Tibetan White Crane

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Southern Chinese Kung Fu
21

[QUOTE=once ronin;1175070]records from the Deng family in guangzhou show Wong Yan lam was a rebel fighting the ching.

In Hong Kong Choy Yee Kung walked with a limp because he was trying to escape with Wong Yan Lam from Ching Govt soliders and got stabbed in the leg.

The poems for Cotton in the needle from white crane and Noi Baht Moon hop ga form has hung moon theories in it.[/QUOTE]
That’s really interesting, if that is the case, who is to be assumed to be the creator of the Min Loy Cham poem?

22

[QUOTE=TenTigers;1174790]I noticed that from the small exposure I had in TWC, there were some short hand techniques similar to Fukien/Hakka/Siu-Lum crane. Bong-sao, gaun-sau, and also the hooking and crane’s beak strike-nearly identical to Siu Lum Hung Kuen.
I understand that there was some trading in the system, and some TWC systems have a variation of the five animal fist from Siu-Lum Hung Kuen. (Deng family Hop-Ga also uses the Kiu-sao single finger hand)
What can you add to this?[/QUOTE]

Quentin Fong’s TWC comes largely from Deng Jak Ming, although he initially learned from Lok Chee Fu. It includes the Ng Ying Kyihn. So did Ng Yim Ming’s Hap Ga, although they were somewhat different. Fong emphasized that any long hand technique has a short version, (e.g.: chyun cheui becomes “jin cheui” or arrow punch, fired from in front of the chest or face rather than from the sides). Some “lama” groups call the short punch jihk cheui, the same term as in some SPM systems.

I know the kiu-sao as “gam gong jih” or adamantine/diamond finger. It is prevalent in both the White Crane and Hop Ga that I learned. It occurs at the end of our Iron Chain set as a hand signal–not a fighting technique and in our first Hap Ga form as both fighting technique and as a part of an opening tension exercise.

23

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1174792]How many types of TWC is there and how does Lama Pai / LionsRoar fit into it?[/QUOTE]

One way to look at it is that there are versions that were taught to practitioners of other systems, and versions that used only lama style methods. This gives us at least a few major branches and lots of smaller offshoots.

Hong Kong Pak Hok Athletic Association style. These folks had the impossible task of trying to standardize and regulate the style while also trying to preserve it by modifying it.

Chan Hak Fu style. Reportedly different–his own style with a pared down syllabus.

Luk Chee Fu branch. His son, Luk Chung Mau (Michael Lok) continues to teach. I think there were schools influenced by them in Malaysia, Britain and the Philippines. Should be very close to Ngai Yoh Tong and the P.H.A.A. style.

Kwong Bun Fu style. He was one of the senior representatives of Pak Hok when he died a few years back. Left students in Asia and Canada. Some of them claim he should have been the gate keeper of the style but many in Hong Kong disagreed.

Au Wing Nin style. Learned lama style from at least four different teachers. Apparently became the senior disciple of Ng Siu Jung. Au went along with the name change to White Crane but seems to have taught the Lama system more or less as he learned it, without the tendency for expansion that happened in later decades.

Please add others to this list as you think of them.

In regards to the second part of sanjuro_ronin’s question: In the past, some have suggested that White Crane resulted from a specialization in one aspect of the Lion Roar curriculum and that systems using the names Lion’s Roar or Lama Paai must reflect older versions of the tradition. I don’t see it this way at all.

If you look at the origins of systems now calling themselves Lion’s Roar or Lama Pai you find that they stem from blends of White Crane and Hap Ga as much as anything else. White Crane and Hop Ga were established before most Lama Pai schools. This reflects political changes in China that allowed the older names to be used again. They were no longer so politically incorrect, and, as Gru Bianca mentioned in a previous post, allowed for a name brand recognition that set them apart from other Chinese arts.

24

I have seen videos from the Hong Kong Pak Hok Association, and in my opinion, there is really not much difference between forms. The techniques are just strewn in a different order.

Which makes me believe that sets in Pak Hok or Lama is a very recent invention…

25

[QUOTE=jdhowland;1175139]One way to look at it is that there are versions that were taught to practitioners of other systems, and versions that used only lama style methods. This gives us at least a few major branches and lots of smaller offshoots.

