Hung Ga in YKM?

[jon]

Ive read a few posts saying that YKM has some HG influence.
I was hoping maybe someone could tell me a little about how the two arts where intergrated and what aspects of HG are in YKM.
Are there any full Hung Ga forms?
Also if anyone knows any of the history of YKM [looking towards FT here;) ], could they tell me A] which YKM master intergrated it?B]who they learnt the HG from?
These are in no way trick questions im just generaly interested in how these two arts got put together. I know very little of YKM other than it uses a fair amount of Bak Mei forms.
Any responces would be welcome?

[fiercest tiger]

We have no original Hung Ga forms in Yau Kung Mun. We have a form called Ying Ching Kuen; which has dynamic tension, swinging arms, and it's very hung gar-ish. Our late Grandmaster Har Hon Hung learned Hung Ga and Choy Li Fut from his uncle in Guangzhou when he was young and was supposed to be pretty good at these arts as well. He was defeated by Cheung Lai Chun in Guangzhou and became a student after that. All of Cheung Lai Chun's students from this area were kung fu people that he defeated. I also heard that CLC closed down around 15 Hung Gar and Choy Li Fut schools in Canton in one day. I kind of like the Hung Ga influence in Yau Kung Mun to build strength, stances, etc. It is very similar to the iron wire form of Hung Ga. That is all that I can give you for now. Talk more later.

[jon]

Thanks heaps for the information mate:)
lol still this quote i find a little odd...
"I also heard that CLC closed down around 15 Hung Gar and Choy Li Fut schools in Canton in one day"
For a start thats a LOT of schools to visit in one day, was he in a REALLY bad mood?
Also Lam Sai Wings School was in Canton if im not mistaken, and im pretty sure CLC didnt show up there on his little rampage hmm wonder why. Not sure on exact times he was teaching in that area though. Still many good Hung Ga schools in that area and most are still around.
Not stating this to argue, simply i never like when people try and hint towards one art being better than another.
Again though thanks for the info of how the arts are related.

[fiercest tiger]

hi mate,

my comment wasnt to try and start trouble im just passing on info, i love hung gar i think its a great system. clc must have been in a hurry and to be around canton so fast he must have the fastest legs in town. talk about mo ying gerk! :)

anyways thats all i have to tell you, probably only half is true!:)

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Hi there,

I'm not here to start trouble either. Just to let you know that I don't think YKM is very good.

[Buby]

When have you ever seen YKM? And who did you see demoing?

I ask cause not to many people have seen the real YKM system.

Anyway, like they say to each his own. :rolleyes:


Buby

[fiercest tiger]

Thats cool, each to there own! as long as im happy doing what im doing and i find its effective then i dont care what people have to say.

all the best:)

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Buby

There are a number of schools in the vicinity. Like other southern styles, theres alot of emphaisis on the shape of the hand, translating the terms into chinese which is meaningless given that all of us in the States speak english. Plus the foot work is very sluggish.

Your right fierce tiger. YKM is suitable for students with certain atheltic dispositions.

[Buby]

"Buby
There are a number of schools in the vicinity. Like other southern styles, theres alot of emphaisis on the shape of the hand, translating the terms into chinese which is meaningless given that all of us in the States speak english. Plus the foot work is very sluggish."

I can't speak for the YKM schools in your vicinity, if there's even one located in Jeresy. All I know is that my sifu (Fiercest Tiger) knows his sh*t and does a hell of job passing on his knowledge.

We don't place lots of emphaisis on the shape of the hand. Actually we place more emphaisis on stance work, luk ging (proper body mechanics), conditioning, and lots of pad work/fighting drills. What type of fist we use depends on where we're aiming for and type of damage we're trying to inflict.

Translating the terms into chinese might be a waste to you, but it's actually taken my studies a step further. I take it you don't understand what I'm taking about, cause you consider it a waste.

Our footwork sluggish? I doubt you have seen YKM in action. Hey maybe you saw a beginner or someone that doesn't train properly. For all I know maybe that practioner just plain s*cks. YKM isn't the fixer upper for everyone. Have you ever heard of ba bo gung si? Have you ever seen a YKMer rip through fubo? It's really explosive!

Can you tell me where in Jerezy is the YKM school/s located? I would love to go have a look at what you saw. From what I know of, the only ykm schools in the states are located in Cali. and not in Jerz.....But who knows!

Buby

[fiercest tiger]

;) mad love

[L D S]

Fiercest Tiger.

"I also heard that Cheung Lai Chun closed down around 15 Hung Gar and Choy Li Fut schools in Canton in one day".

This is strange because Cheung Lai Chun and Lam Sai Wing of HG were contemporaries. They worked together in the Southern Kuo Shu Institute in Guangzhou (Canton).
Although PM is a style with very good principles and tactics I do wonder if such claims are supported by real evidence.

