The Buck Sing Fighting Arts of Grandmaster Tarm Sarm

[hskwarrior]

forgive me nospam,

the performer at 5:25 is carey wong again. but in my singapore hsk video he does basically the same form and they announced it as kau da.

now, i have a question, are that set and the one done at 1:26 completely different?

the only think i noticed was everything up to the bow was the same but after that i saw a completely different set. but ALL hsk lineages have that pattern opening.

are my eyes giving out on me?

[Fu-Pau]

here's buk sing clf's Carey Wong doing a jow ga set......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gp8gNLQxY9Q

hsk,

Thanks for sharing.

I should point out, however that the form in this video is not the Chow Gar (Jow Ga) Fu Pau Kuen form. It looks very “Jow Ga” flavoured in the techniques shown, but it is not the Chow Gar, Fu Pau Kuen as practiced in Chow Gar. Unfortunately I can’t get my hands on one to show as comparison though.

I realise of course that Master Kong On was originally a student of Chow Lung (founder of Chow Gar), and that some of his Chow Gar came into his BS CLF lineage. This leads me to ask, as I have always been curious to know, if the Chow Gar in this particular lineage of BS CLF is (a) taught as a separate art, or (b) fused in with the CLF as a blended art? It is very rare to see any of it on the net, so I have always been curious? The comments at the bottom of that video clip suggest that the Chow Gar (Jow Ga) forms taught are the more blended sort, with names such as “Jow Ga Kuen #1” “Jow Ga Kuen # 2” etc.

Perhaps Nick or anyone else from that lineage, knows the answer to that one?

Cheers

[nospam]

hskwarrior

No idea. I'm watching these from video and am not an expert on patterns outside my family. We have 2 patterns that start the same as in the patterns shown, and as I have posted in this thread, then branch out to different 'phrasing'. I see similarities after (for the most part) the common opening line and thus make my assumptions on the patterns.

In the end it doesn't matter besides to acknowledge and confirm we've all learned our gung fu a little different, which is also quite common. I'd wager the one single commonality, as can be seen in all the pattern variations, is the bak sing fighting philosophy. Discard the patterns and engage in either 2-person training techniques or sparring and this is when bak sing shines.

In the end it is all one glorious bak sing family which puts a smile on my face.

nospam

[Satori Science]

I think my original point was that it doesn't really matter which form it was or what the form was called.

Forms, and their endless variety are just that. A variety of differnent ways to play the same basic tequniques and concepts. Even look at my Sup Tse and Nospam's and you will see several differences even though our teachers were from the same school. But I can always tell a bak hsing form from another CLF family style.

When I see masters that age preform, I assume the techinques they demonstrate are the one they like and are good at. That is usually the way forms get set up. Even Carey Wong's kow da looks very differnet from my sifu's version.

My point was, if I cared to I could easily take movemnts from sup tse and/or our jeen kuen patterns and set up five new forms. they would all look different but would there be anything "unique" about them? Once when I was getting really excited and asking questions about the exact order of movements in Sup tse my sifu told me that, "when I was 25 the order of the movements was very important to me, but by the time I was 35 I didn't really care anymore, what is the difference a gwa-chop is a gwa-chop why does it matter when I do it"

I'm usally more interested in how well they play their form and perform their family's hoi jong.

Alot of the time a sifu isn't even going to demonstrate his family version of any form. Even Sifu wong's kow da looks to short to me, maybe a sui kow da kuen, but when i showed my sifu that video, he asked me "Was there a single movement in that form that isn't in your sup tse?" and of course the awnswer was NO.

[k-no]

nospam, Satori Science...

...couldn't have said it better myself. At the end of the day I just wanna chun-sow-gwa-charp somebody/something. I cross-train to bridge fighting environments, that is all. I'm not really interested in common threads, I just want to train what I've learned, Buck Sing.

embrace diversity.

[Satori Science]

I would add that my Sifu started learning Bak Hsing at the age of 12 in Hong Kong. He told me he didn't learn his first form until he was almost 18. He did five years training basics, drills and fighting.
I read somthing on one of the Lacey sites along those same lines. That for the first several years GM Kong Hing only taught them basics and fighting , no forms.

Sihing told me that when discussing forms with SiGung he said, "Martial first, art later!"

[k-no]

When I was asking to learn forms as others were in our class, my Sifu told me that he had been well into his fight training until he started learning forms. When I asked to learn a particular form a few years ago, he knew my goals and told me this, and he also said "As long as you know how to use your Buck Sing quickly and effectively, don't worry about forms. Keep drilling your techniques and just concentrate on fighting." It wasn't until I mentioned my interest in teaching that my Sifu gave more encouragement in learning forms. From the start, our Buck Sing curriculum was clearly designed for fighting.

