Hung Ga Family Joint Statement

[DF]

There have been numerous debates in the past months over the Internet, in magazines and in private, among the various Hung Ga lineages, concerning the matter of who was more senior or sifu to whom. This joint public statement is being made to clarify the history of Wong Fai Hung’s Hung Ga as it happened.

· Tang Fong was a disciple of Wong Fai Hung.

· Chiu Kao and Siu Ying were disciples of Lam Sai Wing.

· Chan Hong Chun was a disciple of Lam Sai Wing.

· Lam Jo’s version of the so-called lineage chart was made up in the 1950’s by themselves, years after Grand master Lam Sai Wing had passed away. This alumni association is only composed of members of Lam Jo’s own people and is not acknowledged by any other of Lam Sai Wing’s disciples. The lineage chart was composed and edited by this association and does not reflect actual history. In addition, since its release, this lineage chart has been pointed out as being different from actual history by Lam Sai Wing’s disciples across multiple generations.

· The Ng Long Bat Qua pole set was not brought in by Grand master Lam Sai Wing and only taught to Lam Jo, as Mr. Hamby claimed in his IKF article. This pole set has always been part of the Wong Fai Hung system.

· Mr. Hamby accepted Lam Jo’s information as valid, assuming that Lam is the last survivor from the time of Wong Fai Hung, as Mr. Hamby stated in his article. Lam Jo is not the last survivor. Tang Fong’s disciple Wong Jo and Lam Sai Wing’s disciple/Chiu Kau’s wife Siu Ying are also alive and well in Hong Kong.

· Mr. Hamby made his claim that Lam Jo is the sigung of the entire Hung Ga system. Lam Jo may be the sigung of his own lineage but definitely NOT of everyone else. We do NOT recognize Lam Jo as the head of our lineages.

Lam Jo’s lineage will probably ask for proof for the statements being made today. The documentation and historic pictures will be furnished in the coming publications.

The purpose of this statement is to let the public know that the Hung Ga family is very united in pointing out false claims. We all know what the history of our family is. We will not allow this great history of our family to be twisted and distorted for personal gain. Therefore, we feel it is important for us to put out this public statement at this time, with a more in depth publication in the future, so that our future generations will not be fooled by people who spread false claims.


Tang Fong Branch
Wong Jo, Disciple of Tang Fong
Yuen Ling Alumni Association
Yee's Hung Ga Kung Fu Academy
Lam Sai Wing Branch
Chiu Chi Ling International Hung Ga Kung Fu Association
Chan Ka Wang/Chan Hong Chun Lineage

[South Paw]

I am very glad with this clear Hung Ga Joint Family Statement.

Addition: To my information Tang Fong's disciple Chao Wing Tak is still alive in Hong Kong.

South Paw

[Kung Lek]

It is interesting to note that those words in the ikf article (which I finally got to read at the newstand last night) are Don Hamby's interpretation of what was said and not to many direct quotes from Lam Jo or his son.

However, in the end "all Hung families are united as one".

That phrase holds more importance than any other imho.

peace

Kung Lek

[meltdawn]

DF,
Thank you for setting an honorable example by the composed manner and validation of facts within your succinct reply, as representative of the Hung associations.


Kung Lek,
"However, in the end "all Hung families are united as one"... That phrase holds more importance than any other imho."
Yes, it is important, but it must have intent, and the intent of those in question has been proven otherwise.

"Waiting is bad." - Musashi

[PingChoy]

Excellent well! Stand tall with integrity, Hung families!

...It's all good...

[Kung Lek]

hi-

Meltdawn, I'm not sure i understand how the "intent" of the Lam Jo lineage has sullied other Hung families.

please let me know of an article or book I should read that will define with clarity what Lam Jo himself has stated about the Hung system.

to the best of my knowledge, it has always been all hung families are united as one.

to the best of my knowledge it is not the masters of Hung Family fist who are wagering this war of words but various students of hung family fist who are doing so.

i am interested in this strictly from a standpoint of curiousity and knowledge.

peace

Kung Lek

[meltdawn]

Kung lek, I am not in any way stating that one line "sullies" another.

