Which form would you pick?

[Yogicmotion]

ginosifu,

I think I understand your dilemma. Have you ever thought of having just 1-2 non-combat based beginners class a week? Teaching basic stuff like warm-up, stance drills, basic punches and a little physical conditioning exercising, maybe end with some static stretching?

Then moving those who want to do forms on as the improve?

[markt]

I don't believe this is an issue about what to teach beginners, those of us who have trained traditional Hung Kuen already know what we learned as beginners.

If you are changing your curriculum to appeal more to casual and beginner students, then let's be honest, it's not about passing on the art at this point, it's about the business. I am strongly against this kind of changing the art to make my business more successful kind of mentality. But then again, I don't have a school.

I think it's selfish to claim that you teach Hung Kuen, but force students to wait a year or two to learn it, and by the way, please pay me monthly fees to learn some other random stuff first.

If you were lucky enough to learn from your sifu and he did not teach you in this kind of way, then doesn't the next generation deserve the same kind of opportunity ? How is the next generation going to get the same appreciation and love for the art if we don't teach it properly ?

Also, I do not understand this idea that a student needs some level of skill to learn GJFFK. What skill is this : Hand-eye co-ordination? The ability to stand on two feet and move their arms and legs without falling over ? The student should not be expected to do things properly the first time. In the beginning, they can focus on learning the overall routine, and as they develop, they can be corrected and learn the details.

Just my opinion...

[Asmo]

I have 2 people in my group who dont care about forms either. They still just know the first few steps of muifa, and by the looks of it, it will remain like this for a long time to come. But they love the lin gung, that's what is driving them to class. We dont spent that much time on forms, about 15 minutes, so for them its apparently not a problem to sit through that and enjoy the rest of the class. I hope in time they'll pick it up, and move on with the rest of the form...

Who am I to say to them they cant enjoy the class, because they really do. They benefit from it health wise a lot too, so... If I were just to train those that could become teachers to pass on the art themselves I better train with 1 or 2 of the group in the park or so...

Anyway, only have this group for a few months now so I might change my views on that in the near future already

Ginosifu, I think dividing GGFFK into GGK and FFK makes sense. Also you can pick sections and drill those before starting to learn the whole of the set also. But maybe you mean soemthing different?

[PM]

ginosifu: my school is a bit different i guess. we have 2 hours lessons, students come to train 2-5 times a week, not many ppl at the lesson. i am not interested much to have casual students - i do not need them kick out as they will quit on their own. or, they stay and eat the bitter - i have 5 year students who know gjffk only (and still not much progress). if they want to stay, they need to do what i say, period.

the beginner's programme (cca. 6-12 months or longer) is:

strengthening and conditining (lin gung): fundamental lin gung drils (so called geui bun gung): gungfu warm-up, basic stances, stance training, brathing exercises, conditioning, strengthening, stretching; special lin gung drills - heavy bag, pads, kicking shields, rattan ring, weights etc.

technique (lin kyun): fundamental "shadow boxing" drills (saan sik - footwork, body movement, kicks, strikes, takedowns, locks) - on the spot, with turning, with steps; with weights, to the mitts, to the shields, to the heavy bag; first half of gjffk (section 1-13), or the complete set (sections 1-18 )

application (deui lin): application drills (saan sau) - training drills (stances, footwork, body work, usage of the fundamental techniques and the tchniques form the first set; fighting drills (attack/counterattack, self.fense against commo types of street attacks - lapel hold, headbutt, scarf hold, clinch, low kick, groin kick, punches to the face, shoot... ); sparring set (deui chaak) - 1st side of the gung ji fuk fu kyun deui chaak, oro both sides; sparring drills (upper, middle, lower gate, inside/outside gate; long, medium, short distance; kicks, strikes, takedowns, holds); free fighting (saan da) - with the protective gear or without

theory (kyun lei): concepts, principles, tactique, strategy; terminology; history

