I personally feel Wong Yun-Lum made a huge contribution to present day Hung-Ga (Wong Fei-Hung line) and I am always researching Hop-Ga to get a better understanding of my art. I don’t feel simply saying,“Well, we use gwa,cup, sow, been, etc..” is enough. Hop-Ga is an entire system, and to simply borrow a couple of hands is not the same as really knowing how to best employ these strikes. You must know correct tactics, otherwise the technique is greatly diminished.
How much do you draw from the techniques, training methods of Hop-Ga in your Hung-Ga teaching and training?
[QUOTE=TenTigers;1111841]I personally feel Wong Yun-Lum made a huge contribution to present day Hung-Ga (Wong Fei-Hung line) and I am always researching Hop-Ga to get a better understanding of my art. I don’t feel simply saying,“Well, we use gwa,cup, sow, been, etc..” is enough. Hop-Ga is an entire system, and to simply borrow a couple of hands is not the same as really knowing how to best employ these strikes. You must know correct tactics, otherwise the technique is greatly diminished.
How much do you draw from the techniques, training methods of Hop-Ga in your Hung-Ga teaching and training?[/QUOTE]
I think that “start big end small” thing is very much Hop-gar, whether it came from it I don’t know, but that they share it, yes.
The interception and limb destruction is another thing.
Hung ga/ Hap ga
TenTigers, I was just about to start a new thread about the crossover in terminology between the Lion’s Roar and Hung Ga when I saw this, so I’ll throw this question into your topic, instead.
What are the Cantonese terms for basic techniques in the Hung Ga system?
I suspect that much of the terminology for Lama style methods was already in place when it was systematized in the 19th century.
As an example, Hop Ga has:
chyun (piercing)
paau (flinging)
kahp (stamping)
bin (flailing)
chaau (reaping, pulling, gathering)
deng (nailing)
johng (knocking, colliding)
jaau (clawing)
jin (arrow, also called jihk)
chaang jeung (rushing palm)
jin jih (arrow fingers, also called biu)
sou (sweeping)
Kicks include:
daan geuk
paak geuk
tin gong geuk
syuhn fung teui
fuh mei geuk
sou geuk
chat sing teui, etc.,.
Are there more than a few commonalities?
reverse the position?
How much hung ga did Wong Yan Lum got from his father?
The original Hop in Hop Ga meant a combination of styles.
[QUOTE=once ronin;1111865]
The original Hop in Hop Ga meant a combination of styles.[/QUOTE]
NO IT DOES NOT
It means “hero” or “patriot”
Wong Yan Lum didnt do Hap Ga , he did Lama , not the same thing! Wong Yan Lum’s disciple Wong Hon Wing changed the system and renamed it Hap Ga.
In regards to Hung Ga…
Wong Yan Lum was said to have taught both Wong Kei Ying and Wong Fei Hung.
Wong’s teacher Sing Lung was said to have taught Tit Kiu Saam.
So there is that relation.
How much Lama is in Hung Ga?
- Technique-wise some. The "chat sing leen waan keun" section of Tiger Crane is basically Lama techniques. The latter half of Ng Ying Ng Hang (5 animals 5 elements) is full of Lama long arm techniques.
- Influence-wise much. Lama is most likely what opened up the short tight postures of "old hung ga". You could argue that it was Tit Sin Keun that was the influence, but in my personal opinion Tit Sin Keun was originally not so stretched out, as is found in the many other similar practices in other southern systems.
Wong Fei Hung made a very intelligent system when he combined old hung ga, lama pai, and tit sin keun. Though the techniques are clear from portion to portion the true union is in the posture and way of motion… in my opinion!
I wasnt there to hear the dialogue when the changes came about but this is what Harry Ng lineage & Chan Dat Fu explained to me:
Wong Yan Lum had these significant student:
Ng Siu Chung & Ng Siu Chan named there forms White Crane Min Lui Jum
His last disciple Choy Yee Gung Lama Loi Batt Moon
Wong Hon Wing Hop Ga Loy Batt Moon
Prior to these 3 Hop Ga meant a combination not hero.
