Finally found it - Version of Siu Nim Tao

[Xue Sheng]

I have only learned Siu Nim Tao but I have learned it twice from two different guys from two different lineages and

One guy is a student of Ip Ching and the other was a student of Fong Chi Wing and Fak Tak Ling.

The second teacher taught me Sill Um Tao a little different than the first and I assumed it came from Fak Tak Ling, since he was his most recent teacher and it was Fak Tak Ling who told him he could teach. So I looked all over for videos of Fak Tak Ling. Fak Tak Ling’s version of Sil Lum Tao and did not find it. So I went to his teacher Leung Sheung and found a few videos that allegedly show Siu Nim Tao from Leung Sheung.

But here is the thing; they all looked similar to what I learned from the student of Ip Ching

But today I was looking at videos and I found myself looking at Augustine Fong (Fong Chi Wing) and there it was

They do that double punch and all this time I thought it came from Fak Tak Ling…but then it might, I have not yet seen Fak TAk Ling do Siu Nim Tao

 

[Marnetmar]

Yes, that's definitely derived from Leung Sheung's style, which does seem to differ a bit from what you see in most Wing Chun classes. I'm from the Kenneth Chung branch, so we still do things a bit differently but we also share a lot of things in common.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Actually the second one, the one I am talking about as the second one I learned, is not from Leung Sheung. They person doing that form is Augustine Fong and his teacher was Ho Kam Ming.

Now I am not disputing that Leung Sheung may do it the same way, it is just every video clip I have seen of Siu Nim Tao from Leung Sheung looks more like what I see Ip Ching doing that what Augustine Fong is doing

 

[Vajramusti]

Actually the second one, the one I am talking about as the second one I learned, is not from Leung Sheung. They person doing that form is Augustine Fong and his teacher was Ho Kam Ming.

Now I am not disputing that Leung Sheung may do it the same way, it is just every video clip I have seen of Siu Nim Tao from Leung Sheung looks more like what I see Ip Ching doing that what Augustine Fong is doing

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The devil in the details again Xue sheng.----there are differences in the large circle of wing chun people.
In Fong Sifu's slt video -old video-that you show- there is that double punch-a distinctive feature of
Fong Sifu's slt. When he was learning from Sigung Ho in the 60-s, sigung had him do the double punch many times
and sifu practiced it hundreds of times while in yee gee kim yeung ma and also in ma bo moving stances.
In his slt as a text Fong sifu put it at the beginning of the section of the slt which has two hand together movements-
ding sao etc.The double punch as a drill- helps send out power evenly from both sides of the body.
Of course there is more to it. I hope this helps.

 

[Xue Sheng]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The devil in the details again Xue sheng.----there are differences in the large circle of wing chun people.
In Fong Sifu's slt video -old video-that you show- there is that double punch-a distinctive feature of
Fong Sifu's slt. When he was learning from Sigung Ho in the 60-s, sigung had him do the double punch many times
and sifu practiced it hundreds of times while in yee gee kim yeung ma and also in ma bo moving stances.
In his slt as a text Fong sifu put it at the beginning of the section of the slt which has two hand together movements-
ding sao etc.The double punch as a drill- helps send out power evenly from both sides of the body.
Of course there is more to it. I hope this helps.

Yes there are differences in Wing Chun people, but there are differences in Xingyiquan people and Yang people and Chen people too

Thank You

I have been trying to find out more about this version since it was taught to me but I was looking in the wrong places; in the Leung Sheung lineage and not in the Ho Kam Ming lineage

 

[Vajramusti]

Yes there are differences in Wing Chun people, but there are differences in Xingyiquan people and Yang people and Chen people too

Thank You

I have been trying to find out more about this version since it was taught to me but I was looking in the wrong places; in the Leung Sheung lineage and not in the Ho Kam Ming lineage

------------------------------------

Who was teaching you?

You are right about differenced in taiji.

But they are not all co equal just because they are different,

 

[Xue Sheng]

------------------------------------

Who was teaching you?

You are right about differenced in taiji.

But they are not all co equal just because they are different,

I believe I told you once before who I learned this from, and I just told you again

And you are right being different under the same label, be that taiji or Wing Chun, does not make then equal.

 

[Vajramusti]

I believe I told you once before who I learned this from, and I just told you again

And you are right being different under the same label, be that taiji or Wing Chun, does not make then equal.

----------------------------

thanks

 

[Thunder Foot]

So be clear, is that 2nd video the format of Ho Kam Ming's SLT? Or is that Augustine Fong's creation?
And then my 2nd question would be if they are disciples of Ip Man's Wing Chun, why do the movements of the 2nd video deviate from those found in the 8mil film?

 

[Marnetmar]

There's nothing stopping them from deviating from Yip Man's classical style according to what they find more practical.

 

[Xue Sheng]

So be clear, is that 2nd video the format of Ho Kam Ming's SLT? Or is that Augustine Fong's creation?
And then my 2nd question would be if they are disciples of Ip Man's Wing Chun, why do the movements of the 2nd video deviate from those found in the 8mil film?

