i was just think about something......

[hskwarrior]

i was wondering how many of you guys have different forms with the same material as your other forms in it?

and if you had the opportunity to combine the best from those 3 forms into one would you do it?

do you think that by doing so is wrong or right for the benefit of your lineage?

in your opinions what are the pro's and con's of doing so?

[Shaolindynasty]

Interesting question. I pretty much smmed up my opion on this in an article I wrote "Traditional Yet progressive". The link can be found here http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=693

I feel the creation of that particular form is of great benifit to us. I think the benefit definatly depends on the intentions and experience level of the person creating the form.

As a choy lay fut practitioner I don't think you should be afraid to inovate. History has shown past masters weren't afraid to. It's what keeps us relevant and prevents stagnation of the art.

[hskwarrior]

yeah, you know back in the early days of our lineage in the u.s.a. Lau Bun taught things like kau da, ping kuen, sup ji, and much of these three original sets as handed down from the fut san hung sing kwoon had some of the same techniques or sections as did the other three.

So he combined all three to form our sup ji kau da. the elements are easily identified from each form. the other thing i like about what he did, was he cut out the repeating sections from the forms to form one complete form.

From what i learned about lau bun, he was more on the here and now then what came before. as a teacher who taught for real life combat, he cut out things that he felt weren't beneficial to his training.

I mean Lau Bun survived the tong wars which was going on in california during his time......not forgetting that the NON CHINESE would mistreat the CHINESE so Lau BUN had to focus his gung fu for real life situations. From what i learned, he was a very survival minded type of man and possessed an incredible insight into the usage of clf.

anyways, back on track.........i believe in NOT being stagnant. I won't lie about innovations. anything i create that my sifu didn't hand down to me i put into the category of "MODERN CHOY LEE FUT." in fact, i created "SUP JI LIN WAN KUEN" and developed it based on my own understanding of the Choy Lee Fut that was handed down to me.

a personal philosophy i preach within my school is this........

"GUNG FU IS A HAMMER, YOUR SIFU IS THE JOURNEYMAN AND YOU ARE HIS APPRENTICE. YOUR SIFU GAVE YOU THE HAMMER, AND IT IS UP TO YOU TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT HAMMER.

1) YOU CAN EITHER HANG THAT HAMMER UP IN THE GARAGE, OR

2) YOU CAN TAKE THAT HAMMER AND BUILD THINGS. SHOW YOUR SIFU WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH THE SKILLS THAT HE HANDED DOWN TO YOU."

HOWEVER, EVERYTHING IMPROVES OR IT GETS OBSOLETE. HOW MANY PEOPLE STILL OWN A VCR WHEN YOU CAN UPGRADE TO DVD? WE ALWAYS UPGRADE OUR COMPUTERS TO DO WHAT WE NEED IT TO DO.

ANYWAYS, SD, THANKS FOR YOUR WORDS.

EVEN THOUGH YOU GAVE ME SOME ATTITUDE AT LAST YEARS TAI JI LEGACY, YOU'RE STILL A GOOD GUY ;)

[Shaolindynasty]

[QUOTE][EVEN THOUGH YOU GAVE ME SOME ATTITUDE AT LAST YEARS TAI JI LEGACY, YOU'RE STILL A GOOD GUY /QUOTE]

did I? What are you talking about?

[hskwarrior]

RIGHT BEFORE YOUR FIGHT, YOU ME AND JOE WERE SITTING THERE, AND I SAID YOU NEED TO GET ANOTHER TAT ON THE OTHER SIDE TO BALANCE IT OUT AND THE WAY YOU RESPONDED WAS KINDA...........ATTITUDISH, WITH WE DIDN'T REALLY KNOW EACH OTHER AT THAT TIME IN MIND. IN JEST, YOUR RESPONSE WOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO START A FIGHT OVER.......AT LEAST WHERE I COME FROM....lol........:D:D

SINCE YOU DIDN'T KNOW ME, I DIDN'T REALLY TAKE IT PERSONAL. I STILL ROOTED FOR YOU IN YOUR FIGHT. ;)

[Shaolindynasty]

I don't remeber but I think i just said "its hard enough for me to get a job now"


IN JEST, YOUR RESPONSE WOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO START A FIGHT OVER.......AT LEAST WHERE I COME FROM....

No need to try to flex.

There was no attitude on my end.I guess you just preceived it that way

[hskwarrior]

i wasn't flexin.......just sayin that it threw me off at first.

[jdhowland]

Good topic. I have mixed feelings about the large number of sets and redundant moves in fat systems such as CLF, Praying Mantis and Tibetan White Crane. As I see it, the sets serve two purposes: 1) to train proper structure and functionality, and 2) to form a catalog of techniques for the system.

One way of looking at it is that having redundant moves in numerous sets is just a way of anchoring the style to its basics. I doesn't hurt to get more exercise and challenge the brain while learning the canon.

Another viewpoint is that (as has been proved time and again) if you have good training you simply don't need sets to learn how to fight. That isn't their purpose. The application of what we learn from them is the essence of gung fu.

