Hung Gar Groundfighting.... in the forms...

**Lujke** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 1:30am

I couldn't view all of the first video, but there as some clear and obvious groundfighting applications in the second one. As per the OP's request:

* The use of a high horse stance. Imagine this with the practitioner on his back and you can see that kung fu had the 'open guard' well before those BJJ pretenders.

* There's a jumping crescent kick which obviously represents a transition from guard to mount. (I can't quite make out whether there is also an alternative application in which the opponent's arm would be trapped between the practitioner's legs, giving a great flying armbar).

* Further on in the set are some straight arm punches. I'm thinking these must be techniques for dealing with an armbar applied against the practitioner. (Not that I can see how they would work, I just can't imagine why else you'd want your arm locked out in this position).

* There's some rapid blocking with the arms, applied while walking backwards. I'm guessing the armwork is designed to deal with a 'ground and pound' situation. Not too sure about the backward steps. Maybe they represent repeated attempts to bridge and roll the opponent?

**Scott Larson** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 9:36am

uh-oh, that's not going to cut it around here. These guys don't accept anything but cold, hard proof. You can't guess, you're going to get slammed.

**Gezere** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 9:56am

Originally Posted by Lujke

I couldn't view all of the first video, but there as some clear and obvious groundfighting applications in the second one. As per the OP's request:

* The use of a high horse stance. Imagine this with the practitioner on his back and you can see that kung fu had the 'open guard' well before those BJJ pretenders.

* There's a jumping crescent kick which obviously represents a transition from guard to mount. (I can't quite make out whether there is also an alternative application in which the opponent's arm would be trapped between the practitioner's legs, giving a great flying armbar).

* Further on in the set are some straight arm punches. I'm thinking these must be techniques for dealing with an armbar applied against the practitioner. (Not that I can see how they would work, I just can't imagine why else you'd want your arm locked out in this position).

* There's some rapid blocking with the arms, applied while walking backwards. I'm guessing the armwork is designed to deal with a 'ground and pound' situation. Not too sure about the backward steps. Maybe they represent repeated attempts to bridge and roll the opponent?

The double palms are actually a choke that you will not see in lesser arts like BJJ and Judo.

**Ming Loyalist** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 11:11am

Originally Posted by OZZ

I think Ming Loyalist is probably the go-to guy on Bullshido as far as Hung Gar sets go.Maybe he can shed some light on it..
Authentic Hung Gar is pretty solid stuff..but I'd say this guy is questionable at best.

ok. that first clip looks like an example of the demonstration version of the tiger-crane form to me. it does contain the butterfly palm technique at a couple of points. (demo versions are usually shortened versions that are made extra flashy to impress the viewers and to win points at forms tournaments.)

the second clip is of a set that i have never heard of (it is labeled the butterfly palm set, but the wing lam guys have made up so many sets at this point that i can't really comment on what i see there other than to say that what they do is pretty different that what we do.)

as far as finding "secret" ground fighting applications within hung ga forms, i think it's pretty safe to say that they don't exist. as has been said over and over around here, TCMA just didn't put a lot of emphasis on fighting off of one's back for many reasons (not all of them good) the examples of the battlefield where anyone who didn't get back up qquickly qould get skewered, etc come to mind.

IMHO anyone claiming to find hidden groundfighting techniques in TCMA forms is deluded. by that i mean claiming "wong fei hung was a great grappler, and meant to imply that this move should be used on the ground in this way."

what CAN be done, is that certain principles of TCMA can be applied to groundfighting, after a knowledgeable TCMA practitioner cross-trains with qualified grappling instructors for a decent amount of time and then is able to see legit applications of TCMA concepts within the techniques that were taught to them.

i have gotten into this concept a bit on the CMA forum, but in brief:

if you are looking at a technique like butterfly palm as a set of movements that are meant to be done exactly the same every time, and to be used in that way in a fight, then you are missing the point, and your kung fu will be useless (this is like 90% of all TCMA practitoners IMHO.)

if you are looking at butterfly palm as a philosophy of fighting, and keep an open mind as to how it can be applied to various situations, then your kung fu will grow the more you use it, especially if you cross train, spar other styles and keep an open mind.