I was merely pointing out that "all Hung families are united as one" is not the true intent of someone who "...allow(s) this great history of our family to be twisted and distorted for personal gain".

F. Sifu and the Hung associations should gain the credit for honorable intent - "The purpose of this statement is to let the public know that the Hung Ga family is very united in pointing out false claims."

And students DO represent the family, in honor as in deceit. Just as your deeds reflect upon your master. Especially in a national publication and public forum.

Peace, O Finder of Short Butterfly Swords for Small Sisters. :)

"Waiting is bad." - Musashi

[Kung Lek]

point taken meltdawn.

still, do you have a source where I can read more on the situation?
thanks

peace

Kung Lek

[doug maverick]

sorry df but lam jo and his son say that chiu kao nor his wife ever studied under lam but went to a school named after lam but was run by a student of his.

[illusionfist]

kung lek- this is where it started pretty much www.hungkuen.com (http://www.hungkuen.com)

Most of it is in response to a comment that was made by Chiu Chi Ling.

As a member of two of the lineages in "question", i wholeheartedly agree with the above statement. We must not allow the history to become tainted just so that one (or a few) can leave their mark(s) on the system. The main concern should be propagation of the art, not propagation of oneself.

The so called research and evidence that was presented in Mr. Hamby's article is far from conclusive. Its shoddy research to base an entire history on one persons account of it, especially when other integral members of the art are still alive. This also pays them a huge disrespect. If hung gar is to be a united family, then you must have a multi-lineage perspective, which would entail speaking to the other lineages (most of which who have key members still alive and also teaching).

Peace :D

[South Paw]

The comment of Chiu Chi Ling was his response on the Lam Family's claim that his father Chiu Kau, Chan Hong Chung and others were portrayed as students of Lam Jo instead of Lam Sai Wing.

This claim can also be found in Buck Sam Kong's book 'Gung Gee Fok Fu' in which some parts of the 'Memorial Book' of 1951 are translated.

South Paw

[Kung Lek]

Thanks for the information illusionfist! :)

peace

Kung Lek

[doug maverick]

i know everyone cares about leanege or what ever but that won't help you become a better martial artist there are three reasons to practice gung fu

1)to maitain health
2)to defend your self when needed
3)to defend others who are not as skilled as you

even thou knowing the leanege of your style is good it should not bother you and you should focus more on your training.

[denali]

I think that's pretty obvious Black Tiger.
But some people also find the history of their style interesting and want to learn the truth about it. It doesn't mean that they do that instead of training.

[illusionfist]

Lets put it this way, how would you feel if your parents lied to you and they said they weren't really your parents? Now your sense of identity has been thrown for a loop.

Peace :D

Hi Black Tiger,
I'm just curious what is your lineage?
I mean who is your Hung Gar Sifu?
Thanks
D. :)

[KillerSloth]

I seen Black Tiger post stuff on this forum and he has a tendency of saying things he doesnt know about and has challenge other people in this forum. so try not to pay mind to what he says in this thread. he does not know what he speaks of.

Its just idle curiosity.
Tiger you still there?

[hasayfu]

I'm pretty neutral in this discussion but as far as illusionfist's analogy, I'd offer an amendment.

It's more like if you're dad makes his living because he had a PH.D from John Doe University and then another guy says he has "proof" that your Dad didn't get a PH.D from there.

But your dad has this sheepskin that says in plain letters JDU. Oh, it came from a sister University that could use the name on the diploma but it's not the same.

To further complicate matters, lots of people seem to treat your dad like his PH.D. is legit but the proof this guy has is also convincing.

Now you have a dilema. Or do you? He's still your dad. That never changed.

