Relationships between different Southern styles.

[The Xia]

Many Southern styles trace their lineage to the Fujian Shaolin Temple. One can see similarities between many of these styles. Hung Gar and Choy Lay Fut are two seperate styles but I think most would agree that they share many similarities. Many have even called them sister styles. I have never seen Fut Gar nor read/heard much commentary on it's relation to Hung Gar (aside from how it combined with it to form Hung Fut) so it's difficult for me to discuss how it fits in. Anyone have commentary on this? Many believe it to be one of Choy Lay Fut's roots if I'm not mistaken. One can surmise that the similarities between these styles comes from the Southern Shaolin root. The problem that arises from this conclusion is how to explain Bak Mei and Fujianese arts that also have roots at the temple. Bak Mei has many similarities to other Hakka arts such as Lung Ying, Southern Mantis, etc. Personally, I believe that Hakka arts and Fujianese arts look closer to each other then they do to the other Southern Shaolin arts that I mentioned. Perhaps the explanation for this is that the other Southern Shaolin arts come from Preist Jee Sim while the Hakka and Fujianese arts have an origin elsewhere in the temple. Then again, is it just Bak Mei that has a Shaolin lineage or do the other Hakka arts have it too? If the other Hakka arts don't, how do you explain their place in this?
Any thoughts on this theory folks?
Oh, and it is not my intention to offend anyone. I'm just sharing my thoughts. I could be completely wrong.

[hskwarrior]

hey Xia,

yeah in Hung Sing CLF under the Jeong Yim branch our fut ga came from Monk Ching Cho. and MonK Ching Cho was connected to the Fujian Shaolin Temple. as it goes......;)

However, when i was in fut san during the performances on stage i commented on one performers performance, and asked what CLF school was he from? I was told that it wasn't CLF but Fut Gar.........

I was completely shocked because i saw some many similarities in that fut gar i was watching, I could've sworn it was CLF.


peace.

[TenTigers]

I see a relationship in Fut Ga to Tibetan White Crane, so I wonder where that connection lies. Hung-Ga, pre-WFH was played alot smaller, smaller horse,short bridge, short strikes, duan-ging-short power. The opening sections of the "Pillar forms", most noticable in Fu Hok Seurng Ying Kuen show this. After WFH's exchange with Wong Yun-Lum, of Hop-Ga, you see the introduction of the long arm technique. I play Hung-Ga,as well as the Hakka Kuen, and I constantly see these relationships.

[Satori Science]

Fut Ga is related to Wing Chun, it shares many similariteis to some qualities in Hakka arts but also contains more techniques and mid range application?? that is what I always thought. Like Fut Ga was a more complete, rounded Wing Chun.

For Sifu Frank, in Hong Kong many Bak Hsing schools call their gung fu "fut ga" My Sigung called his style Bak Hsing Fut Gar at his school in Vancouver. Sifu expalined that when ever some asked Tam Sam what style he did he said "Fut Ga, Buddha Style," I've seen two or three schools besides mine that describe their Bak Hsing as Fut Ga.

[htowndragon]

i saw a old video from the 60's of SF chinatown kung fu performance.

i saw my sifu when he was young performing fut gar that he learned from lee keung.


i thought it was choy lee fut.

my sifu also said that CLF back in the day looked a lot like hong ga.

he also learned a village version of hong ga under ma sik. shorter bridge, a lot of angry tiger movements. ma sik used to be a bouncer for a gambling parlor. heard he killed a guy during a fight with a gwa choi to his head.

[The Xia]

Anyone see much of or have experience with Fujianese styles like Five Ancestors fist or White Crane to see how they fit into this?

[htowndragon]

uhhh....they look the same?

[htowndragon]

honestly the most "unique" of the chinese MA styles, and by unique i mean has a unique way of moving and fighting principle, as well as focus, are the tibetan styles,

[Satori Science]

this is a version of the Bak Hsing Sup jee Kuen, that i found labeled as "Fut Gar" on youtube

This sifu is actually a third generation master under Tam Sam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YRkeoqDDPc

[Infrazael]

this is a version of the Bak Hsing Sup jee Kuen, that i found labeled as "Fut Gar" on youtube

This sifu is actually a third generation master under Tam Sam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YRkeoqDDPc

Holy crap, that looks completely different than the CLF I'm used to seeing. Does most Buk Sing look like this? I can definitely see a huge difference here . . . . .

[Gru Bianca]

I see a relationship in Fut Ga to Tibetan White Crane, so I wonder where that connection lies.