[QUOTE=once ronin;1112254]
I
Prior to these 3 Hop Ga meant a combination not hero.[/QUOTE]
[SIZE=“6”][/SIZE]
That character does NOT mean “combination”
I have seen TONS of actual documents regarding this
For many years, both Wong Yan-Lam and Wong Lam-Hoi used the Lama Pai name and taught essentially the same system. However, the rapid increase in the size of the system inevitably led to divisions. The system also suffered because it was a foreign method. The Republic period was a time of extreme nationalism and few instructors wanted to claim to be teaching a foreign system, especially one the Qing royal guard had practiced.
For this reason, Wong Yan-Lam’s number one disciple, Wong Hon-Wing, adopted the name Haap Ga (Knight Family Style) based upon his teacher’s nickname and the recommendation of Dr. Sun Yat-Sen. However, most of Wong Lam-Hoi’s students did not accept this new name. They simply refused to give more credit to their Si-Baahk (elder uncle) than to their own teacher. In response, Nhg Siu-Chung established the White Crane style (Baahk Hok Pai).
It has NEVER meant “combination”
Also, there are a LOT of lineags that have nothing to do with Choy Yit Gung or Lo Wai Keung who use “Lama Pai”
don’t believe the hype
[QUOTE=once ronin;1112254]I wasnt there to hear the dialogue when the changes came about but this is what Harry Ng lineage & Chan Dat Fu explained to me:
Wong Yan Lum had these significant student:
Ng Siu Chung & Ng Siu Chan named there forms White Crane Min Lui Jum
His last disciple Choy Yee Gung Lama Loi Batt Moon
Wong Hon Wing Hop Ga Loy Batt Moon
Prior to these 3 Hop Ga meant a combination not hero.[/QUOTE]
No, I dont believe this at all. Who ever told you this got their facts confused.
This [SIZE=“5”][/SIZE] is Hap meaning combination
This [SIZE=“5”][/SIZE] is Hap meaning knight
The style NEVER was combination, and furthermore is not a combined style!
Same sound but different characters and different meanings, could only be confused by a westerner (no offense)!
Still, Hap Ga is a branch of Lama Pai, and the name Hap Ga simply didnt come into place until Wong Hon Wing started using it!
Not sure of the hype.
The poems in both versions of Loy batt moon verified the lineage to Wong Yan Lum and their level of learning or how much they paid to learn from Wong Yan Lum.
As for Min Loy Jum their is a difference was there with Ng Siu Chan.
Back to the Hung Ga topic, Wong Ping, Wong Yan Lum father was known as Tit Gerk Tung Yan have a more than solid horse stance.
I would think Hop Ga maybe a softer version of Hung Ga mixed with Lion’s Roar.
[QUOTE=once ronin;1112315]…I would think Hop Ga maybe a softer version of Hung Ga mixed with Lion’s Roar.[/QUOTE]
It might be enough to say that Wong Yan Lum’s approach was eclectic. He had no problem sharing and learning from friends. No one can say what he learned from Wong Ping. But he kept the lama footwork and basic hands.
My estimation is that he was quite conservative in teaching the complete lama fists curriculum, regardless of what he added.
jd
[QUOTE=once ronin;1112315]
Not sure of the hype.
[/QUOTE]
The “hype” is that Lama Pai comes through Choy Yit Gung’s lineage, it does NOT. It is what they were all calling it before the “split”
[QUOTE=soulfist;1112313]No, I dont believe this at all. Who ever told you this got their facts confused.
This [SIZE=“5”][/SIZE] is Hap meaning combination
This [SIZE=“5”][/SIZE] is Hap meaning knight
The style NEVER was combination, and furthermore is not a combined style!
Same sound but different characters and different meanings, could only be confused by a westerner (no offense)!
[/QUOTE]
THIS!
Please note the characters, note that they don’t mean the same thing
[QUOTE=once ronin;1112315]I would think Hop Ga maybe a softer version of Hung Ga mixed with Lion’s Roar.[/QUOTE]
What does that mean? I thought we determined that Hap Ga has nothing to do with Hung Ga, you are trying to say that Lama is Hap Ga but it isnt.