Maybe you question what he has taught you. Maybe you question his character. Maybe he's just telling you what he was told and there is no real deception in his version so in the end it doesn't matter.

These are not issues to be aired online. It's good that the guy brought up the proof. It gives you context but his-story is a matter of perspective. Look at the Qing/ming thread.

[illusionfist]

Hasayfu's analogy is better (way better). Thanks for clearing that up. The one thing that i was trying to express with mine is just the mere shock of the statement.

[Kung Lek]

ok, but nobody is saying that Lam Jo didn't study with Lam Tsai Wing right?

And Lam Jo family is saying that these other masters studied their Hung Gar under him (Lam Jo)as he headed up Lam Tsai Wings school right?

Is there anything that says Lam jo was not the system holder?

Or that he was a top disciple of Lam Tsai Wing?

Personally, I think that Hung Fist is one of the a-1 systems of kung fu on earth and that if the system is taught properly then hte whole lineage thing loses importance in light of the skills of those who teach it.
what I mean is a teacher can have a great lineage but still be a less than satisfactory teacher with les than satisfactory skills.
whereas someone who does not hold lineage and learned the Hung Fist from a source far removed or from several sources can be an excellent stylist and an excellent teacher.

That's the only problem I have with lineage questions.
If the training is good, and the skills are there, I personally do not have a great concern about where they came from, only that they are there.

So all Hung stylists are OK in my books.

infighting in a family is not a good thing at all as it tarnishes the whole.

peace

Kung Lek

[illusionfist]

The one thing that must be made known is that we are not splitting into factions or anything. The hung gar system is a true family. The main point about the joint family statement is mo duk. All lineages have been recognized and they have been respected. Its about a true history that was founded on mo duk. This is a JOINT statement made by DIFFERENT lineages of Hung Gar, this shows nothing but UNITY.

Peace :D

[doug maverick]

i'm really really sick of the bull yes you have seen post stuff on the forum and each time i know what i'm talking about many people have agreed with me so shut up. as for the statement about who's my sifu well it's paul koh he studied the tang fung and the lam sai wing sect's of hung gar.
as kung fu artist of the new age we must strive to
bring the truth to the light and find out weather someone is telling the truth or not how research it is the only way a wise man wants said "believe half of what you see and only a third of what you hear the rest come's from pure research" thats what kung fu was built on. remmeber the three don'ts of kung fu:
)don't be rash
)don't be impulsive
)and don't let your anger get the best of you.
so i say everyone research the facts and you would find out wheather chui chi ling is lying or not FIST mentioned lum jo's sons website check it out and you will see the facts lum jo never said that
chui's parent were his students it's just that when lum jo took over the school from his kung fu
brother chiu chi ling's parent were i think still students. correct me if i'm wrong. and as for the haters at the top i won't give you the benefit of me saying any thing angry at you cause you are not a true martial artist if all you can do is bad mouth other peopl[QUOTE] [/QUOTE[QUOTE] [/QUOTE

[KillerSloth]

i thought paul koh studied under tony lau which is tang fong lineage (correct spelling black tiger) and tak wak eng who studied fu jow? as for true martial artists. a true martial artist doesnt go around challenging people on-line or lie about who is there sifu tiger.

enuff said

[doug maverick]

there is know need for me to lie if you were smart then you would know that tak wah also know hung gar basic of fu jow pai and any fu jow pai would agree with me. if you don't believe me go to the website at www.shaolinblacktiger.com (http://www.shaolinblacktiger.com) it will tell
you all you need to know.now enouth about you.
listen up guys i was on the yee' hung ga site last night and it turns out that for a short time tung fung(correct spelling) was lam sai wing's student(not actual student but he finish his hung ga training from him strange with all this leanage thing how two leanages can be tide togather) as for people who want to talk trash about me do it somewhere else this forum is very important and intereference from people who don't like me ruin it so go away

[illusionfist]

Lam Sai Wing and Tang Fung exchanged info just like two sifus would. Tang Fung did not "finish" his training with Lam Sai Wing. Tang Fung finished the core (four pillars) before he left.