TenTigers,

Sorry mind to elaborate further???

Thanks

Regards,

Luca

[CLFNole]

It just looks like CLF, yes its played a bit different and combinations might be different from what you are used to seeing but all I see is CLF. Actually I see a lot of the same stuff we do just with a different interpretation.

[Infrazael]

What I was talking about was the interpretation and focus of the movements. While it's obvious that he's using bin jing and everything that makes CLF what it is, the interpretation like you said is different, and the emphasis is different too.

Thanks again for post that.

[CLFNole]

Right but there is no huge difference. If you even look throughout the Lee Koon Hung line you can see differences but that is just kung fu. If you watch enough buk sing you can definately see that Sifu (LKH) had some buk sing influences. Just notice all of our punches are chop choy's, we never what would be considered a typical punch with a closed or clenched fist.

[Satori Science]

CLF Nole is right but at the same time, there is clearly a different emphasis in the way the movemnts are played, as well as the type and the style of sequencing in traditional Bak Hsing forms. And in the Case of Master Wai on that video he doing excellent Bak Hsing. The movemtns are the similar definately, and there are influences back and forth. I do agree that there is only one CLF really, this is what Grandmaster Lung Jee always taught my sifu.

That said, there is a disitnct differance in how we release our gwa-sow-chop from any other style.

Every Master adds on to their stlye. Tam Sam our Sijo was a very gifted fighter and modififed his CLF tirelessly. We play our forms diferrently based on the modifications that Tam Sijo made.

[CLFNole]

I think every branch and lineage has a different emphasis and each branch and line have some unique things that they do. I would also guess if we got together and went over different things they wouldn't be as different and unique as we might think.

My point was to look at that video and say "wow it is so different from what I have seen" is a bit extreme and something someone who hasn't been exposed to much CLF might say.

[JAZA]

I think it's pure CLF.

For example, when I see Sifu Vince or Dave Lacey sparring or drilling is the closest I've seen to Sifu Chen Yong Fa doing the same. I guess not many will agree, but if you set your perception to stare at differences you will see only differences.

[byond1]

My 2 cents -

I see a huge differance to "Southern Siu Lum" arts, and arts that are Hakka. When i say differance, im not refering to just physical hand movements. What i mean are the entire use of the Body and Jing are totaly differant beasts. Differant "Engines" as a friend of mine "Coined". The use of breath as well as the use of the Spine are completly differant.

Now looking at Fut Gar, there is absolulty no relation to Wing Chun other than they are both chinese in origin. Im part of a research institute(AWCKRI) that is currently tracing the roots of Wing Chun to Weng Chun County White Crane. 2 branchs, in particular of White crane, We believe currently, are involved, as well as an internal Snake boxing system from Emie Mountain. Plus some components from another 4th system, as well as the application methods being derived from another totaly differant 5th source.

Of cource when one examines modern WCK, such as H.K branch they wont see as strong of traditional kung fu roots, that White crane has. BUt when you look at older branchs of WCK such as Cho Gar, Yuen Kay Shan, or Kulo village, the White Crane is obvious. As well as traditional Kung Fu training methods.

Ive always wondered where and what White Crane came from. And have no clue, as my research currently doesnt include tracing White Cranes roots. I have always seen a stronger connection to Southern Mantis, and other Hakka arts to White Crane, than most traditional southern Siulum.

Oral tradition of Weng Chun county (~Might~) point to 18 Lohan Fists as the base. With Siu Lum Ng Ying Sau, Bok Hok being used as the Flavor. How possible this could be, i wouldnt pretend to know. I have never seen 18 Lohan fists , other than material in a book, which is very limited.

Many suggest WCK comes from Hung Gar or other "Chi Shim" arts, but that couldnt be from the truth, based on mechanics, Jing Manefestation, Ancestral methods of organizing material, Kuen Kuit, Application, Hand structures, training methods, concepts, principles, which all substantiate Oral tradition as well as the simple fact that WCK isnt a "Kiu Sau" type art, and is a "Conceptual/Jing based Art" (Just like Weng Chun County White Crane).

[Vajramusti]

Of cource when one examines modern WCK, such as H.K branch they wont see as strong of traditional kung fu roots, that White crane has. BUt when you look at older branchs of WCK such as Cho Gar, Yuen Kay Shan, or Kulo village, the White Crane is obvious. As well as traditional Kung Fu training methods.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If by HK branch you mean Ip man wing chun---you seem to be making IMO some
unwarranted assumptions. The roots of IM WC also go to the past through Leung Jan.