[lungyuil]

jon

You study Hung Gar under Joseph don't you?
I studied under him for a short period at a school in Parramatta.
Does he still teach there?:)

[jon]

Hey how are you:)
Yes i certainly study with Joseph and have for five years now.
If you were there in that time there is a chance i may know you. I only went to private lessons for a long time but im back doing both now.
I take it by your profile your studying YKM now? How is that going and are you studying with F.T?
Anyway hope you enjoyed your time with Joseph my body is going numb just thinking about my next class and thats in another 3 days, darn stances;)

[fiercest tiger]

you would know better, i was told this by a bak mei sifu not ykm!

probably right! too me i think its all bull and i really dont care i was just talking about what i was told.

[lungyuil]

Jon

Joseph is really into his conditioning. I remember training 3 star forearm conditioning, stances in a circle and hitting the phone books.

At the time i was training there were about 5 students constantly including his kids (a son & daughter). How many forms does he teach as part of his syllubus these days? Back then it was 4 forms incl. 1 pole.

What nights do you train and where?

Yeah, i train under FT. Its going great, finally found the art for me, so to speak, we train hard. alot of conditioning, drilling of the forms, breakdowns etc. Training is a killer as always.:(

[jon]

Yep that sounds like Joseph alright. The style of Hung Ga is really big on conditioning and he likes to train the way he was taught.
His classes are and always have been very small, he prefers to teach how he likes,rather than to change the class to suit new students so to speak. Hence not many stick around for that long.
Jospeph actualy teachs all the Hung Ga piller forms plus several weapon sets but getting that info out of him can be tricky.
He has several made up short sets he likes to teach newbies but in Hung Ga proper he teachs these sets.
Lau Gar fist, Cross Tiger Fist, Tiger Crane, Five animals Five elements. Iron Wire.
For weapons
Short stick, Lau Gar staff, butterfly twin short swords, 8 diagram staff.
He used to never teach forms in class though, it was more a private lesson thing, i remember the most you used to see was the occasional senior going though Lau Gar.
The classes these days are Monday and Wensday at the school from 6.30 to 8.30+ and Saturday mournings from 6am.
Im glad to hear YKM is working for you though, its important to find a style that suits both your body and personality.
I never thought of myself as a Hung Ga man but over the years its slowly cemented itself into my personality.
Still F.T sounds like a great sifu i wish you all the best on your journey

[Yum Cha]

Ego makes a good point about Southern Styles, one that deserves at least an exploration. Speaking in broad based generalities only for the sake of this diatribe...

Southern styles aren't as accessable as many other styles of martial arts, especially the karate and TKD styles and other heavily sport oriented or organised arts. This isn't really anything new.

The stances are diffucult to come to grips with in the early stages, I couldn't agree more. It takes years to learn them, much less to learn to make them work for you. Sluggish is a poor execution, stable and energetically economic is however not to be confused with sluggish. The bouncing about of a boxer and kick boxer has its place, just that it is different, like a wrestler's shuffling...

All you have to do is watch how many southern stylists drop into kick-boxing when they put on the gloves. And, many, many do, as anybody who has ever attended a tournament will testify. Granted, the gloves dictate the style of combat to a certain extent too.

Understanding a southern style is a matter for most westerners to learning a different perspective of combat, as well as the techniques. Very few, if any, southern styles believe in trading blows for a time, gradually wearing down the opponent for a finishing off power technique. Sparring in lots of southern styles risks being counter productive.

A pre-occupation with hand and fist shapes is probably a fair observation from outside as well, as these are "next level" lessons that a novice in southern style wouldn't really understand, or be able to apply properly, but must come to terms with. A gloved fist is much easier to use from the beginning, and much more in keeping with western psyche.

What I'm getting to, is my own humble observation that southern styles take much more time to come to grips with because you have to change attitude, as well as learning new, un-natural techniques.

Which amongst the YKM and PM players ever felt totally natural with that stance to begin with? Or the inward pointing elbows? You body has to learn the new postures and accept them as natural first. One year, perhaps two? If you do your lessons... (or perhaps 15 years?? <grin>)

Now, the chinese language thing. Well, thats a trickey one, and I'm coming to terms with it now. As a round-eye that doesn't speak cantonese that learns from a Cantonese Sifu that doesn't speak much English, language was never a part of my 15 years of training. Watch and do, over and over, and over. I got tidbits and learned some names of the combinations, but not the translations. Now, I'm getting a bit more of the language stuff from a few friends, and pestering Sifu, and it's interesting, but also a distraction. On the whole, it does improve my appreciation of the art though, if not my execution.

I guess my message is, concentrate on the workouts, take language as an extra - tempting that it may be - and you'll learn well. Southern styles (generally speaking) are special because they take time and devotion to learn, the lessons are not obvious, not quick and easy to use in reality.

