Drunken Monkey

legend has it that you watch him 'die' in the film....

i can't really remember what happened.

something to do with blanks, live rounds, set explosives, whatever mix up accident.

don't forget, blanks can kill too....

double post deleted.

i should point out that i only know the names of things in cantonese....

for me the river is called 'cheung hor'.

um, i thought the yangtze was the 'yellow river'.

i could be wrong.

like i said, i only know the names in cantonese.

the term longfist is a bit confusing.

in chinese it is used to refere to both the style of long fist as well as the form itself called 'long fist'.

when you mentioned shaolin longfist, i assumed you were talking about the form, not the style (seeing as 'shaolin longfist' isn't a style, whilst it is a derivitive of shaolin...).

also, i know of longfist, the form, to be long, low and full of whipping, hip generated power.

not really a long range as it isn't that mobile (able to close gaps) compared to something similar like choy li fut.

i said this briefly before but the long range capabilities of wing chun, as i understand it, is its ability to close gaps;

getting from out of range to in controlling range in one movement (be it one step or two or whatever).

that is how wing chun deals with range.

also, technically, it isn't really about range.

it's about not letting the opponent do what they want to do.

as a result, there are lots of traps, minor locks, control of opponents movement/direction.

add this to the fact that you should be also be pressing, the opponent should have no option except to go backwards (again, think of what would be happening in an alley with wing chun against shaolin..)

i have to say that what yip man did to his line of wing chun from futshan to hk was not modify the moves but modify the names.

at a rather famous meeting between yip chun and some of the futshan wing chun guys, they compared techniques and they were more or less identical apart from the names.

what yip man did was to remove the old obscure terms; five elements in footwork

and

replace them with simple terms; step, cross, shift

(approximate translations from chinese)

i would say that it was leung jan who started the simplying.

some say it was to give less for chan wah sum to learn, some say say it was to make learning it easier.

what ever the reason, it is known that one of the last things he said that part of his wish was to make wing chun accessible to everyone, to make it simple so everyone can learn.

you said something about high level shaolin being able to defend against shaolin.

this is (in theory) true but not really the same thing as wing chun being 'anti shaolin'.

i have never heard of shaolin shortfist used to cover southern shaolin styles.

shaolin is a system by itself and includes things (originally) like the 72 'final/specific' arts and fighting forms like iron palm, small plum blossom.

wing chun, hung gar, etc are styles by themselves and do not fall under any catagory other than the 'southern fist' ('northern leg') thing.

finally the thing with the bricks.

i should point out that your head does not have the same properties as a brick or tile.

a brick or tile is hard, brittle and has no give.

your head can be taken as a point mass on a soft support.

add to the fact that i doubt he can get you head in a similar postion to how he breaks objects (i.e resting on a similar hard object whilst he prepares himself for the strike).

just out of curiosity, who's the last major head of your line?

it would help me understand where you're coming from.

in case i don't see you....

i don't have one favourite.

i don't think it exists.

it's like kids saying that their favourite book is 'harry potter'.

which one?

'all of them.....'

there are too many films that i haven't seen.

i've said this before but it's more like i have favourite moments in films, little camera angles, certain lines, a stunning pan.

like when instead of the penguin, it was marla who takes a drag, exhales 'slide'.

or

the little look morgan freeman gives brad pitt in seven when he says 'ladies and gentlemen, we hae ourselves a homicide'

or

the bit in jfk when kevin costner realises whats going on and his glasses go from reflecting white light, to being clear.

lots of little moments.

look, when i said that it looked messy, i wasn't infering that your school isn't legit or whatever, although i can see how this can be read in my words.

i was just trying to point out that it doesn't seem to follow how shaolin is usually taught (how i was taught)

base 'arts' (stretching, stances, punches, kicks+variations using stances...)

small forms (little sets of ten 'sup sik')

long forms (lohan kuen, tan tui, mui fa etc etc)

executions of loose techniques from forms.

it looked to me that you were being taught singular moves as opposed to the entire form.

this is what i meant by messy (i'm not a big fan of breaking up forms into chunks....)

as for the names of things.

there will be some confusion as you seem to be giving me names in mandarin and i know only know in the cantonese.

as for my comments on the shaolin temple and the monks who are currently there.

do a little search on the (modern)history of the temple.

it's not that great a place.

there's a chinese chicken wing dish that is 50%fresh red chillis.

surprisingly, it's called something that roughly translates as 'hot chicken'....

can i post obscure hk and japanese flicks?

in the mean-time, things you guys haven't mentioned.....

the usual suspects

la confidential

babe

pulp fiction, dogs, kill bill (i don't care what you think, it is ONE film..)

chasing amy

unforgiven

12 angry men

lock stock....

traffic

just a pick from my library to give you an idea of what i watch.

i'm also in the process of collecting the kurosawa collection.

just found out that three of my dvds from hk do not have english subtitles.

shaolin 'longfist' is not a 'long range' style....

the 'long' is in reference to the river of the same name (cheung) in that the form is long and continuous like the river.

i should point out that the first recorded tai chi form is also called (cheung kuen/long-fist).