How did Chen style Taiji become Yang style, how did Yang become Wu, how did Chen and Yang become Hao and how did Hao become Sun. How Dia Xinyi become Shanxi Xingyiquan how did Shanxi become Hebei XIngyiquan? Some guy changed it to work better for him or thought he had a better idea or decided he was not bound by tradition.. It happens

Now don't MAKE me start listing Bagua styles :uhyeah:


Note
It is also my understanding that Ip Man was not teaching exactly what he learned from his Shifu either

 

[mook jong man]

Sometimes certain movements in the form were modified with Yip Man's permission after his students experiences in actual fights.

My master's master Sigung Tsui Seung Tin apparently had the height of the Tan Sau raised.
Originally the Tan Sau was performed lower than solar plexus height , but in an exchange with a Praying Mantis practitioner the young Tsui Seung Tin was hit in the chest.
So he asked Yip Man if they could now perform the Tan Sau a bit higher in the form and Yip Man said yes.

 

[Thunder Foot]

How did Chen style Taiji become Yang style, how did Yang become Wu, how did Chen and Yang become Hao and how did Hao become Sun. How Dia Xinyi become Shanxi Xingyiquan how did Shanxi become Hebei XIngyiquan? Some guy changed it to work better for him or thought he had a better idea or decided he was not bound by tradition.. It happens

Now don't MAKE me start listing Bagua styles :uhyeah:


Note
It is also my understanding that Ip Man was not teaching exactly what he learned from his Shifu either

Sorry, so was it Augustine Fong or Ho Kam Ming?
I understand people change things, but when they do I like to examine the reasons. Without knowing the reasons and being exposed to the original, we miss out on the moment of clarity experienced by our teachers and are then merely mimicking. Isn't it the responsibility of our teachers to pass this down? In addition, as we know Wing Chun is more than form practice so the forms don't necessarily need to be changed in order to pass down such ideals of personal practiality, but to each his own. Just my personal opinion.
As for as Ip Man's form, I don't know that he taught differently from what he learned. I'd be interested in hearing more and it's sources.

 

[geezer]

Sometimes certain movements in the form were modified with Yip Man's permission after his students experiences in actual fights.

My master's master Sigung Tsui Seung Tin apparently had the height of the Tan Sau raised.
Originally the Tan Sau was performed lower than solar plexus height , but in an exchange with a Praying Mantis practitioner the young Tsui Seung Tin was hit in the chest.
So he asked Yip Man if they could now perform the Tan Sau a bit higher in the form and Yip Man said yes.

Good story. My sifu also changed or adjusted a couple of moments in SNT and Chum Kiu, and was very open with us about the reasons. On the other hand, all his published versions of the forms in books, on DVDs and posters are either older versions or incomplete ones --deliberately so. That way any "online" student of "Sifu Youtube" or dabbler from another school can be immediately spotted. Unfortunately, this very cagey old-school Chinese way of thinking gives rise to a lot of false ideas about how things are done.

Personally, I have only had formal instruction for a brief period in one other lineage beside the one I currently practice ...and that was the Augustine Fong/Ho Kam Ming lineage which we have been discussing. The differences in stance, steps, form and chi-sau from my current VT system are significant. Although my second sifu derided the stuff Fong Sifu taught, it's obvious to any objective practitioner that each has its own strengths. If more of us could get together and honestly evaluate different takes on WC/WT/VT the way people in other sports do we might actually get a better idea of the scope and profundity of our art rather than looking like a bunch of bickering fools to the rest of the MA world.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Sorry, so was it Augustine Fong or Ho Kam Ming?
I understand people change things, but when they do I like to examine the reasons. Without knowing the reasons and being exposed to the original, we miss out on the moment of clarity experienced by our teachers and are then merely mimicking. Isn't it the responsibility of our teachers to pass this down? In addition, as we know Wing Chun is more than form practice so the forms don't necessarily need to be changed in order to pass down such ideals of personal practiality, but to each his own. Just my personal opinion.
As for as Ip Man's form, I don't know that he taught differently from what he learned. I'd be interested in hearing more and it's sources.

No worries, and it is good to ask questions. I will have to see if I can find where I read about the change. I did recently post a video of an interview with the last living Ip Man student in Foshan (who I believe recently passed away) and he did say Ip Man did not teach the Baat Jaam Do in Foshan but he did teach it in Hong Kong so Ip Man did not always teach the same.

 

[Danny T]

My sifu also changed or adjusted a couple of moments in SNT and Chum Kiu..., On the other hand, all his published versions of the forms in books, on DVDs and posters are either older versions or incomplete ones --deliberately so. That way any "online" student of "Sifu Youtube" or dabbler from another school can be immediately spotted. Unfortunately, this very cagey old-school Chinese way of thinking gives rise to a lot of false ideas about how things are done.

