CLF forms for tournaments!

[iron_silk]

Hi! Serpent, Fu Pow, Extrajoseph, CLFNole, and anybody else interested...


I recently started to get back into studying kung fu and I notice that the forms I learned are different from the students from other schools. The other schools' masters are actually disciples of my sifu.

Another master (of a different style) told me that the way I learned it was more traditional (from my sifu) and the way the others did it (from my sifu's disciple) was changed. ie. wider stances, extra stomps, and wushu flashy moves. (swaying body movements for look).

The change was meant for demonstration, incorporate wushu styling, and other such.

I thought it was funny how it changed so much within the small community of Chinatown and only one generation next could develop so much differently.

Do you guys notice such change in your schools? Example like the way LFH did it compared to how his long time disciple who taught other change?

Thanks! This is just for fun. I like observing subtle changes. Much like the experiment of passing a voice message through a room and notice the change of the message as it does.

[CLFNole]

Iron-Silk:

This is also true with my own line. I learned late in Lee Koon Hung's teaching and his style had evolved and was slightly different than the way he taught some of my sihings back in Hong Kong in the 1970s.

Some moves were slightly different and some postures were changed to look stronger but the forms were basically the same. No wushuy style like you referred to.

By the way are you a student of Wong Ha if so I know the school & sifu that you are referring to. We saw them at John Leong's tournament in 1995 and they are doing aerials and splits and we asked them what style they were and they said Hung Sing CLF. My sifu just shook his head when he watched. It looked pretty but it didn't have the power that is characteristic of CLF.

Peace.

[firepalm]

GM Wong Ha has been teaching since the mid sixties & has had several groups of students from different time periods. Those that he taught in the height of his school (60s to mid 70s) were not necessarily taught the same as he taught in later times. Many of them were also taught to varying degrees of expertise, some also spent more time on fighting application while others learnt more of the forms & weaponry (during the peak years of his school, they did many demos & needed forms people). Additionally those that went on to teach emphasized their specialities and were affected by external factors, as in the case of the clubs that competed (not all of GM Wong Ha's people take part in competition). In very recent times there has been a resurgence of vitality from GM Wong Ha & his disciples, with many setting up schools & classes. Ironically there is some division amongst many of these students now sifus, with each claiming to be teaching what is original, or perhaps improved. Who is to say what is better, what GM Wong Ha taught earlier or later?

Any larger CMA school with a long enough history has these problems. Hung Sing club in San Fran, has students teaching the style & forms differently although they all learned come from the same club. Wah Lum school is spread all over the US yet there is quite a bit of variance. Wing Chun school from GM Yip Man same scenario.

Don't always buy into the, "ours is correct or 'traditional' & theirs is changed, wushuized, *******ized, etc..." Do your research & pick what you feel best suits your needs. :cool:

[nospam]

I agree with firepalm. Differences in teaching and in how a style is interpreted varies from student to student. I have experienced this in my style as well. It is the ever changing face of MAs. There are great teachers that held much knowledge and taught many. Many more of these students could not surpass nor equal their teacher and vast knowledge was thrown out the door as useless, never understood, and or never taught int he first place.

Regarding patterns. It is a pitty that most patterns now a days are more for tournament prettiness than what they were created to be. But that is where the public demand has directed supply. A simple relationship.

And I agree, a lot of patterns have become wushu. Also, there have been new tournament categories- traditional and contemporary.

Too many of the general public see the MA flicks and define what they believe MA fighting and end results should be. They forget or are too eager to laugh at the many out-takes at the end of the movies.

Another interesting 'generation' that I believ will hurt the grwoth of modern MAs is the children in MAs for the past 10 years or so. MAs has exploded (always going through phases) and parents have thrown their kids into MAs classes at $75+ per month and continue to fuel the direction of their own demise. What can you teach a child besides wushu? Yes. Yes. I am aware of the physical and perhaps mental bonuses anyONE can get from MAs, but if you think on it a while...I'm sure you can see my point. As I drive by these Mckwoons at night, I see nothing that remotely resembles MAs except for the gi's :)

I am sure this MA youth movement will water the vast majority of MAs out there as they become teachers. What is the venue but tournies and classmates.

