Southern Mantis versus Hung Gar

[Tit Sa]

jo-

Your NASCAR anology proves my point. A gifted person should get the special attention to excel. This can be said about ANYTHING, karate, jiujitsu, bakmei, NASCAR, hung ga.....

So why all the secrecy? Borrowing, feel, etc. these aren't "alien" terms to any style of martial arts. karatekas, judokas, BJJ, Thai boxers, NASCAR racers, accomplish the same level of skill in their arts without all the "special rules fanfare".

And somehow Jook Lum, in particular Lam Sang's jook Lum is special?

I don't have any students because I don't teach. I spend my time learning from people who has something to show, and show everything out in the open, who don't spend their time telling unverifiable stories about how his teacher beat up so and so, with the secret dim mak touch.

You call me ignorant, but when was the last time Lam Sang and his special style of Jook Lum SPM produced any fighter that had more than just stories to tell about their sifu?

Just a Guy-

I have no venom against Lam Sang or SPM at all! Believe me when I say this. In fact I think SPM is a great style and i heard Lam Sang was a very accomplished kungfu sifu too.

But the problem is when people start spinning stories about, death touches, beating so and so the famous sifu, how their style is special and can only be learned in this fashion....etc. You get my point.

As far as you say "other ego -stroking activities are avoided", well, then why even tell stories about how you beat up so and so. Except to stroke your own ego.

Why tell stories about how good your sifu and grandmaster is or was? Except to stroke your own ego.

And when public challege matches came (ie Gracies, Oyama..)why weren't they there? Was it to save their own ego? because you have everything to gain by winning and you can even add another story to your style.

I know traditional CMA, I learned it too, and still consider myself a CMAtist above everything, and when people deem stories of the past are more relevant than events in the present I think their is a problem.

Ego/pride is the problem and if you can't let go of your ego you will never improve.

While JMA and the relative newcomer Brazilian MA, are improving their arts by doing, "traditional" CMA are busy talking.

[Chin Chung Cao]

Why all the secretiveness? The most obvious reason would be to keep it from people with out the proper mind set. My Sifu has told me many time's that, "If you are going to draw a gun and put a bullet in it you had best be prepared for the consequences. Martial arts taught without morality will only produce streetfighter's." Another reason is to insure that the art will be past down to someone who respect's it. To many system's are "mixed' with other styles creating a chop suey martial arts. You yourself, Tit Sa, admit that you dont have any student's, you spend your time " learning from people who have something to show, and show everything out in the open". So what you learn you keep to yourself, isn't that also a form of secretiveness? Lum's gung fu is special to all that have learned any of it, just as whatever gung fu/martial art you've been lucky to study is special to you. This hold's true of practitioner's in any system. And the storie's that upset you so much are also found in all style's, even your own teachers have their opinion's about other style's and their teacher's, more storie's. Unfourtunatly there are many people like you who have the mentality that because you, in your own little space and limited view, have never "saw" or "heard" of someone they couldn't possably be a true fighter. All system's produce many good fighter's that you and I have never heard off, but that dosn't change the fact that they exist. They may not have a "title" or "championship" to their name that you approve of, but it dosn't make them any less real. Yes, Lum has produced some scary talent, but because you haven't heard of them I suppose they could't exist? Henry Poo Yee comes to mind as a excellent fighter, he's almost 65 and his hand is still strong. His student, Paul Huber would be happy to have a little exchange with you to compare the realitive worth of the system, that way you could draw your own conclusion's based on real experiance. He will be in Huston for his Sifu's birthday March 5th and 6th, If your in the area drop in. If your really interested in increasing your knowledge and out look it would be a good opertunity for you and him.

[Tit Sa]

I keep it to myself because i don't teach. It doesn't mean if someone ask me I won't show it. Or that I will perpetuate the myth of secret techniques.

Yes, all teachers tell stories, and most of the time i don't really listen to them, unless I deem it worthy of attention. Especially when they talk about how grandmaster beat up the so and so famous kungfu guy or famous karate.....

I never said SPM is not a worthy system, in fact I said words to the contrary. Go back and look at my post.

[TAO YIN]

(Sighs)

Ching Chung Cao states:

"Why all the secretiveness? The most obvious reason would be to keep it from people with out the proper mind set. My Sifu has told me many time's that, "If you are going to draw a gun and put a bullet in it you had best be prepared for the consequences. Martial arts taught without morality will only produce streetfighter's.""