[QUOTE=jdhowland;1112324]It might be enough to say that Wong Yan Lum’s approach was eclectic. He had no problem sharing and learning from friends. No one can say what he learned from Wong Ping. But he kept the lama footwork and basic hands.[/QUOTE]
Wong Yan Lum’s father was Wong Ping? I thought he learned Lama from Sing Lung… What did he learn from his father?
[QUOTE=soulfist;1112346]…Wong Yan Lum’s father was Wong Ping? I thought he learned Lama from Sing Lung… What did he learn from his father?[/QUOTE]
As above: “no one can say.” Sing Lung was Wong Yan Lum’s only known teacher of repute. Anything else is speculation.
One thing is clear. As soulfist pointed out, Wong Kei-Ying learned from Wong Yan-Lum. Wong Kei-Ying was also a friend and associate of Wong Yan-Lum. Both retained membership in the Ten Tigers organization. This means to me that Wong Yan Lum had respect for Wong Kei-Ying and his prowess. Kei-Ying wasn’t just another student, he was a respected comrade. He did not give up his school to teach Lama Kyuhn, he added to what he already had. It was all good stuff for its time.
Not that I have a dog in this fight but “learning” might be over thought as many sifu’s exchange ideas & techniques between each other thus “learning” but I don’t think anyone would consider Wong Kay Ying a student of Wong Yan Lum. I would venture to guess Wong Kay Ying influenced Wong Yan Lum as well. I think this is universal across syles - CLF, hung fut, jow gar, etc…
i have been researching this subject for a long long time - the only sure think is that Hung Ga Kyun is definitelly influenced by Lama paai/Hap Ga/Baak Hok, but when and how, we do not know.
most people quickly assume Wong Yanlam and Wong Keying/Wong Feihung relationship and influence, but so far i have not seen a single reliable Chinese source having a proof. i persdonally think that the Ten Tigers of Gwongdung story is made up much lter by the novelists. Wong Yanlam is such a big name in the South that the bios of Wong Feihung would certainly devote a big part to that - and they do not (just his father Wong Keying and Lam Fuksing are usually mentioned as his teachers, plus the guy who supposedly taught him no shadow kick concept).
old Chinese sources have also no idea- some of them say that the long bridges were adopted by Ji Sin Sim Si after his 3 visits of Gwongdung; the other side of spectrum claims it was Lam Saiwing. one Chinese source even says that Wong Feihung has learned 5 Elements from Lam Fuksing (!) - yes, some of the sources say that one of Tit kiu Saam’s Teachers was “Golden Hook”/Bearded Lei, ie. Sing Lung (thnx for Ross sifu for the assistance identifying this person).
in the Tiger and Crane books there is no word about Hap Ga, long bridges are atributed to Fat Ga Lo Hon Kyun (Fat Ga being other name of the so called Tibetan systems? Lo Hon Kyun being a name of the set?)
loads of Hung Kyun masters had some Hap Ga experience - just look at Dang Fong and his sets like Gau Duk Kyun/Gau Ji Lin Waan Kyun, Ho Laptin and Lau Sing Kyun, Lam Saiwing and Sap Ying kyun etc. etc.
Mok Gwailaan lineage has also long bridges in their curriculum, so i personally think that the long bridges were added by Wong Feihung (whenever he has learned them - Chines esources say he has adopted elements of Hap Ga), and later expanded by other masters, who did some Hap Ga here, come CLF there (my sigung told me that our leopard is indeed from CLF). Everything before Wong Feihung is just speculation. i personalyl think that Wong Honwing might have a big influence eg. on Lam Saiwing and othe masters from that place and era.
some other discussion elswhere:
http://www.hungkyun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=58
http://www.hungkyun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=904
http://www.hungkyun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1045
http://www.hungkyun.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1397
looking forwad to hear more from you guys! research!
so..let’s take this further.
What drills, training methods, theories, techniques and concepts from
Lama/Hop-Ga/Bak-Hok do you employ in your training?
Personally, I feel it would be wasteful to absorb techniques from such a rich, effective system as this, and only have a few technique that only resemble the art on the surface.
IMHO, there is a lot of wasted potential in Hung-Ga these days. The art has become a mere shadow of its former self.