---

jin jeung, wu dip jeung, Lau ga kyun are imho auxiliary curriculum. i personally like jin jeung a lot, it is also one of the sets which could be used as the beginners set. i do not like Lau ga kyun, and i definitelly do not like wu dip jeung (and do not know and teach the set)

gung ji fuk fu kyun is the beginners set, so called kyun jing, "seed set", our siu lin tau - i personally do not agree with the approach of the many todays schools, where students have to wait years before they learn gjffk. once a gjffk is mastered fhsyk could be learned very, very fast. the more my students knowt he faster they leanr - gjffk may take a year or longer, fhsyk a month, two or three. as for the auxiliary sets, student can learn them in an hour or two.

a "black belt" level is something completely different in my eyes.

just my 2 cents guys!

[ginosifu]

Just to let everyone know I have learned Hung Gar traditionally from John Ervin, a senior student of Wing Lam Sifu. I do have a traditonal class where I teach Hung Gar the way it is supposed to be (there are only a couple of students there). However, I run a commercial school and this is how I feed my family. I need the majority of classes to filled with students that stay for long periods of time and have fun and pay their tuition. On the other hand I come from a traditional line of teachers and I was taught differently. I have a traditional HG class where the student will train similarly to the way PM has his. In the Traditional class if it is too rough for you... so what!... that sort of weeds out wanna be students. Again, I have found that the majority of newer students that join kung fu schools are not the same as me (when I joined). They have this McDonalds Drive thru attitute, you pull up pay your money and they want skill right then and there. If they dont get what they want right away, they end up quitting soon after. There are not very many young people that are patient and willing work hard knowing that there is a wealth of stuff at the end of that path.

Yogimotion
I have class that is like what you descibe. It is usually filled with 20 students everyday.

Markt
Yes you are correct about taking a student slow and giving correctins as that improve. It is just a difficult task to find a way to teach the masses. Average students that only come twice a week forget most of what you teach them by their next class.

PM
Your curriculum is a bit more of how my traditional class goes. Students are supposed to come 3-5 times a week. 2 Hours each class. The forms I teach however, I teach them because this is what John Ervin Sifu learned from Wing Lam Sifu and I am following his request to have those in the currciculum.

ginosifu

[Yogicmotion]

So is that you personally want to teach formsand more traditional hung gar?

If you make living off this and are getting 20 people a lin gung class, that's good! Maybe you could teach forms in a workshop format. Where for a couple of weeks you take a small group who really want to learn it. Then spend extra time with them after class working on sets. I think I would do Gung gee or maybe even Fu hok.

As your students get better, people will take notice and may take interest, in learning more.

For myself, I teach yoga for a living, when I ever I do a series of workshops of kung fu, they tend to love the basics and have trouble getting into the forms. I have had only a handful of my students really wanted to learn "real kung fu"

So, I make it an exclusive event that only a handful sign up for. It allows me take make sure that they are getting solid instruction and creates a "buzz" that the rest of the students want to be apart of.

Also remember that I am in no way shape or form a traditionalist. I also am business man. I too feed my family off my teaching. I think I am taking a interest in the thread because I have been wanting to add Kung fu to my teaching schedule and trying to see what works and what does.

I love Hung Kuen, but I have no desire to teach it traditionally. So my views are very different maybe then everyone else here.

[Rising Crane]

Interesting thread!

The thing to remember is that everybody is training for different reasons. In Hong Kong and China now, forms are usually sold- a student asks 'How much to learn Fu Hok?' etc. That seems to be the norm. The idea that a student who wants to learn a broadsword also has to do wrestling would be crazy from a commercial sense.
As Sifu's we have a responsibility not to mislead the students. If I tell them 'If you learn this internal form then you will be able to defend yourself' then that is cheating them. If I said 'If you want to be able to defend yourself, you must also train conditioning and sparring' then that is honest. It is up to the individual student whether or not they want to do so, but at least they have been informed and can make their own decision.

