A nice documentary in three parts in Cantonese made by Guangdong Television on one of my fathers old friends, Peng Zheng-Ting, who studied with Chan Yiu-Chi and Ou Han-Quan and is now the head of the CLF Association in Guangzhou.
In the first part he spoke about the five sounds of CLF and the difference between northern and southern martial arts, the second part about some of the unusual weapons of CLF like the Nine Dragon Trident and the Steel Fan and the third part on lion dance and CLF footwork.
Good to see traditional martial’s arts like CLF is managing to survive and prosper in mainland China through people like him putting in the hard work.
In the past as I’ve lurked around here I happened to noticed that many of the CLF players claimed that C.L.F. wasn’t Choy Gar, Lee Gar, and Fat Gar at all. Um, didn’t the first part of the clips state that C.L.F. was indeed Choy Gar, Lee Gar, and Fat Gar.
That is because people in the West don’t understand the subtlety of the Chinese language well, Gar in this case simply means coming from a person of the family with the surname Choy or Lee or Shaolin in the case or Fut (there is no Chinese surname of Fut), it does not mean a particular style or a school of martial art. Even within Shaolin there are many styles, it is just a generic name for a person or a place, not referring to any style in particular. So Choy Gar simply referred to Choy Fook, Lee Gar referred to Lee Yau-Shan and Fut Gar to Shaolin.
CLF history is not sketchy, it is one of the few surviving traditional Chinese martial arts still have a direct descendant, that is the first male born, carrying on the family teaching for 5 uninterrupted generations.
But CLF history is controversial, because many branches have established since the Chan Heung founded the system, and some wants to break away from the family shadow and set up their own brand with their own version of history. In a commercially dominated society like ours, it is to be expected.
So are you stating that the documentary is incorrect in their stating that CLF come from Fat Gar? Lee Gar? and Choy Gar? And oh, um, CLF history is very sketchy. yes, Chan Heungs family line may still pass down their material, the history itself is really sketchy I’d have to disagree with you there. sorry. This forum has taught me alot about the history since the arguing has been going on for some time. I’m not gonna pick sides, but will stand on the history being sketchy.
As a Southern Shaolin style with Five Animal techniques, Hung Kuen is a close relative of Choy Lee Fut and is said by some Choy Lee Fut branches to be the style that Chan Yuen-Wu taught founder Chan Heung.
Like i said in the past. First they tried to claim Chan Yuen Wu taught Chan Heung Hung Kuen. Then when Fut San was pushing hard on the Fut Gar from monk Ching Cho now look, they are trying to claim Chan Yuen Wu taught Chan Heung Fut Jeung. This is not sketchy? we all know about the Choy Fook = Monk Ching Cho fiasco.
[QUOTE=Snipsky;1126932]So are you stating that the documentary is incorrect in their stating that CLF come from Fat Gar? Lee Gar? and Choy Gar? And oh, um, CLF history is very sketchy. yes, Chan Heungs family line may still pass down their material, the history itself is really sketchy I’d have to disagree with you there. sorry. This forum has taught me alot about the history since the arguing has been going on for some time. I’m not gonna pick sides, but will stand on the history being sketchy.[/QUOTE]
The documentary is correct and if you read Peng Zheng-Ting’s book he said the same thing, Lee Gar Kuen refers to Lee Yau Shan and Choy Gar Kuen refers to Choy Fook and Fut Gar Kuen refers to Shaolin Kung Fu.
If you think the CLF history is sketchy, may be it is because you are confused by the different version of history, Frank seems to be very clear about his version of CLF history, so I am sure it is not sketchy to him, nor is it for me and you heard both sides over the years in this forum, so there is no need to go over it again.
Besides this thread is about Peng Zheng-Ting, so lets stick to the topic.
That guys kung fu feels more like hung sing than it does chan family CLF. at the same time, i hear his lineage is questionable. regardless, i like how he executes his forms. i think YOU said something about him in the past coming from the loong gee choy lineage if i remember correctly as his video’s had been posted back in days by me here.
yeah well, there is still the feeling amongst other sifu who question his lineage. either way, i like him cause he feels more like my lineage and how we do things
Yeah but if you watch him you can see a lot of King Mui CLF but with a little bt of a different flavor. I always find it funny when other sifus question someone’s lineage, I mean this isn’t Paulie Zink :eek:
i could care less about his lineage. but, i like how his CLF flows. i’m just sayin it reminds me of fut san. and he throws his Yeung Chop like Fut San does as well.
In the documentary, he does teach in Futsan, may be that is why he remains you of Futsan
he doesn’t teach in our Hung Sing Kwoon- Fut San. and, nah. thats not why he reminds me of our lineage. i think its cause Yiu Chi picked it up from us.
The way that sifu moves reminds me of how our lineage looks different from the Chan Family/King Mui line. We come from the Chan Koon Pak tree as does Peng Sifu but both have different flavor from the source.
I have a feeling there was some change when CLF moved to Guangdong.
Out of curiousity what do you focus on in your training these days. I am not sure your age but I was curious your approach to CLF as we age (I know you are not that old but can guess you don’t train now the way you did in your 20s or 30s).