That's why southern stylists are different personalities than other stylists (if you're not culturally dictated to learn a style that is). I know lots of people who don't like to fight that choose southern styles for their physical and cultural richness. Likewise, some of the most deadly people I've ever met do southern styles for their effectiveness in real life.

Then of course, finding a good Sifu, and not a outright fraud, simple pretender or "Bruce Lee" wanker is another challenge....

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Yum Cha,

That's an interesting perspective. It is true that the rules of combat to a large extent influence the weapons of combat. Boxes bounce because they don't expect their legs to be taken out. Wrestlers leave their groin exposed and head unguarded because no hits, not kicks to the groin. Muey tai employs large round house kicks that leaves the groin pretty much exposed- again no kicks allowed to the groin. Just some examples.

Going from a rule based to a no-rules situation (I'm not refering to NHB as there are rules - and taking down one opponent to the ground assumes that your facing only one opponent at a time in controlled surrounding of a ring) one could look towards Northern Kung Fu which was developed by the military for combat and elite body guard services.

If one could find a competent si fu, one would not only understand how to deal with real life situations but also understand why boxers box the way boxers do as well as other combat related sports.

As a result it also shows the combat difficiencies of Southern Kung Fu which I'll just say there are many for the time being which Northern Systems also address.

I disagee that cultural richness should be a factor in choosing a kung fu style as it would cloud the primary objective of choosing an effective combat system.

I do appreciate your prespective and its refreshing to read about a different idea without the smut and sexual inuendo that many posts have become.

[Buby]

Can you tell me where the YKM school is located in Jerz.?


Buby

[jon]

I dont usualy bother resorting to insulting people BUT...
You are a total moron and are spreading total BS like its gospell.
Would you mind PLEASE stating ANY valid points as to how a southern system could be inferiour to a northern? Can you also tell us where on earth you have seen southern kung fu?
What style do you study, that you deem to be so much stronger?
Anyone who insults a whole region of china which is famous for its strength in martial arts had really want to back up such statements with serious facts and good skills.
From your posts so far im guessing you have no real training other than what you have read in books. Im also guessing you have never seen a southern martial art let alone tested there hands in person.
Please if your ever in Australia look me up ill be happy to give you a taste first hand. Im not that skilled but i have enough to stand up for what i belive in.
Once again please state ANY POINTS... So far you have made nothing but sweeping statements.
Again please answer my questions or else im just going to assume you have nothing.

[Yum Cha]

You make several good points, I'm glad you understand where I'm coming from.

Culturally speaking, lots and lots of people don't take up martial arts just for the fighting aspect. Some do because it is the way of their people, others because they want to learn more about other cultures, and on, and on....

Likewise, I know many artists who don't spar, don't want to spar and aren't agressive enough to survive street fights. Perhpaps that's why they started learning, for physical confidence, but people find what they search for, and these kind of people are looking for different things.

We've all seen grandma doing Tai Chi, right? One person chooses NHB or BJJ, another Hsing I or Ba Qua - one chooses White Crane, another chooses Tak Kwon Do - it is a rich world, and Art figures into the equasion.

It isn't all about fighting for lots of people, granted, without reservation, it is for many, the vast majority.

Along the lines you were developing earlier, generally speaking, norther styles have long arms, southern are shorter. Choy Lee Fut, from my very limited exposure, seems to be in the middle.

In a bar, long arms, like long legs, are pretty hard to bring into play.... On a field of battle, the same restrictions don't apply....

An example: Pak Mei stance is difficult, yet quite protective of the groin, making it quite hard to break the eggs, and likewise, very hard to sweep. The solidity of the stance is fundamental to the fighting philosophy, but I caution you, if the student doesn't have 5 years training, I would be very suspect that they could execute properly. 5 years of many styles and you're a teacher!

Picking a style is a very personal decision, some people invest their lives into their pursuit, some people build their identities around it, that's why people get so crankey when you bag theirs.

There's a saying that most martial artists hear sometime or another, "Its not the style, it's the skill of the practitioner."

Good look on your journey, I hope you're lucky enough to find a good teacher.

[fiercest tiger]

nice post my brother!;)

total moron hahahahahah

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

That doesn't make sense to train in a martial arts that requires 5 years in order to stand properly. Better to train in other styles where you can be an expert in 5.

So if you train from young, you could be an expert by age 65. is that why the style is called Pak Mei (white beard)!

[yuanfen]

Another hollow post on Soutern fists from the trolling Ego-Extraordinaire! Best ignored.

[Paul]

>>>if the student doesn't have 5 years training, I would be very suspect that they could execute properly

what?

[lungyuil]

Yum Cha,
So are you saying that because i don't have 5 yrs of stance training, my stance wouldn't be that solid and rooted properly?

