Which styles of kung fu have the most rigorous training regimens?

I'm posting this just as a curiosity.

I would ask those who have achieved a basic proficiency in an art to kindly list what arts you feel have the most difficult physical training in terms of conditioning (not forms per se) . From what I know (I will still always consider myself a perpetual student no matter how many arts I attain proficiency in). The arts which seem to have the most fatiguing and brutal training are:

1.) Hung Ga/Hung Kuen: At least the way it was practiced in ye olden days: It was reported that old school masters would have beginners stand in a deep sei ping ma (horse stance) daily until a student could stand for 3 *hours* : :eek::eek: Then, after this phase was mastered, the REAL training would begin (this does nnot mean that I am implying that this level of endurance is not impressive).

2.) Ying Jow Pai: 50 rows (!!) of Lin Kuen, many, many fingertip pushups, extreme flexibility and emphasis on front and back flips.

3.) Ba Bu Tang Lang (8 step): I have only studied Ba Bu at this time and cannot comment if this is seen in other famiies such as 7 star, 6 harmonies,etc.(so please don't think I am looking down on your art): 100 single leg squats (50 per leg--in other words..left or right leg extended out in front as if one were doing a front kick, then squat down to where butt touches the hell of opposing leg), 50 fingertip pushups.

4.) Chang Chuan/Northern Shaolin: Maybe it's me, but the continual walking/extending while balancing on plum flower stumps doesn't seem especially easy!!

5.) Lung Ying Kuen (southern dragon): footwork while standing on ice..(forces one to extensively train their balance and mind/muscle connection in addition to stabilizer muscles of the whole body), grip training involving filling a 5 gallon water jug with progressively heavier objects.

6.) Southern Mantis: Watch the movie w/ the Great Lo Meng: NUFF SAID!!! (oh and the Dip Gwut Gong) machine which slams like a battering ram into ones torso from the front back is allegedly used! (from what I have been told).

7.) Monkey kung fu/Tai Shing Pek Kwar: Haven't studied any but a former kung fu brother of mine had a previous instructor (in a different art) who studied some TSPK and he claims that it was expected at a certain level to have to stretch for up to 2 hours per day!

I look forward to others thoughtful contributions. (apologies to any art I have have missed)

rigorous depends on the practitioner.

If a style addresses striking, kicking, throwing and locking, is trained solo, with a partner and uses devices to enhance attributes, it can be as vigorous and rigorous as the practitioner chooses.

If the practitioner is lazy and doesn't break a sweat, then the style they practice is irrelevant.

A style is an empty box in a particular shape. You fill the box, or you leave it empty according to what you put into it.

How hard a system is depends on the particular teacher/school/practitioner, as opposed to the style itself. Even within the same-named style or system, training emphasis will vary.

As far as TSPK requiring 2 hours of stretching per day, by any chance was his teacher Paulie Zink? I have some doubts that traditional TSPK would require that much stretching. In kung fu, there CAN be a point of too much anything, including stretching. Flexibility is important, but over-stretching can result in floppiness, joint instability and injury.

The CMA I've personally studied, in order of earlier to later, are:
Changquan (Northern Long Fist)
Tanglangquan (N. Mantis; 7-star and 8-step)
Lung Ying (Dragon)
Choy Lee Fut (my MA for the past 24 years)

In my own personal experience of those, the most rigorous was CLF. And they were all rigorous in their own ways. To put it simply, it was its fight training that was the most rigorous. Not that the style itself was inherently easier or more difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Jamieson

rigorous depends on the practitioner.

If a style addresses striking, kicking, throwing and locking, is trained solo, with a partner and uses devices to enhance attributes, it can be as vigorous and rigorous as the practitioner chooses.

If the practitioner is lazy and doesn't break a sweat, then the style they practice is irrelevant.

A style is an empty box in a particular shape. You fill the box, or you leave it empty according to what you put into it.

---

Thank you, sir. (bows humbly.) This is what I experienced in Longfist training. I know what I have and I know how I push myself, strive for excellence. I looked around in the school and did see some people not striving. But the school is good, the teacher will work with you if he sees you putting in the effort/ talent. Up to the person's skill level and ability I guess.

One system that I have had a bit of exposure to, but do not consider myself trained in whatsoever, is Bak Mei. I would add to your list Bak Mei, because those guys train the Phoenix-Eye punch. Tearing holes through walls with a phoenix-eye punch is pretty bad-ass.

Thank you all for your fine input!


"As far as TSPK requiring 2 hours of stretching per day, by any chance was his teacher Paulie Zink? "

I will ask him who his sifu learned from.

Agreed, that ultimately it's not the art technically, but the effort of the student.

I sort of blocked out CLF. And with 300 plus forms (at least in the Chan family lineage--give or take handful?), close to 60 weapons (just a little more than "18 classical weapons", wouldn't you say? : eek::eek:) and what..10 (? please correct me if I am wrong) different wooden dummy training aides, you are talking about a hurculean ammont of effort!

Good point about Bak Mei..thank you.

Hi, LaterthanNever:

I trained CLF directly under my sifu nonstop for 11 years, and never learned anywhere near that many forms or weapons. I did learn more than I currently include in my training, though. Nobody can practice even 100 forms and weapons and be good at any of them, or even keep them straight in their head. "You can become good at some or bad at many." My current practice is down to only about a dozen sets (still a lot), but some of those are extremely rare, generally short sets NOT found in Chan Family, Hung Sing, Buk Sing, or any other lineage, for that matter. Besides, the focus should never be mainly on forms, unless one's sole purpose for wanting to learn kung fu IS the forms. Beyond a certain point, most forms are basically rearrangements of already-learned movements in different orders/sequences, anyway. I might have learned around 30 (give or take) or so total full-length forms in CLF. I know there's still more available to me, but I've pared down the totality of my practice material significantly.

I personally don't get it when people say that CLF people learn hundreds of forms. There may be hundreds of forms that exist within the CLF spectrum (lumping together all lineages, branches/offshoots, individual schools, newly-created forms, etc.), but I cannot imagine any school having more than a fraction of that. The essentials of CLF or any other MA are a thorough development, understanding and incorporation of the basics, and the principles of how they work. And that entails very rigorous training.

300 is grossly exaggerated and for the record being a long time CLF practitioner like Jimbo, it has way too many forms LOL.

Apologies. I typed that post when I was sleep deprived. I meant to say "roughly 190 forms in the Chan lineage" and some forms contain "over 300 *moves*". Plus I don't mean to imply that everyone who learns Chan family CLF has to demonstrate proficiency in that many sets.

(I guess I ought to redirect the crux of the topic back to training and conditioning *excluding* sets).

For those who may be inclined (or for those who many not be a sifu yet..with permission from your instructor) to post some of you training regime..that would be most interesting.

any style that has heavy weight lifting is the hardest training.