As for fu jow pai stuff, post it on another thread. This statement was made so that other hung gar practitioners could express their concerns or thoughts.

Peace :D

[DF]

Hi blacktiger,

you mentioned that you saw on our website about Tang Fong was a student of Lam Sai Wing, I am curious where is it located on our website.

By the way, may be you can help. When is the best time to reach your sifu Paul Koh?
we have been trying to call him at the school the last couple of days. When you see your sifu, can you ask him to call Pedro, we have something to discuss with him.

peace
DF

[loki]

I'm really not trying to start anything here but I remember reading in one of Ho Lap Tin's books that Tang Fung did "study" under Lam Sai Wing. He may have learned the "core" or main sets of the Hung style from WFH but Tang Fung's lineage also has the "extra" forms which LSW taught. So obviously there was some "teaching" going on here on the part of LSW. Yet I doubt very much that LSW considered TF his student. Remember that KF has a family structure. If they started out as Kung Fu brothers then that is how they will always be. It's then just a question of who is the older brother and who is the younger. The same would apply to Lum Jo and Chiu Kau.

Peace

NO ROAD IS AS LONG OR FILLED WITH AS MANY OBSTACLES AS THE ONE TRAVELLED BY THE CHINESE BOXER. FEW ATTEMPT TO TAKE IT . THOSE THAT REACH IT'S END ARE EVEN FEWER.

[Je Lei Sifu]

Hey Loki,

My sifu is a student of Ho Lap Tin, and in his book, what he is saying, is that Tang Fong had become friends with Lam Sai Wing prior to becoming a student of Wong Fei Hung. Lam Sai Wing introduced Tang Fong to the Canton style of hung ga but was not his student. He also introduced Tang Fong to Wong Fei Hung and this is how Tang Fong became a student of Master Wong. According to my Sigung, when he was alive, Lam Sai Wing was not recognized as a teacher to Tang Fong but a good friend. Just want to clearify what he was saying in his book. Also my sifu has all the records and history of Tang Fong, which was passed on to him by Ho Lap Tin Sigung, and not once does it mention that Tang Fong was a student of Lam Sai Wing.

Peace

Je Lei Sifu :cool:

The Southern Fist Subdues The Fierce Mountain Tiger

[Je Lei Sifu]

I forgot to mention. No we do not have the extra forms in our lineage that the Lam Sai Wing branch has. Ho Lap Tin learned all of Tang Fong's gung fu. and the sets we use (handsets only), are:

1) Gung Ji Boc Fu Kuen

2) Fu Hok Seung Ying Kuen

3) Ng Ying Kuen

4) Gow Gee Lin Wan Kuen (created by Tang Fong and Ho Lap Tin)

5) Tit Sin Kuen

6) Lao Sing Kuen (created by Ho Lap Tin)

Peace

Je Lei Sifu :cool:

The Southern Fist Subdues The Fierce Mountain Tiger

[DF]

Lam sai wing was the older training brother or sihing to Tang Fong. We had always acknowledge the contributions Lam Sai Wing had on Tang Fong's training. We have the same hand forms as Je Lei Sifu with the exception of Lao Sing Kuen, since we are from the Yuen Ling lineage of Tang Fong.

[loki]

Jei Lei and DF , thank you for the clarifications.


Peace

NO ROAD IS AS LONG OR FILLED WITH AS MANY OBSTACLES AS THE ONE TRAVELLED BY THE CHINESE BOXER. FEW ATTEMPT TO TAKE IT . THOSE THAT REACH IT'S END ARE EVEN FEWER.

[CPS]

I'm a little bit confused here by people saying Tang Fong never learned at all from LSW.