also, i know ng ying kuen.

it is a very close range style (or as i prefere, it teaches you to close gaps)

why wouldn't you want a six and half point pole in an alley?

what would you pick of the chinese weapons, from any style over this one with this form?

i should say that i have never heard ANY wing chun line teaching throwing weapons.

more info if you please.

also, it wasn't used to fight wars.

there was no organised fighting during the rebellion.

instead you have what i can only describe as terrorist acts.

you can call it a war if you want but it was nothing of the sort.

i say again, it was specifically designed to be anti-shaolin because at the time, the majority of the military and body guards were skilled shaolin guys.

it's purpose wasn't to be used in mass combat.

it was to be used to 'remove' singular people and to aid escape via said alleys.

i've said this elsewhere but the chinese do not describe the martial arts as that.

'martial arts' is a western term that has been accepted to describe the 'fighting arts'(this being a closer term).

whether or not a chinese fighting art has been used in a war of any sort does not have any bearing on it being regarded as a 'chinese martial art'.

trust me.

it's a language thing.

now to the brick breaking and related.

i'm not saying that they are not possible

but

i'm pretty sure some of the guys here can tell you how it's done.

wing chun isn't a crash course in shaolin.

technically speaking, it is anti-shaolin.

also it was specifically designed for use in the alleys (or any other place where the traditional shaolin style could not move as they desired, whilst the wing chun guy retains his entire arsenal).

while they might not have said 'let's design a system fo use in alleys, they did say 'let's design a simple to learn system that can be used against the traditional shaolin styles.

take a look at the pole form.

it has range, yes but it is very narrow, again for the environment in which it was intended.

wing chun was not used by the rebels for any reason other than because it was they who created the style (look for stuff about a bloke called cheung ng and the red junks. forget the five elders myths and legends...)

punching through bricks, tiles and rocks are parlour tricks.

there's a guy that can heat a pan of water by sticking his hands in it....

i am not putting them aside.

i'm just pointing out that they are rather meaningless (like the ever popular taking pictures with renown sifus for no reason...).

as i pointed out, for the sum of $3000, you too can train at the shaolin temple.

food and accommodation is provided.

see, that's what's bothering me.

the things you mention do not sound like shaolin to me.

you are mentioning what sounds like single moves (that you seem to cal forms).

cheung kuen=long fist, a basic set taught in shoalin (also regarded as a style in itself but i am atlknig of the base form)

tan tui=spring legs, another basic set.

actually, wing chun wasn't designed to fight wars.

it was meant to 'take out' people in the tight alleyways of old chinese cities...

my experience?

2 years learning said long fist, tan tui and ng ying kuen.

monument of "brotherhood"

there's a monument of william wallace in scotland (stirling i think).

except it's of mel gibson as william wallace.

if you want, i can erect a monument of brotherhod for you too...

you realy should find out a bit about exactly what the shaolin temple is these days.

it's not the place it used to be.

it isn't much more than a government sanctioned money making machine.

i have always said this; the best place to learn shaolin kung fu is probably not the shaolin temple in china.

every year, the monks come and perform at the seni exhibition in birmingham.

they are invited and paid.

the monuments and monks do not mean anything in respect to the school.

i can invite and pay for the leading wing chun guys to visit me, stay at my house and teach me.

wouldn't mean much....

the strengths of a style do not automatically discount from the weaknesses of a style.

the same is true if you switch the words around;

the weaknesses of a style do not sutomatically discount from its strengths.

who cares if it takes longer to learn as long as the end result is the same.

who cares if the style is 'simple' (isn't that a good thing?).

remove all of the baggage and we are all essentially learning how to hit people and not get hit.

when deciding if a style is good or not, look at if it teaches and trains you (not the same thing) to hit and avoid hits.

i have said this many many times before.

i seriously doubt that many of the chinese schools these days teach you to fight like the style is supposed to.

that's where the 'sports' styles have their advantage.

imagine training your 'classical' style how they do.

actually fighting with it.

after all, it's what they used to do.

bruises, loss of blood and broken bones used to be regular events in the old martial arts schools.

that's why the sifus NEEDED to be bone-setters as well.

on the other hand for those that say that the 'sports' styles lack depth, imagine what they could do with the material that the 'classical' guys have?

peace keeping mission over.

monkey out.

yip gee keung's mantis school does not use a belt system.

the majority of first gen yip man students do not/did not use a belt sytem.

the shaolin class taught by shi yan zi does not have a belt system.

i don't think the lau gar eagle claw uses a belt system.

i know the five elders fist class local to me don't.

those that i know of that do have coloured belts in their class is to differentiate those who can teach and those who are learning.

so to answer to your first question.

yes, many (very traditional) schools in the west keep many (often too many) students without a belt system.

in fact, i would say, most people would avoid a 'chinese' style school if it had a belt system as it totally destroys the family spirit of the traditional chinese martial way.

second question.

i'm not bothered about what you do or do not have to learn to get your first belt.

the point is, that's not how chinese martial arts is about.

there is no syllabus.

there is no, 'do this, do that, here's your belt'.

the point is everyone is good at different things so one system cannot be used for all.

i don't think a belt is the best way for a student to know he is making progress.

i think the best way for student to know when he is getting better is when the student get's hit less and he finds things easier to do.

and why can't you have everyone training together?

because not everyone can do the same things?

i say that isn't a valid reason.

as i have said, if anything, it violates the idea of the chinese martial family.

there is only one type of separation; teacher and student.

anything else only serves to create a sense of superiority and potential animosity.

you say there are 32 animal forms.

now i do not know what you mean by form.

but as i know it, a form is a training method that serves to unite your footwork, hand work, structure by way of linking techniques together to form a sequence.

the resulting sequence is a form.

you may call something else a form.

