Written By : Sifu Kostas Tsoligas

Dear martial artist /sifu / master,

I am in the unpleased position to respond in a bad, inadmissible and incorrect publication revealed on the Internet regarding the Lam's family Hung Kar.

We don't have any personal desire, actually we are not interested, in what anyone wants to claim for himself. We live in a free world. But: "The freedom of the one stops in the point that the freedom of the other begins".

Specifically in the website of: Chiu Chi Ling International Hung Gar Kung Fu Association http://home.earthlink.net/~chiuchiling/history.html is written that:

……To honor the legacy of martialarts and it's originators, we obey these doctrines: Don't spread false memores and don't slander the tradition. Chiu Kau and his wife (my father and mother) were prominent disciples of Lam Sai Wing. Lam Jo's actions confuse the lineage of Hung Gar Kuen. Chiu Kau was one of the earliest disciples in Lam Sai Wing's school. The school name was Lam Sai Wing's School, and Lam Sai Wing himself was dedicated to teaching my parents (Chiu Kau and Siu Ying). My father was much older than Lam Jo, and therefore Lam Jo could not be my father's teacher. Lam Jo's claims are nonsense.

Hopefully, from now on, Lam Jo would not do such things again, and instead follow decorums of society, as committing immoral actions such as confusing others of his real lineage would bring about declamation from the martial arts world, and ruin his own reputation.

We don't want to analyze word by word the style and the content of this wicked publication, that speak by it self and unmasks the real personality of the writer. Not of being afraid of doing it, but because we would not like to downgrade the standards that practitioners and sifus of Hung Kar family should follow. Actually, low class behavior like the writer's doesn't belong to a real sifu; not only is against on any martial art code but also offend all the International Martial Community. On the other side we are obliged to present the precise truth by comparing evidences and facts against talk; for respect to the world of Chinese Martial Arts.

The truth is:

At first sifu Chiu Kau and his wife, sifu Siu Ying, practiced Hung Kar at Tang Hin Choi's Hung Kar school (Lam Sai Wing Gymnasium - 2nd Branch)(*). Tang Hin Choi was disciple of Lam Sai Wing and "si dai" (younger kung fu brother) of Lam Cho. Not long later, Lam Cho took over Tang Hin Choi's Hung Kar School and changed the name of the school in "Lam Cho Kwock Sutt Say" (Lam Cho's Chinese Martial Art School), because sifu Tang Hin Choi didn't like to teach any more. From that time Chiu Kau and his wife Siu Ying continue their practice in Hung Kar under Lam Cho's teaching. When this happened (1933) Lam Cho was twenty-three (23) years old, while Chiu Kau was thirty-eight (38) years old; and thus explained the age difference between Lam Cho and Chiu Kau.

On the other side Lam Cho started his training in Hung Kar under his uncle guidance at the age of five (5). As well he started teaching in the age of six-teen (16), at his own school and as "senior instructor" at the "Lam Sai Wing's Kung Fu Gymnasium - Main school" until Lam Sai Wing passed away. When Chiu Kau and his wife Siu Ying followed Lam Cho he had already eight-teen (18) years experience in Hung Kar and eight (8) years experience in teaching.

(*) Sifu Tang Hin Choi and any other disciple of Lam Sai Wing, except Lam Cho, when they opened their Kung Fu schools they had to use Lam Sai Wing's name and not their own name; because at that time it was tradition to do such thing. For that reason sifu Tang Hin Choi used Lam Sai Wing's name to entitled his own Kung Fu school even though Lam Sai Wing never taught or came to Tang Hin Choi Kung Fu school.

Actually Lam Sai Wing had not taught Chiu Kau and his wife even one time and there are many evidences that can absolutely prove this. Respectfully I am presenting you some of them:

- The first, is a page that included a 1951 publication dedicated to the memory of Lam Sai Wing, published by Lam Cho and the Lam Sai Wing Alumni Association. This page shows Chiu Kau and his eldest son Chiu Chi Wai to demonstrate a two persons sparring technique and it includes a short biography of Chiu Kau. I must notify that this biography was personally written by and submitted by Chiu Kau or his wife Siu Ying, for published in "Lam Sai Wing Memorial Book" and for revise Lam's (Lam Cho) family Lineage.

- The second are two photos. The top photo was taken in 1936 and shows Lam Cho and his students in the Botanical Garden, Hong Kong.
The bottom photo was taken in 1938, with Lam Cho and his students outside Po Hing Theater, Hong Kong. Sifu Chiu Kau and his wife Siu Ying are included in the photos. It can be distinguished that both of them wearing kung fu uniforms with white braid. It is known that kung fu uniforms with white braid are wearied by students and definitely not by instructors.

(*)The three documents, one page and two photos, are in the bottom of this page.

Regarding this particular publication Chiu Kau wrote at his biography:
Chiu Kau, age 56 (in 1951) and a native of Sun Hui County, Canton, China, liked practicing kung fu. In his youth, he left China to go to South Pacific to work in the mines, later changed to working as a tailor. There he started studying kung fu under Wong Sai Wing (NOT Lam Sai Wing). After spending many years there, he returned to Hong Kong to work as a tailor. Initially he started studying kung fu at a school entitled, "Lam Sai Wing Kung Fu Gymnasium - 2nd Branch"(*)(**). Not long later, Lam Cho took over the 2nd branch school and Chiu Kau continued his study of Hung Gar under Lam Cho. Chiu Kau practiced diligently and eventually opened his own school on Wai Ching Street, ..................

(*) The first branch school of Lam Sai Wing was run and managed by Lam Cho, while the main school was run by Lam Sai Wing with Lam Cho as head instructor.
(**) The 2nd branch at that time established, managed and run by sifu Tang Hin Choi, a "si dai" of Lam Cho

At the moment, with this official statement of our federation we consider that this matter has been consumed.

We have to make clear, that with this statement we are NOT trying to say that "we are the best in the world" and useless things like that. The people can see by them self. Also, we have not something against the sifus and the students of Chiu Kau Hung Gar Kung fu family; in opposite we believe that most of them are real martial artists and honest persons.

Additionally we are deeply believe that the importunateness is not in "who learned from whom", but stays in the kung fu and the personality level. But, the reality is the reality and of our position we have the great responsibility to present the precise truth to the International Chinese Martial Art Community. In order to defend the reputation of our family name, the reputation and the history of a pillar of Shaolin Kung Fu, Lam Cho; against the writer's low class behavior.

For more information you can visit the "home of Lam's family Hung Kar Kung Fu": www.hungkuen.com

In conclusion:

- First, of the above can be easily seen, that "Chiu Kau Hung Gar family" not follow the decorum of society, confuse for many years the real lineage of Hung Kar style and create its fake story into the Chinese Martial Arts World.

- Second, we are worrying too much in what will happen with the arrogant characters in the Chinese martial art field? Today is this, tomorrow what?

- Third, maybe this question must set in thoughts the International Chinese Martial Art Community.

- Forth, we are deeply sorrow that this particular person (writer) consider him self as a sifu and member of World Hung Kar Family.

Athens, Sept. 15 2000

Respectfully yours:
Sifu Kostas Tsoligas, physiotherapist.
President of European Siu Lum Pai Hung Kar Federation.
Official representative Lam's family Hung Kar in Europe.

Lam Cho's martial art school (1936) at Botanical Garden, Hong Kong.

Lam Cho's martial art school (1938) at Po Hing theatre, Hong Kong.