No offense mate, but BOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

This assumption is one of the most false, CLICHE', untruthful, ideas in the entire Martial Art community. Come on! Who goes out and gets in fight to the death streetfights every day? Even so called street fighters value their own lives somewhat... I mean, if you teach a person, from day one, the philosophy of "hand to hand, heart to heart, if you don't attack I won't start" ...and the person you teach this doesn't get it and turns into some super thug streetfighter...then you should have chosen someone more worthy to teach. Now lets look at this from the other angle. If a streetfighter comes to learn from you, and you can't teach him how to chill the fark out and be respectful, you're a "no good" teacher.

As a teacher, if you can't at least get across the philosophy of honor to someone, you shouldn't be teaching...

Anyways, my rant. Everything in the MA community is turning into one big mess of cliche' assumptions.

[travelsbyknight]

Let's get back to Lam Sang and his challenge to Lam Sai Wing. I want to know if there's any truth to this and where I could find information about it.

[Chin Chung Cao]

No offense taken"Mate", apparently you take thing's a little to literally. I wasn't talking about shooting people with a gun. The gun is an analogy for the human fist, the "bullet" is the phoenix eye. You can substitute any hand/foot formation you like. I never said anything about fight to the death street fight's, you injected that into it. Even the best of teacher's have had student's that turned bad on them, in the "old" days the Sifu would take back the gung fu from the student by destroying the muscle/tendon structure and in rare case's by killing them. The ability to get one's point across isn't a reflection on a teacher's skill or lack of. Just think back to your time spent in the public school system and the many teacher's you had. I'm pretty sure that many were unable to reach you or inspire you. Dosn't mean they were bad teacher's, they may have reached many other student's. Bottom line, we are all responsible for our own behavior. Don't blame it on poor Mom and Pop or the school system or your race, the system and any of a dozen more copouts. You know the deference between right and wrong, be a man/women and take responsibility for your actions.
And thats my rant, Mate"

[TAO YIN]

Mate,

What is taking things too literally in regards to an internet chat forum? In this case, I read your post, understood your analogy, or lack there of, and analytically replied. I didn't mention anything about your analogy. I didn't mention anything about loaded weapons, guns shots, or phoenix eyes. I aruged against your implied written statement.

Ching Chung Cao wrote the following:

"Even the best of teacher's have had student's that turned bad on them, in the "old" days the Sifu would take back the gung fu from the student by destroying the muscle/tendon structure and in rare case's by killing them."

I mean, read this back to yourself, from a literary standpoint.....


Let us not get bogged down in semantics however. If you will go back and re-read my previous post or the post before that, from a realistic standpoint, you will notice that every point I make is concretely straight forward.

bye mate,

TAO

[jo]

1) Yes they can, and......No.

2) Thats great to hear.

3) Sad, but its the truth IMHO.

4) The Paul Mitchell "Martial Arts Championships"....'nuff said. ;-)

5) Now that IS sad.

6) I never said Jook Lum is BETTER than other systems. Just different.

[Jook Lum]

It is not so much secrecy as quality control!

[TenTigers]

One of the main reasons that Jook lum hasn't flourished, from what I've been told, is for a few reasons;
one, it was not taught to non-Hakka-until recently
two, it was taught in fives-meaning that the Sifu would take on five disciples, this way two pairs of two working out and one with Sifu in rotation, so that everyone can feel his hands-Jook lum is taught by feeling, one on one, not en masse. Each of the five would in turn, take on five and down the line. This would work in a pyramid fashion-in theory, but only if each continues to teach, desires to teach, CAN teach, lives long enough to teach, etc, etc.
It wasn't until Mark Foon, and later Henry Poo Yee brought it out in the open that people even knew of its existance. Actually, Henry Poo Yee really made it mainstream-and caught alot of flak for it, both good and bad. My personal opinion is that it was a good thing because Jook lum might have died out. Of course like any art being taught publicly-there is the problem of quality control, and degeneration of the system due to too many unqualified teachers.
I also must take issue with the comment about Sifus Norman and Milton Chin being referred to as Mutt and Jeff. I think that was a disrespectful comment. I'm not sure if that was the intent, but they both have earned well deserved respect in the Chinese Martial Community (Mo-Lum) I believe their 'nicknames' were in fact "Thunder and Lightning" -two monikers that from what I've heard, were also well deserved.
Will there ever be another Lam Sang, Wong Fei-Hung, Tung Hai-Chuan? Who knows?
If you teach a thousand students, after ten years or so you might find a few that will stay with you long enough to transmit true knowledge to. Instead of the ones that show up when they feel like it, or practice sporadically, or quit after a few years, look for the ones that have been steadfast in their training year after year. Through the hard times as well as the easy times.They are the ones. Everyone else will simply pay the rent. Of course they will derive tremendous benefit from training. both physically, and mentally. But only the few will be in that 'inner circle' who will go the extra mile,push themselves. Look at Tiger Shullman-they claim that they have had five of their guys place in NHB tournaments. They have over 30 schools with at least 200 students in each, so out of 6,000 students, couldn't you find five hard-core, die-hards? It's a numbers thing.