Joy chaudhuri

[brothernumber9]

a while back in another thread, I had brought up, in one of my many useless posts, That I suspect there are underlying influences and similarites in "southern" kung fu styles that particularly made their way into and out of HK. For lack of a better way to coin it "HK Southern" kung fu styes.

There are glaring similarities in "southern long" styles, like Choy Lay Fut, Hung Fut, Jow Ga, Hung Ga, Mok Ga, Hark Fu Mun/Fu Jow Pai, and others, PARTICULARLY from lineages within or that made their way from Hong Kong.

Anyone else think so too? Or no?

[byond1]

No worries Joy. That statement isnt deragatory. H.K WCK IE Yip Man branch, does not include many of the traditional Kung Fu training methods. Thats not a negative, simply fact.
Yip man did in fact stream line the WCK system, and is aknowledged by most students, for doing so. By traditional methods i refer to Training methods and implitments. For example use of Chop Sticks, Paper, Candles, Jars, were not taught by Yip Man. Some students of Yip have reintroduced these ideas, most do not. Another traditional training method...the Tang Huen. Yik Gan training is not included in any branch i have encountered. This isnt a judgement call on Traditional training methods and implements. It is simply stating the fact. Bamboo Jong is found in almost all Mainland WCK, as is Gwun Jong. Which is also not found in the H.K system.

Many who use H.K WCK, as there point of referance do not see as strong of White Crane characteristics, as they have gradualy been streamlined into smoother angles, with the bridges. Your branch is one of the few in H.K that retain the older shaped Tan. True YKS WCk, Kulo, Cho Gar, Lo Kwai faimly are more similar in appearance to White Crane. This doesnt mean its better. Again simply fact.

Yip Man produced many fighters. So again, please dont project something negative onto my statement. I would never think to make a value judgment on the Yip Man system in relation to other Mainland branchs. Nor make a value judgment on older training methods vs. more progressive training methods. Facts are simply facts.

[TenTigers]

"Many suggest WCK comes from Hung Gar or other "Chi Shim" arts, but that couldnt be from the truth, based on mechanics, Jing Manefestation, Ancestral methods of organizing material, Kuen Kuit, Application, Hand structures, training methods, concepts, principles, which all substantiate Oral tradition as well as the simple fact that WCK isnt a "Kiu Sau" type art, and is a "Conceptual/Jing based Art" (Just like Weng Chun County White Crane)."

I think this is because many people have a mistaken impression of what kiu-sao actually is. People see the movies, see the forms and decide that Hung Kuen uses the kiu-sao in only the hard way it is demonstrated. Hung-Kuen is not played any more like the forms than wing chun fights like siu nim tau, or tai gik kuen fights in slow motion . Separate "gung-faht", from "kuen-faht." Kiu-sao is alot more complex than simply a hard bridge. There is listening ging, and sticking,trapping,running,leaking concepts within the kiu-sao faht. Again, look towards the opening movements of the "pillar forms"to see the similarities, and you will see a completely different art.

[byond1]

Hi 10 tigers

I dont disagree with your defintion of Kiu Sau, nor do i train using that methodology. Nor do i disagree that Jing is used in ALL Chinese Martial arts, which would include a Kiu Sau art, which i didnt equate to simply "Hard Arms". I thought Kiu Sau meant each bridge hand had a differant jing or energy attached to it, as well as traditional position.

That is completly differant though , to being a Conceptual based system that uses Jing Fatt as the base. There are very very few systems that could be considered Conceptual. Most of them are systems classified as "Internal" such as Tai Chiu Kuen, Ba Gwa, Hsing i, Yi Chuen, White Crane, and Wing Chun. This isnt an exhaustive list by anymeans.

Sad thing is i see some WCKer attempting to fight with Siu Lien Tao, using the system as a technique based method instead of a conceptual based method.

