but invariably leads to massive ebay sales at low prices which is unfair on the people who paid full price for their tickets (either buy one get one free price, or individual ticket prices).

Medwestern Lifestyle Events' sales team in many cases consists of below average sales staff who ride off the back of the enthusiasm of seminar attendees, make out they are fully acquainted with Tony Robbins' philosophy and teachings in their communications, and use every cheap trick in the book to sell you more seminars. Such poor sales technique and fixation with profits rather a genuine care for their customers is surely contradictory to Tony Robbins' own values? Surely Tony Robbins' seminars are 'solutions' rather than low denomination products similar to 'double glazing', and require a more intelligent solution selling approach? Perhaps they ought to attend one of their own seminars.

BlackSpy doubts that Tony Robbins is particularly bothered by all this, as he nets an enormous income through regional sales from his affiliated sales organisations. Does he really care about you as he says he does in his seminars? Why does he repeat his seminar almost word for word each time, without improving or changing the content significantly? Why does he not address many of the areas discussed above on this page? These are not exactly secrets amongst seminar goers. Would he allow a rather incompetent 'Living Health' segment to be taught to seminar goers if he was really did? Is Tony Robbins perfect or a 'mere mortal' trying help people who is subject to moments of selfish behaviour, greed, narrow focus and making errors of judgement/incompetence just like the rest of us? Who is to say. You decide. BlackSpy is not sure you can ever expect perfection from a psychology or health-related book, seminar or web site, but the spirit of continual improvement, honesty and willingness to listen should be there. In a sense it is irrelevant if we personally like everything about Tony Robbins, as we are only interested in his seminar and how we experience it, but BlackSpy believes it is important to have a high level of respect and to trust the person giving the seminar to avoid cynicism and inhibitions creeping in and preventing you from getting the best of the experience (for your money). BlackSpy encourages people to attend NLP and other good psychology seminars that they like the sound of (including perhaps UPW) and to learn and use what works best for them.

back to top
 

Sid Sofos, Martial Arts Instructor:

http://grandmastersidsofos.com

BlackSpy trained with 'Master' Sid Sofos back in the early to mid 90s. In total training with Sid's school and his brother Andrew's school for 5 years, attaining assistant instructor status (BlackSpy was near top of the class during his latter training years). Sid's school was called Fatshan. Andrew's school was called Shaoshan. The academy which both schools belonged to was called Wing Chun Boxing Academy. Sid trained new students up to senior instructor level. Andrew's school was designed for beginners and intermediates only, as Andrew was himself a student of Sid in his senior class at Fatshan. The top students at Shaoshan would then be selected to move over to Fatshan to train with Sid. BlackSpy trained at Shaoshan for roughly 4 years and at Fatshan for roughly 1 year or so.

Whilst at the academy, BlackSpy secretly attended a number of seminars by actual students of Yip Man, including Grandmaster William Cheung and Grandmaster Yip Chun, son of Yip Man, to experience other styles of Wing Chun. After finally leaving the Wing Chun Boxing Academy, BlackSpy joined another school (a different style of Wing Chun Kung Fu - affiliated to Samuel Kwok, in 1996) and was almost bettered at Chi Sau by a student had only been training for just 3 weeks! Sid/Andrew's chi sau was lacking in break out moves and has a forward energy that rendered it highly detectable. The instructor of the class was very happy when I walked that night for the first time and said that I had done Wing Chun for 5 years and wanted to train, as his class was comprised of beginners. We did some chi sau and sparring, and he took me apart. I didn't understand what was going on as he was terminating his strikes. I then explained how I'd trained before, and he said that yes we could do it this way (went into brief and rapid freefighting), but he said there was no point as it was good for flow but wasn't actually achieving very much. It was clear at this moment how the structure and technique BlackSpy had learnt was highly flawed. Since leaving, there has happened much with the Sofos brothers, including a big argument and falling out, whereupon the two brothers ceased contact and run separate schools. Some of Sid's senior instructors set up their own schools and called themselves 'Sifu'. Below are some of the issues BlackSpy had with Sid Sofos during his time there:

• Had to pay for all lessons in advance. It wasn't cheap and you ended up paying for lessons you weren't able to attend. BlackSpy was once pushed into buying a video of Sid doing 3 onto 1, which was £40 and lasted less than 5 minutes (and which he'd already seen at one of the kung fu shows on the projector). This was at 1996 prices. BlackSpy bought a 2 hour video including actual footage of Grandmaster Yip Man performing the dummy form for half the price at a martial arts store! Comparative value for money?



• Culture of bullying. Students were forced to go on flyposting runs to put up posters advertising the school. Sometimes you had to run from the police! BlackSpy was caught by the police on one occasion. Reminiscent of 'public school fagging' but worse. Students were groomed to be overly aggressive as this was perceived as confidence and strength, but in reality made for insecure people. Senior instructors were encouraged into dubious, violent professions such as being bouncers or debt collectors.



• Wannabe army style atmosphere. Students were bossed around and shouted at frequently. The 'Master' demanded respect from his students rather than earning it. The Master would bully his instructors into how he wanted his school run, and the instructors would in turn bully the students into how to act, and how to treat their teacher. Gifts and donations for presents were occasionally demanded rather than invited.



• Sid and Andrew groomed/brainwashed students into being overly aggressive and sharp. To the point where students were hyper-stressed. High on adrenaline to imitate natural and relaxed confidence. But it is no substitute for the real thing. Real confidence and belief in what one is doing. Where one doesn't have to convince oneself all the time about it. Although 'stillness' was mentioned in classes, the classes were not conducive to this at all, and the focus was on pushing students to the point of cracking up and throwing them around without their resisting, rather than breaking down their technique and improving it in a relaxed and positive atmosphere. No relaxed confidence.



• Sid stopped formal tuition with any knowledgeable Sifus back in the 80s (together with his brother Andrew), mainly because he'd fallen out with all his former instructors, and he decided to create his own style. Sid's exact Sifu is not certain as he has never revealed it or been willing to divulge any information about it, preferring to focus on his 'own style'. Rumour has it that it was Kevin Chan. Being quite a vain person, he decided to change the kung fu to look faster, allegedly inspired heavily by a Randy Williams video he'd watched and certainly influenced by the numerous movies with his action movie idol Steven Segal (copying movies and style, even though it was just movie action choreography and a different martial art Aikido). Segal's on screen moves were choreographed to look good as opposed to being the usual Aikido style. Sid thus coined the term 'Sijo' for himself, which is reserved for the originator of a style, (i.e. creator of Wing Chun style, Ng Mui at the Shaolin Temple ONLY!) According to Lakis Phillipou, one day Lakis mentioned that he had seen Andrew with a Randy Williams video. Lakis asked if he could borrow it. Andrew then came up with some 'cock and bull story' about the video having been stolen from his car, his car having been broken into as he had left the video out on the back seat or similar, and thus was unable to produce the video. Was this indeed true? Or was Andrew being evasive as he did not want Lakis to see that he had 'stolen' moves this video in question? Who can say.