[Just a Guy]

Good points, TenTigers.

Add to this the fact that many SPM teachers won't teach SPM until the prospective student is already extremely accomplished in another style, and it's easy to see why there aren't many competent SPM people out there.

However, Jow Gar (Hakka SPM) is a bit different from Jook Lum in that Jook Lum wasn't so restricted to Hakka. But Jook Lum was a temple tradition, and so restricted in other ways. Jow/Chow/Chu Gar is the Hakka variant, and they have recently opened their doors, just as some Jook Lum stylists have.

[jo]

Originally posted by TenTigers
I also must take issue with the comment about Sifus Norman and Milton Chin being referred to as Mutt and Jeff. I think that was a disrespectful comment.

I know you look up to Norman.
But then a lot of people do....because he is tall. :-)

BTW, do you who "Mutt and Jeff" were?

[SiuHung]

Originally posted by jo
[B]4) The Paul Mitchell "Martial Arts Championships"....'nuff said. ;-)

wtf...So you see this kind of crap and then say non-hakka like glitter and flash?

How much Hung ga, jow Ga, Choy Li Fut, Mok Ga, Fujian White Crane, etc... do you see in a competiton like that? None. Why, because that's a martial performance competition and there is no place there for a real fighting system. So please, do not have the impertinence to lump non-Hakka Southern style practitioners with that lot! I mean really, do you live in a jook Lum plastic bubble or something?
Mike

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SiuHung


1) Anyone can train as much as they want to. It's the individual. Are you saying that in the past people didn't have jobs and families?

It's not so much an issue of time as it is how time is spent. They didn't have all of the distractions that we had, and also had a different attitude. However, time may have been a factor, considering the power of money these days. I usually train 2-3 hours a day, at least. I bet there were several people back in the day who put in more time than that.

6) More stylistic hero worhsip. Any fighting system...my bias being for CMA, can produce a great fighter. But it is the individual more so than even the teacher who will determine just how good of a fighter they become... But to suggest that Jook Lum has some "edge" over other systems is to dive into the kind of style-centric garbage that promotes silly internet forum debates over who's better than who. Quite simply go to any school and you will here the same "our style has blah blah advantages over others...". Are you saying that Jook Lum is that much better than other systems? If you are, I'm sure that there are plenty of CMA practitoners out there that would be glad to debate that with you, not to mention the MMA crowd.
Mike

It's not necessarily style-centric. There are arts that produce competent fighters than others. It's more of an issue of training methods though, not the style itself...

[TenTigers]

yep, I know who Mutt and Jeff were. I also know who Rube Goldberg was, so you can guess that I'm older than dirt! LOL
There are teachers out there who teach for the love of their art, the fact that they also make a dollar from it seems to upset only those who want a free ride or a hand out. They somehow feel that they are 'entitled', -to what, I have no idea. To these people, Many of these teachers might seem to charge alot for what may seem like a little. Some might 'string you along' with all sorts of 'doors' and levels. Did you know that these very same teachers that you so despise have also taken in very serious students-those with the desire and commitment to learn the entire art...These few students are those they have taken under their wing, so to speak. These students aren't all paying special fees, some not at all. Perhaps these Sifus are looking for something...'special' and have found it in these few. Perhaps the few haven't come along yet. Perhaps they never will. Sifus' lament, I suppose. You can idealistically say that one should teach everything and just put it all out there. But, there are certain things in Gung-Fu that can only be taught on a very personal one to one basis, with a huge commitment. (we're not talking about money, we're talking about Gung-Fu-time, effort, hard work, commitment) When you invest this much on a student and the student ends up being disloyal, or selfish, or greedy, or whathaveyou, you take a little more time and care in choosing your next student.
This is not an attack or a defense of anyone in particular, because it applies to many people, and many circumstances. I can not speak for anyone other than myself. I am only speaking from my own personal experience, both as a teacher, and as a student.