I have to disagree with you on that. I'd say it is more the teachers fault. It would mean that his/her explanations are not easily understood.

I admit that sometimes students are either lazy or not "into" the arts and the proper training, but to execute a proper stance, they should be able to do it within even 1yr or less.

All this in the end depends on the student and the level of understanding they wish to achieve of the art they study. Some see it for self defence, others for fun, and then there are "us" who are passionate about it that try to absorb averything possible.
Does that mean we won't be any good unless we train for 5yrs minimum?:rolleyes:

[Yum Cha]

Oops, the ankle biters are after me :D

Lung, from your profile, you do have 5 years, and I certainly wasn’t addressing you personally. I will graciously cede the point that a devoted student could learn much faster than a lazy one, I chose 5 years as more of a maximum, by 5 years one would be expected to have developed good stance techniques, beyond just static Ma Bu. In Tae Kwon Do when they gave you your black belt, they said you had learned the basics. I think of it the same way. Please excuse my sweeping generalisation.

Most novices spend their time and effort in understanding their patterns, and the more interesting hand techniques. The stance, meaning not just the static Ma Bu, but all the transitions and incarnations, is very complex and takes practice of 10,000 times, according to the wisdom of the old ones.

My experience with YKM and Pak Mei is that very few students can come to grips with the stance in a year, however, my experience is my only measure. When I learned YKM, I was devoted, and my Sifu was unquestionable. I trained 3-5 nights a week and finished Yin Ching near the end of my second year. Sam Mun Ba Qua was still a year away. You surely know these patterns, you’ll know what I’m talking about. Ying Jau Lin Que introduces yet more new lessons. It took me 5 years to get to that pattern under the teaching of Sifu Leung Cheung, but he was conservative. I wouldn’t blame him, rather, I thank him for his thorough training.

In my following 12 years with Pak Mei, I learned everything again, and again, and again. Personally, I have yet to master anything. Take my opinion with a grain of salt, it’s your journey, and good luck to you.

My experience has been that novices think they have a good stance, move on to more complex techniques, then discover that they can improve their stance in ways that improve their techniques later, once they have learned several patterns. Then they learn more effective techniques, and then more stance lessons that improve them, and around it goes, around and around. Pretty soon, they are no longer novices, and the style begins to reveal itself. That’s the richness of the style, not the weakness of the student.

The subtlty of the stance is such that it keeps on showing new advantages as you develop your skills, and one follows the other.

Paul:
What what? Perhaps I’ve answered already, in not, ask again.

Ego

Why study a style where it takes 5 years to learn the subtlty? I think the answer is in the question. What are you looking for? Why get a university degree as opposed to a High School diploma? Why get a Masters, a Phd? I know Millionaires that never finished High School? Anybody with $99 can become an expert in Gun Fu in less than an hour, so the question once again arises, what do you want?

Subtle, rich, cultural styles with internal and external aspects are different to athletic sporting styles. Its just my choice, I don’t claim that my choices are the best or the only.

[Buby]

What do you feel was the hardest thing to get used too when it comes to stance training?

I think the hardest thing for me to get used to was the front foot pointing 45 and circular stepping. Opps...While in Batt Ding Bat Batt (front stance)

SiHing Lung - Hey Bro whats poppin? How's training going? Give my regards to all my bros. and sis.

Sifu - I'm finally online from home.:D Yeah I know it's about time.:D

Take care,
Buby

[Yum Cha]

Front foot is a big one indeed, but not too hard to remember, just get kicked in the balls a couple of times, and you'll remember. :eek:

Hips rolled under and butt tucked under in Cat stance, as well as in the others.

Keeping the trailing foot down off the toes, thinking from the heels...

Finding the right bend in the trailing leg, not to much, not too little.

Maintaining the grip with the toes of the foot against the heel and getting the lock from the twist.

Reverse bik bo (reverse tiger stepping).

sheeeeit! The list goes on, and on, and on...:D

I snapped an achilles tendon a few years back, so I have a couple of additional personal challenges too...

[jon]

As im fast starting to find out the difference in stances is yes everyone can LEARN a stance in a matter of hours but to truely be able to use it. Now that can take a LOT longer. Im a five year hung ga student i wouldnt dream of saying i had even mastered the horse stance.
To be able to use a stance in actual combat requires it to be part of your mental and physical programing. You must go into and out of it like its nothing your muscles simply forming the stance without you having any part in it.
Doing that requires years of training and dedication.
Stances are often quite harsh on the body as there designed to set joints in a particular way. This will only become confortable over time.
Yes you can learn to do a stance in a matter of months but there is an old saying my sifu seems to like.
The basics are the top and the top is the basics.
IE there is a reason old masters still spend long times in stance.