• Sid in the mid to late 80s, Sid trained with comptemporary Wing Chun practitioners Savvas Georgiou and Lakis Phillipou. They were good friends. One day, Sid and Savvas came up with a new way of sparring, later termed 'freefighting', which they thought was faster than regular chi sau or sparring. They showed Lakis, who was horrified at what they'd created. Freefighting is sometimes referred to by ex-Sofos students as 'slap fighting', which is a style of sparring, initiated with an abstract rotating pak sau drill, and which can be very fast. It doesn't however involve terminating many of the moves and is an exercise in presenting the forearm to the opponent and 'pumping the centre line' (using moves that encourage fast flow and the continuation of that flow), without actually really doing anything. The idea is to gain the centre line but not do anything with it, whereupon your training partner, then reacts to that move by whatever comes to the arms/mind, to regain control of the centre line. Etc. Often once you had gained the centre line, if the partner didn't respond instantly, you would leave your hand where it was, and sometimes signify that you could hit them, without actually doing it. Finally the partner would respond and the flow would continue. Flow rather than actual practicality was the goal. What you train, you will do 'in anger'. If you don't train something, you won't be very good at it (terminating moves in an unpredictable scenario). There was no purpose in the freefighting, no progressive closing of the range, so most bouts end in a pointless sweep as the practitioners can't think of anything else to do. This is a very crude sweep and no very sophisticated in martial arts terms. The purpose behind each move was missing and the structure of the move was flawed. If one considers what series of moves would occur in reality, as soon as one strike is landed, a logical and rapid series of strikes occurs, closing the range culminating in a poweful close range strike (utilising the fact that the opponent is unable to strike you because of your positioning, range and how you have trapped their arms etc.), which will drop the opponent to the ground (if he hasn't dropped during the preceding strikes). The concept of maintaining the range and exchanging so many blows, and finally sweeping, is abstract and not related to the reality of a fight. Often during freefighting, the better practitioner will 'slap' the training partner around the face a few times, to indicate that they need to keep up their arms or maintain control of the centre line, rather than actually landing proper strikes and doing a logical sequence of range closing and pinning moves. Good Wing Chun training is to drill in lightning reflexes for practical situations and reality. As freefighting was seen as dynamic and exciting looking, the practice of slowly practicing a preset series of moves was seen as boring and not performed. So the result is that freefighting resulted in one concentrating on easier to perform moves and not really gaining much proficiency in sets of moves that came less naturally. Sloppiness was therefore ingrained into most students. So rather than practising every conceivable permutation and practical sequences of moves (in a realistic scenario where the opponent doesn't keep regaining the centre line after repeated hard strikes), and building total confidence in them, the focus is on fluidity and 'freedom' and not paying attention to where one's real weakness are in move sequences. Perhaps the focus being on repeated strikes on expecting the opponent to continue fighting as effectively is based on the assumption that the actual strikes have very little effect on account of the impractical stance and the elbows being too far in. In a general sense, one had to acclimatise to 'freefighting'. When BlackSpy first saw it, he thought it was rubbish and that he'd never end up doing that. And that he'd only land strikes properly and work on his structure. But ironically he did later on. It was only after leaving the academy and viewing other WC styles that he realised that his original impression was correct. Freefighting looks good only to those accilimatised to it in the school and to those ignorant people who have no idea about martial arts. Freefighting is performed with the concept that one is training with one's hardest opponent, and that anyone else one fights for real will be easy to tackle. Perhaps this is true for the most rudimentary of opponents but not for an experienced streetfighter or anyone with martial arts experience. In the latter scenario, one might wish one had actually trained to land strikes on the opponent.



• Freefighting or chi sau only ever flowed when there was a 'spring'. This was Sofos speak for each practitioner exerting a slight force forwards in his arms that met with the other person's similar forward force, so that it anyone dropped an arm etc, then the other person's arm would 'fly' forwards (but to a point of course apparently) into a strike or other move. However, relying on this, and relying on the relaxation of the opponent to be able to actually shift his or her arms is a flawed way to train and divorced from the reality of a fight. The need for relaxation to actually shift the partner's arms at all showed a lack of using the body's actual natural structural strength. This was also evident in that sweeps never worked when one's partner was resisting, which was something virtually all students noticed in classes. If one resisted, then the instructor or practitioner would say something like 'Don't resist, as I can just hit you'. But if that was the case, why didn't they hit you earlier? Wasn't that the whole point of freefighting? If you are not going to hit the other person, then why bother freefighting at all. And indeed, the person resisting the sweep could equally 'just hit' the other person, as they were preoccupied with trying to make their sweep stick. Surely freefighting should be more like sparring, with constant attempts to land strikes on the training partner. If you don't practice this in class, it won't come out of your body when you need to use it in 'anger'.



• In 3 onto 1 practice, it would only work if you punched in a certain way (punching presenting the whole forearm, not really going for target). The persons attacking would all do the same style lunge, with a very wide stance and most of body weight over the front leg. Punches weren't aimed to strike as such but more was a presentation of the body to be swept or pinned. If the odd punch was aimed at the defender's head, the whole strike and lunge was so predictable it was very easy to block. If attackers weren't swept or dealt with immediately, they would often just stay in the lung with their punch extended in the air and wait to be swept. Many people who were unfamiliar with martial arts or street fighting would see this as highly skilled. Practising 3 onto 1 at another Wing Chun school was totally different. Instead of having to wait 6+ years to do it, we started after 6 months training, with chaotic and unpredicatable attacks, aiming to land strikes and outwit the defender by any means available.



• During freefighting or 'counters', quite often if person A lands a strike, he leaves it there, and waits for person B to acknowledge that it is there. Person A may emphasize that it is still there, but thrusting it forwards or slapping Person B around the face. When Person B finally wakes up, then he would perform a move to 'block' that strike, to connect with Person A's forearm and to regain control of the centre line. This is however a flawed practice, as there is no realism. A punch held out is no longer a punch and has no meaning. If a strike has landed, the person attacking does not leave it there and there is no point blocking something that has just landed. This is not strictly true if it is a grappling move, but otherwise it applies. Much of the Sofos training involves strikes that are held out in front of a person, who can do as he wishes with the person's arm. In a real fight, people jab, they do not punch and leave their arm out. No training BlackSpy ever had at the academy involved dealing with people jabbing straight and direct punches. The only street fighting training involved predictable and wide swinging hooks, involving the same arm eact time (i.e. predictable, telegraphed).



• Another bad habit picked up by most practitioners in freefighting is the tendency to chase the hand and chase a connection/stick to the other person's arms. It is thus possible to outfox the training partner by drawing their arms out from the centre, as they seek to stick and 'cover' themselves against your moves. But as you draw the person's arm or arms out, you know what they are going to do, and you move around their arms as they make their move, or you just go straight for the centre with a strike. Training a person to stick to the other person's hands is not always wise and is a form of restrictive conditioning. It has its place clearly, but it should not rule one's technique.



• A real fight only lasts a few seconds. A kung fu bout similarly shouldn't really last more than five seconds or so. Freefighting artificially prolongs the bout in a somewhat abstract manner. Sweeping is an irrelevant concept often, as the person who lands the first strike usually has the advantage as the person being hit loses their concentration or strength for a brief moment, enough time for the attacker to pin them or strike them again and close the gap. After being hit several times, the defender may well be unable to fight back with any conviction, and may drop their arms and open themselves up for a final strike. This is where the attacker can use their positioning to leverage their whole body weight into a very powerful strike, for example, to the ribs, which usually drops the opponent. Having the visually put the person on the floor during training with a sweep, because you can't hit them very hard, is rather abstract. Certainly, in some instances, you can use a person's momentum to throw them to the floor, but it should be not used all the time.



• The Academy never really taught the concept of a feint or diversion in an opening attack. These are often used in fencing or martial arts like JKD. In Wing Chun, they can either be destabilising moves, like treading on the person's front foot as they move backwards (causing a wide stance and surprise etc.), or moves that destabilise (causing arms to drop or distract the person) by causing pain, for example running your leg down the front of their shin, kicking the shin. Once the person has experienced severe pain, they are usually much easier to engage.



• The bong sau/punch drill was performed with a backfist rather than straight punch to target, rendering the direction of the punch upwards and not forwards and being totally useless in a fight.



• Certain 'freefighting' strike moves were totally ineffective and lacked a sense of reality. For example, sometimes an instructor would land a (side) chop on your stomach. Whilst a chop is effective if striking soft tissue such as the neck, which has no structural protection, landing this move on the stomach would not be very effective! On occasion students would land a 'fook sau' on their training partner, as a terminating strike. This is a good way to break your wrist or to damage the veins on the top of your wrist. A fook sau is not a terminating strike move but a block and precursor to a hoong sau (wrist roll - like a fencing move) and then a strike or a lock, for example.



• Sid and Andrew used a table to fight on, to promote close quarter fighting - this was inspired by The Prodigal Son martial arts movie. When fighting on the ground, it was performed in a circle, in a similar fashion. This does not necessarily mean that this type of training had no value, but it was not derived from 'secrets' handed down by their previous teachers. Adherence to the circle or table was often at the expense of realism and coping with different scenarios/ranges.



• Sid and Andrew claimed to use the concept of a triangle, which all Wing Chun uses, but the application was flawed. The concept is keeping the arms in line with a triangle between the shoulders and the point of furthest reach in front of one (in the centre). However, in Sid and Andrew's Kung Fu, the elbows are not in line with the sides of the body and the sides of the triangle, but are kept in close to the centre line (so they cannot be used in an arm lock apparently). And often too close to the body. The disadvantage of this is that the arm loses its structure and the moves have no power. But shifting the elbow out slightly (in line with the actual triangle) and by ensuring the elbow is always at least a fist's length away from the torso, the power of moves can be greatly increased. This is what Bruce Lee did.