I have run a full time school for 15 years and have agonized over all of this stuff- I would beat myself up because the students were not all 'getting it'. My Sifu said to me 'If you think all of your students are going to be good then YOU ave a problem.' Thanks Sifu. It only took me another 5 years to figure it out....

One time I was watching a gymnastic demonstration. ALL of the kids could do splits, backflips etc. was so impressed that afterwards I went to the coach and said:
"Those kids are so amazing- I teach martial arts and to get 20 kids up to such a standard seems impossible-what's your secret?"
He laughed and said "I am a national level coach and these kids are picked from about 2000 regular students"
THATS when I figured it out! (I'm kinda slow)

Now I teach three separate classes- one is basic training and self defense. All students start in this class, but it is not a beginners class because advanced students also come to this class for stance training, bridge work, stretching etc.
The second class is forms ONLY.
The third class is sparring ONLY (Long range, close range, grappling etc.)
All classes are an hour so if a student wants an hour basics THEN an hour of forms or sparring then they can.
Everybody gets a free choice and my classes are all busy.

[PM]

Rising Crane,

interesting model of lessons. i have something similar - i teach 3 types of lessons

a) standard (= basics, lin gung, drills, sets)
b) application (= applicatin drills, sparring sets, self-defense, saan da)
c) free fighting (= lin gung, saan da drills, saan da)

most students visit usually one a) and one (or two) b) types of trainings a week, c) is just for couple of students, "invitation only"

[TenTigers]

I have a question;
why is it that so many people equate learning alot of forms with quality and traditional teaching?
I would think that learning lien gung, technique, and basics WELL, and less emphasis on collecting forms would be a better indicator.

Besides, if you take a pizza, and cut it into six pieces, or ten pieces, you still eat the entire pie. How you break down the curriculum is not the issue so much as that you teach your art and develop your students thoroughly.

Think about it-isn't giving your students more sets, more commercial and less traditional training?
What are your goals? Demos? Tournaments? or creating a strong Hung-Ga student?

[PM]

TT: well said!

[Franc]

Thanks TT,

Which form? How about all of them. Disect each individually and you'll find many traits in common. Would a student or pratitioner choose one because of its CQB capability and disregard the longer ranges or throwing sweeping, takedowns or joint manipulation?

I continue to find these applications within all of them, not just one and not another. BUT.... if I had to choose it would be the GGFFK, perhaps beacause it was the first one I learned. Then I would add a non- pillar form, Gow Duk.

Perhaps there is a reason for relatively few fist sets in HG, the search must be within each of them. The imagination is a wonderful thing.

Franc

[TenTigers]

Franc-that is the beauty of Hung Kuen. Just a few forms to encompass such a vast amount of material.
I love CLF-but boy am I glad I don't have to learn 150 sets!

[Itinerant_Phenomenologist]

Isn't that why Buk Sing CLF, which wanted to make a name as being the more combat oriented of the branches, teaches only a few core forms?

Agreed about the plethora of forms NOT equaling quality of instruction, transmission, and utility.

Regarding quality of students who want to learn, I always say that sincerity is always the overriding factor. I can honestly say that the few people that have asked me to teach them are not remotely close to being naturally talented in any type of physical exertion. But they genuinely wanted to learn. And given my background of how I learned, it was only fair that I not deny them if they are sincere.

Regarding Rising Crane's statement of students walking into schools and asking the cost to learn a particular form... that is something I was not aware of. I think my uncle might have been referring to that when he said "commercialization of our cultural treasure". I always thought he was referring to belt/sash factories and the oodles of trophies schools tempt you with in order to get business.

[Asmo]

People can learn forms anywhere, all forms are available on video... Tutorial video's by Wing Lam, Frank Yee, Bucksam Kong, others or even on Youtube...

Learning a form is something different then learning kungfu though...

[Yogicmotion]

Wells said TT!

Question what is the percentage of men to women in your all's classes?