BTW EGO
"That doesn't make sense to train in a martial arts that requires 5 years in order to stand properly. Better to train in other styles where you can be an expert in 5".
Im glad you think this way. Makes me feel kinda warm and fuzzy that im doing something worth while:D
Stupid is as Stupid does

[Paul]

Maybe I misunderstood, but it looked like you were saying it would take someone 5 years to use their kung fu effectively? I don't agree with that, but hey it looks like you have a lot more experience than I do. It's entirely possible that I misunderstood what you were saying.

[Yum Cha]

Jon,
It seems you know what I'm talking about, good on ya.

Paul,
Yes and no. If you want to learn to fight or defend yourself in a hurry, southern styles aren't the fastest to learn, and thus apply. This forum is full of stories about Kung Fu guys with years of experience getting their butts kicked by untrained Hard Cases.

However, the depth of the art contains its own rewards.

Now, where are George and Ringo?

[jon]

I think its going to depend on what your view is of effective and who your planning on defending yourself against.
In five years imho
You should be able to easily beat an half trained fighter who doesnt fight at all, or possibly even a street fighter who fights quite a bit.
More than one person very questionable.
Weapons problerly no chance.
Another highly skilled fighter - totaly up in the air
You see thats where all this comes down. How effective do you want your kung fu to be?
Just get you by in terms of health and conditioning and proberly let you get out of a nasty situtation. Five years is proberly pleanty.
Have a level that another kung fu master would respect, five years is but a drop in the bucket.
This is where the art side comes into it. If all we want is to know if its going to work heck buy a gun or just carry a knife?
If what you want to is feel in yourself that you have a true level of skill and one that can be appreciated by someone else of a high level, then your gonna be training your whole life.
To be a master of stance means your a master of your own body weight and balance, you should also be able to compleatly absorb force in your stance without having to move out of it.

Im just trying to agree with Yum Cha here, that there is always more in the basics than we juniors think. Just becouse you can do something doesnt mean its perfected.

[Paul]

Yum Cha and Jon,
cool, I get what y'all are saying.

>>>This forum is full of stories about Kung Fu guys with years of experience getting their butts kicked by untrained Hard Cases.

Is this the art or is it the practitioner. street fighting can be a reality check for some people. The so called "untrained" hard case actually knows what works for them in a real situation. How many martial artists can say that???

[Yum Cha]

There's an old saying, "Its not the art, its the practitioner" and when people get into spitting matches about this art or that art, remember that.

Many traditional arts can't accommodate "sport" fighting, unlike Tae Kwon Do, Karate, Grappling, etc, etc. You can't really test taking out a guys windpipe, eyes or eardrums. You can't practice dislocating an elbow or patella on friends. You can learn other alternatives, but then they become the instinct, not the "proper" technique.

Finding a good "real life" way to practice is difficult and a challenge. It all looks fine until you cop a few jabs to the nose. You make a good point. It has to be addressed in training, one way or the other. But, its not all about fighting.

Many martial artists are not interested in fighting, sparing or pretense. They use the art to avoid fights, not to win them. The greatest coward is one that fears their own weakness and seeks to escape that fear by attacking others.

When you have confidence in yourself, you don't need to prove or test it in unnecessary confrontations.

Life is a balance, yang and yin is a comfortable metaphore. Training and exercising your skills balances your need for agression in other parts of your life and gives you a more well rounded personality, just like intramural sports in school balance a students academic efforts.

[jon]

"Is this the art or is it the practitioner. street fighting can be a reality check for some people. The so called "untrained" hard case actually knows what works for them in a real situation. How many martial artists can say that???"
Just speculation on my part...
This is sadly VERY true, very few martial artists train for the real deal. Although i dont always think they should have to, i do think if the student wants serious self defence then they shouldnt be under any illusions that its easy.
We train pretty hard for application and conditioning at my school but its not the same everywhere. Its mainly the practioner i belive. Certain arts are good for self defence and are easily applied but on the street an untrained fighter will ALWAYS panic.
If your not very confident in what you do and totaly ready to attack you will likely thow all your training out the window and resort to streetfighting yourself.
This doesnt mean you can never use your kung fu but i doubt strongly a person with much less than 10+ years would do proper kung fu, so much as apply some principals to there mayhem.
After a long time of having punches thown at you, getting hit, getting back up and doing it again it would become less of a shock. You would also be more confident in your proper moves and would be more likely to apply them.
Depends on the person of course but i dont think a lower level student would use real kung fu, which already puts them at a disadvantage.
Skill is skill but it takes proper time and training to apply it to something life threatening.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

"Is this the art or is it the practitioner. street fighting can be a reality check for some people."

It's both. Southern styles are insulated in small communities where the exposure to a range of combat situations is limited.

"The so called "untrained" hard case actually knows what works for them in a real situation. How many martial artists can say that???"