• In addition, most Wing Chun employs a fighting stance whereby the torso is more or less square on to the opponent, allowing the practitioner to use both arms at their full range if necessary. Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do used a fencing style stance, whereby the person was side on. The reason for this is that his attacks were based on speed and the element of surprise and comprised of a single strike that was designed to hit the opponent before he could defend himself. Sid and Andrew however applied this to Wing Chun, and decided to create a bizarre stance. It was officially 60/40 weight distribution, but in reality it was more 80/20. It meant the student was leaning back and almost falling over during footwork drills, was quite immobile, and had no power. It also meant that the stance was very narrow and unstable. Putting more weight forwards radically improves the stance, power, stability and manoevrability. A good strong stable stance should allow high manoevrability, but also provide a solid platform for which arm techniques can root from. It provides an ease and effortless of performing arm movements and provides nature structure and strength support to the arm movements. This is what is missing in the 80/20 stance where one has to try much harder to perform the arm movements and one has no power. Power often comes from tensing up in such cases or adopting a wider stance (and hope no one notices). A wider stance with a more central weight distribution feels more natural, and when you perform it, it makes sense to the body and feels good. Any good martial arts style should feel good naturally and give you natural confidence. A narrow, unstable stance keeps you struggling and your body does not feel like one unit. One feels like the ground has been pulled from underneath one and the strike has little to push itself forward from. It is like trying to fight someone in a swimming pool who is standing on an underwater ledge or steps, whilst you are treading water. In addition, copying Bruce Lee's JKD, they made the Wing Chun stance side on too, so that not only was the student leaning back and off balance (in case someone tried to sweep his front leg) and less able to move than if he was in a more 60/40 or 50/50 stance, but also he was turned sideways with his back shoulder hunched down and the head tilted to the side. This was conducive to back and neck ache but also not conducive to allowing both arms to reach the opponent or to effectively defend. It made movement very difficult. Blocking with the back hand was only possible when a strike was almost on the body, and did not allow a wide range of defensive hand movements. The stance was almost like a sick joke, making life as difficult as possible for the students, so that presumably, when they were later 'allowed' to adopt a normal stance, it would seem much 'easier'. Why not adopt the correct stance from the beginning? Sid never practised this ridiculous stance, so why should the students?



• Andrew and Sid copied a number of ideas from Bruce Lee, often applied incorrectly. Andrew had a copy of the book Wing Chun Do by James W. DeMille, one of Bruce Lee's senior students, in his office and a few training aids that BlackSpy recognised from this book, that he never saw him use or mention in front of students. How much of the techniques of the above stance was 'handed down' to Sid and how much was copied from books or videos is a matter of debate.



• BlackSpy actually trained with one of Andrew's instructors, Mark, after BlackSpy had left the school. Mark had not trained in years and was amazed at BlackSpy's new found skills. BlackSpy had attended some other martial arts classes (wing chun), and demonstrated to Mark that using the same hand techniques as Sid/Andrew taught, but by widening the stance and making it 50/50, his power and technique were greatly improved. This Mark acknowledged at the time and found very interesting. BlackSpy attended two seminars with Mark, including Grandmasters Yip Chun and William Cheung (I am not 100% sure about the latter seminar) where we both noted the footwork used by different practitioners being different to the Sofos style (i.e. more 60/40 or 50/50 with wider stance). Later on, Mark rejoined Andrew's break away school as an instructor, and it is likely that the stance in Andrew's style of Wing Chun has improved mysteriously since then. This may also be on account of Andrew's dealings with Sifu Lakis Phillipou and his basic understanding of his style.



• Sid and Andrew's footwork was not very mobile, apart from the weight distribution. With the exception of 'walking' or 'darting' forwards and backwards, the back foot never moved. In walking or darting, the back foot was supposed to remain on the ground and dragged as part of the movement. This resulted in a kind of inertia, accentuated by the fact that most of the body weight was over the back foot. It was therefore a real effort to try to drag this back foot along the ground. In would be harder still to do so on the street wearing grippy trainers on tarmac for example, and virtually impossible wearing trainers and standing on grass, compared with kung fu slippers on a well polished floor in the studio. This inertia would often lead to the upper body moving out of synch with the lower body, thus destroying the power generated from rooting into the ground and punching from the feet. The concept of co-ordinated hand movements was a case of 'more is better'. A walk forwards move, where one would bring the back leg through the centre line and place it out in front, using the hips for power, and accompanied by three punches was not very powerful. This was partly because the weight was too far on the back leg, but also because there was no half step at the beginning or end, and because there was no power in the first two punches, as there was no stability of rootedness in the stance. The last punch is really the only punch that would count, and its power was sapped by having performed two punches just immediately prior in the middle of the move. Whilst training, practitioners often felt these 'machine gun' punches to be very weak and ineffectual, especially when hitting pads held by a partner. Other Wing Chun styles only perform one punch with a walk forward, making this punch count. A walk backwards move, where one would bring one's front foot backwards and place it behind one but keeping the other foot still, would be combined with three punches (to swap arms to feet the same arm same leg out in front) was even less powerful. It makes no dynamic sense to be punching whilst moving backwards as there is no power from the root of the stance and one is taking momentum away from one's punches with the body. In other Wing Chun styles, one simply swaps arm as one walks back (ending with a half step of the foot that remained still) in preparation for the next move. Clearly the three punches were included to look good, regardless of the reality and practicality behind them. Only the dart forwards and dart backwards had the correct number of punches, even though the weight distribution was wrong and the probably wrong hand was punching first (i.e. being side on, punching with the back arm first (the arm that is furthest away from the opponent), rather than being square on and punching with the front arm (closest arm) first.)



• The shift forward or shift back - essentially a move where one steps out to the side at 90 degrees - always had one foot remain on the spot. This restricted mobility and often put the practitioner too close to the opponent or wooden dummy and slightly at the wrong angle, making him unstable and likely to fall over and bounce off his opponent. BlackSpy later re-learnt the footwork, and the shift forward and shift back was preceded by a half-step of the foot that is shifted from at the start of the movement, and a half-step by that same foot at the end of the movement. The half steps help to drive the momentum of the practioner forwards or backwards depending on the move, allow sufficient space to move around the opponent or wooden dummy to get the right angle and allow for a strong stable position, and also combine a turn of the hips with a thrust of the whole body, creating much more power and unity in movement of the stance/legs/torso and hand techniques. By keeping one foot still throughout the move one is effectively relying on a hip movement alone and there is very little forward momentum, especially as the weight is then almost soley on the now back foot (that did not move in the shift forward). The 80/20 stance also made the movement slower, weaker and more clumsy than it should have been. A similar principle applies to the pivot in and pivot out. Having nearly all the body weight on this back leg that stays motionless, and relying on the hips to turn you around through 90 degrees makes one feel rather unstable and saps all the power from the move, as opposed to using a half-step forward at the end of the pivot which is more stable and has a dynamic forward motion and momentum, and is easier to perform. The correct way to perform the shift and pivot described above make the dummy form better and provide stability and the correct angles. BlackSpy often saw students always falling over and bouncing off the dummy, and not 'blocking' the dummy's arm properly as the footwork was wrong and not moving the position of the body out of the way of the 'strike' enough.



• The dummy form was taught to be fast and flowing, but the footwork was fairly minimal with the minimum of stepping to the side to execute moves, with the result that students would often be almost falling over and being knocked backwards off the dummy when executing certain step/move sequences. The angles were also as a result not quite right. BlackSpy had to relearn all the sections of the dummy form he had learnt from Sofos when he went to train at another school.



• Front basic (front) stance, Sid and Andrew's footwork involved either a shift forwards, or a turn (relying solely on a hip movement for the power). Rarely was a side step incorporated into the footwork when performing punch/block drills, which is optional in other Wing Chun styles, nor was a simple step straight forwards (economy of motion - from one corner of the triangle to a point on the centre line on the opponent) - a proper shift had to be performed where one foot would touch the other or move to the centre line before moving forwards. This way is slower. Wing Chun should be as directm fast and powerful/structurally sound as possible.



• A warm up before each class got underway was employed by both Andrew and Sid. This consisted of a partner holding pads, and the other person closing in and doing 'knees' and 'elbows' on the pads. Then a punch pad was used for punching. The rapid punching was nearly always rather feeble and lacking in power, and the knees and elbows only felt substantial because the partner would push the pad out to meet the elbow or knee. If he or she did not, then the strike hardly had any impact at all. The last part of the warm up was pracitising kicks. Only one basic kind of kick was taught at the academy to most students. This used no knee action, but a nearly straight (slight bend in knee), and a combination of lifting the leg upwards and forwards and rotating the hips. The kick was not initiated from a bent knee to generate the power. There were three different variations on this kick, landing the foot the toes above the heel (vertical), or with toes pointed inwards (45 degrees), or with toes pointed outwards (45 degrees). During the warm up, the training partner would hold the tyre, and the person kicking would kick the tyre repeatedly. There was no real power in this kick, and the person kicking would almost bounce off the tyre if it wasn't a flexible one. Not very practical in self-defence and in a street fight.