Keep the faith I say. Plus bills gotta be paid...C'est la vie.

nospam.
:cool:

[iron_silk]

First off thanks every one for replying!

I don't know much about my kung fu lineage and situation so it's really neat to be informed!

BUT to be fair!...

1) I wasn't referring to my sifu (GM Wong Ha) teaching style changes. But it could've have been a factor I didn't consider though.

2) I did not make any quick judgement. No opinion was given by me nor mention that it was development flashy vs. advancement. So I didn't say what was better or not, etc...

3) My master still teaches the way I use to learn it in the early 80s. Differences I have seen are from his disciples who became sifu and taught others. I felt it was fun to notice the difference. Yet not offering a judgement in anyway, only noticing differences.

4) It was another sifu that told me (NOT MY OPINION) that what I learnt or did was considered traditional and others newer to fit their purpose. Whether the heavy emphasis of wushu, competition affects, or merely each individual's own styling.

5) Conclusion:

I am saying its competition not because I felt that was the reason but instead it was the reason told to me. The sifu himself/herself could have specifically had the student perform that way so to add more entertainment value for the audience. Still that is only a maybe and only info that was told to me.

So I made no quick judgemen nor did I mean to start any debate. I only observed some stuff and wanted to share with others.

Thanks everyone for sharing! Especially firepalm whos almost seems like a historian of knowledge of Kung fu in Vancouver. It's great to know someone so close to it all for myself.

Thanks again!

[firepalm]

Just insites, your points are noted (I saw them as nothing more then observations).

Just an addition GM Wong Ha has never added in 'wushu' components or extra stomps for theatrical effect to my knowledge. There is only one school by one of his students that has added in 'wushu' so to speak. That particular school originally started to incorporate wushu elements when they first started to venture onto the competitive circuit. Since however they generally keep the two very separate.

Other instructors from GM Wong Ha have however made their own changes, stomping, calls, etc...

GM Wong Ha generally never instructed his students in the CLF calls (wah, dic, etc...), some of his students turned instructors however through their own research or instruction from other sifu later incorporated this.

A lot of the variance you see is simply a case of preference on the part of the instructor in the way they wish to teach CLF and the areas of the art they see as relevant.

If you look at the Vancouver My Jong La Hon school originally taught by Alex Kwok in the seventies, you have several students that went on to teach & all in entirely different ways. You have one instructor that has gone almost completely in the modern wushu direction, another that while teaching My Jong couples it with internal arts, another that emphasizes Karate style point fighting, etc, etc...

I see it as kind of being akin to a parent child scenario; the parent brings the child up but once they strike out on their own what the child does is ultimately up to them. Hell why do you think their is some much variation in CLF as a whole.
:D

[iron_silk]

firepalm
Sorry I only brought up the topic of debate so to avoid any confusion, but not necessarily indicating that you think so. It's just based on what you wrote that got me thinking what others might get into:

"Don't always buy into the, "ours is correct or 'traditional' & theirs is changed, wushuized, *******ized, etc...""

No biggie!

Also like my first point (and in addition) I never mentioned that my sifu (Grandmaster Wong Ha) made any changes what so ever. Only that some of this students did. In fact there was an article on one of my si-hing's in regards to his ability to keep up with the times. So there was never any confusion about my sifu changing the ways of executing a form but only "his students" have.

Also I am not sure and you can correct me on this but I think my sifu was somewhat against tournaments/competition?

I am glad you made the point about calls!
Cause sifu never taught me any calls. Back when I was still learning CLF (from GM Wong Ha).

At first I thought those who practiced calls were kind of funny, but after awhile observing how others from different system uses it I felt that perhaps I wasn't doing the full part of the kungfu.

I thought he wasn't going to teach us calls until we reached a certain skill level. I kept seeing other people using calls and they say it was related to "qi" and power. Such as in Hung Gar "Tit Sin Kuen."

As I read more on CLF I learned that calls from different schools were unique, and that CLF calls help others identify us as fellow CLF practicioners.

To tell you the truth I felt kind of left out. But many years later and only recently a master (of another style) told me that calls are not important. Calls are only used to help the student breath out when executing a move, and to tell the master that the students are breathing properly. Wow...all those years I thought otherwise...is this right in your opinion? I mean that calls are essentially not that important but only ques for breathing?