Quotation: "It was from Lin, Deng Fang first started learning the Hung's pugilism. Then to pursue his interest, he followed Master Huang Fei Hung for futher study of the intricacy of Hung's and also the osteopathy."
(Book Ho Lap Tin; Hung Ka Pugilsim, self defence, umbrella of dragon and tiger)

Here Ho Lap Tin says Tang Fong first learned from LSW, then from WFH.

In the text "Hung GAr, the kungfu of TAng Fung, Wong Fei Hung's other pupil", by John Seeto in IKF, Januar 1985:
Tang Fung first learned from WFH and trhen cam to HK. Quatation: "Tang Fung decided to join his clasmate LAm Sai-wing, who had already established himslef as an accredited instructor in Hong Kong. For a short period, Tang Fung underwent additional training under LAm Sai-wing, allthough the former had already mastered Wong Fei-hung's entire system. This has led to some confusion among the descendants of Lam Sai-wing's school...."

According to this text he learned later (as a brother).

So did TF study at any way under LSW or not at all?

[illusionfist]

They exchanged info just like kung fu brothers would.

Peace :D

Ok, ya'll have got me really confused. I've just started Hung Gar as one of my studies. Currently I am studying under Grandmaster Yim, HonSok. He is the Grandmaster of Teoul Moon Kung Fu. In the late 70's he trained in Taiwan under Grandmaster Chung Guk Chi in Hung Gar. Where does this name fall into the Hung Gar family tree? Hope this does not still any more crap up on this topic. I know this is my first post. But a little info. I started 5 animal in 82, have been practicing since. Started Tai Chi (Chen) in 89, practicing since. I'm not real new to the arts, but I'm still a student. Just curious where my Grandmaster's Hung Gar came from. Ya'll have a nice weekend.

Teoul

[Je Lei Sifu]

What you have read is in my sigung's book, but the interpertation can be misconstrued. As I have stated, Tang Fong had meet Lam Sai Wing prior to becoming a student of Master Wong, and just as it was during those times, many masters would share ideas and techniques, which is what happened in the case. Later on he trained under Master Wong and learned the complete hung ga system from him. Several years later Tang Fong meet up with Lam Sai Wing in Hong Kong, and they shared and traded ideas and techniques from each other. If Tang Fong had learned from Lam Sai Wing, I believe that we would have many of the forms that was created by Lam Sai Wing and added into his system, but this is not the case. And as I have stated, Ho Lap Tin never acknowledge nor was he told that Tang Fong was a student of Lam Sai Wing. As DF has stated, we share the same lineage, therefore, if what the Lam's teach is not in the lineage that comes from Tang Fong's students--Ho Lap Tin & Yeun Ling--then it is impossible to recognize him as a student of Lam Sai Wing.

I think a lot of confusion comes from the word LEARNED. Just as Wong Fei Hung had learned different things from different master of different styles, he was never a student of these master or the style. They were just mutual friends who exchange ideas and techniques.

Peace

Je Lei Sifu :cool:

The Southern Fist Subdues The Fierce Mountain Tiger

[This message was edited by Je Lei Sifu on 02-11-01 at 07:06 AM.]

[CPS]

Je Lei Sifu,

Thanks for your explanation.

[WongFeHung]

Hey, Hung Bros, it gets better-did you see the article in IKF where Lum Jo states that Lam Sai-Wing is the only branch that has the Ng Long Bot Gwa Gwun! (That's it, I'm goin to Hong Kong to take pictures with-oops, I mean train with Lum Jo)

[Quan]

if you had taken the time to read. you would know that the article does not say that only the lsw branch has the ng long bot qua quone. it says that it came from the yang family styles and that lam sai wing (let me repeat that) "lam sai wing" only taught it to lum cho and that he taught it to a select few. it doesn't say anything about any other "branch" knowing it or not knowing it just that if you are a lsw student thats where it came from. and as for you going to hong kong to learn from lum cho. he has stated that anyone who has a love for the hung is welcome. but if he did teach you anything, im sure you would just swear you got it straight from wong fe hung.