[TenTigers]

"I thought Kiu Sau meant each bridge hand had a differant jing or energy attached to it, as well as traditional position."
That is the way we usually see it described,demonstrated in articles, books, etc. That is not the way (the Hung Kuen that I practice)is played. Ok,well yes and no. Each "bridge" has a different ging(jing), but it isn't,"Oh, now I use this bridge, like this." The bridge encounters energy, and naturally reacts accordingly. If you were to ask, "Which bridge did you use?" there is no answer. I just went. It is all based on sensitivity,reaction, and the internalization of the structures and concepts. The "traditional positions" are simply the structures-and there are of course variations within the structure, that create proper, or ideal alignment for each.
Herein lies the problem-the more you try to explain this, the more complicated-overcomplicated you make it, until you are tangled up in your own terms. Trying to explain in words, pictures, etc something that needs to be felt to be understood. Gung-Fu-real Gung-Fu is taught from Sifu to student in direct transmission, hands-on. "You need to steal your Sifu's hand" is what my Sifu and Si-Hings have always told me.

[The Xia]

honestly the most "unique" of the chinese MA styles, and by unique i mean has a unique way of moving and fighting principle, as well as focus, are the tibetan styles,
How so?
I find Lama Pai, Pak Hok, and Hop Gar to be similar to Choy Lay Fut in some ways. They both have lots of long arm techniques that use whipping power. The main difference I see is that the stances are narrower. That and there seems to be more of an emphasis on the closed fist in the Lion's Roar arts.

[htowndragon]

i would say it would be the footwork and training methods/concepts.

but i do agree they are similar to CLF in lots of ways.

the thing that surprised me after trainign in hop gar though, was that other than the "obvious" in the application, etc. hop gar is a very very sophisticated and complex style. sure u can take the hands and just brawl with them, but you can brawl at a different level as well.

[htowndragon]

also the composition of the system is unique. what i mean by that is the separation of the "different lines" of attack.

look at the different lions roar arts. the one thing that u can see remained consistent is the idea of "fist seeds", in which most of them are still the same. add or subtract a few numbers, some different names, but its still there.

the division of the "long arm" (first line attack) techniques, short hand techniques, etc.

pak hok
law horn
wei to
daat mo

the four divisions of my hop gar. sets have never been an emphasis in the style.

you ask a choy lee fut guy, show me kao da, cheung kune, etc.
wing chun guy, show me sil lum tao, chum kiu, bil jee
hung gar, show me gung gee fook fu, fu hok seurng ying
bak mei, gow bo tui
lung ying, mor kiu
fukien white crane, san zhan
tong long, sam bo gin or variants

etc. etc. each style has a "core" set that defines it.

some hop gar/lions roar lines have totally eliminated sets all together.

show me chune, pao, kup.

[Buddha_Fist]

Fut Ga is related to Wing Chun, it shares many similariteis to some qualities in Hakka arts but also contains more techniques and mid range application?? that is what I always thought. Like Fut Ga was a more complete, rounded Wing Chun.

Or that Fut Ga is a more flowery, indirect, less efficient method - It all lies in the eyes of the beholder, or what the eyes of the beholder have been trained to see.

There is nothing better than a good old beimo to clean up misconceptions!

:D

[The Xia]

also the composition of the system is unique. what i mean by that is the separation of the "different lines" of attack.

look at the different lions roar arts. the one thing that u can see remained consistent is the idea of "fist seeds", in which most of them are still the same. add or subtract a few numbers, some different names, but its still there.

the division of the "long arm" (first line attack) techniques, short hand techniques, etc.

pak hok
law horn
wei to
daat mo

the four divisions of my hop gar. sets have never been an emphasis in the style.

you ask a choy lee fut guy, show me kao da, cheung kune, etc.
wing chun guy, show me sil lum tao, chum kiu, bil jee
hung gar, show me gung gee fook fu, fu hok seurng ying
bak mei, gow bo tui
lung ying, mor kiu
fukien white crane, san zhan
tong long, sam bo gin or variants

etc. etc. each style has a "core" set that defines it.

some hop gar/lions roar lines have totally eliminated sets all together.

show me chune, pao, kup.
I didn't know that any of the Lion's Roar folks got rid of sets altogether. I was under the impression that most just condensed the material. I heard that Lama Pai, for example, has tons of sets. However, many of them are repetitive so they were condensed by a lot of the Pak Hok and Hop Gar masters. And aren't certain sets sort of the "cherry on top" for the style? Like the Min Loi Jam almost being to Lion's Roar what the Tid Sin Kuen is to Wong Fei Hung-Hung Gar? Which would mean that getting rid of all sets would be getting rid of that "cherry". And other styles (Choy Lay Fut included) also have fist seeds.

[htowndragon]

yeah all styles have seeds.

but "sets" are not emphasized in the lions roar as much as other styles. mostly drills.

[Mulong]

Fojiaquan has no true similarities with yongchunquan; fojiaquan uses the mabu (horse footstep) were as youngchunquan uses bazibu (eight character footstep).

