Toi San Hak Fu Pai?

[jmd161]

I'm sure Winterpalm or David J can give me some insight on this. I was looking into Fu Jow Pai's history and noticed that Wong Moon Toy was from the same area from which Hak Fu Pai comes from. I've said and have noticed many similar techniques within these two styles, even the same exact opening/bow once upon a time.

The reason I bring this up is two fold. For one I know that Black Tiger and Hung Gar are closely related and share many techniques and in some cases forms. I also know that there is Black Tiger within Hung Gar, the exact same techniques that Black Tiger is known for. Now the techniques that are within the Hung Forms I'm talking about, are direct techniques from Soo Hak fu's Black Tiger. Soo Hak Fu's Black Tiger has very distinct Black Tiger techniques that can not be mistaken.

With that being said, I've noticed that from what I've seen of each style Fu Jow Pai nor Hak Fu Pai have these techniques or flavor. I'm not saying that neither style Isn't Black Tiger I'm just saying that they don't have the characteristics of the Soo Hak Fu Black Tiger, that's found within Hung Gar. It's obvious that most Black Tiger styles have at one point or another crossed paths, what I'm trying to understand or figure out is. When did Fu Jow Pai, Hak Fu Pai, and Soo Hak Fu's Hak Fu Mun cross paths, and who changed them to what we see today, which are vastly different systems?

In looking at Hak Fu Pai there is alot of Fu Jow usage just like within Fu Jow Pai. Hak Fu Mun on the other hand doesn't have as much Fu Jow usage, but many other Tiger techniques. That is another reason that leads me to think Fu Jow Pai and Hak Fu Pai are very closely related, if not in fact at one point the same system? You can see the Lama influence in Both Hung Gar and Hak Fu Mun, but it seems to be missing from both Hak Fu pai and Fu Jow Pai. But I've only seen a lil of both systems, so I'm by no means an authority on what each style contains.

Just some thoughts of mine maybe you guys can chime in and help?


jeff

[David Jamieson]

Hey Jeff

In a lot of the Hung Gar I see played I see what I consider to be a choy li fut flavour, although, I'm sure it's probably just how it is.

The Hak FuPai I learned doesn't have that clf kinda looseness which is what I think you're talking about? It is definitely more train like than whip like in that respect although there are some crossovers for sure.

in the hak fu pai, there is fluidity, but it is not the same flavour as that in what Stan shares for instance or in what you show in the vids you have posted and yes, I think that what I learned is more in line with wai hongs fu jow pai for a couple of reasons.

1) the salute is long and virtually exactly the same as the salute that tak wah eng shows in all his renditions of the fu jow pai black tiger sets.

2) my former teacher said himself that he trained with a fu jow pai guy at one time in the past.

I have no idea about lineage in the style going beyond the teacher I learned from and as far as I know, neither does anyone he's taught. he says it is because his teacher requested anonymity, so, I'll probably never know.

In Gum Gong Kuen (Kam kong/king kong), which i believe is not actually a black tiger set but rather it is a shaolin set, the way it plays is much closer to clf that i see and lama that the others have shown here...which also looks very clf to me.

In any case, I regard it all as shaolin. I do find that the hung gar aspect of the black tiger i learned looks more like yc wong / buk sam kong and wing lam variations of hung gar which are more 'slow/fluid/then tension, then explode' in expression.

This differ from other hung gar play i see from other sources outside of the Chiu and Lam lineages. Although I see guys from both of these who play Hung like CLF.

Ultimately, personal expression comes forward once a person inegrates the training into themselves on a bigger basis. But I've been exposed to a few things and retain none of the same expression as those who taught me. the shape is there, but I like to train more along the lines of application now and so the sets I've learned are all variated in that sense. they are all tighter and smaller in shape now than when I first learned them. the big frame stuff just doesn't work for me in free sparring and so the samller frame and compacting of it all is what Is happening to the sets as practiced.


so, don't know anything about lineage, to be honest, I don't care either lol
but the methods are interesting. cross training with black tiger material to throw in the mix is a good thing.

[jmd161]

Hey David,

How's life treating you bro?


It's not really the lineage I'm looking for, I'm just interested in how, if all came from the same source, they changed so much? I mean I know that Grandmaster Wong Cheung changed and added a lot to Soo Hak Fu's Black Tiger, but the flavor and core are still there to a degree. And you're right Kam Kong Kune is a shaolin form and not Hak Fu Mun. Ye Fu Kuen (Night Tiger Fist) is a Hak Fu Mun core set though and is seen within some Hung Gar lineages. Yet Hak Fu Pai nor Fu Jow Pai has this set or anything close to it from my knowledge. As well as other Night Tiger sets, so they were eliminated or taken out some where along the line.

You did learn Ye Fu Kuen from Stan right? A lot more Fu Jow in that set! LOL


jeff

[David Jamieson]

I am not sure it all came from the same source.

I think kungfu is different all over and in all its expressions for what is likely myriad reasons.
If we consider for instance that the shaolin temple was destroyed and the monks were dispersed, then it is safe to say that not all monks that were dispersed were necessarily masters of what they knew, but likely, many of them shared it out or taught what they did know to laymen.