[illusionfist]

(sigh) :rolleyes:

[PM]

As far as I know, Ng long baatgwa gwan of Yeung clan was incorporated before or by Wong Feihung.
It was Lam Saiwing who created 2-man set (!!!) Ng long baatgwa gwan deuichaak. The other 2-man set created by Lam Saiwing is Gungji fuk fu deuichaak.
However, along with fist sets (e.g. Lauga kyun) and weapon sets (e.g. Pekgwa broadword), there are many 2-man sets which were incorporated/re-choreographed/made by Grandmaster Lam Jou and which are unique to Grandmaster's lineage - the most famous is Fu hok seung ying deuichaak.

[WongFeHung]

Now why would you go and say a thing like that? I certainly would not claim to have gotten anything from Wong Fei Hung-why should I when I'm channelling in Jee Siem ? wait a second...something's comming in...hey, I gotta go, Guan Gung wants to show me a few Guandao moves! see ya!

[Paul Skrypichayko]

If you look in some older topics, you'll find the group has talked about the tiger and crane sparring form. It's pretty doubtful that Lam Jo invented or choreographed the form, unless it's his own special version. This is because almost all of the other branches have fu hok doi da.

All these disputed claims of "someone" creating all this stuff and teaching all these students really makes you wonder about his credibility.

[Je Lei Sifu]

But in my school, each and every hand set as a two-man set to go along with it. From Gung Ji to Tit Sin.

These two-man sets were a part of Sigung Ho lap Tin's curriculum.

We also have Ng Long Baht Gwa Kwun Doi Cha.

Peace

Je Lei Sifu :cool:

The Southern Fist Subdues The Fierce Mountain Tiger

[tonker]

First of all,I'd like say that there are some interesting replies concerning Dong fong lineage.
I must say,that the posted reply that I read on the yee'Hung Gar website seem's to comply with Lam
Sai Wing alumni AKA[Holy Grail].Now lets be real
what reason would Master Lam sai Wing' students
record a lineage? Were they being provident,knowing that in the year 2000 there would be fabricators& deceivers who would dupe their student'making them think that he came from
the Elite. I don't think so.One of our great leader' stated that" History is best served to reward our research".The alumni wrote a history
of those that were instructors& or students.
The Lam Family don't care who you claim you learned from,but when you attack their integrity
then you better have some proof to back up what you claim to know. So far I have not seen anything tangible that can refute the statements
made by the authur of the article written in Inside kungfu,just fatuous talk.
Hay you guys ,just face it,you've been bamboozled
led astray.don't be angry at me or the Lam Family
we didn't start this the chiu clan did.Now all of you are in a up roar because what you thought was true may just be in fact hopeful desire.Don't get
emotional get busy do some research,trace your
lineage back to it's Hung Gar beginning i.e.
from Wong Fai Hung who Master Lam Jo said ony had
7 students,LAM SAI WING BEING ONE OF HIS MOST PROMINENT disciples down to the present day.
AND WHEN YOU STEP TO ME AGAIN HAVE SOME TANGIBLE
EVIDENTS,OTHER WISE DEVOTE THAT ENERGY TO PRACTICE.
SINCERELY
TONKER

from.

[illusionfist]

"...do some research,trace your
lineage back to it's Hung Gar beginning i.e.
from Wong Fai Hung who Master Lam Jo said only had
7 students..."

Research often dictates that you get info from multiple sources, not just one person (i.e. Lam Jo) or a book that was written by the same individual.