• No techniques for falling were taught. Nor for getting up or jumping back up again. Many other martial arts classes teach how to perform rolls and movement whilst on the ground. Sid and Andrew had no real knowledge here. Nor any knowledge about grappling. After landing on your elbows and incurring painful injuries, one would not do it again and try to land on one's bottom/back, in a kind of roll. And get up facing the opponent, but with no fancy jumps or specific techniques. Korean martial arts for example spend much time on rolls on the floor, jumps and jumps off the floor.



• Both Sid and Andrew taught that one should always keep one's eye on the training partner or opponent, even if one is 'swept' onto the ground etc. This is all good. However, it was taught to maintain eye contact at all times. This may be counterproductive as the opponent may try to distract you with their gaze or eyes, and in addition, one cannot tell what the shoulder or arm is doing by looking at the eyes! It is better to look at the top of the torso, and specifically at the shoulders, as any punches or moves are first telegraphed by the shoulders. This allows for the greatest amount of advance warning that a strike or move is going to be performed and by which arm. This is something BlackSpy learnt at a subsequent Wing Chun school.



• The general philosophy behind freefighting is for speed, but also to manhandle the opponent, move them around, slap them around the face, and encourage the training partner not to resist, but to keep using their technique to regain control of the centre line. One is not encouraged to think about attacking the instructor, but simply to passively defend oneself. The concept of surrendering oneself to blows and not resisting and stiffening up, but simply keeping a clear mind and using the techique is part of the 'zen' approach promoted. However, it is difficult to really relax when you are constantly being shouted at and being made to feel guilty about various things. And in addition, the strikes that the instructors land on the students are not real strikes, but rather soft, and in a sense quite pointless, as they don't really prepare the student for the reality of how a fight transpires. And if the student was actually hit hard, they would be rather lost and not know what to do. Hitting people to 'toughen' them up is thus rather ridiculous, and instead it is better to give the student confidence through strong technique and stance. The concept of 'surrendering to whatever abuse is given' was certainly pervasive in freefighting training, but also in a general sense in the school, with students having to take whatever was dished out by Sid, Andrew or the instructors. And never being allowed to resist. Is this training in Buddhism? Or pointless bullying and brainwashing students not to question anything or think for themselves. Freefighting also only ever seemed to work when the other person was relaxed and allowed you to manipulate them physically.



• Sid and Andrew taught students to breathe through their mouth the whole time whilst training, as it was beneficial for 'qi'. There was no particular technique, just to breathe normally. All other Chinese martial arts teach the opposite, that one should breathe through the nose, and to combine the breath with the movement, as a form of moving meditation exercise, to help to generate qi.



• Many other Sifus when asked why one performs a certain techique will be happy to show you why you do what you do, and how performing the technique differently, according to different styles of Wing Chun, would have its pros and cons. Ask the same question of Sid or Andrew or his instructors, and you got a rather defensive response, one that involved showing you that you would be hit (whereas you could be probably hit anyway using the 'right' technique), and no comparison with other styles would be made (presumably as there was little knowledge or will to teach students about the concept of there really being other alternatives).



• Ironically, by bullying students so much, it has the opposite effect of relaxation and results in tension all over the body. A relaxed but energised atmosphere is far more conducive to better martial arts training. Distracting an opponent is a key skill in Wing Chun which was not taught at the Wing Chun Boxing Academy. Sid during the Sadler's Wells kung fu show invited a teenager onto the stage to fight with him. He somehow expected the kid to do freefighting and tried. The kid resisted and didn't move his arms. Sid performed various moves, including a pak sau etc to collapse one of his arms and strike him, but he couldn't shift his arms. He became frustrated as he kept expecting the kid to respond with 'freefighting' and pump his centre line without any explanation. Eventually he lost patience and tried to sweep him (couldn't think of anything else to do) and even that didn't work because he was resisting. Eventually he hit him on the nose and gave him a nose bleed! Very 'controlled'. Very 'effective' technique. BlackSpy has experienced many other styles of Wing Chun that work whatever the opponent and his or her state of relaxation. You don't have to 'force' the move to make it work, if it has natural strength through structure, it will work with no effort at all.



• BlackSpy was asked to help instruct the odd class at Fatshan, Sid's studio, specifically, a women's self defence class and also a children's class. At each class, the chief instructor could see that BlackSpy was hyped up and ready to push the class really hard, as he had been groomed to do with the normal classes, but the instructor took BlackSpy aside and asked him to 'go easy' on the students in these two classes, as they were potentially vulnerable and perhaps a little 'sensitive'. Presumably then the usual amount of hostility and spite that was not acceptable in a women's self defence class was perfectly acceptable for a 'normal' class with a mainly young male membership. On some level there was a recognition that the way of instructing and leading the regular classes was 'bullying' and 'unacceptable'.



• Both Sid and Andrew's schools practised the policy of fining students for any lesser misdemeanours or when someone forgot to bring their uniform. This applied even to beginner classes. A £5 on the spot fine was administered. This was practised to instill discipline in students presumably and to teach them 'respect'. It also conveniently lined the pockets of Sid and Andrew. During one early lesson at Andrew's studio Shaoshan, when it was in his garage (much to his neighbours' annoyance), a beginner student was fined for something (BlackSpy can't remember if it was forgetting his uniform for one lesson or inadvertently leaving his Clash T-shirt at the studio). The expression on the face of the student was priceless. He just looked shocked like 'what the f....?!' He never came back again.



• All instructors and students wore a sash tightly, as it helped with hip movement, and to keep the body as one unit. If one ever forgot to wear one's sash, then one would have no power at all and feel like one's kung fu had gone backwards a few years. Putting the sash on would cure this. Nowhere else has BlackSpy experienced this reliance/dependency on the sash, as different technique and structure has natural strength and does not require it. In addition, in a street fight, you would not be wearing a sash in any case.



• If one considers that Sid learnt Wing Chun from an instructor for 5-7 years only (before he modified it), and that BlackSpy learnt from Sid and Andrew for 5 years (the same as BlackSpy's contemporaries who were roughly of the same standard), then if both styles were equal, then they'd be of the same standard in different points in time. The fact that BlackSpy felt out of his depth when training with beginners from a different wing chun school would suggest that what Sid actually was taught was of a much higher standard than what he subsequently developed himself. In addition, the Wing Chun style was designed to be mastered in 5-8 years, unlike other kung fu styles which took a whole lifetime to master. After 5 years BlackSpy hadn't been even taught the third form or leg drills. The street self defence component of the style was extremely poor and lesser than what BlackSpy subsequently learned in 6 months with Lakis.



• If one thinks about it, many students left Sid and ended up with other Wing Chun clubs and schools. However, rarely if ever did anyone already studying Wing Chun, leave their school to join Sid or Andrew's class. On the one of two occasions this did occur, it was a case of someone geographically relocating and it was the first Wing Chun school they came across. There were students joining who had trained in Japanese martial arts, and this is probably because they had no real experience or idea of what kung fu was all about. The majority of the students were those who had no previous martial arts experience or idea of fighting or practicalities of martial arts. Sid had a habit of losing his senior instructors on a regular basis, and to date, only one remains. In the late 80s, Sid lost all his senior instructors, in somewhat dubious circumstances rumour has it. After the break up with Andrew, many of Sid's instructors left. Of Sid's two chief instructors that remained, one has now left for all of the above reasons. The other, Brian, a 'Master', now remains (true at time of writing in 2007).



• It is likely that Sid's deep insecurity came an event in his childhood when he and his poor parents felt humiliated by some well intentioned friends of theirs wanting to do them a good turn. However, it is likely that he was relatively insecure and lacking in positive self-belief prior to this. Perhaps like many people he was not actively encouraged or praised enough as a child. Who is to say. Only Sid can answer that question.



• The only really good proponents to come out of Sid and Andrew's schools were those that were physically hard anyway and had had streetfighting or other martial arts experience and/or a military background prior, which they used to make their kung fu actually work. Also lack of physical work out (press ups, sit ups, running etc) made the students weak and puny and lacking fitness. Good wing chun requires strong triceps for pushing a punch forwards and also strong abdominal muscles. All good martial arts schools incorporate some form of physical training involving moving one's own body weight into their programme, e.g. press ups, sit ups, dips and/or chin ups. Most students of many years at Sid's and Andrew's schools had no power in their punches or moves. Funnily enough, the one or two students that were physically fit and did these types of exercises in their own time were able to land much harder strikes and had a stronger stance.