Hong Kong Pak Hok Athletic Association style. These folks had the impossible task of trying to standardize and regulate the style while also trying to preserve it by modifying it.

Chan Hak Fu style. Reportedly different–his own style with a pared down syllabus.

Luk Chee Fu branch. His son, Luk Chung Mau (Michael Lok) continues to teach. I think there were schools influenced by them in Malaysia, Britain and the Philippines. Should be very close to Ngai Yoh Tong and the P.H.A.A. style.

Kwong Bun Fu style. He was one of the senior representatives of Pak Hok when he died a few years back. Left students in Asia and Canada. Some of them claim he should have been the gate keeper of the style but many in Hong Kong disagreed.

Au Wing Nin style. Learned lama style from at least four different teachers. Apparently became the senior disciple of Ng Siu Jung. Au went along with the name change to White Crane but seems to have taught the Lama system more or less as he learned it, without the tendency for expansion that happened in later decades.

Please add others to this list as you think of them.

In regards to the second part of sanuro_ronin’s question: In the past, some have suggested that White Crane resulted from a specialization in one aspect of the Lion Roar curriculum and that systems using the names Lion’s Roar or Lama Paai must reflect older versions of the tradition. I don’t see it this way at all.

If you look at the origins of systems now calling themselves Lion’s Roar or Lama Pai you find that they stem from blends of White Crane and Hap Ga as much as anything else. White Crane and Hop Ga were established before most Lama Pai schools. This reflects political changes in China that allowed the older names to be used again. They were no longer so politically incorrect, and, as Gru Bianca mentioned in a previous post, allowed for a name brand recognition that set them apart from other Chinese arts.[/QUOTE]

John,

You summed it up pretty well I would say; only an addition in regard to Au Wing Nam, you are right in what you say (or at least so I have heard too) but he actually did not only study Lama prior to Pak Hok he actually studied Pak Hok with Ng Siu Chang more than he studied with Ng Siu Chun. But he showed great respect non the less to Ng Siu Chun

26

[QUOTE=taichi4eva;1175159]I have seen videos from the Hong Kong Pak Hok Association, and in my opinion, there is really not much difference between forms. The techniques are just strewn in a different order.

Which makes me believe that sets in Pak Hok or Lama is a very recent invention…[/QUOTE]

I’ll have to desagree with you on this; surely the techniques are the same (to be politically correct) or else it wouldn’t be the “same” style, but their execution and how the forms have been reconstructed after being forgotten really underline differences between different lines of origine.
Just my opinion of course

27

Ten_Tigers:

The foundation in a larger frame boxing style develops the “engines” for a more compact system.

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1174802]Very much so, going from “big to small” really develops the engine much better than diving it at “small”.
I am sure some can make it work from the start of course.
The commonality of many southern systems is that, start big and end small.
[/QUOTE]

Good observations. I’ve often wondered whether the descriptions of TWC in popular media as a truly long range style were fostered by the featured instructors who didn’t want to give too much away. Many of our techniques are designed for body-to-body contact, even those performed at full extension.

I’ve had some training in Chu Ga and SPM and find great similarities. Even the fung ngan cheui/phoenix eye strikes are common in TWC and Hop Ga.

Long range TWC methods “open the chest” to allow waist rotation and side power for full momentum. The short hand techniques are done differently, with a “closed chest, open back” and the common flurries of three to five short hand techniques are done with power from trunk muscles, but with little waist rotation. My teacher even described a waist folding and extending technique in our Kau Da Kyun as “eating and spitting.”

28

[QUOTE=Gru Bianca;1175166]John,
… in regard to Au Wing Nam, you are right in what you say (or at least so I have heard too) but he actually did not only study Lama prior to Pak Hok he actually studied Pak Hok with Ng Siu Chang more than he studied with Ng Siu Chun. But he showed great respect non the less to Ng Siu Chun[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I was taught that he learned from both brothers but bowed to Ng Siu Chan as the senior.

29

Fong Kwan TWC

Thought this might be interesting to some. It’s the list of fourteen basic training methods called the Foundation Course (approximately the first year of training) as posted in Quentin Fong’s Mason Street school in San Francisco, circa 1973.