Those who can't say that should not be considered martial artist. Let me ask you, what percentage of southern kung fu practitioners does this exclude?

"We train pretty hard for application and conditioning at my school but its not the same everywhere. Its mainly the practioner i belive. Certain arts are good for self defence and are easily applied but on the street an untrained fighter will ALWAYS panic.
If your not very confident in what you do and totaly ready to attack you will likely thow all your training out the window and resort to streetfighting yourself. "

If you feel you have to be totally ready before your southern tiger can come out of its cage, then most probably you won't be capable of applying your skills. Kung Fu is not to replace street fighting, but enhance it, improving your chances of coming out on top.

"This doesnt mean you can never use your kung fu but i doubt strongly a person with much less than 10+ years would do proper kung fu, so much as apply some principals to there mayhem. "

That's rubblish dished out by some sifus I've come across. If you plan to say be very competent in 10 years, you should be able to apply advance techniques by say 4th.

"After a long time of having punches thown at you, getting hit, getting back up and doing it again it would become less of a shock."

Geeez, you must be refering to retarded learners or retarded programs. Either way, i've come across alot of this in southern kung fu.

"You would also be more confident in your proper moves and would be more likely to apply them. "

what do you mean by proper moves?

"Depends on the person of course but i dont think a lower level student would use real kung fu, which already puts them at a disadvantage. "

What a stupid stlye if that were the case. Should improve not reduce your chances of survival at any level of training. Think about at as you might want to revist your horse stance training. Have a word with your instructor if this is what sifu is telling you!

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

but please elaborate.....

Let's assume for the moment that there are 2 lines of thought. Western and Eastern which purporat separation and unity respectively. Wouldn't this be 2 sides of the same coin.

If the sum of the components does not equate to the whole there would be something missing. The problem is some people accept sifu wholesales which is no good at separating the chaff (frauds) from the wheat (genuine)!

Afterall, factor analysis and principal component analysis si applied to many fields of studies. Why shouldn;t these concepts be applied to kung fu when it is just a subset of bio mechanic action.

[jon]

Here we go again:D
Man you can talk some rubbish:rolleyes:

"Kung Fu is not to replace street fighting, but enhance it, improving your chances of coming out on top."
What exactly is the mystical "streetfighting" you speak of? Where may one go to learn such skills?

You speak as though you can master kung fu in just a few years.

"If you plan to say be very competent in 10 years, you should be able to apply advance techniques by say 4th."

Name me ONE Northern sytem thats actualy decent that you can "apply advance techniques by say 4th" ?
If your trying to apply advanced techniques in your 4th year of training your proberly in a mckwoon.
This depends a bit on your definition of advanced, obviously you see advanced as something very different to me. Still im a five year student and can apply basicaly everything i know although at differing levels of success. Ive also learnt a lot in that time.

"what do you mean by proper moves?"
Try going to a class once in a while, you may learn some:rolleyes:

[CLOUD ONE]

What is all this about it takes X amount of time to master this technique or that form or that stance training?

Is time relevant? Could you learn something from years and years of repetetive arm and feet moving? Could you not learn the same thing just from a poem?

'it is not the style, but the practitioner' nice quote but b/s

Do masters still train? if so why if they have already mastered this style or that style, what have they mastered?
si fu does it really mean master?

Is it important to know the terminology of this and that technique, would it be easier to understand?

BTW sui it probably depends where you got your wheelchair from;)

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Sleepy tiger,

Of course, northern styles are practical in a way that it teaches classical forms of combat. It's designed for the military remember. Unless you want to lead dad's army or granddads army into the battlefield, you don't have the luxury of waiting 20 years to train your troops or bodyguards. Where not taking about setting up a wine industry here - just effective self defence.

On this note, why do you think Southern teachers tell you to hang around for the next 20 years or preferably your whole life time?

It's amazinbg to see how people today get suckered into a life time program when you yourself have admitted an untrained fighter who goes quite hard probably matches a southern practitioner of 5 years plus training.

[CLOUD ONE]

Well said Ego.
Like you I have the same questions.
The line of Pak Mei I am accustomed to would take 4-5 years to make you a decent fighter. That is if you are all that you are after:o

One thing intrigues me though what is meant by classical forms for combat?

Learning a martial art does not make you invincible does it?

wouldn't you say that training an army to go to battle requires no knowledge of kung fu but a loyalty to die for the cause?

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

"Like you I have the same questions.
The line of Pak Mei I am accustomed to would take 4-5 years to make you a decent fighter. That is if you are all that you are after"

I see Kung fu as a weapon system. You have to learn to use it for it to work properly for you. Take for example a F22 Raptor - most advance fighter jet but without the proper training and body conditioning, its useless to an untrained pilot.