• At a Street Self Defence seminar, BlackSpy was scolded in front of the whole seminar for practising chi sau as a warm up before the seminar started. He did this as '3rd Scroll' chi sau training was practised to build up a 'spring', working on footwork etc. Most other wing chun styles use chi sau to practice actual fighting techniques which can practically be used in the street. If chi sau is not a good exercise for self-defence, what is the point of doing it at all?



• Sid and Andrew would not infrequently relay some form of wisdom from past kung fu masters or practitioners and it would sound very impressive. This would have the class really acknowledging this wisdom and paying their respects. However, the knowledge and lessons imparted were rarely actually practiced by the school! For example, Andrew would relay a story of how a wise student decided to wait 10 or 20 years before joining a kung fu Sifu because he wanted to prepare himself for it by training in a gym first. Virtually no stretching or (body weight) strength training was performed in classes and in many cases students of several years were very weak and unfit. Andrew also relayed stories of schools where all one would do for the first couple of years is to do footwork or sit in a horse stance. Andrew was relaying the importance of stance work yet there was a distinct lack of leg strength in his students and little leg training was actually performed. Although footwork practice was a regular occurrence, it did not seem to be a practice that strengthened the legs, nor to build competence or foundation in students on account of the virtually 80/20 stance which rendered students unstable like a Eurofighter!



• Sid and his instructors always used to tell the class that one should not miss a lesson, as the pace and workrate was so high, that non-attendance and lack of consistency could result in injury during freefighting. This is mainly because the philosophy behind freefighting was more about speed than working on drilling in strong technique. In all of BlackSpy's time at the academy, he took occasion holidays with no problem. Ironically, a month or two before leaving the academy, he went away for a week's holiday, and upon coming back, expected the instructors to go slightly easier on him on the first lesson back, but they did not, and one instructor went harder than BlackSpy had ever had (with the usual, high speed flow and attempts to slap the student around the face a few times if they don't respond and a pointless sweep at the end), and this resulted in BlackSpy being thrown onto a wooden floor, landing on his knee, and having knee and inflammation problems for around 3 years afterwards, where he could not run, jog or do any kung fu on it. The academy had a habit of mouthing off on a variety of subjects but not always practising what it preached. What was annoying is that the whole thing was so unnecessary.



• Several of the instructors would get occasionally into street fights, and on many occasions came off worse (whether fighting people with limited or no martial arts experience), despite years of kung fu training. One would have thought that even a few months of training of an 'excellent, practical and effective' style would render one virtually untouchable to attack by the untrained street thug.



• Sid liked the idea of secret societies and elitism and secretly taught his instructors a different style (inspired by the William Cheung Traditional Wing Chun Kung Fu story?) which was based on a made up Wing Chun style using a wide pole fighting horse stance. This was claimed to be ancient Wing Chun but was made up and historically incorrect. The stance was only supposed to be used when fighting with a pole. When Sid or Andrew were demonstrating the correct technique, they would use a wider stance and different shapes to the students, but the students were told to do it a different way (which would evolve and open up over time). In practice, their stance was wide (not pole stance wide, but shoulder width or so) and almost 50/50 or 60/40, but they made their students adopt a much narrower, 80/20 stance that made their footwork very difficult and took all the power out of their arms. Any teacher who doesn't practice what they teach you is a fraud and isn't doing what they teach you to do because it is clearly rubbish!



• BlackSpy once received a certificate for a Seminar or Scroll grading that he attended which featured a Pentagram on it. In Chinese internal medicine and martial arts, the concept of the five elements is used, normally shown diagramatically with 5 objects with unidirectional or bidirectional arrows. These are not the same 5 elements as used by European pagan traditions, who use a Pentagram to represent these. It is likely Sid chose to use a Pentagram to make the scroll appear more esoteric and fancied the occult imagery and association.



• Sid once asked BlackSpy to procure some explosives for use on stage in a kung fu show. This would have potentially blown off someone's limbs! BlackSpy declined and then Sid pretended he didn't want them after all. He would do this very often. Another time, he had just had some interesting photos taken of a senior training session, and implied that a punch through a block of wood involved the fist moving so fast that it virtually existed in both places at once, or rather, somehow appeared on the other side of the wood. Sid asked me to express this in terms of physics, and I came back the next lesson and did a brief presentation on how as an object's speed increases, it's mass increases by tiny amounts. As it approaches the speed of light, it's mass approaches infinity. Sid and the class liked the sound of it, but then Sid said that he wasn't saying his fist went the speed of light and denied the whole thing.



• A week or two prior to the kung fu show described below, a whole class was dedicated to a lecture about the 24 hour circulation of qi in the body. Everyone thought they were being given some really hot information (something you could read in a book). It was very high level and lacking in detail, using one cluttered diagram. Sid had one of his instructors do the presentation. We were made to feel really grateful for the 'secret' information being given. He opened for questions at the end, and BlackSpy asked him how the generation and use/movement of qi in kung fu movements fitted in with the 24 hour circulation of qi. BlackSpy presumes Sid didn't know or couldn't be bothered to explain, as he just told BlackSpy that he was 'way off' and left it at that. Very helpful! No training was done that night. It turns out that the 'lesson' was in fact a trial run of the instructor's presentation at the show, and that as well as practice, it would have been rude to have not formally taught students of 4 or 5 years the information that was given out in public at a show. Very respectfully done!



• The academy hosted a show at Sadler's Wells in 1996. It was to raise money for the victim's families and survivors of the Dunblane (spelt 'Dumblane' on the first issue of fliers) massacre in Scotland in 1996, where a psychotic individual shot dead a number of children at a primary school. The first scene of Sid's show was a mock up of an terrorist embassy siege, and one of the instructors walked to the front of the stage and fired a real submachine gun at the audience (using blanks). How this was legally performed BlackSpy is not sure, but hosting a show with actual firearms and mock violence and killing could perhaps be considered 'slightly' inappropriate considering the circumstances of the actual massacre. After the show all the students of the school who attended (forced to attend and bring their relatives too) were talking about it and wondering why it was done.



• The kung fu shows organised by Sid and Andrew were arranged by their students and instructors. During these shows, and also at gradings, the instructors would almost scold the audience if they weren't showing enough applause! Great atmosphere!



• Students of both schools were heavily encouraged to buy tickets for the kung fu shows for themselves and their family and friends. If a student said that he could not afford it then he was heavily pressured by instructors. Students attending were also expected to help with the running of the show, even though they had paid to actually attend! In some cases, students that BlackSpy trained with missed virtually the entire show as they were doing chores and manning the doors or reception areas. That is money well spent! Not!



• Many of the stunts at the kung fu shows were very 'showy' in nature, often with somewhat limited technical content. For example, one stunt for one of the kung fu shows was to involve Andrew performing a flying punch. This was a leap through the air, whereupon he would land a punch on a pad, being held by an instructor. As most martial artists will recognise, this has no basis in real practical street fighting, nor in traditional kung fu. A punch without a root in the ground is unlikely to be as powerful as one where one is rooted into the ground and using one's body weight, leveraging off the ground. The flying punch was a made up move to look visually appealing. Perhaps because it was not thought out or constructed so well, training resulted in severe injury, with Andrew's face landing on the instructor's knee. This resulted in Andrew breaking his cheekbone and not being able to perform at all for the academy's kung fu show.



• Sid claimed that his movements were very small and imperceptible to the untrained eye. His butterfly knives practice was reputed as such, whereas he had little structure or technique and it was just wiggling his wrists in an undisciplined manner, wiggling the knives a little. This was reputed to be highly advanced. Any trained martial arts practice results in clearly defined, structured moves that flow perfectly, with fluidity and also stillness at the same time.



• Sid and Andrew used to slag off virtually every other martial arts instructor under the sun, especially Wing Chun. Anyone who talked about attending a seminar by a visiting Grandmaster from Hong Kong would be scolded for being disrespectful that they were considering learning from someone else. People were told to believe that all other styles were rubbish in comparison, when ironically the complete opposite was true. BlackSpy has attended many seminars and touched hands with many Grandmasters of Wing Chun, including William Cheung and Yip Chun (aka Ip Chun), and at each seminar was a wide variety of Wing Chun stylists and practitioners. Such seminars were a great learning experience and a chance to see other styles working and in action. The William Cheung seminar that BlackSpy attended was organised by other Wing Chun teachers Brian Desir and the McKensie brothers. Although their styles were very different to William Cheung's, they were open minded and decent enough to organise and arrange it and participate in the exercises. Andrew and Sid had on many occasions implied that the McKensie brothers were rubbish, whilst not actually mentioning their name. Sid and Andrew tried to avoid and isolate themselves and their from their contemporaries in Wing Chun, presumably out of fear that they might be exposed or brought down a peg or two, and/or because they were so arrogant.



