The Tang Fung Ng Ying is a little different from the Lam’s Sup Ying form. The dragon part is very different, the Lam’s has more of an iron wire flavor in it. The leapord part is also a little different. The tiger ,snake and crane portion are much more similar. Both are great forms.
The sup ying is by far much longer, boy do you need to be in shape for it, lol.
We are familar with the folks in Malaysia, from what sifu said from his last visit with them, their forms are very similar to ours.
Hope this help
Ng Ying Kuen from a different perspective. First, I have to digress a little.
White Crane, Pak Hoc, is well-known and has been around for quite a while. Wong, Yan-Lum (WYL) was a contempary of Wong, Kay-Ying and Wong, Fei-Hung. The were all acquaitences and members of Kwangtung's Sup Fu (Canton's Ten Tigers). It is even rumored that WYL has some influence on Wong, Fei-Hung's Fu Hok Sheon Ying Form (The upper/downward cuts and "pow" upward swings). Interesting rumor that has been floating around for decades, but just that - a rumor to note. The execution of these hung gar techniques and white crane's "pow (upper cut) and cup (downward cut)" is different in taste and form. But who knows...dang...I am going off on a tangent again. Back to the subject of Ng Ying Kuen!
White Crane kicked a lot (really...a lot) of ass in the old days in Canton. They took a lot of challenges on platforms and to this day, remain elite and difficult to cull any significant amount of information on their style. They have their own organization (social, political, and martial arts wise). They do not care to associate with other system; hence, we do not see a lot of intermediate or advance sets demo'd to outsiders. Snotty behavior, but they possessed a very effective and efficient (no block but strike)system.
As was the tradition, if one came across a superior opponent and lost the fight then you would join that style. White Crane acquired a lot of different martial artists(MA) within their system. For example, Luk, Ah-Choy who is Quentin Fong's sifu was a traditional Choy Lay Fut practitioner and they have some CLF influenced flavor in some of their white crane forms.
Many of these MA still practised and retained some of their old forms. By the time Ng, Siu-Chung (considered the Father of White Crane) standardized Tibetan Lamma into White Crane during the WWII period; Ng Ying Kuen was already in the pak hoc system. A hung kuen practitioner (don't know who he was) had brought in Ng Ying Kuen because that was the set that Hung Kuen practitioners were taught and prevalent at that time and NOT Sup Ying Kuen. This is white crane history.
So if you ever luck out and see a white crane demonstration of Ng Ying Kuen, please note that it IS a Hung Kuen Set. Even the white crane clan say that it was from a former Hung Kuen MA who joined their lama system. The form has some interesting dynamic tension that we associate with hung gar and even has the signature "que sao (one-index finger)" coupled w/sei ping ma AND yee gee kim ma. The crane is done in dynamic tension form also...very, very interesting indeed.
I thought that Paul and DL would find this though provoking...heh, heh.... So there is some oral history from the white crane clan supporting the Ng Ying Kuen stance as a major form at that point in time, back in China... Remember that it is just my two-cents soooo please do not get agitated if you do not agree.
The teacher of Quentin Fong is Luk, Chi-Fu and NOT Luk, Ah-Choy. Sorry for that late night error!
Having talked to my sisuk, it is a mistake to assume that all hung kuen practitioners from the “Kwangtung Sup Ying” period learned everything. Even as late as the early sixties, some hung kuen people never went beyond Fu Hok Sheon Ying Set. He mentioned that the mentality was not to collect and learn all the sets, but to work on what was taught to you and explore and excel in your form, martial arts skills until you were damn good. If you opened up your own studio, and your students wanted to learn more, you would just send them to one of your sihings or sidyes or the form/training. No big deal…
I agree with molum_jr that things were taught differently back then. I remember all we did back then was basic,techniques and foundation trainings, Forms were taught out before we have to do a public demo, and not necessary in any specfific orders. I remember learning the spear as my second form after gung gee, lol. Molum_jr sisook is corrected in basiclly saying it is more important to have quality rather than quantity.
The pak hoc connection is very interesting and worth exploring. I will now go and haunt my pak hoc friends about their ng ying, lol.
I don’t know too much about bak hok pai or bak hok kuen, but perhaps this mystery figure who brought some hung gar to white crane was Kwan Tak Hing.
A few things might not fit though. Kwan Tak Hing’s base style was white crane, and he learned his hung gar later, as a casual student or friend from Chan Hon Chung. Chan Hon Chung however did not teach Ng Ying Kuen, but we also know that Kwan Tak Hing created his own Sup Ying Kuen.