If you say set yourself 10 years to be a very competent practitioner, 4-5 years should be a reasonable benchmark to be proficient. Then you have the rest of the time to refine techniques etc..

"One thing intrigues me though what is meant by classical forms for combat?"

Hand to hand, classical weapons - such as spear, staff, broadsword, skinny sword. I have omitted those specialised weapons such as hook swords etc...

"Learning a martial art does not make you invincible does it?"

No. it doesn't. Improves chances of survival in certain situations. there are situations that you know you'll probably just die.

"wouldn't you say that training an army to go to battle requires no knowledge of kung fu but a loyalty to die for the cause?"

There was this american Gneral who said something along these lines: no army has won by dying, but has won by making the other mother f*uckers in the opposing army die. what wins the day is good battle tactics, logistics, well trained and motived army force. (air support from the above mentioned F22 Raptor would help!)

Northern styles were developed with tactics in mind. However, many schools do not train this way anymore. Instead they focus learning form no. 1 to form no. 1001

[jon]

You guys have both taken my comments way off context.
What i was saying, was a fighter with less experience from ANY style will not use the art in its proper form but will instead resort to simply punching and kicking. That doesnt mean there not using the art at all and doesnt mean they dont have a hope.
Im now learning tiger kung fu, that doesnt mean if im attacked the first technique I use is going to be a tiger fist. After another 3 years there is a good possiblity i would.
Your training is a gradual process in a higher level art. You still get results right from the start but the end goal is different.

Ego the way your billing your arts is for the millitary. This is actualy a dirt poor use for any combat art. To teach an art for the military you MUST teach it in a set time and cut huge corners to make it effective. If all you want is to be able to beat an average street thug fair enough.
When i learn, i want to know i can handle fighting another skilled fighter. That way i know i can handle myself in lesser situations.

I learnt how to kick and punch a long time ago, I grew up in a reasonably rough area and learnt to both streetfight and spar. Now i want a system i know is a lifetime study and holds benifits at every step along the way. Tai Chi is notorious for how long it takes to build true power but some of there fighters have been unbeatable. You get back what effort you put in...
If all you guys want is a quick easy method of self defence... Buy a can of mace.

[Steven T. Richards]

In my experience time is a factor but not the determining meta-framework. Essentially, it the qualitative interaction between teacher and student - they are the ingredients - the people concerned - and then the 'culture' of the system that they may hold to. Time then becomes a framework within which the above decisive variables develop.

Purely subjectively, I'd say that if something has to take x number of years then there is a basic flaw in the method (teaching) or the student - or indeed in both.

In an art dedicated to producing fighters, I'd expect to see pressure testing right from the off, a pressure testing of students up to their failure point both physically and morally, and of teachers under the same criterion.

I've had apparently hopeless students blossom when taught the right way - very quick and profound progress being made.

If the overall agenda of an art is to serve the status of a teacher (real or illusionary) then time becomes important. Time can also be a legitimate strategy to test out character, but I'd say that 'pressure' is a better discriminator. Many 'good characters' fail in the street.

[Steven T. Richards]

About the implied suggestion that southern styles are incestuous with respect to training/fighting in an inbred - closed environment - this viewpoint could devleop from the perspective of the secrecy say of Hakka arts which fit that (alleged) critique to some extent.

However, it is a category error to mistake a partial observation for the whole deal.

It is equally true for any 'closed system' - which is MOST martial arts styles, be they Chinese or whatever - region of origin in China has no effect on this.

The closedness is based simply on the often implicit 'completeness' of the systems in question - something that is necessary sometimes to maintain a group identity - otherwise the style basis of practice is in danger of falling away.

My own Pai, is a closed shop Hakka art but, we have always beeen encouraged to pressure test to failure point - and NEVER to simply practice to fight our own structures - which is the most common and reductively absurd error in martial arts.

I guess that what is important is too set aside large scale category errors and seek out specific examples of theory and prcatice. That way we can set aside this North v South nonsense and simple 'see' what is really going on.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Hi Steven,

You mentioned that some styles were closed because they've become complete. Just out of interest if you know at what point in history the style was closed off and for what reason?

To my knowledge, wing chun, fukkien white crane, southern mantis all sharred common traits to an extent that it is unlikely to be coincidental. It would suggest that they had developed along the same lines and had cross influence with one another.

However, what we see today is a sense of great secrecy about what southerners practice, which leads me to speculate that the business of closed doorness is quite a recent event, but one which people have now come to belief is old tradition.

[Steven T. Richards]

Hello Max,

My subjective definition of 'closedness' would be as soon as a system describes itself as 'complete' -it then becomes de-facto a 'closed system'.

For separate systems to survive they have to define themselves and any comparisson with other systems also involves contrasting with them - in effect saying that 'we don't do it like that'.

A truly open system would resemble the aspirations of JKD. In practice it doesn't work that way as the elimination of techniques still works reductively away from true openess.

