Lama Pai, Hop Gar, Bak Hok

[chusauli]

You guys are always letting the cat out of the bag

Ooops sorry!

I personally got tired of trying to practice all of the forms Chan Tai Shan taught me. It was just too much with that, Hung Ga, Bak Mei, WCK, etc. I need more lifetimes to do that.

And application is the proper way. One has to develop their own game.

[lkfmdc]

Ooops sorry!

I personally got tired of trying to practice all of the forms Chan Tai Shan taught me. It was just too much with that, Hung Ga, Bak Mei, WCK, etc. I need more lifetimes to do that.

And application is the proper way. One has to develop their own game.

I have come to see it this way, by doing all those sets (and I stopped learning new sets at one point, I said "enough"!) I did the movements thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of times. I also learned movement, watching and copying movement....

At this point, whether I remember a set sequence or not is irrelevant. It is the skill and application

My biggest gripe about sets is, today who has that time? I dropped out of school and spent 7 days a week with CTS, hours every day. So of course I had time... but who does that really?

[Dale Dugas]

I agree with Dave, forms are not meant to be learned just to learn the form but the principles within the forms are much more important.

If students can extrapolate the concepts/principles, so much the better. But some people have a tough time with this.

[cerebus]

I have come to see it this way, by doing all those sets (and I stopped learning new sets at one point, I said "enough"!) I did the movements thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of times. I also learned movement, watching and copying movement....

At this point, whether I remember a set sequence or not is irrelevant. It is the skill and application

My biggest gripe about sets is, today who has that time? I dropped out of school and spent 7 days a week with CTS, hours every day. So of course I had time... but who does that really?

That's one of the reasons I am usually interested in knowing which sets people think of as the "primary" or most important in a given system. I like the idea of choosing 3 empty-hand sets and maybe 5 primary weapons sets so as to preserve the traditional art, and then spend the rest of training time developing skill in the application of the art and it's principles and using realistic training methods (full-contact sparring). I've long felt that this would strengthen the Chinese arts greatly.

[cerebus]

I agree with Dave, forms are not meant to be learned just to learn the form but the principles within the forms are much more important.

If students can extrapolate the concepts/principles, so much the better. But some people have a tough time with this.

Yup! +1

[lkfmdc]

That's one of the reasons I am usually interested in knowing which sets people think of as the "primary" or most important in a given system. I like the idea of choosing 3 empty-hand sets and maybe 5 primary weapons sets so as to preserve the traditional art, and then spend the rest of training time developing skill in the application of the art and it's principles and using realistic training methods (full-contact sparring). I've long felt that this would strengthen the Chinese arts greatly.

Siu Lo Han (in CTS line) pretty much has everything you could want in martial arts, the basic punches, elbows, knees, front kicks, side kicks, back kicks

The footwork

The throws

You probably could learn more clinching and some in-fighting from Fu Hok Seung Daau

There are more kicks and kick combination in Lo Han Kyuhn

But again, at this point, if I didn't remember those sets, I'd still have all their contents at this point, it's all in my brain

[cerebus]

Excellent.

[chusauli]

I agree with David. The Siu Lo Han, Fu Hoc Cern Doe and Lo Han Kuen were amongst CTS' best sets and didn't have too many crazy things in them that were out there.

CTS taught it based on your abilities and what suited you. I remember learning Dae Saat from CTS, all the acrobatic ground fist, kicks and sweeps were a bit over my gymnastic ability. As a result, that one is history.

Of course, there is no guarantee CTS ever taught the same form twice. But that's another story....

...the old generation didn't have any set forms... sometimes you felt they were just making stuff up at the moment or they had to refer to their own Kuen Po to get it. And I am not the only one saying this, you can look at practitioners of other large systems and see sometimes the inheritors just have to piece the sets together. You learn like this in CLF, Ba Gua, Northern Fist, Eagle Claw, Mantis, etc.