32 forms.

does getting your first belt involve being able to use everything of the 32 forms?

or just being able to perform it?

like i say, we might have different terms for things.

a side note.

having gone to train at the shaolin temple in china isn't that much of a biggie.

for $3000 US you can do the same.

should also point out that his choice of using a belt system probably stems from his japanese training.

i would just say that the nature of karate training and chinese style training are so fundementally different that to apply something like the belt system to the chinese style would , like i said before, destroy some of the principles of the chinese way.

i said it seemed messy to begin with is because from what i can tell, you aren't really being taught anything like shaolin style kung fu.

instead, you seem to be learning loose 'mini' sets of movements that have been given a name that seems to have no meaning.

the things you have mentioned briefly before here to not sound like any shaolin kung fu that i know of.

i mean, do you know what 'monkey steals peach' or 'angry dragon waves tail' or 'small lotus blossom' are?

you aren't even doing basic forms like cheung kuen or tan tui.

my use of the word 'messy' was because the style you seem to be taught looks a bit messy.

wow, from sil lim tao to chum kiu in two days....

um, i have to say, your school sounds a bit um, 'messy' draven....

not sure what i think of a 'shaolin' school with belts.

wonder what shi yan zhi would think?

another thing i have pointed out before.

any stories regarding the five elders should only be taken as that; stories.

the one you presented to us is just one story.

other stories have them going about their different ways never directly meeting.

not sure why the shaolin elders would go to o-mei as this was the female counterpart of the shaolin temple, set up in defiance of shaolin and according to legend, there is a bitter rivalry between the two.

besides, the burning of the temple only relates to one of the sites (exact location unknown).

they did not burn ALL shaolin temples.

if they needed santuary, they could have chosen any of their own temples or perhaps even help from wudang.

there is also a lot of confusion, coincidences and too many similarites between some of the stories despite maybe a hundred years difference.

it has been specualted that the elder stories was in fact to hide the true origins and the identites of the true masters of the new styles that were emerging during the anti-ching period.

each of the elders have one major style attributed to them

but at the same time they all seem to have contributed to all of the major styles.

i can't see how five people travelling on agreed different routes would meet and have the time to develop and teach and train so many styles, over quite a great distance.

(also, it is quite well know that fong doe duk appeared on the red junks, which puts him about 100 years after the dates mentioned in the article)

anyway.

enough of myths/legends/history.

i have to say i am confused.

everything they mention on the site is clearly karate.

the pics are of guys wearing gis.

i'm not entirely what 'bok fu' actually means?

is is supposed to be white tiger (bak fu)

or northern tiger (buk fu)

or something else?

my guess that it's white tiger looking at their symbol.

only thing is, again, in the pics they are doing something that definitely looks like karate.

doesn't mean it's not a good school though, or even if its a good style.

you know how it was.

the school's been around for ages, right from the time when no-one knew the difference.

the name 'kung fu karate' is probably just a left-over of that legacy.

also, the name 'bok fu' could just be the name of the school (white tiger from their badge) badly translated from chinese (again, a leftover of the 70s).

gonna add my worthless lot.

mantis in general has very heavy emphasis on body/arm/positional structure.

part of the mantis claw is that is lines up the joint along your arm and focuses strength/energy/power into your elbow in order to produce a very strong receiving position.

that's why you then use the body as guiding force, in order to not compromise elbow power.

in other (and very simple) words, you receive with your hands and control with the body and move with your feet.

often these things overlap (as in turning hip to add power, step in to increase effect) but the basic principle is there.

ugh, i think i've confused the matter by over explaining....

hope you understand.

depends.

in the car park that you can see from my sister's place there are a few nice cars.

i like walking in her car park, i can pretend to be rich!

yeah, my sister's flat has windows that face the A3, a brick wall and another little flat complex....

my window doesn't face the garden.

i have a lovely tree lined view.

just curious, where did you get the chinese characters from?

nevermind then.

i'm an essex lad.

well, not quite.

ilford, born and raised.

the A13 is really in my back yard.

i can see the A406 flyover to ilford from my garden and that joins onto the A13.

on quiet nights, i can hear the bikes roaring on them roads!

i'm not getting 'het up'.

i still see things being attributed to jade and then jade being abused because of those things.

it annoys me more because the person who attributed the statements is the one doing the abusing.

i don't have any issues with what's been said.

hehe, what school/sixth form did you go to?

cos you really remind me of someone i once knew....