Peace :D

[Je Lei Sifu]

The so call holy grail is a bunch of bull. On Lam Chun Fai's website, it is stated that each master that is named on the so called holy grail wrote there names voluntarily. To help you out a little my friend. Not only is Tang Fong's name mention, but so is Tang Sao Kin, who learned from her relative, Master Tang Fong, not Lam Sai Wing. Also Listed under Tang Fong's Name is my sigung Ho Lap Tin. And I can tell you for a fact that these two people where not there to sign jack. My Sigung, Ho Lap Tin, did not get along with Lam Jo what so ever, so to say that he signed that statment voluntarily is bull. It is obvious, that you are the one that has been bamboozled, led astray, and hood-winked. My friend, and I do say that lightly, it is obvious you are of the Lam's, which in itself is okay, but recongnize that the holy grail is only a part of the Lam's Alumni and not accepted outside of that alumni. So next time you post, bring some proof which is outside of the alumni to the table, but if you can't, then you try to prove me wrong. Ain't nothing here for you but a whole lot of knowledge. Who do you know outside of the Lam's lineage? Do you know any of Tang Fong's people personally? Have you ever trained with someone who is directly from Tang Fong? And I don't mean someone who claims to be but can't prove it. I knew my sigung and I know what he taught as well as the history of my lineage. If you wake up and smell the coffee, maybe you would realize that we all have great respect for Lam Sai Wing and what he has done for the style, but you do not see that same respect for Lam Jo. Now if that didn't hit you like a ton of bricks, then you are useless to converse with. Enjoy your day.

Peace

Je Lei Sifu :cool:

The Southern Fist Subdues The Fierce Mountain Tiger

[T. Cunningham]

Tonker,

I wasn't aware there was any Hung Ga in San Diego. Who is your Sifu?

[DF]

To Tonker


You said that "The Lam Family doesn't care who you claim you learned from, but
when you attack their integrity then you better have some proof to back up what you claim to know. So far I have not seen anything tangible that can refute the statements
made by the author of the article written in Inside Kung Fu, just fatuous talk. Hey you guys, just face it, you've been bamboozled
led astray Don't be angry at me or the Lam Family…."


First of all, we are not mad at you or the Lam Family, nor did we attack their integrity. If any thing we have always acknowledge the contribution made by Lam Sai Wing to Tang Fong as a Si hing. You keep asking for proof and evidence and yet your only source of information as you put it is from your grandmaster Lam Jo. What makes Lam Jo’s statement more valid than my elder, Wong Jo? We can argue this forever and it is obvious to me that this situation will not end any time soon.
I respect the fact that you trust the words of your elders but as you, yourself put it "Don't get emotiona, get busy. Do some research, trace your lineage back to it's Hung Gar beginning i.e."

This is something for everyone to think about:
In the IKF article, it stated that "Being that Lam Cho was Lam Sai Wing's
nephew and was adopted at the age of six," This could only mean that Lam Jo was
adopted in the year 1916 since Lam Jo was born in 1910.

In the article " During that time, the Ching dynasty was in rule and Lam Cho
accompanied Lam Sai Wing who was being hunted down as a rebel by the Ching
government because of the Leh Shan Theater fight. Being proficient in hung
gar was their means of survival."

Well folks, the Ching dynasty ended in 1911, according to your own history
Lam Jo was just an infant (0-11 months old) and not yet adopted by Lam Sai Wing.

You stated "from Wong Fai Hung who Master Lam Jo said only had 7 students, LAM SAI WING BEING ONE OF HIS MOST PROMINENT disciples down to the present day." I will now give you the respect and the time to double check this claim. our si gung Tang Fong is number 76 disciple of Wong Fai Hung. (Are you aware of how many disciples did their Bai See to Wong Fai Hung?

We can continue this debate and more questions in public or as you wish we can share our information in private either via email, telephone or in person. I think we all agree if we all continue at this pace, we will just
be the amusement of the general public.

At this point I would like to cut to the chase. I can see by your writing that you are /or are associated with Donald Hamby. You use the exact word for word philosophy as he has used on a recent conversation with my si dai Pedro Cepero. I would like you to come from behind your curtain (Nickname) and tell me who you are. This way everything is up front. From this we will know how serious you are about this situation.