[YouKnowWho]

I like the idea of choosing 3 empty-hand sets and maybe 5 primary weapons sets so as to preserve the traditional art,

We did this in the Longfist system. Longfist has too many forms. We divide Longfist as

Plum Flower Longfist:

Tantui -> Shi Zi Tang -> Taizu longfist

Muslium Longfist:

Tantui -> Pao Chuan #3 ->Zha Chuan #4

5 weapons are, Dao, Jian, staff, spear, and Guan Dao.

[lkfmdc]

Of course, there is no guarantee CTS ever taught the same form twice. But that's another story....

I was with CTS like 16 years, I watched him teach a lot of people. For example I watched him teach 5 versions of Dai Lo Han.... the thing was, they had the same key points, all had the same opening and closing... all had certain techniques and combinations...

What was not the same, and didn't matter, were the exact sequences, one guys move #57 may be different than the other guys, but everyone that did Dai Lo Han learned the lihn waan chyhn dah, the dai siu kau, bouh chouh cham seh into kaph, etc....

[taai gihk yahn]

I was with CTS like 16 years, I watched him teach a lot of people. For example I watched him teach 5 versions of Dai Lo Han.... the thing was, they had the same key points, all had the same opening and closing... all had certain techniques and combinations...

What was not the same, and didn't matter, were the exact sequences, one guys move #57 may be different than the other guys, but everyone that did Dai Lo Han learned the lihn waan chyhn dah, the dai siu kau, bouh chouh cham seh into kaph, etc....

I think that this is the key point - and in a way, one we missed to some degree early on when we'd argue about who got the "correct" version of something or some such - as you say, it's not so much the sequence as it is the particular set of principles; of course, not everyone got to learn 6 versions of "bik da" either...

[lkfmdc]

Also, as Robert alluded to, not everyone got an "A version" either... CTS taught you what you wanted, but at the level you were actually at.. some people asked for so called "advanced sets" and got very basic stuff with a nice name attached...

But I digress

[jdhowland]

Cheuk Tse was very conservative in passing on the sets. Kept the same sequence always. All were straight line forms, no cross patterns. No "chambering" of the fist at the waist that you find in some versions that have a strong Hung Kyuhn influence. He didn't confuse his CLF or Eagle Claw with Lama but taught them as separate entities.

Even so, what you learned from him was based upon how well he knew and trusted you. The students who were only there because their parents made them come stayed in the back of the room and followed along as best they could. Those who were really committed to training were taught additional moves or variations within the sets. The "core" students were shown variations within the footwork or hand positions that were different from the way the set was done in group practice. We were all supposed to practice the sets the same way in group training but keep the additions for ourselves. I think he really enjoyed teaching and passing on what he knew but didn't want to be bothered with those who weren't really dedicated.

He told us a story about how someone payed him a lot of money to learn an authentic Chinese staff set. Cheuk agreed but on condition that the man never ask him about it again after he had learned it. Of course, this was because he made it up as he went and wouldn't remember it. The man got what he wanted--a set by an authentic Chinese teacher and Cheuk was happy to take his money.

[chusauli]

Also, as Robert alluded to, not everyone got an "A version" either... CTS taught you what you wanted, but at the level you were actually at.. some people asked for so called "advanced sets" and got very basic stuff with a nice name attached...

But I digress

Yup. Agree completely. Thy old man had variations upon variations of each set, and could also make up things on the spot.

But as David said, "the thing was, they had the same key points, all had the same opening and closing... all had certain techniques and combinations...", some were done in different order or juxtaposition, but CTS best teaching to me was often repeated, "Sau Lei, Gung fu is ging, ging is gung fu!"

[taai gihk yahn]

CTS best teaching to me was often repeated, "Sau Lei, Gung fu is ging, ging is gung fu!"

in other words: "If u r a mean-tempered, bad-asz MF'er, u will b an effective fighter regardless of what u hav studied."
I think that pretty much sums him up; that and "Guns r better than gung-fu when fighting more than one person."