• For some strange reason, Sid had an association with a local Karate master in 1996 (who's studio we all helped to paint), but it was not long before he was slagging him off and ceased dealings with him. Sid had a habit of falling out with most people he had any serious dealings or associations with. It would have made sense to have had an association with another kung fu instructor or better still, a Wing Chun school. Perhaps this would have been too threatening, as the other instructor or Sifu would have discussed technique etc. Andrew's breakaway Wing Chun School, the SAS Academy (with no connection to the SAS!), reputedly adopted a local monk Cecil Cheng as its spiritual head, but it is not certain how much Wing Chun he ever did if in fact any at all. One can only presume that the person in the ridiculous ninja outfit is Andrew (see link). Perhaps this practice of adopting allegiances with 'non-threatening' but respected masters was done to give Sid and Andrew's schools more credibility but without rocking their respective boats and without introducing too much 'Wing Chun reality' into the mix, so they could keep their monopoly on Wing Chun and not have to discuss their technique. It would be perhaps cruel to say that now that the Grandmaster Cecil Cheng has passed away, he is 'safe' and 'non-threatening' towards Andrew's academy, and there is no risk of them both falling out. And in addition, who is to say that they were even close friends or that he even agreed to be the honorary head of his academy; and who is to say that the masked person next to Cecil is even Andrew, as you can't tell! If BlackSpy was going to have his picture taken with an authentic Kung Fu Grandmaster, he wouldn't disguise his face! That would be stupid.



• Sid and Andrew arranged their class timetable so that the senior instructors' class ran very late. And they would get home well after 1am. During week nights. In preparation for kung fu shows, the instructors would routinely only sleep a few hours a week. This was seen as being 'tough'.



• Sid and his instructors made one feel very awkward and guilty about missing a single lesson, let alone leaving the school. Years of grooming meant that one had to find a good excuse to leave, be it total physical debilitation or geographic relocation! And of course large sums of money would be expected as leaving presents



• Every year or two, Sid and Andrew ran seminars. These were the few occasions where students actually got to practice practical sequences of moves in a street fighting type situation. Moves were broken down and repeated over and over. If only they did this in their classes. Most other Wing Chun classes by other schools however actually do this every lesson! Progress is much faster and students actually understand what they are learning and it is much clearer.



• BlackSpy had started seeing an excellent acupuncturist whilst at the academy. After one month, his CFS/PVFS symptoms virtually disappeared and he felt great all the time on very little sleep. He mentioned this to the chief instructor, would said that it was all down to the kung fu training and not the acupuncture at all. Overblown self-importance?



• Sid would occasionally mouth off and insult people who were very common. He would also be highly patronising to anyone who was from Africa or Asia, not meaning any ill will, but came across as rather racist. In the school magazine, he compares a 'black' instructor to a witch doctor!





• Sid could be a little creepy and narcissistic at times, and this is reflected in this article in his school magazine quite well!





• Sid's 'kung fu' from his DVD 'Born in Warrior's Blood' can be viewed illegally on youtube.com if you search on 'Sid Sofos'. This film was funded almost entirely by Sid's chief instructor of the time who was said to have invested £5000 of his own savings into it (no doubt pressured into this). This involved international travel, filming costs, living expenses and accommodation.



• Sid and Andrew would frequently boast to students that they never advertised, as news of their kung fu was spread by word of mouth and recommendation, so they didn't need to, and that they had to turn away students as they were so in demand. Clearly they were conveniently ignoring the fact that they got free advertising from their instructors, including BlackSpy, who were forced to go on poster runs and fly post around North London and escape capture by the police! Also, BlackSpy never heard of anyone being turned away from the school as it was too full, Andrew just crammed them in like sardines if necessary. Demonstrations conducted at the universities in London were over the top and often led to complaints.



• Wing Chun in many respects does not have a formal grading system. Certain schools use different coloured sashes to designate level, whereas others do not. Sid presumably created/made up his own grading/scroll system. There were reputedly 17 scrolls in total, Sid having all 17 of course. Andrew only had 4 or 5. In fact no one that I had ever heard of had more than 5 other than Sid. Other than the first scroll, no one ever saw a syllabus for the gradings, and the scroll system was never explained. The 5th scroll was said to be 'more spiritual' and very hard to attain. The 4th scroll (only taken by students of 6-7+ years of training featured exercises such as 3 onto one and fighting off knife attacks, as well as breaking blocks of wood. 3 onto 1 was something BlackSpy later practised with greater realism after 9 months of training! The 3rd scroll was mainly chi sau exercises, with only 2 main break out moves, and using freefighting. The first and second scroll were basic moves only. There was very much a sense of techniques and knowledge/curriculum for future gradings being withheld. BlackSpy held 3 scrolls and in the last 2 years of training, no additional gradings were taken and he was years away from being 'worthy' to be taught how to break wood etc. BlackSpy never really had a sense of when training for the next grading would begin in a formal sense or what the progression was. It seemed that only people in the instructors class would be taught any of these things, regardless of how good students were in the class below. Sid stated at various times that the scroll system was handed down to him, but never elaborated on who this was and how far back the grading system originated. BlackSpy spoke to Sifu Lakis Phillipou about the scroll system and Lakis was of the opinion that Sid made it up and it was inspired by Lakis' own Alpha Scroll system.



• BlackSpy had some great times with Sid, and some with Andy, but less so, in spite of all the bad things that went on and the psychological games. They had their nice moments in between all the bad ones. Sid and Andrew did care about certain charitable causes, and did raise money for various charities over the years. This is commendable. However, BlackSpy is sure that part of the reason is to be centre of attention, to take credit for it, be looked up to by people and as perhaps they were bored with just running a school.



• Sid met a number of celebrities in his years, as well as other leading martial arts. He had a habit of falling out with virtually all of them. For example, Shadow from The British Gladiators, came to visit and it was not long before they were having a fight in the toilets at Fatshan. Lennox Lewis also came to see him, but Sid later slagged him off.



• Sid was no stranger to foul language. Or losing his temper. Is this in accordance with the Tao or Buddhist traditions of martial arts?



• Both Sid and Andrew used to badger their instructors about various matters just before their instructor class started, which was immediately after the senior student class. Often it would involve making telephone calls. Rather than do so in an organised manner, Sid or Andrew would have a go at their instructor or instructors, who would then subsequently feel obliged to get on the telephone immediately. For example, one night Geoff was harrassed by Andrew to make some calls to ex-students to try to sell them tickets to the kung fu show. This took place at 10:30 to 11:00pm, at which time the calls were not exactly welcome! After leaving the school, BlackSpy's parents were called up by one of Sid's instructors at 11pm, who was angry at the letter that BlackSpy had written to Sid about why he didn't like the school or kung fu, and demanded to know of BlackSpy's whereabouts (for purposes of intimidation presumably). The call was met with a somewhat frosty reception! On frequent occasions, after Sid or Andrew had had a go at their instructors about something, the instructors would then pick on the nearest student or students they came across about something or other, regardless of whether it was appropriate to do so or not and whether it made any sense.



• There was a trend amongst students to constantly pay their respects (putting one's palm and fist together) to Andrew or Sid during a class, whenever they explained anything, as if he was doing them a favour by telling them anything. If one did not show one's respects properly after each sentence or meaning, then the instructors would start to have a go at all the students. Thus the students were bullied and pressured into doing this constantly during any explanations, to the point where it became totally ridiculous. In addition, every time a pair of students touched hands, they had to pay their respects also. In all other Wing Chun classes, it is common practice to pay one's respects before entering the Dojo or training area, and then before leaving, and rarely in between.



• Sid was a sexual predator at times. He seemed to like younger girls, who would have trouble seeing what he was really like. It was the reason he fell out with some of his old kung fu brothers. When BlackSpy was there, he was harrassing a senior instructor's girlfriend, bombarding her with phone calls etc, because he really fancied her. This was disrespectful and inappropriate behaviour. The behaviour of a disciplined master? BlackSpy actually met Sid's first wife and her new husband whilst working for a London Borough council, and she seemed very nice and had nothing bad to say about Sid. It is likely Sid was more reasonable a guy back in the early 80s. Apparently Sid was banned from the Imperial College fitness centre as he was allegedly caught oggling a naked woman. The men's changing rooms overlook a block of flats/several houses and Sid happened to be looking out of the window and spotted a woman getting undressed. She must have spotted him and given Sid's intense stare, reported him to the college. However, if a typical guy had happened to be looking out of the window and saw a naked woman, it is likely that he would keep looking! No major crime there. However, no other martial arts instructor including Andrew got themselves banned. For small minded reasons, several years ago, BlackSpy tried to find someone at Imperial College fitness centre to verify this, but there was no record.