An open system is 'becoming' rather being fully formed, as soon as it finishes its development it is closed.

There is a cycle of evolutionary change in martial arts that runs roughly as follows:

Monistic: (single whole styles in polarised relationship to one another)

Eclectic: (postmodern deconstructionsim - e.g. JKD)

Integrative: (combined styes basd on a rationalising synthesis once the reductive-eclectice phase can reduce itself no further than the singularity of absurdity)

Neo-monistic (the intehrative systems resolve into new single 'whole' - polarised styles).

It is a cyclical process with the overall energy moving forwards, but with recursive loops built into each phase. Also, at any one stage, all the others will exist in relative strengths although one may be said to be 'dominant'.

I've published on this both in books and professional papers.

Cheers Max,

Steve.

[Yum Cha]

Steve, thanks for bringing an interesting tone to the thread, your views certainly cause one to pause and think.

I see things slightly differently, perhaps in common from another angle...

Mind you, this is not a factual disertation, more a logical interpretation of human nature and historical clues, my own viewpoint.

To me, from my experience, I think all styles are in constant state of flux, around core principles. Like gravity pulls the dust of the cosmos into planets, elements of a particular style, for whatever reasons, attract each other and form the fundamental principles, but the details are always being tested and developed.

Northern styles developed at Sui Lam grew and grew until they were divided into animal groups, then individuals became the carriers of a particular style, family styles, community styles, whatever, they coalesced into the many fundamental cores we have today.

Southern styles, depending on your belief in the southern Sui Lam, or Hakka origins, or whatever, developed different information and experience along similar lines.

The part where I seem to disagree with you mostly is that I see traditional styles as being constantly refined and developed by teachers and students as they take and pass the information from generation to generation. I also think that the styles followed the Men, not vice versa. A famous fighter from a particular era creates a style, and for generations thereafter people follow his or her lead, and refine and develop the sets.

The sources of Southern Mantis, Pak Mei, Yau Kung Mun, Choy Lee Fut, Dragon style, Wing Chun all came from great fighters who basically created the styles from fundamentals they learned in their experiences. Long arm, short arm, whatever.

Two elements of human nature come into play here, the creative desires, the rationalisation of a given amount of knowledge into new ideas and better refined concepts.

And, the desire to define and categorise information into manageable commodities.

We could even address the egotistical desires to leave ones mark, to make ones name live on beyond their own being.

I guess my belief is that human nature doesn't want to just leave things alone, and accept the status quo. At an elite level, stylists will try to improve or make more relevant the knowledge that they received from the previous generation.

The fundamentals of physical conflict change with the generations and the arts reflect that as well. They pick up relevant teachings from insightful teachers who use the core principles to develop new techniques, whereas outdated, outmoded techniques slowly fall from the conciousness. I think most the traditional Chinese Martial Arts fall into this category.

The notable exceptions of course are the stricter sporting styles, like karate, Tae Kwon Do, Wu Shu, etc which aim at documenting and capturing a complete set of techniques into a particular closed group.

As a side note, my experiences with secrecy have been that its primary use is to keep others from knowing how you fight, so that the element of suprise remains in your favour.

For Example, there are many northern techniques, the rotating backfist to name one, that were developed to counter certain Southern tendencies at centerline punching, like the Wing Chun.

Secrecy does take its toll, as much can be lost as well.

Thats my rave for the day.

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Hi Steve,

Interesting, my believe is that for styles to remain relevant, it should continue to be open, continue to intake new ideas etc.

I don't mean putting in new forms as what ching mo had done. I would feel that over the last 300 years or so, the therories of classical combat has pretty much been fully developed.

As an analogy, the theory of air combat was formualted in WW1 when people had little more than bi-planes.

What kung fu systems can benefit from today is the advancements in teaching methods, sports medicine, understanding of health and training equipment. This should enable a student (for a given amount of trainng time) to on average exceed the achievements of prior generations and do so with less injuries.

It's sad to see many styles cling on to what they believe to be traditional methods when better ways to do things have been developed.

Following on from the above analogy, jet fighters today have made the application of air combat theory more effective than it had been in the past.

Back to kung fu. Northern styles became this powerful because they were not bound by the secrecy. There was cross pollination between styles and usless methods were thrown out without mercy. To be true to the training philosophy of Northern styles, its necessary to maintain this idea while training. Unfortunately there are many schools around today that live off the reputation of the grandmasters without critically testing their theory to ensure that the concepts have been understood in simulated combat situations.

There're many schools today that don't know how to use stances in combat and resort to very basic tit for tat as seen in kick boxing match. Not to say that kick boxing is wrong, it is optimal for the the defined set of rules. If you operate outside those constaints, kung fu should be able to capitalize on the extra degree of freedom.