I think “agnostic” is a good way to describe my attitude. In a classic philosophical sense, “agnostisism” should be only believing in that which is proven. A sort of emperical positivism if you will.
All I know is that some of our forms are based on our forms (much like all styles are to a certain extent), our second form is based on/derived from/very similar to the first Wing Chun form. And apparently our third form is similar to a Southern Praying Mantis one. Since Wing Chun was widespread, and Southern Praying Mantis comes from the same region as LauGar (plus has links with Hakka styles) this is hardly suprising. I’m just interested in seeing the various versions to see what changes exist. It would be great to know when them came into our style too, but I understand getting sources for that is very difficult.
I’ll try and clarify:
"Can I ask what you mean by “don’t look traditional”? Do you mean they don’t look like the respective Wing Chun and Praying Mantis ones?* Or do you mean they don’t look like traditional LauGar forms?
*which I’m guessing they wouldn’t if they were brought into the style hundreds of years ago.
Traditional chinese kung fu style be they southern, northern or internal conform to a number of specified precepts with regard to body movement/mechanics shape etc.
If you look at southern styles, most common, Hung Gar, Wing Chun, Choy Lay Fut Bak Mei, Lung Ying, Chow Gar they all have very clear and defineable body movement, shape and characteristics.
If a style thats says it is traditional and for eg one of the above and does not conform to the style specific precepts then it cannot be considered traditaional in the sense of that style.
Dave I think Mok was actually being very helpfull and open with you and trying to assist in his answers.
Wing Chun done with Northern stance work …would not be defined as a traditional wing chun be it Hong Kong or mainland version
Er. I don’t think the first LauGar form (Kay Bon So Far) is wingchun based - I’ve never heard it reffered to as such. And it looks nothing like the three WingChun open hand forms.
The second LauGar one (Jorn Sau) almost certainly is. The start is very similar to Siu Nim Tau, footwork included.
i said THE FIRST TWO LAU GAR FORMS HAVE WING CHUN MOVES IN THEM…not that they look like each other,and the footwork aint the same apart from the basic stance which aint footwork ,just a stance…
Mr Yau has included lots of forms and concepts from other styles such as Hung Gar tiger Crane and Sticky hands also.
Paul[/QUOTE]
Yep we do do Tiger Crane but it is not a part of the written syllabus and there are a few other forms like this. Sticky hands at the moment is coming from Yang stile tai chi though there is starting to be a Chen influence.
On top of kay boon sau fa and charp choi. Fai Loong Gee (Finger movements of the dragon) is very like tai chi.
As to the history, your right, it is very obscure. Has any one thought to ask Master Yau. I probably won’t see him again this year.
[QUOTE=stainlesschi;719066]i said THE FIRST TWO LAU GAR FORMS HAVE WING CHUN MOVES IN THEM…not that they look like each other,and the footwork aint the same apart from the basic stance which aint footwork ,just a stance…[/QUOTE]
I was reffering to Paul T England’s comments, and trying to clarify where wingchun crossover occurs; No need to “shout”.
As for Kay Bon So Far having wingchun moves in it, I’m not convinced: Basic inner blocks, outer blocks and so on could come from any number of styles.
As for the stance/footwork thing: The first WingChun form doesn’t have any in it, it is all in stance: Just like the start of Jorn Sau, as I said.
Their isn’t any two man forms per se*, but we do two man work in punch blocks/kick blocks. And there is a very short staff defense senquence of about 10 moves.
*there seems to be a two-man staff form for 2nd degree blacksash grade, but that was never there when Kevin Brewerton (our chief instructor) was part of the BKFA as far as know.
[QUOTE=stainlesschi;719066]i said THE FIRST TWO LAU GAR FORMS HAVE WING CHUN MOVES IN THEM…not that they look like each other,and the footwork aint the same apart from the basic stance which aint footwork ,just a stance…[/QUOTE]
Whilst the stance in journ sau is very similar to wing chung and the way the form is performed I would say that is the only similarity in that I have seen the movements from the first two forms in many arts. Particularly southern ones.
Two man forms in lau gar are present though no empty hand ones that I have encountered or heard of yet. There is stick defence (Kwun Jorn) for brown sash, Dual stick form (Kwun Jorn Doi Chark) for 3rd degree and I guess you could include knife defence though it is alot less rigid than a set form. I know there are others later on but I haven’t got to them yet.
[QUOTE=laugarkuen;719101] Dual stick form (Kwun Jorn Doi Chark) for 3rd degree [/QUOTE]
Can I ask how long that has been in the BKFA syllabus? I’ve been training since the early 90’s, and the only time I’ve seen that performed was when I went to University in about 2001.
