Will Yang Luchang Tai chi replace Yang Cheng FU Tai Chi

[dre_doggX]

A Chen and Yang style Analysis, (Study Chen Iam not sure,you may want to read this
Iam not sure, according to Erle , Yang learn his art from a Daoist of the San Zan Feng leniage, directly will at the CHen village, the Chens had many contacts with Daoist but, Yang Luchan decided not to use the Shaolin like movements, Erle's claim becomes more believe when you study his stuff.

you see the things in his book Reflex Violence, and meditation on the Reptile Brain, studying Jing and stuff, I think I see a diference between Yang LU CHan Tai Ji with its Natural movementsna and CHen Style Tai JI with its unnaturally movements, I used to pratice a 57 movement chen form all the time.and it is on the lines of Shaolin, but the Yang Styles have certian things that differe them from of Kungfus(or external martial arts) the fist are always soft, and are held a a certained where as Chen style is like a Shaolin fist.

Erle says Chen Style is a external Shaolin art, I not completly sure about that

BUT I DO KNOW THIS.
Using the REPTILE BRAIN(Animal instinct part of the human brain) the Yang style dosent change in movement or appilcation, where the Shaolin and CHen style seem to. The Yang style is the same with or without reptile brain mode(which you can learn about inthe book reflex violence on his website).

Yang Lu Chang may of studied Chen style, but I believe that he may of learned from someone else who was not a Chen, but a Daoist.

It is fact that the Daoist did Soften the CHen families martial arts. and that there where more then one visits of Daoist Hermits to the Chen Village.


I was slow to accept this, until I started praticing it for myself.

I like the Chen style butwhen I praticed the YangLu CHan style, and studied the knowledge from it I looked at aspects


1) Chen Wan Ting was a Warrior, like the Samuria of Japan, his martial art was made to grapple and disarm people. this is probably why both Jujutsu and CHen style Tai ji use alot of Chin na(locks, and stuff)San Zeng Feng and the Daoist hermits where Hermits, they wondered China, and Asia but probably didnt take part on the battle feild, Erles claims that there is not grappling in the Internal martial arts,.

2) Now look. in Erles rules of fighitng he says its better to strike down your opponent, will you see if I was Chen Wang Ting or a Samurai my opponent would me armed, and he would have a armor, hence you would need Chin-na techinques to disarm him and flying fancy kicks to battle people on Horses, NOTE if alot of the CHen styles strikes do not hit pressure points to the body where armor would be,then what does that tell you. I havent studied the oringal Chen Wen Ting form only the one made my Chen Fa-ke,but maybe I should Elre has and he said Yang style has more postures. But look at how the Yang form seems to have more dim-mak then Chinna. On the street where hermits would more likely be, Dim mak is what you would use. But on the Battleflieds of China, Chin-na would be great for disarming a warriors weapon then attacking him in an unarmed part of his body.

3) FINALLY, lets talk about the Postures. Chen Fa-ke said that Chen Style is based on the thirteen postures, and even if you took Shaolin Cannon fist of the Chen family and studied that I-Ching, and based it on Daoism with the push hands and the softnes, if it isn based on the thirteen postures then ITS NOT TAI CHI, Erle doesnt consider Chen Style to be Tai CHi, but I do only for this reason. Wudang vs Shaolin, and Tai chi can be said to come from both. how do we know. hmm
lets us look at styles they made,

Wudang has Xing YI QUan and Eagle claw master general Yueh popularised it but we get the ideal the this art exsisted way before he was born. Then you have Bagua Zhang which has a history with more shadows and questions, one legend says that Tung learned it from a Hermit who revived him well freezing in a cave close to Wudang.

Both seem different and opposite to each other, but finally San Zeng Fangs martial art, people say it was Tai CHi but, thats not true(even though the Wudang certianly has a Wudang Tai CHi), he took Shaolin Martail arts and made 12 Qi disruptive forms.(according to Erle) and this was the ancestor to ALL INTERNAL MARTIAL ARTS again according to Erle.
He as an interview with a village of people who are descendants of San Zeng Feng, the do not teach there art openly to the public because Westeners, and Easteners alike have watered down martial art styles of almost every popular form. But according to Erle these 12 movements are in Yang Lu Changs forms,. (You can get Wudang 12 M videos from him to).

In sort BaguaZhang and XingYi Quan we know them to be more Wudang even if they may of been influence by Shaolin, however, when looking at

THE YANG LU CHAN STYLE and comparing it to Bagua Zhang and Xing Yi QUan. the doing the same with Chen style TAi chi, what looks more the same.