Foundation Course
[INDENT][INDENT]
1. waist loosening exercise
2. pushing palm
3. arrow punch
4. ascending punch
5. descending punch
6. fist and finger push ups
7. chop stick twisting
8. leg stretching exercises
9. front stiff leg kick
10. front snap kick
11. front push kick
12. roundhouse kick
13. sand bag practice
14. six strength fist set[/INDENT][/INDENT]

30

long-short

I think the “label” of the Tibetan systems as being long range mainly derives from the theory of not engaging in bridges and in avoiding contact till the right moment, i.e. the finishing one.
It was discussed in a thread opened by Ross the principle of whereby basically is stated to move out as soon as you launch a technique hence hinting to certain “disdain” for extended contact.
But then again, if we look at Siu Ng Yim, Min Loy Cham, Siu/Da KamNa etc…it’s full of short range techniques, shuaijiao and so on so forth.
From my very limited and inexperienced perspective I’d argue that by virtue “the style” preaches unprolonged contacts with the opponent hence “long distance” but at the end of the day I believe it to be highly dependent on the skills of the pratictioner and his mastering of Sim (a quality I was told Wang Lam Hoi had very well developed)

31

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1174802]Very much so, going from “big to small” really develops the engine much better than diving it at “small”.
I am sure some can make it work from the start of course.
The commonality of many southern systems is that, start big and end small.QUOTE]

I agree. It’s hard to imagine doing it the other way. Imagine the difficulties spending years on, say, a short Hakka system and then trying to loosen up for longfist. TWC is well organized as a teaching method and first develops gross motor skills which can be used under pressure.

I recall one person mentioning that he believed that the southern short hand systems are all just “expressions” of an original long hand one.

Interesting. Wondered about that myself. It would explain why systems of supposedly northern origin do not resemble what remains in the homeland.

32

90% of the people who can hit for sh1t in a short ranged system trained a power base in a long range system.

33

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1174796]I’ve seen some TWC that is “tyical” long range stuff ( kicks with both arms out for balance, lots of “CLF” type long looping strikes, etc) BUT have also seen LR/LP stuff that was as inclose as SPM.[/QUOTE]

(Bold type added by me)

Thought this might be worth a comment.

The oft-noted arms out while kicking seen in TWC is a training method and does not reflect the fighting technique. I would say that it’s not even for balance (although one of my teachers said exactly that). Our kicking drills are often done with the arms outstretched to the sides for the duration of the drills and often with weights, though Master Fong preferred using grip exercisers to train a tight fist. Shoulder strength is important in this system due to the emphasis on keeping the hands up and away from the body during a fight.

Along with endurance training the method also adds inertia to the upper body so it doesn’t move at the same time as the waist and legs. It becomes an isolation exercise that creates awareness of the lower trunk–the “golden girdle” or central power source.

34

i respect hap kuen, but its rediculous to call it a tibetan martial art. also, please cut it with the stereotypical “rebel hero” bs.

35

[QUOTE=bawang;1176481]i respect hap kuen, but its rediculous to call it a tibetan martial art. also, please cut it with the stereotypical “rebel hero” bs.[/QUOTE]

Ridiculous why? Mind to elaborate in more details?

36

because it is not a tibetan martial art.

37

[QUOTE=bawang;1176481]i respect hap kuen, but its rediculous to call it a tibetan martial art. also, please cut it with the stereotypical “rebel hero” bs.[/QUOTE]

what’s wrong with rebel heroes?

38

[QUOTE=bawang;1176647]because it is not a tibetan martial art.[/QUOTE]

yeah, thanks a lot I got it already you were of that opinion, I would be interested though to know if you have a specific reason to say so (.i.e. you have some sort of proof or you have seen some document or what?)

39

the traditional tibetan martial arts of archery and wrestling are alive and well in tibet, and traditional culture in tibet is also continous and well preserved, with no “lost history”.

more importantly, chinese martial arts with legitimate ties to lamas all practice spirit possession, called the great spirit jump.

40

[QUOTE=Gru Bianca;1176661]yeah, thanks a lot I got it already you were of that opinion, I would be interested though to know if you have a specific reason to say so (.i.e. you have some sort of proof or you have seen some document or what?)[/QUOTE]

It would be like Brazilian jiujitsu, or Russian kung fu, or Haitian karate.