• Sid's school brought out a school magazine every few years. The magazine in 1996, Everlasting Pilgrimage, featured Sid on the cover holding two Wing Chun knives (bart cham dao), superimposed on a fancy blue background. Funnily enough, under close inspection, it could be seen that Sid's head was out of proportion to the rest of his body and that there were faint cut out lines around the bottom of his head. His head was too big (no joke intended by BlackSpy!) What had happened was that an early photo of Sid's body (we assume it was Sid) had been used with a recent photo of his head cut out and placed on top of it, then sent to the printers like this. Sid had become a little obese in the 1990s, and made out that it was all muscle. But he clearly wanted to appear slim in the magazine. Sid always wore baggy clothes and long sleeves to cover up his shape. One wonders actually how fit he really was, how often he would go out running or walking. And how healthy his diet was. He was a very vain man. Fatshan was covered with photos of his senior students, but mainly himself. Is this obsessive vanity really the mark of a Master? Or Grandmaster? An enlightened individual?





• Sid make claims about his mystical and supernatural kung fu abilities, which his instructors were told to back up and verify. These abilities were often similar to those seen in martial arts movies, funnily enough, such as firing 'balls of energy' as in Big Trouble in Little China, hovering in mid air, making his knives disappear, lighting the air with flames when using kung fu knives or to punch at the speed of a bullet, bending light with his kung fu knives or hand techniques or even turning the volume knob on his car radio without touching it, using qi from his finger. Sid and Andrew claimed they were amongst the few people to know the third form of Wing Chun, Bil Jee, as if it was an esoteric secret. This was only taught to senior instructors after 5 years or so of training and proving their worth. In other WC schools, it is openly taught and in some cases after a few weeks of training! If one picks up techniques quickly, many schools reward this by teaching more, not holding back for the sake of it. Sid and Andrew's instructors backed up these claims but were not unknown to lie or exaggerate in other areas, so one wonders whether these claims were true either. Senior instructors would frequently tell other instructors what to say and what to believe, without seeing any evidence or experiencing it themselves. This was also true for instructing students. Sid's feat of 'hovering' could perhaps be explained by the temporary slowing in movement when one does a jump at the peak of the jump, perhaps prolonged by a shift of the centre of gravity downwards whilst maintaining a similar position in the air overall for a split second. Sid's description of chipboard being the hardest form of wood to break is no doubt grossly exaggerated. Perhaps some of the demonstrations performed by Sid and Andrew were reasonably good, but clearly the significance of many were grossly exaggerated and 'sexed' up and made out to be esoteric and much more than they were. You decide. Examples of such claims can be found in pictures from one of the school magazines, show below. Notice the lack of modesty and humility and penchant for association with the esoteric.























• Andrew made very overly exaggerated claims also, including the attendance of the school's Sadler's Wells show. Andrew claimed it was attended by 1800 people. However the capacity of the theatre is only 1568!! And BlackSpy was there, watching it and helping out, and the theatre was much less than half empty, with a few hundred people or so in attendance. How very humble and truthful of Andrew!




http://www.londondance.com/content.asp?CategoryID=77


• Sid and Andrew liked the image of esoteric kung fu masters, taken from the old school kung fu movies. They frequently referred to themselves as Shaolin monks.



• Sid alluded to his self-healing and psychic abilities at various times. To what extent these stories are true and to what extent they are exaggerated or fabricated is a matter of debate of course. Sid stated that his eyesight improved because of his qi skills, and that his optician was amazed that he did not need to wear his contact lenses any more. Sid also recalled a story where he cut his finger and within seconds the cut had disappeared - something similar happened to BlackSpy (with a very thin and shallow paper cut that drew blood but subsequently seemed to disappear a few seconds later). Once, one of Sid's chief instructors told Sid that when he was in South Africa (as far as BlackSpy can remember), he was praying to God. Sid retorted that he had felt the prayer and heard Brian's words, at which point everyone was very impressed with Sid and paid their respects. Was Sid actually psychic? Or was he implying that he was on a level with God? Or was he grossly exaggerating? Who can say. However, when a person is known to lie in some respects, it is hard to trust everything he says in other areas.



• Sid performed demonstrations of breaking concrete slabs, usually of around 1-2cm in thickness. These would be placed on his torso or his forearms which were rather large (muscular and body fat) and hit with a sledgehammer by an instructor, and broken. At the end of one show, he was driven over by a motorbike. A motorcycle only weighs in at a few hundred kilos at the most and by tensing the stomach muscles it could probably be achieved easy by an amateur. BlackSpy has had his foot driven over by a car and trodden on by a horse, and whilst painful was not that bad. Whilst all this slab breaking looked impressive, was it really that difficult? Was this a show of Sid's skill in 'iron jacket' or a shield of qi around the body, or just the laws of physics? Most, but not all, of the energy of the hammer strike goes into the slab and breaks it, under the right conditions. Either way, it is not that impressive when compared to the touring Shaolin monks from China. BlackSpy has witnessed demonstrations by the Shaolin monks of breaking multiple thick concrete slabs placed on a monk's head! And two monks bending an iron bar by placing the bar on the soft part of the throat where it meets the chest and walking towards each other. This is a truly impressive demonstration of 'iron jacket'. Perhaps Sid did have some genuine ability in this area, e.g. resisting very hard strikes, but it was not something that was really demonstrated or shown to students.



• Sid and Andrew taught their senior students to break wooden boards, usually chipboard. They also did demonstrations themselves on occasions to students. The time at which this was taught to senior students seemed later and later as the 90s went on, from BlackSpy's experience, as if it was purposely being withheld. During demonstrations, when Sid or Andrew did not break the board on any one attempt, they would scold the instructor and blame them for not holding the board properly. They would also do this in an aggressive manner if the instructor was hit by a piece of board when it was finally broken. Instructors often looked scared afterwards. This is another example of their bullying nature. An example of this can be seen in Sid's DVD Born in Warrior's Blood.
  
  
• 6 months prior to leaving the school, at the beginning of 1996, BlackSpy underwent a religious conversion, becoming an evangelical Christian. It was not something that was planned or expected. There was a girl who lived in the groundfloor flat in his building and one Sunday BlackSpy went over to give out some Women's Self Defence leaflets to her. They got talking and she told him that it was Satanic! BlackSpy wondered what all this was about and they discussed the matter. She invited him in and an hour later BlackSpy was 'converted'! BlackSpy wasn't 100% convinced about martial arts being Satanic, but knew what was trying to be said as there was a different 'spiritual vibe' or 'energy' about them. It is a long story, but during the discussion BlackSpy started hallucinating and the woman's head started to distort and seem repulsive. She was talking about the Holy Spirit at the time. As the discussion went on, BlackSpy was unable to understand anything she said, but was only aware of one word at a time, as if something in his brain was trying to stop him listening to what was being said. BlackSpy also felt the urge to run away and get as far away from the woman as possible. But BlackSpy thought it was all very amusing and wierd, so decided to stick it out and see what happened next. All of a sudden BlackSpy could hear the whole sentences again and understand what was being said. She had had no idea of what was going on but had noticed BlackSpy looking rather strange. The room seemed to be filled with light and suddenly it felt like a huge weight was being lifted from BlackSpy's shoulders. It was a truly incredible experience. Whether you want to believe it is literal or metaphoric (psychological - removing deep rooted negative beliefs) is up to you. BlackSpy related the story to Sid a few days later (seeing him as a spiritual 'guru'), and when in the changing room, all the senior instructors from the class above were there, and were all discussing it with BlackSpy, telling him that there was nothing wrong with BlackSpy but something wierd about this woman, and that he should stay away from her, and that my gut instinct was correct. BlackSpy didn't appreciate being ganged up on and told what to do, and this his personal beliefs and choices were not being respected, so BlackSpy continued to train but ignored the 'advice' being given. Sid and the instructors probably felt threatened by the fact that they had on some level lost power over BlackSpy and were trying to get it back. BlackSpy felt this. BlackSpy had expected a different response as he knew Sid occasionally attended church himself. It was around this time that BlackSpy started to attend seminars with other Grandmasters, and also to discuss Wing Chun with a close friend of his who had left Sofos and was at Sifu Lakis Philippou's Wing Chun school. Over the years of course BlackSpy's understanding of faith has evolved and his concept of how martial arts fits into the wider spiritual realm has changed. BlackSpy does not believe martial arts to be Satanic per se, it is the spirit in which they are engaged in which can be good or bad (i.e. this article!!)