Actually firepalm do you know of any masters who had a chin woo kungfu background? Thanks again for your help and insight!

[iron_silk]

Everybody/Anybody?

I guess I am wondering what kind of changes people tend to see in forms.

I know there is a history of changes in people's system that is why there are different lineages and etc...

But to see it within such a tight area and time frame is fascinating to me. Like literally watching as history change right in front of my eyes.

Thanks!

[Sho]

Interesting thread.

I wouldn't necessarily want to be taught any contemporary flashy versions of CLF forms, but instead some main principles how to add more flavour to the forms yourself in case of demonstrations and such. Not compulsory to learn, but only if the student wants to. Just my humble opinion, oknp.

[Sho]

But when we're talking about form changes in general, I think it's terrible in the sake of competitions. Okay, we've got wushu for form competitions, but let's disregard that point of view for now. It's quite difficult to organize a forms competition if everyone does their forms differently. I mean, a few inches varying this way or that way is no problem, but when the whole technique is changed - now that's a problem. In our school, the forms change all the time. The forms are not changed just to p1ss people off, we know that, but enough is enough. They should be universal to a certain extent, which means that they should be comparable in competitions. <rant>Competition is not the main point, okay, we know that too, but ffs Chan Heung probably wouldn't recognize any of the forms that are taught nowadays!</rant>

[iron_silk]

yeah?

Cause sifu never taught me any calls. Back when I was still learning CLF (from GM Wong Ha).

At first I thought those who practiced calls were kind of funny, but after awhile observing how others from different system uses it I felt that perhaps I wasn't doing the full part of the kungfu.

I thought he wasn't going to teach us calls until we reached a certain skill level. I kept seeing other people using calls and they say it was related to "qi" and power. Such as in Hung Gar "Tit Sin Kuen."

As I read more on CLF I learned that calls from different schools were unique, and that CLF calls help others identify us as fellow CLF practicioners.

To tell you the truth I felt kind of left out. But many years later and only recently a master (of another style) told me that calls are not important. Calls are only used to help the student breath out when executing a move, and to tell the master that the students are breathing properly. Wow...all those years I thought otherwise...is this right in your opinion? I mean that calls are essentially not that important but only ques for breathing?

[Fu-Pow]

Iron Silk

What is the name of your school?

I think I competed against some students from your school in a tournament in Vancouver.

If it is the school I'm thinking of, I didn't think it was very fair that they were throwing Wushu moves into what was supposed to be a "traditional hand form" event.

For example, one of the competitors had a kip up in his sup ji kow da hand form.

I mean people can do what ever they want but show me one other "traditional" form from any other style that has a kip up in it.

[firepalm]

Just to clarify for you Fu Pow as I know of which school you speak. That is in fact Shung Ying KF Club, run by Hilbert Yiu (Shung Ying) a student of GM Wong Ha (your Sifu will know him).

Sifu Hilbert has been teaching independantly of the Wong Ha school for some time and as such has made some modifications to the forms. He also has many of his students doing wushu & internal arts, I am not saying this is good or bad, just merely stating a fact.

Iron & Silk is with the Wong Ha School (to the best of my knowledge), his posting of this thread was as I understand in reference to the changes he has observed of many of the schools of students of GM Wong Ha. Generally speaking within the Wong Ha school they do not make such changes however once someone strikes out to teach on their own, Wong Ha really doesn't tell students what to do.

Just playing devil's advocate, I have seen the modifications you speak of but what is the difference between that & another sifu added a few more 'Gwa, Sou & Chop' or a few more clawing actions etc... versus a kip up or splits (these moves are not just modern wushu but can be found in other 'traditional' systems such as Northern Styles like Eagle Claw Fan Tsi & Wah style, even Southern styles like Fujian Dog Boxing)? I have seen CLF forms that other sifu have added the single digit finger hand position of Hung Gar, should this be allowed?

Unfortunately for you, you are entering competitions without any tight controls on what is actually traditional. Next time you should bring up to the head judge or forms arbitrator.

Just food for thought!


;)

[JAZA]

About the single digit, there are some Chan family form that have this.

[iron_silk]

Thanks firepalm!

Fu-Pow I believe firepalm has answered the questions for me.