AFAIK when our club split (along with alot of other clubs back in the 80’s before the whole gaurdians thing was set up) the only weapons were: Broadsword, Butterfly Knives, Tiger Spear (trident), and the knife/stick defenses.
Originally Posted by laugarkuen
Whilst the stance in journ sau is very similar to wing chung and the way the form is performed I would say that is the only similarity in that I have seen the movements from the first two forms in many arts. Particularly southern ones.
Which Particular Southern styles are you referring to.
[QUOTE=Mano Mano;719111]Which Particular Southern styles are you referring to.[/QUOTE]
I’m beginning to think uploading a video to YouTube so you can see might be the easiest way to explain all this, you could see all our forms and see for yourself.
The first two forms are very basic and therefore cover very basic moves (inner blocks, outerblocks, harvest hand, rolling punch, palm heel strikes, a knee stomp etc) as so they are similar to most styles - how many styles don’t have outblocks in them!
I’ve done a bit of HungKuen (up in preston) and recognised several things, and from the few praying mantis videos I’ve watched there seems to be similarity there too.
I’ve also seen video of a BKFA Lau Gar chin na doi chaak. Two man drill with chin na and anti-chin na.
Again, I’d love to know when this came into the BKFA. It certainly wasn’t there when we split, and I didn’t see it even when I did train with the BKFA about 5years ago.
Yeah I have seen it to though as far as I know it is not part of the official syllabus. We do a lot of things in Lau Gar that are not as I have mentioned before.
Master Yau and the guardians have a wealth of experience between them. Do any of you expect it to be solely Lau Gar and nothing else. Hell we even do lion dance but again its not on the syllabus.
Dave, if I remember correctly you do lau gar with a shaolin twist. (Now officially you should not be being taught the lau gar syllabus at all if you if you have split from the BKFA as it is copyrighted and the property of Master Yau. Not having a dig, just a comment.)
As the syllabus is Master Yaus and he is still alive, things get changed now and then and if you are not in the BKFA you will notice the difference. Even in the BKFA we notice a difference from instructor to instructor :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=laugarkuen;719252]Yeah I have seen it to though as far as I know it is not part of the official syllabus. We do a lot of things in Lau Gar that are not as I have mentioned before.
Master Yau and the guardians have a wealth of experience between them. Do any of you expect it to be solely Lau Gar and nothing else.[/QUOTE]
Oh no, of course not. We do alot of JuJitsu bits and bobs (for self defense) as a few of our instructors are trained in that too.
I’m just trying to work out what the “core” syllabus is/was. hence being interested to see which bits seem additional to me.
Dave, if I remember correctly you do lau gar with a shaolin twist. (Now officially you should not be being taught the lau gar syllabus at all if you if you have split from the BKFA as it is copyrighted and the property of Master Yau. Not having a dig, just a comment.)
Our Syllabus is identical to the BKFA one as it was in the 1980’s when we split, except: We’ve added a few knifeblocks (with the admission they are “additional”) and 1 -4 punch/kick blocks start from stance and not u-bay.
(as for copyrighted, there is no copyright symbol on the syllabus or anywhere else I can see. He has tried to trademark the name “Lau Gar” though, which is a totally different thing)
As the syllabus is Master Yaus and he is still alive, things get changed now and then and if you are not in the BKFA you will notice the difference. Even in the BKFA we notice a difference from instructor to instructor :rolleyes:
Of course, you always get that! As one of our instructors says “it’s the same, but different”.
I have seen the two man chin na form you mentioned, and it is an exact copy of a chin na two man 72 lock form currently available on dvd that is a northern form.
Which was not on sale for more than two or so years
you cant copyright a family name either…Lau..Gar meaning Lau family..how many Lau families are there
[QUOTE=Wong Ying Home;719295]I have seen the two man chin na form you mentioned, and it is an exact copy of a chin na two man 72 lock form currently available on dvd that is a northern form.[/QUOTE]
Which style is it from?
And TBH, I don’t really care about that - we already know that is a addition to the style. It’s the core style I’m interested in.
DaveTart
The reason I asked about which styles you were referring to was when you replied to because Paul T England you said
as for Kay Bon So Far having wingchun moves in it, I’m not convinced: Basic inner blocks, outer blocks and so on could come from any number of styles.
Admittedly most Southern styles & a few Northern styles have these inner blocks, outer blocks and so on, however they very rarely follow or use the same hand movements.
. I will as my Sifu though. He is one of the Guardians so will hopefully know.