I preserve the sets as I learned them because they are history and I happen to value that. I don't own them. My students deserve to receive them as part of their heritage. Like holding on to a letter some ancestor received from George Washington, a set can be invested with values beyond its original purpose.

If I were to create my own system I would feel embarrased and ashamed to require my students to learn dozens of sets for graduation. The most important techniques of a fighting system could be conflated into a few sets of hand-to-hand material. They could be organized into categories such as striking set, grappling set, ground fighting set and weapons.

The traditional Japanese koryu systems are admirable for their efficient training methods. In these schools dozens of kata may be taught. Each one is designed to enlighten a simple technique, situation or insight about fighting. A kata may involve a single move or several, but anything lasting longer than ten seconds after the first engagement is unusual. This kind of approach-response training is used in Chinese systems as well when we deconstruct the sets to practice applications.

Anyone who has been around awhile knows hundreds of techniques and variations. If you want to pass them on you have the options of making up numerous sets or teaching them in smaller bits. So what's next? Will electroninc information systems replace the kyuhn as the popular method of preserving technique?

Be well.

[Shaolindynasty]

I think the "new" set would have to serve some function. In the case of the Hon Jerng lin Wan Kuen from our lineage, the form just places and emphasis on the concept of direct continous attack. The techniques in this form are based on the 10 elements so of course they are seen in other forms. It's the underlying concept that is important. if you don't know the concept to your form then clues are usually found in the name.

I personally wouldn't delete any forms because I want to continue to pass them on and show respect to my martial ancestors.

[Lama Pai Sifu]

Good topic. I have mixed feelings about the large number of sets and redundant moves in fat systems such as CLF, Praying Mantis and Tibetan White Crane. As I see it, the sets serve two purposes: 1) to train proper structure and functionality, and 2) to form a catalog of techniques for the system.

One way of looking at it is that having redundant moves in numerous sets is just a way of anchoring the style to its basics. I doesn't hurt to get more exercise and challenge the brain while learning the canon.

Another viewpoint is that (as has been proved time and again) if you have good training you simply don't need sets to learn how to fight. That isn't their purpose. The application of what we learn from them is the essence of gung fu.

I preserve the sets as I learned them because they are history and I happen to value that. I don't own them. My students deserve to receive them as part of their heritage. Like holding on to a letter some ancestor received from George Washington, a set can be invested with values beyond its original purpose.

If I were to create my own system I would feel embarrased and ashamed to require my students to learn dozens of sets for graduation. The most important techniques of a fighting system could be conflated into a few sets of hand-to-hand material. They could be organized into categories such as striking set, grappling set, ground fighting set and weapons.

The traditional Japanese koryu systems are admirable for their efficient training methods. In these schools dozens of kata may be taught. Each one is designed to enlighten a simple technique, situation or insight about fighting. A kata may involve a single move or several, but anything lasting longer than ten seconds after the first engagement is unusual. This kind of approach-response training is used in Chinese systems as well when we deconstruct the sets to practice applications.

Anyone who has been around awhile knows hundreds of techniques and variations. If you want to pass them on you have the options of making up numerous sets or teaching them in smaller bits. So what's next? Will electroninc information systems replace the kyuhn as the popular method of preserving technique?

Be well.


Very good post. I feel the same.

[hskwarrior]

okay......see.

the yuen hai lineage at one time was huge. He had many many students and taught at the hong kong hung sing kwoon. BUTTTTTT, there are no existing lineages directly from him other than Lau Bun. We are the keepers of Yuen Hai's material.

in my opinion, it is and was up to us to evolve our gung fu according to our own specific needs since we were the last of the mohikans so to speak.

we have taken what was taught by yuen hai, and i'm sure there are some things directly from lau bun, jew leong my sifu, and even myself within our lineage. i believe it IS up to us to continue on Yuen Hai/Lau Bun's legacy into each and every generation.

people seem to forget, the forms chan heung taught just didn't magically appear. he created them, koon pak and chan yiu chi created forms. first there were 49, now there are over 200. virtually everyone does at one point or another to test their own abilities.

i agree, a new form HAS to have FUNCTION, just can't be a bunch of random moves without purpose. there are alot of things in our gung fu that i feel should have deeper training forms for. for example, there are methods, ideas and concepts on the chop choy that aren't found in forms. just in application. but if a form contained effective elements for the various chops choys IMO would be a great thing.

a form is just a form, one way to preserve your ideas so to speak.

thanks folks for your words.

[Shaolindynasty]

for example, there are methods, ideas and concepts on the chop choy that aren't found in forms. just in application

Curious,do you mean things that could be in the forms if so like what?

[hskwarrior]

sorry, i had to rewrite my thoughts.......

sometimes when we experiment with the usage, we find things not typically done in forms, be it sweeps, hand techniques, defense, offense or whatever.

you practice the fighting technqiues, but only when you have a partner to work with. so by documenting, and preserving things not taught within your lineage is a great way to expand your knowledge.

for example, tam sam's lin wan chop choy most likely wasn't found in a form. it was developed. or even biu ma. i'm sure biu ma came as a discovery, or concept before it shaped into what it is today.

okay, let me ask you this SD........how many ways do you know how to kwa sow chop?