Honestly, southern styles boxing (nanshiquan) can be dived into two regions, i.e., Guangdong and Fujian:

Guangdong styles have the inclination to favor longer arm method (changshoufa), i.e., hongjiaquan, cailifoquan, etc., were as Fujian styles favor shorter arm method (duanshoufa), baihequan, baimeiquan, etc.

[The Xia]

yeah all styles have seeds.

but "sets" are not emphasized in the lions roar as much as other styles. mostly drills.
I thought that was true of Pak Hok and Hop Gar but not Lama Pai. From what I understand, Lama Pai has tons of forms many of which repeat themselves. What I thought that Hop Gar and Pak Hok did was trim the repetitive stuff. Not saying any are superior to the others, they all emphasize the same concepts, conditioning, and techniques if I am not mistaken.

[The Xia]

Fojiaquan has no true similarities with yongchunquan; fojiaquan uses the mabu (horse footstep) were as youngchunquan uses bazibu (eight character footstep).

Honestly, southern styles boxing (nanshiquan) can be dived into two regions, i.e., Guangdong and Fujian:

Guangdong styles have the inclination to favor longer arm method (changshoufa), i.e., hongjiaquan, cailifoquan, etc., were as Fujian styles favor shorter arm method (duanshoufa), baihequan, baimeiquan, etc.
I would add a third category for Hakka styles. I should mention (if I already hadn't) that I see many similarities between Hakka Kung Fu and Fujian Kung Fu. And from my understanding, Hung Kuen from the Wong Fei Hung Line got more longarm techniques from the Lion's Roar fighter Wong Yan Lam but other Hung Kuen lineages are more focused on shorthand.

[Mulong]

Indeed, Fujian styles are heavy influence by the Hakka culture, i.e., short hand method; were as the Guangdong styles have a cosmopolitan quality to them, i.e., i.e., potpourris of styles intermixing; this is mostly based upon Guangzhou, i.e., Canton, being a major harbor city.*


*The first harbor open to Western nations to trade with China.

[bredmond812]

i heard a story that a travelling monk from Tibet came to the southern shaolin temple and taught a few people, such as Bak Mei, Ng Mui, some tibetan style martial arts. Could this be a possible influence as to where these Fujian/Hakkanese Martial arts seem to have a Tibetan influence. I could be getting my facts messed up, but the message is this: travelling tibetan monk, southern shaolin students --> new systems.

[TenTigers]

Xia writes,"I see many similarities between Hakka Kung Fu and Fujian Kung Fu. And from my understanding, Hung Kuen from the Wong Fei Hung Line got more longarm techniques from the Lion's Roar fighter Wong Yan Lam but other Hung Kuen lineages are more focused on shorthand."
Very true, and may I also add, the opening sections of all the pillar sets-most obvious in Fu Hok Seung-Ying Kuen, are all Fukien/Hakka influenced,short bridge,small horse.

[The Xia]

i heard a story that a travelling monk from Tibet came to the southern shaolin temple and taught a few people, such as Bak Mei, Ng Mui, some tibetan style martial arts. Could this be a possible influence as to where these Fujian/Hakkanese Martial arts seem to have a Tibetan influence. I could be getting my facts messed up, but the message is this: travelling tibetan monk, southern shaolin students --> new systems.
I never heard that before. The closest thing to that I know of would be the Lama Pai influence on Wong Fei Hung Kung Fu.

[The Xia]

Choy Lay Fut, another art with Southern Shaolin roots, is a long arm style.
Oh and before anyone says that Choy Lay Fut is more then just long range techniques, of course it is! Long arm doesn't mean only long range. Long arm can be done in close range combat.
That being said, I have no idea what Mok Gar and Fut Gar are. But I don’t know of any Choy Lay Fut being influenced by Lion's Roar. Therefore, my guess would be that Southern Shaolin did have long arm being practiced there. Thoughts anyone?

[jdhowland]

My guess is that long fist existed in Guangdong by the beginning of the 19th century. The monk Choy Fook is the earliest historic source I know of for what was probably an atypical style and must have been a northern import.
Similarities between Siu Lam styles and the Lion Roar tradition are hard to judge at this late date but I'm sure it's not a simple matter of one stemming directly from another. There was a complicated interchange of ideas as these styles developed in the late 1800's. Lama styles are often taught with twisting punches that were not part of the original system. Tibetan White Crane has sets such as Kau Da, Mui Fa, and Ng Ying Kyuhn that are completely different from forms of the same names in Hung Gar or CLF, but the names show that a cultural continuity was important. At the end of the Ching period Lama arts had to become Chinese arts in order to survive.
According to Quentin Fong, most TWC teachers were former Hung Gar men. Some were CLF as well. Those who studied under GM Ng Siu Chung or his students Au Wing Nin and Tang Jok Ming (there may be others) learned "non-shaolinized" Lama.