Lovely how confusing things get. =)
hehehe
Perhaps this mystery figure was from Tang Fung lineage or from Chiu Kao? If it was around WW2, it would be before the period of Bak Hok Sam Fu, and should be easy to figure out, as most of the people from that era are still alive
Talking about white crane and Hung Gar:
Ever seen the Bubishi (Patrick McCarthy’s translation/version). It’s about Goju Karate and the origin which is Crane Kung Fu (don’t think it’s Tibetan white crane).
In the section on the origin of the crane styles Fong Weng Chun is mentioned as the founder. Also there are some drawings depicting here with her husband “Official Hung”. So while we have the legend of Hung Hsi Kwan and his style being influenced by his wife Fong Weng Chun, in Crane style it is exactly counterwise. Here the legends tell Fong Weng Chun is the “creator” being influenced by Hung Hsi Kwan.
So crane style and hung gar date back a long way.
Secondly I have to agry with Ha Say Fu.
I also have seen several lineages/schools. All have there small differences, but the main line is always the same. It’s always Hung Gar and will always be our family. (regardless if we also have some different forms and stories).
Since different teachers are all trying to make a living teaching Kung Fu, the tendency is to see their closest “relatives” as the worst competition
simply because they offer a similar curriculum. (and thus theoretically steal students back and forth)
Of course the Hung Ga lineages are more similar than they are different. I don’t see other Hung Ga people as ‘bad guys’, but I would still be cautious about going into one of their schools, because despite any good intentions I may have, they may see me as a potential troublemaker. I wouldn’t want this, so it is best to love one’s own lineage, admire what is good in other lineages, and stay out of trouble! The Hung fist will thrive if we all train hard, teach good students, and remember how to behave
I recently heard that the subforms Moi FA Kuen, Wu Dip Cheung etc. were inlcuded in the Hung GAr style in the 1950’s.
Several Hung Gar master came together because htey thought other styles had much more forms and Hung Gar could use some “beginner forms”.
So they created/edited some forms together.
Does anybody have any info on this?
Note: please do not come with the story of the Ching Mo. Lam Sai Wing was not a member of this association.
Patrick Chiu wrote: “Please do not come with the story of the Ching Mo. Lam Sai Wing was not a member of this association”
He was a member of the Kuo Shu Institute though. This Institute was founded in the early thirties in Guangzhou and was a branch of the Central Kuo Shu Institute in Nanjing. Also in this institute Northern and Southern Styles were mixed and new forms were created.
Chiu Wai says that Moi Fah Kuen was created by a group of Hung Gar instructors that wanted to create a bridge between Gung Gee and Fu Hok. It could be taught as a beginner form since it is so short but like Lau Gar, it emphasizes some very core concepts. I’ve looked closer at the John Leong book and his version is different then what I learned from Chiu Wai. Similar but shorter.
He also said that Wu Dip Cheung came from Ching Mo. I did not ask if it came from LSW. My guess is that he would say it didn’t since my Sifu thought it came from Chiw Wai’s mother Siu Ying and Lum Jo’s school does not teach either of these sets. They do teach a subform, Chin Cheung, though.
Hasayfu wrote: “He also said that Wu Dip Cheung came from Ching Mo. I did not ask if it came from LSW. My guess is that he would say it didn’t since my Sifu thought it came from Chiw Wai’s mother Siu Ying and Lum Jo’s school does not teach either of these sets”
I also heard that Wu Dip Cheung was created by Chiu Wai’s mother. Actually she was born in a small village in Guangdong. There she learned her first Kung Fu. I can’t remember if this was a Northern Style, because Wu Dip Cheung seems to be a mix.
I remember asking Chiu Wai if his mother created the set and he said no. Not sure where the other story came from but as I said, my Sifu (who studied under Chiu Wai) said it came from his mother too.
I heard the 3 animals set was @ 50yrs old and not a popular set.
A student of BuckSamKong sent me a video tape of himself doing it…Joseph Plante I do believe was his name. I’ve also heard that it exists in book form. Perhaps he picked it up some place, not sure. Anyone heard of this book?
My personal opinion is that the movements of this set are nothing really new to our arsenal of techniques.
I sure someone must know something more about this particular set. Well, that’s all I know.
The book for that form is usually advertised on the back of the Lam Sai Wing books, along with about 30 other kung fu books. I too have heard about Bucksam Kong’s people performing that form, but haven’t heard of any other hung gar people doing it.
There is an old book I saw of this form. I also had a friend that does this form but unfortunately I haven’t seem him in years. Fron what i remember, it is an interesting form as Subital said it is nothing new but it does has a different flavor. The movements do appear to be shorter and lighter if you know what i mean.
I try to run to Chinatown this weeken to see do they still have this book in print.