***Omega Supreme*** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 12:23pm

As a former Hung-gar practitioner I can tell you outright that this is bullshit.

**The_Tao** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 12:31pm

Originally Posted by Kickcatcher

According to Grandmaster Julio Anta, Hung Gar kung fu contains groundfighting techniques hidden in the "Butterfly Palm" form. My understanding is that this form is anyways a Northern Kung Fu form but generally integrated into Hung Gar and taught in most (all?) lineages.

GM Anta:

Anta is a leading member of NAPMA, an organisation that essentially encourages McDojoism. So where there's NAPMA there's virtually always stuff like loads of belt gradings, kiddy black belts, contracts, Black Belt Clubs etc etc.

What he says that I think stinks of bullshido:
From http://martialartsandfitness.typepad.com/kungfu/

Examples of the Butterfly Palm form from Youtube - shows slightly different variations of the same.

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FttOf1nf6a4

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0yjzE4KWAA

It may astound you to learn that I did Hung Gar briefly and started learning this set. The version I was taught is about somewhere halfway between the two above examples. I was told that the characteristic move that gives the set its name is the twin palm strike with crossing-steps. Another move in the set was called "cat wiping face" which we drilled as successive tiger-mouth blocks to catch punches for arm locks ("breaks") and counter. Interesting stuff academically but very abstract IMO. And very silly.

On a side note, I think that several other things in that paragraph are extremely dubious:

a) 300 years claim. Surely there is no proof of this time frame for that form, plus it implies incorrect assertion that 'other' grappling is recent occurrence

b) Not flowery claim. Having done Hung Gar a bit, and seen his site, I'd say it's very flowery.

c) Battle proven etc. Where's credible proof of this????

If anyone can suggest the ground fighting techniques in the form, I'd love to see them. The funnier the better.

in any form there are techniques that you can ADAPT to be used on the ground, in fact almost any strike or movement you can do standing up you can also do from your back.
thats the groundfighting that people talk about, think about it.

**Ming Loyalist** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 1:10pm

Originally Posted by Omega the Merciless

As a former Hung-gar practitioner I can tell you outright that this is bullshit.

i have to agree that the claim as it is set forth is bullshit.

i'm not sure that the school is bullshit however. the guy looks pretty legit as far as background goes, he has a background in the military and as some form of LEO (or was that corrections?)

also he seems to have a judo black belt, BJJ brown belt teaching at his school (regis lemus) http://www.antakungfu.com/instructors.html although that claim should be looked into i guess.

so it seems to me that he may have some bad/misleading marketing going on, but he seems to be doing the right thing by having students cross-train and having a real grappler teach the classes.

now if the instructors bio page is bullshit, then he really is full of it, but someone with more time will have to investigate that part.

***Omega Supreme*** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 1:19pm

NO just the form claim is what I'm calling bullshit on.

***Omega Supreme*** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 1:24pm

Originally Posted by Ming Loyalist

i have to agree that the claim as it is set forth is bullshit.

i'm not sure that the school is bullshit however. the guy looks pretty legit as far as background goes, he has a background in the military and as some form of LEO (or was that corrections?)

also he seems to have a judo black belt, BJJ brown belt teaching at his school (regis lemus) http://www.antakungfu.com/instructors.html although that claim should be looked into i guess.

so it seems to me that he may have some bad/misleading marketing going on, but he seems to be doing the right thing by having students cross-train and having a real grappler teach the classes.

now if the instructors bio page is bullshit, then he really is full of it, but someone with more time will have to investigate that part.

On the other hand I will call them a Mcdojo, not belt factory Mcdojo but god, they're doing every gimmick under the sun.

**Ming Loyalist** · Posted On: 7/09/2007 1:27pm

Originally Posted by Omega the Merciless

On the other hand I will call them a Mcdojo, not belt factory Mcdojo but god, they're doing every gimmick under the sun.

yeah, that was my thought as well! i hope he's making a good living with all that marketing.

personally i found it easier to get a day job again, and just let the school do a little better than break even. but if he can make it work, more power to him.

as long as the BJJ/Judo program is legit that is.