[Buk&Hung Sing]

I always thought Fut Ga was a Southern short fist, this proves me wrong. I also see the similarities in the Wai video between Hung Sing CLF, but not so much with the Buk Sing. When taught by Master Chau, Buk Sing didn't do alot of big swinging movements or overhead blocks like Hung Sing. The opening salutation also is more like Hung Sing. Use of the Kai Lo Ma by Buk Sing instead of the Gwai Ma by Hung Sing sets them apart.

[SIFU RON]

Many Southern styles trace their lineage to the Fujian Shaolin Temple. One can see similarities between many of these styles. Hung Gar and Choy Lay Fut are two seperate styles but I think most would agree that they share many similarities. Many have even called them sister styles. I have never seen Fut Gar nor read/heard much commentary on it's relation to Hung Gar (aside from how it combined with it to form Hung Fut) so it's difficult for me to discuss how it fits in. Anyone have commentary on this? Many believe it to be one of Choy Lay Fut's roots if I'm not mistaken. One can surmise that the similarities between these styles comes from the Southern Shaolin root. The problem that arises from this conclusion is how to explain Bak Mei and Fujianese arts that also have roots at the temple. Bak Mei has many similarities to other Hakka arts such as Lung Ying, Southern Mantis, etc. Personally, I believe that Hakka arts and Fujianese arts look closer to each other then they do to the other Southern Shaolin arts that I mentioned. Perhaps the explanation for this is that the other Southern Shaolin arts come from Preist Jee Sim while the Hakka and Fujianese arts have an origin elsewhere in the temple. Then again, is it just Bak Mei that has a Shaolin lineage or do the other Hakka arts have it too? If the other Hakka arts don't, how do you explain their place in this?
Any thoughts on this theory folks?
Oh, and it is not my intention to offend anyone. I'm just sharing my thoughts. I could be completely wrong.

Sifu Jim and I were Grandmaster Ark Y. Wong's first non- Chinese students. I find this (and other subjects) interresting and wish to share my opinion.

I studied Kung Fu from Grandmaster Ark Wong only. He learned a great deal of Fut-Ga from Monk Pang ( Canton). Sifu explained to me Fut-Ga is the sign of the Monk.

He also taught a Hung-Ga style that came from the "Boat People".

They are different.

Of course there are manny other Fut-Ga and Hung-Ga styles and they are all very good. I love all Kung Fu.

I am just sharing an opinion and do not wish to disrupt anything.

With Respect to all,

Sifu Ron ;)

[jdhowland]

I thought that was true of Pak Hok and Hop Gar but not Lama Pai. From what I understand, Lama Pai has tons of forms many of which repeat themselves. What I thought that Hop Gar and Pak Hok did was trim the repetitive stuff. Not saying any are superior to the others, they all emphasize the same concepts, conditioning, and techniques if I am not mistaken.

I used to assume that any school called Lama must be of an older tradition than the later-named Tibetan White Crane and Hop Ga schools. But most Lama Pai schools have been renamed after descending from various TWC or Hop Ga lineages. Reverting to an older name is fine; I usually call what I teach "Lama" simply because our teachings come from sifu who, among them, used all three brand names and Lama is the the most inclusive. "Lion Roar" is even older, but I don't normally use it as a name for what I teach simply because my teachers did not. My point is that Hop Ga and TWC did not have to economize by dropping sets from a hypothetical early-stage Lama Kyuhn system. Modern versions of Lama were enlarged by additions from the various teachers. Here's a clue: if your Lama style has any "sahp-jih" patterned sets, they are probably 20th century additions. According to Quentin Fong, the oldest type of kyuhn were similar to Luhk Lehk-style line drills. Of course, many schools did simplify or stay with simple drills. There was a Hop Ga school in Hong Kong, from Choy Yit Gung's lineage, that used no sets at all!

[PM]

hello to all,

Hung Ga and Gwongdung White Crane/Hap Ga/lama paai relationship discussion:

http://www.hungkyun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=173#173