My Sifu has changed his teachings several times over the years. Some for those who claim they train with him but don't, some for different individuals abilities or personalities, sometimes what works for one doesn't work for others. As I have continue to training and teach I have changed a lot of what I do and how I do it.

...,The differences in stance, steps, form and chi-sau from my current VT system are significant. Although my second sifu derided the stuff Fong Sifu taught, it's obvious to any objective practitioner that each has its own strengths. If more of us could get together and honestly evaluate different takes on WC/WT/VT the way people in other sports do we might actually get a better idea of the scope and profundity of our art rather than looking like a bunch of bickering fools to the rest of the MA world.

Agreed. I've long been puzzled by so many arguing about stylistic and/or form differences all the while inferring WC is a system that is a principle based vs technique oriented. Arguing over the manner one does something (technique) is pointless in my mind. If one holds to the principles there is no right or wrong there is only the consequence. Discussing the manner and the what, when, where, and why would be far more productive.

 

[Vajramusti]

No worries, and it is good to ask questions. I will have to see if I can find where I read about the change. I did recently post a video of an interview with the last living Ip Man student in Foshan (who I believe recently passed away) and he did say Ip Man did not teach the Baat Jaam Do in Foshan but he did teach it in Hong Kong so Ip Man did not always teach the same.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some opinions on questions raised on this thread.

1Physics is physics but different textbooks arrange the subject matter in varying ways and physicists can also vary in their philosophies of science.
More variances in the humanities and the arts.
Even good teachers vary in their methods of pointing to the truths of their subject.

2. Ip Man evolved as a teacher. He did not teach his fatshan students including Lun Gai as long as he taught some of his key Hong Kong students.The learning of
extensive and correct usage of the bot jam do was the final capstone of Ip Man wing chun instruction. He taught only about 4 students the bot jam do and only one of those 4 are still alive. While there were many who had some exposure to Ip Man wing chun- a considerable number added their own interpretation on what they had not been taught Also, well known in academia is after receiving terminal degrees or instruction student/teachers strike out on their own. Some advance knowledge of their subjects- others do not.

3 Augustine Fong was a top notch student and fighter for Ho Kam Ming. HKM spent as much time with Ip Man as anyone. Fong studied with HKM
for 8 years in HK in the 60s before coming to Arizona and stayed in touch with his sifu. Recently in December 2013 there were several celebrations of HKM's birthday in HK and Macao. Fong was there for a Macao reunion. HKM is now about 90 years old.

4 HKM changed and expanded on some things of Ip Man. Fong also changed and expanded on a few things that Ho Kam Ming did.
A key thing was the double punch in the sil lim tao HKM used the double punch a lot- with good reason- in training but does not have it in his slt form. The double punch which HKM had Fong sifu do in training but is not in the slt form. But the principles are important in two handed work such as po pai jeung on the jong. So Fong with explanation to his own students incorporated the double pinch in a relevant two handed section of the slt-so that people will not forget the related principles.

5 The important thing in kung fu IMO including wing chun is to put serious effort in finding a good teacher and to stick with him or her for a significant amount of time.

Have to go without proofreading.....good wishes,,,,,

 

[Thunder Foot]

In terms of Wing Chun with simplicity being an important principle, do we believe that these changes presented here are simplifying the Art? And if so in what way?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In terms of Wing Chun with simplicity being an important principle, do we believe that these changes presented here are simplifying the Art? And if so in what way?

Some changes just simply remove certain physical limitation. I was told that in WC, you suppose to use your

- right Tan/Bon Shou to block a left punch,
- left Tan/Bon Shou to block a right punch.

If you use right Bon Shou to block a right punch, it's even called "wrong Bon".

In one HK Kung Fu tournament, a CLF guy used a right haymaker on a Yeh Man student. The Yeh Man student used a left Tan Shou to block it. The CLF guy's right haymaker knocked through the WC guy's left Tan Shou and still hit on the WC guy's head. The WC guy went back and asked Yeh Man, Yeh Man then removed that "left against right, and right against left" limitation after that.

I have also seen some WC guys not only protect center from inside out but also protect center from outside in.

 

[geezer]

In terms of Wing Chun with simplicity being an important principle, do we believe that these changes presented here are simplifying the Art? And if so in what way?

Fair question. Simplicity is one core concept in WC, but so is effectiveness. Combine simplicity with effectiveness and you get efficiency. Efficiency can be roughly defined as getting the job done effectively with the least time and effort. I believe the changes my old sifu made, like those made by Yip Man before him, were done to this end. In the name of simplicity, some forms were shortened, movements were streamlined, and duplicated movements were eliminated. In other cases important movements that had be dropped were re-inserted into the forms for completeness and effectiveness.

Whether or not these changes are truly warranted is a legitimate subject for discussion, and people will disagree. Ultimately it's up to you, for example, to practice the 108 movement or 116 movement Mook Yang Jong form. Or go back to some of the old Fo'shan versions that were much longer. And what really matters most is can you actually apply the movements when necessary?