You know who I am, besides being the most senior disciple of sifu Frank Yee of the Tang
Fong/Yuen Ling lineage, I also came from a martial family from Hong Kong.
My grandfather was a member of the Nan Wah Chin Mo Association in HK. He is of the same age as Lam Jo, Wong Jo and so are his friends. My information regarding that time period is not solely from words of my elders but also from people of other styles who were around during that time period.


Dixon Fung

Yee's Hung Ga Kung Fu Academy

[Brian_CA]

Hi Guys and Gals,

I have been watching everything over the last several months and I said I would not speak any more of the subject but enough is enough. Looking back at the arguments, the accusations and the bitterness it is time to call a truce. This senseless bickering is not good for Hung Gar. Yes, the Lam Jo Branch of Kung Fu believes what it believes. Other Branches believe what they believe. Cannot we just leave it at that? Do we really live in a COMMUNITY that is so racked by bitterness and old feuds that we all end up looking bad? Last year I was lucky enough to attend a tournament in Germany, where a common community was stressed. Everyone had hopes that all branches of Kung fu would be able to get along and do good things. It seems that since then just the opposite has happened.

We all have been like little children that are finger pointing on the playground. Polite jabs are made through chat room names and Internet connections. Very few of you seem to be willing to give you real name or kung fu family. I do not fault any of you for these, as fear is a natural part of life. This subject is SO tired. Let it go. Let people believe what the want to believe and keep the truth in your hearts. Train hard and let the main guys (I.E. THE MASTERS INVOLED) work out the problem between themselves.

I will admit to being from the Lam Jo/Y.C. Wong Branch. In fact, I am proud to say that I come from them. My Sifu is a good man and teaches good Kung Fu. I respect others beliefs and accept that we have differences. I believe that trying to enforce my ideals on others is not good kung fu.

Let my also make something clear.

THIS IS NOT AN OFFICAL STATEMENT FROM THE LAM FAMILY OR Y.C. WONG. This is my own opinion and only mine. I am not speaking for anyone but myself and what I think, I realize that you all will more than likely tear into me. Go ahead, that is your right. But it does not MAKE you right.

So for the good of the future of Hung Gar let this subject go and let go back to talking about this great art and what brought us to our Sifus to begin with.

Sincerely,

Brian Monnier
San Francisco, CA
Student of Y.C. Wong

[PM]

Well said, sihing.

[DF]

You wrote "This senseless bickering is not good for Hung Gar. Yes, the Lam Jo Branch of Kung Fu believes what it believes. Other Branches believe what they believe"
You are probably correct that this issue has no end in sight. However you also said that you are not speaking on behalf of your family. I respect and agree with you as fourth generation student to another fourth generation student. Unless you can presuade your elders to come and have an open dialogue with us, there is not much I can do at this moment. I promise you, my line of communication will be open to you and your family if they decide to get together with us and talk things over. I am more than happy to play the role to relate mesaages back to my elders.

peace

Dixon Fung

[WongFeHung]

I have had the opportunity and good fortune to study both the Tang-Fung and Lam Sai-Wing branches, as well as some village Hung Kuen. I have had the pleasure of studying with Si-Gung Frank Yee and also YC Wong, and others, and what it all boils down to is.. I just LOVE Hung Kuen, no matter whose lineage, whose family, as long as it is passed down completely intact, without compromise it's good. I like to stay outside the politics and the ****ing matches unless I see something that's just way out of line, I feel it doesn't concern me, and let them sort it out on their own. We are all after all, brothers. Hey, I grew up with an older sister=we don't lways get along, but we're still family. Bottom line= you are all my family and I am **** proud to have a family as large as this one. I hope you all feel the same way and I don't think we should let one man's opinion or quote change this. I personally would like to see more netwoeking on our part, maybe a Hung Kuen federation which would be devoid of politics and just for networking and sharing and growth, (yeah, Rik ,and in a perfect world...)who knows? There are certainly enough of us out there who are more concerned with the further development and promotion of our art than whos **** is bigger. Yes? No?