I found it to be the Yang style having both characteristics of BaguaZhang and XingYiQuan.



but all this I accepted only after praticing it I called myself a Chen style practioner and really like the Chen style but decided any real artist would not be narrow minded, so I took an honest look, and the rest is history.

the Yang Lu Chang form has 3 forms, the other 3 have "small frame" fa-jing so small and complex to be taught by a video or book, so I am going to learn the 2 other forms from Erle or one of his pupils.

you should read his books and articles for yourself

on Wudang Kungfu:http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/disrupt.html

On Chen Vs Yang TaiChi;http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/oldyang.htm

his site www.taijiworld.com and it wouldnt hurt to read "Reflex violence" in his download about books section.

[Brad]

No.
#1 There's to many versions of Taiji which claim to be THE Yang Lu Chan version.
#2 There's to many people that just don't believe Erle's claims
#3 Even if he is telling the truth about his Taiji and it really is more applicable, the general masses are going to practice the version that's better for health more.

Honestly, I think it's pretty clear there's a close connection between Yang familly Taiji and Chen familly Taiji just by looking at it.

[gazza99]

For the most part I agree with Brad on all points. I do Erles YLC form simply because I like it, and find the fa-jing movments throughout more envigorating, no matter if its the exact original Old Yang or not its a good tai chi form.

I have done very limited research on the form and below is a brief summation of why I found the YLC form is historically supposed to be different. I am not however attesting to have done enough research to have documented evidence to link it directly to Erle, I simply take his word that his teacher (s) fit into the Lineage chart/history as I know it.

Taken from my sites forum from a previous post...by me.....

Old Yang comparisons- A look at WHY/What the differences are from History: If anyone has any more info, or experiance they wish to share with these form variations please put it down here.

My lineage comes from Yang-shao-hou also known as meng-Xiang. He practiced taijiquan since he was 6, and was an expert in freefighting and using the various jins, and reached the highest level of taiji gongfu. (this is taken
from a source independent of Erle,)

The third son was yang chen-fu, he was not interested in the martial arts until his teens, he did not really understand the key secrets of taijiquan. It was not until his father died that he started to practive hard. He was more open and taught the heath aspects of the art to the masses.His form is what is most commonly practiced as "Yang" style to this day in all countries. While Yang shao-hou taught his fathers form as it was, compact, agile, quick, and specializing in the martial application of the art. Then we have Chen-man ching (CMC) (another story and lineage altogether) who further contributed to the watering down of taiji (martialy), but basically hes the one who brought taiji to the USA, CMC also taught larger frame (lower, bigger) postures for health reasons.

Difference: Since Yang-shau-hou understood the martial aspects better than anyone else, he left the jins (martial energies) in the form as he had mastered them, and did not change it from his fathers. Since he had very few students most people do not practive this form, which has all the movements, including the expolisive "fa-jing" throughout the form. And is very compact, and small frame compared to others. In fact at the highest of levels the form is so small the individual movements are indicernable, hence the old saying "the more thats going on in the inside, the less you see on the outside". I have seen Erle do this version!
It is good to start with the YCF version. But then if able to find a teacher it is best to move onto the Old Yang Form. I however start out my students with this form, but take it very slowly, and cover all the nuances and jins.

Regards,
Gary

[Repulsive Monkey]

I know I'm lowering myself too here by having a go, but I thought I give my opinion too. I don't feel Yang Lu-chan's form will overtake Yang Cheng-fu's because no one has Yang Lu-chans authentic form in full knowledge to validate it. I'm sorry but i'm utterly onconvinced with some of Erles claims, they just don't have that ring of truth about them, sorry but thats just my opninion. Plus, its one thing slagging off Cheng Man ching especially when you are misinformed, because he didn't water down the martial side at all it was always still in his form, however wehn he went to America he considered harder to tech the fighting principles there and found it was hard enough to teach the health side alone, so he just taught less martial art in America although all of his Taiwanese disciples he easily contest his martial ability (and their's too!).
Someone who in one breath smears Cheng's reputation for whatever reasons should be more careful in considering why he does this. Yang Shao huo was hardly a paragon of good health, as he was a known Opium addict for a fair period during his Taiji practice and caused shame on the Yang family too.

[patriot]

It is the same old "my style is better than yours" BS.

Why on earth would anyone pass on all the secrets of Yang Lu Chen and Wudang to a foreigner like Erle (and apparently no one else) who don't even speak the language?

Why hasn't anyone in China recognize Erle as a member of their families?

[gazza99]

Re Patriot: "who don't even speak the language?"


Did you mean: Who doesnt even speak the language? :)

That would be a question for Erle to answer. It seems instead of posting legitimate info either way you are simply posting rhetorical questions.