I'm on the line with my Sifu right now, he just told me after all the years he had rounded down to about 12 core forms. Even at this lower number, my Sigung Kong Hing told him "Why the hell do you have to learn so many forms for!!?"

k

[nospam]

nospam

[stout]

T

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...=Pak+Sing+Koon

nospam

This vid is pretty cool. Do you know how to get to pt 1 & pt 2?

[mokkori]

Gei Boon Keun is actually called "Hip Wooi Gei Boon Keun", meaning "fundamental fist of the association", and created by Lun Chee... and one other guy I think.


Nospam:

Chuan is Mandarin, and the rest of what your using is Cantonese, its just weird.

Sup Ji Keun = Cantonese
Shi Zi Chuan = Mandarin
Ch'uan = F'ist???

And if your Sup Ji Keun came from Leung Yap Yau then its from Chui Kwong Yeun. Leung learned half of the Daai Sup Ji Keun... then wore out his welcome as the story goes. So the rest is from a different source but the beginning is traditional Hung Sing. Might help to understand why its different from other Buk Sing versions of Sup Ji Keun, its half Hung Sing.

[hskwarrior]

NOSPAM..........My half brother!

[Satori Science]

I'll half to ask my Sifu a few questions tonight to get this all strait, as I can never remeber exact names in Chinese when I start discussing other lineages.

That said, regardless of other Sup Tse Kuens my Sigung may have learned, the version Lueng Sigung taught was the exact same version Tam Fei Pang taught in HK. I have that version of the form which Tam Fei Pang corrected himself when my Sifu also studied with him in HK. I can say, that in essence Nospam's is the same as well (don't mean to awnser for you brother) with minor differences in a few movements between our respective Sifus.

I also have the Lung Jee version of this form which my Sifu learned from him directly, it again is in essence, exactly the same as our Tam Fei Pang version. I would say that when I see Bak Hsing forms they most often all look exactly the same to me, have the same tequniques (at least when we talk about the "three classical patterns") and are ususally just set up in different orders . I also have to say that our three classical patterns do have similarities to Hung Hsing , but our Jeen Kuen fighting patterns don't look all that similar. They run and cut on agles with succesive straight punches. A lot of short hook punches always striking to the center line, not so much swinging arms at all.

I would say that if there is Bak Hsing that looks a little differnet than what we do its just because of the forms and fighting styles taught by Tam Fei Pang and Lung Jee. The two taught together as the closest of brothers for many years. And both maintained there own unique style. Fei Pang was a small man, maybe 5"6 or shorter even? and was a direct student of Master Ku Yu Joeng, so he used alot of kicking and emphasised the coordiantion of chop choi and kicks to enter. Lung Jee is 6'1 and never taught Sifu to kick, he always kept his feet (except low kicks I guess) under him and used his specialized running horse, chop choi and his own style of swininging arms. Sifu always said the mark of those two was that they didn't need to push the others idea down just because it ws a little different, both masters had their own style, had come to their own understanding of its uses in fighting.

[nospam]

hskwarrior

lol

mokkori

couldn't care less how I spell it. I aint Chinese nor do I pretend to be. We can all speak gung fu around here but it means jack. Just like all Bak Hsing CLF peeps do from yester-year to Today - we kick ass and we do it well and we do it not from forms practise but from studying a devestating and well proven and specialised form of gung fu as developed and refined by Tam Sam and each successive masters, right down to those who actively train Today. Bak Hsing let's the other families chit-chat and try to know it all by word of mouth. We'll continue to step-up and put-down: that's just the way it is.

Satori Science

it's all good bro

Tam Fei was shorter than Lung Gee and preferred attacking from ding gee ma as opposed to Lung Gee from sei ping ma to maximise his length/height advantage.

keeping it real

nospam

[Vilmore]

Gei Boon Keun is actually called "Hip Wooi Gei Boon Keun", meaning "fundamental fist of the association", and created by Lun Chee... and one other guy I think.

I think we all have our Gai Bun Keuns created by grandmasters

[hskwarrior]

nospam...........

you know you and me go way way back! even before this forum.

however, I do remember you guys having to prove your Buk Hsing Fut Gar is the real deal. Don't be upset with mokkori, what he's saying basically is that your lineage is real.

confirmation is there now, for everyone to see. no need to worry anymore. i know you're not. but i wanted to say rest assured, you're buk sing.

you know what, forms are just forms. no evidence of anything. created by tam sam, jeong yim, or chan heung, its' nice to know, but they ain't the ones using it today. and today, we think differently than back then. this means things change from person to person. nothing is set in stone.

now, i'm just more interested in hearing more from your lineage.

i hope this doesn't upset anyone, but i heard something about leung lap yau, a challenge and wong ha's school. do you know anything about that story? i'm interested in hearing this.