You would get a lot of differnet variations just from that.

afetr 1500 years we can barely tell what is shaolin and what is not and while it isn't important to ones kungfu, lineage is important to tracing where stuff comes from.

so, when you have someone who is anonymous, it more or less castrates the history of the kungfu and makes it difficult to draw the connecting lines and figure out any history. It can be dissapointing , but ultimately it doesn't have a lot to do with whether or not one can take what they have and kick some ass with it.

so, I just ball it up and call it cma. hahaha, although, credit is given were credit is due. ill tell people this is this or that is that if they ask.

[WinterPalm]

Hi,

You would have to consult with my Sifu. If you go through my profile there is a link to the site and I think an email...or you can send your question through the guestbook and Sifu will reply.

I can't be any help as I do not know much about the history and I have not seen any fu jow pai vids. I have seen other videos, one in the general section that DJ posted that shows a form being done that looks a lot like one that we do but that is played out quite differently.

I know that we have two sets which are 'closed door' which Sifu tells me is basically whoever can get there has the opportunity to learn them, so these I cannot comment on as to what and if they are present in other styles. I know ther is a philosophy of black tiger being smaller, close to a panther, and using agility and redirection for combat applications. I also know that an advanced form, the rolling black tiger fighting set has a very heavy dragon influence. The other stuff is very much Hung but a bit more fluid from what I have seen of Hung.

One of our sets, Hak Fu Bok Hoc Kuen is a fu jow pai set I believe...or other style...my knowledge here is quite shaky...with that set came the opening that Sifu used for the Toisan sets when he started teaching publicly...later he decided to share the full versions of the sets, which included a drastic change to some and the introduction of the Toisan opening. This opening makes more sense for the other sets and how they are played out...it has the feel of our sets within it...that is, it opens with combat applications.

There is also something to be said for black tiger being a system ripe with secrecy and shadows.

I'll look into those fu jow pai vids...good luck with my Sifu!

[jmd161]

Thanks for the reply!


I'll try talking to your sifu like you mention, we have talked both on and off forum before, not always good however... I take the blame for that as it was I that basically started with him. I mistook him for someone else and thus the heated debates.

I'm not looking to say who's right or wrong, just looking into different ideas of how Black Tiger changed or was passed down and where the connection might be.


jeff

[Wong Ying Home]

If of interest I will try talking with one of my teachers who is based in Zhejiang province China, his family style is black tiger. Taught to him by his grandfather who was quite famous for his Black tiger to see if I can get some historical info.

[jmd161]

If of interest I will try talking with one of my teachers who is based in Zhejiang province China, his family style is black tiger. Taught to him by his grandfather who was quite famous for his Black tiger to see if I can get some historical info.

Yes any input that he could offer would be great!


jeff

[Firehawk4]

Would this Shandong Black Tiger also becalled Shantung Black Tiger ?

[Wong Ying Home]

As far as I am aware it is Shandong province..but language could mean a difference..I need to call my teacher this weekend and see what he says

[chivalrous hall]

[QUOTE=jmd161;

Ye Fu Kuen (Night Tiger Fist) is a Hak Fu Mun core set though and is seen within some Hung Gar lineages. Yet Hak Fu Pai nor Fu Jow Pai has this set or anything close to it from my knowledge. As well as other Night Tiger sets, so they were eliminated or taken out some where along the line.

have not viewed this forum in years.

Soo Hak fu's art along with some of the others that were all part of the guondung sup fu must have imprinted on Wong Fei Hong in the development of fu hok . i have seen the Ye Fu chut lam in Wong Lee's hung gar line, does this stem from Soo's stuff...who knows. the only thing they might have in common is the name.
at the singapore Ling Nam Hung Kuen they have Mang Fu chut lam which is very different to the Wong Lee's Ye Fu. everyone has different views on how when where why they are part of this line and not part of that line.
didnt answer anyones question but all this talk was getting me excited!!

cheers,
giuseppe

[chivalrous hall]

hey i forgot does Soo's have a Mang Fu chut lum or anything with a Mang Fu in the sets name.

thanks,
giuseppe

[jmd161]

[
have not viewed this forum in years.

Soo Hak fu's art along with some of the others that were all part of the guondung sup fu must have imprinted on Wong Fei Hong in the development of fu hok . i have seen the Ye Fu chut lam in Wong Lee's hung gar line, does this stem from Soo's stuff...who knows. the only thing they might have in common is the name.
at the singapore Ling Nam Hung Kuen they have Mang Fu chut lam which is very different to the Wong Lee's Ye Fu. everyone has different views on how when where why they are part of this line and not part of that line.
didnt answer anyones question but all this talk was getting me excited!!

cheers,
giuseppe

I spoke with someone from the Ling Nam line (Holland) and we shared two forms by the same name and seemed to be very close in flavor, but that was based on discription and not visual comparison. I'd have to look into the Fu Hok and see what It is you're talking about. I know you can see Soo Hak Fu's influence in another Wong Fei Hung line form.


jeff

[jmd161]

hey i forgot does Soo's have a Mang Fu chut lum or anything with a Mang Fu in the sets name.

thanks,
giuseppe

To my knowledge we don't have a Mung Fu Chut Lum form, but i'll have to check with my sifu to be sure.



jeff

[chivalrous hall]

Both Wong Lee and Soong Siu Por's Ling Nam lines r through Lam Sai Wing.
the Holland Ling Nam i beleive they r also from Soong Siu Por, this correct?
what sets do you share the same name. this is good banter to share and see where these things fall into place.

cheers,
giuseppe