• Sid became addicted to Cocaine during the late 90s, and because he liked it so much, forced his instructors to snort it as well. One of his senior instructors, Geoff, was a Coke dealer at the time. Not before he joined the academy, but during, because he was a bit of a wheeler and dealer and felt he was physically hard enough to look after himself and any trouble. It is likely he introduced Sid and others to coke use. During one of the senior instructor classes, attended presumably by Andrew and his instructors, Sid and some of his instructors forced a young teenage senior student to take coke, even though he didn't want to, and he subsequently became a coke addict for a number of years, luckily kicking the habit eventually. This has been verified by a reliable source to BlackSpy, although at least more than senior instructor was not present during this event and had no knowledge of it taking place. Sid had made a big deal about shielding the young student from the coke usage, as if it made him a moral person. But what was Sid doing snorting coke in the first place if it was a corrupting influence on a youngster? Was Sid a good role model, setting a good example? Ironically, when he finally left the school, he was reputed to have stolen Sid's coke stash (to punish Sid and flush it down the toilet, sell it on or use it himself?)



• At another senior class in the late 90s, presumably attended by the same students and instructors, Sid ordered his top student (Geoff), to beat up his Chief Instructor (Kevin), in front of the whole class. No one intervened. Kevin had been with Sid for 10-13 years at the time, and Sid used to pick on him, bully him and insult him all the time. So, Sid showed his appreciation for Kevin's loyalty by not only abusing him verbally for years but also by having him beated up and humiliated. This was likely fuelled by coke usage. So Kevin tried using his Wing Chun to defend himself, by it didn't work, and he resorted to charging at Geoff and fist fighting, and was beated black and blue. When exactly Sid fell out and split with Andrew is not clear, and which particular incident or culmination of incidents caused it is not clear. BlackSpy doesn't expect anyone is going to talk it as it makes all parties concerned look bad. This is probably why neither brother mentions the other's past partnership or even existence on their respective web sites. Apparently Sid had been bullying and picking on Kevin for many years, but also actively encouraged his instructors to beat him up or take it out on him. The man was a total wreck by the time he left the school, the poor guy. A victim of psychological and physical abuse.



• Sid had a habit of practising his moves on his senior instructors and using them as punch bags. This became much worse after the 90s and classes became much more violent. One senior instructor reported having his whole body covered in scars just from the classes. This is not normal.



• Ironically Sid attended at least one fund raising event for www.actagainstbullying.com, which is particularly ironic seeing as he has been a big bully towards his own students, and in particular bullied his chief instructor Kevin for many years!



• Sid liked the gangster image (much like a huge segment of the population!!), and would always dress in black. When he went out socialising with his senior instructors he would always insist they all wore black, and given their thuggish appearance, liked people to think he was the 'don' or mafia boss with his 'soldiers' accompanying him. Not exactly expressing freedom and individuality. BlackSpy presumes that he would not have allowed anyone to wear a pink top ;-) Sid behaved as if he was some kind of gangster kingpin. He would send his chief instructor out to drive his girlfriend home. He would instruct his students on occasion to go out in their car and tail someone, and have him feel intimidated and threatened. Sid would often sit upstairs in his big office, above Fatshan, like a Godfather in his private room, with his 'heavies' on hand. In fact, Sid upgraded from wanting to look like a gangster to having drug dealing associates who he bought his coke supply from, to actually doing business with gangsters. In 1999, Sid and his instructors started working as security in a local gangster/renowned local kung fu master's pole/lap dancing bar in London. He ordered his instructors to take money out of the till and steal food and alcohol stock to supplement their wages. Who knows if they were involved in drug dealing too, as that is pure speculation. The club lasted about a year before it closed down. Perhaps he had watched one too many Scorsese movies and fancied a 'piece of the action'. BlackSpy thinks Sid fancied himself as a 'Robert DeNiro' as well as a 'Steven Segal'.



• It was rumoured that Sid used steroids when he was younger, perhaps in the early 80s. According to the rumour, he did not lift any weights whilst doing so, only doing kung fu. This allegedly contributed to his large build, but lack of any muscle definition. BlackSpy cannot confirm or deny this rumour.



• BlackSpy ceased association with Sid and Andrew in 1996, but remained friends with a member of the senior class for a number of years afterwards, who helped to provide a great deal of inside information. BlackSpy has been reliably informed that Sid continued to use large amounts of Cocaine (8g per day!) until 2004 when his money and sources of extracting money from others dried up, after which he changed drug and started snorting speed instead. Apparently he used to require 1.5g of amphetamine sulphate just to get out of bed in the mornings. BlackSpy is really not making any comment on what Sid is like now. Clearly he still practices the same style, and still has a large ego, but that is not to say that he is not sorry for what he has done or that he isn't a better person now. Who knows. BlackSpy certainly has no interest in finding out!

back to top

 
Andrew Sofos, Martial Arts Instructor:

www.sas-martialarts.co.uk/Pages/Academy/Branches/head_office.htm

• Whilst a student with Sid, he secretly asked Lakis to teach him in private, after Sid had fallen out with Lakis. Andrew acknowledged that his style was much better than Sid's modified version. Andrew was prepared to learn Laki's style from him and learn from scratch. But Lakis declined as it was too political. After his split with Sid, Andrew decided to change Sid's style slightly, and although BlackSpy has not personally trained in this, it is likely to be more effective, but still somewhat poor in relative terms to the more established styles of Wing Chun. If Andrew was prepared to learn from scratch, then modifying Sid's style slightly is unlikely to bring radical improvements. Andrew was probably too proud to start again anyway after his break up with Sid to do so.



• Andrew was rather paranoid. He used to frequently badmouth Lakis's kung fu school, and one day he suddenly said that we needed to tighten up security as students from a 'rival' school might come around with clubs and baseball bats and try to 'raid' our school and beat us all up. Security was stepped up. Lakis and his students were all very friendly and laid back and the idea that they would be wound up enough to do a raid is preposterous. Whether this was before or after Lakis refused to teach Andrew behind Sid's back is not certain. In addition, BlackSpy was one several occasions accused of lying by Andrew. On the first occasion, BlackSpy had been off sick for a month, off college and unable to train. He explained to Andrew that he'd been ill and fatigued after a bout of influenza (i.e. CFS/PVFS), but Andrew just thought he was being lazy and disrespectful for not turning up and banned him from the school for a few months (only allowing BlackSpy to attend classes at the University). Very sensitive and understanding! A few years later, BlackSpy was asked if he had practised in his spare time, and he told the class that yes he had, and that he practised 10 Sil Lim Tao forms every day. Andrew then accused BlackSpy of lying in front of the whole class, which was not only hurtful but extremely humiliating.



• Andrew in the early 90s would frequently have arguments with his brother Sid. His style was the same. There were clearly tensions in the brothers' relationship as Sid was Andrew's younger brother and teacher, and a big bully. Andrew in turn used to bully his own students, but to a lesser extent than Sid ever did. Andrew was clearly frustrated at the time and wasn't exactly very relaxed and jolly to be around unless you really knew him (which was difficult as he wasn't approachable until you did!) He is probably easier to get along with now that he runs his own school. Both Sid and Andrew were prone to big mood swings and had violent tempers. Andrew probably had slightly less of an ego than Sid, but both were very sizeable. And both were not unfamiliar with selective use of the truth and in many cases lying themselves.



• Andrew seemed to lack social skills. Sid was a real character and on many times, BlackSpy had had a hilarious time with him, but Andrew on the other hand was quite grumpy much of the time, and was hard to talk to. Andrew would sometimes come into the studio and seem totally preoccupied, and even less approachable than normal. On many occasions, students of Andrew's helped him redecorate his kung fu studio, and one occasion, a friend of BlackSpy was alone with Andrew helping painting. For a whole hour they were alone, Andrew didn't say more than one sentence to him.



• Andrew forced and pressured everyone to come in to train even when they were ill. Ironically Andrew himself had to take a year or so off Wing Chun in his early training days as he was chronically ill, so you'd think he'd have more empathy when others were ill. Perhaps he resented the fact that this was when Sid overtook him in skill, as they had both started training with the same Sifu at the same time. Whatever the reason, it was totally unreasonable and idiotic. BlackSpy and many other students discussed this very matter, and the common experience was of feeling horrifically ill and awful for the first half of the lesson, and then finally starting to feel better again towards the end of the lesson. The next day, one would feel worse than one had before one attended the class, so the net effect was to drag out the duration of the illness (influenza, cold etc.) Andrew and Sid did not allow people to take their own drinks into their studios, but instead got the students to fill up empty water bottles with tap water and they were drunk by everyone. This was considered 'brotherly/communal provision.' Not