Re: re..monkey: "Plus, its one thing slagging off Cheng Man ching especially when you are misinformed, because he didn't water down the martial side at all it was always still in his form, however wehn he went to America he considered harder to tech the fighting principles there and found it was hard enough to teach the health side alone"

Sorry, but after you finish reading your own paragraph tell me how I am misinformed? But thanks for re-informing me that I am correct! I define the watering down of an art what happens when a teacher leaves out a huge element (fighting principles) in a style when teaching an entire continent (America). My statement still rings true by your own post. I respect the opinion in the rest of your post, and I have no reason to persuede you to adopt the Erle YLC form as the original one, but dont tell me just becuase CMC knew the martial, that he didnt water it down by not teaching it in the USA when It was introduced. This is why we may never overcome the "health dance" stigmatism associated in this country with Taijiquan.

regards,
Gary

[Kempo Guy]

FWIW, Erle's Tai Ji form (Yang Lu Chan) is quite similar to the Orthodox Tai Ji form of Chen Pan Ling. I believe that Erle actually comments on this fact on his website...

In any event, during one's research perhaps someone should compare Erle and CPL's forms?

I've been taught a modified version of this form (through Wang Shu Jin's lineage) and have done some comparisons to Chen Pan Ling's form from CPL's book.

KG

[Walter Joyce]

Gary,
While Chen Meng Ching may be more well known, Chu Gin Soon, the second recognized disciple of Yeung Sau Chun, has been teaching Yang taiji in Boston since 1969, and was the official Yeung family representative to North America.
My point, Cheng did not, and was not responsible for teaching Yang taiji to "an entire continent"
Not trying to pick a fight, just correct the record.
Regards,
Walter

[Repulsive Monkey]

I think its fair to say that what you have said is correct. Cheng in his own words claimed that he had only 75% of Yangs art when he left him and therefore it indicates that you're correct. However this does not mean that his art that he taught was deficient in martial terms. I was told of how Gin soon held Cheng's art in very low esteem until when he visited Taiwan and challenged one of Chengs students and was conclusively defeated. I heard that not long after that he desisted in his public remarks about slighting Chengs Taiji.

[Walter Joyce]

RM,
My main point was that Cheng was not responsible for "an entire continent." Any inferences drawn as to Cheng's abilities were not implied intentionally by me.

I don't want to get into a "my teacher can beat your teacher" argument, as I'm more interested in knowledge, and consider the source of all knowledge as the universe, and the person who may be sharing knowledge a conduit for universal knowledge. Sifu worship makes me uncomfortable.

While I have heard of the rumors you mentioned, I can not comment because I was not a student of Gin Soon at the time, nor was I in Taiwan. I will investigate as I am curious.

Regards,
Walter

[kboggess]

Add to Brad's first point...

I have a book published in China by Wu Tu Nan that shows the application form of Yang Shao Hou.

Found a VCD set in China on the secret Imperial Court Yang style (the one Lu Chan taught in Beijing). I believe Jarek offers these on his web site.

Used to have a video of Dai Pei Su doing the Old Yang.

Then there is the Old Yang Erle does.

Observation--all four of the forms look totally different. I lean toward the idea that the Yang family style was never crystallized into a set curriculum. Every sibling and off-spring created or evolved their own interpretation (a living art versus a dead one).

Like Gary, I practice Erle's methods. Like Gary, I don't take the oral history too seriously. Taiji is way too popular in China to take any of the history seriously (even the Chen style). Too much power, face, and money involved. Find a method you like and practice. In the end, it becomes a part of you and it will naturally transform again throough the integration of what your teacher shares, your background experiences, and your personality.

Keith Boggess

[RAF]

Keith:

I am about to order that particular VCD and book that is listed on Jarek's website.

Can you give me some estimate as to what you think of it?

Do they play the entire form with its flavor?

I would appreciate any feedback you may offer.

Thanks.

I also agree with you regarding forms. Its the single moving postures that are critical and I think less important as to how you link them.

[Muppet]

This "this teacher is fake, that teacher is fake, etc." is one reason why I gave up on tai chi after a year.

Fake and/or secretive taiji teachers seem a dime a dozen and even people who've been in the internal circles for years seem to be uncertain about who's real and who's not, so it's not too cool when you wonder every step of the way if your teacher is teaching the genuine article.

Between the two though, I think the secretive taiji teachers who are in the know are doing far more of a disservice than the fakers, making taiji a joke in the MA circles even though they could change that if they weren't so selfish.

God knows there's enough people out there who are willing to learn the real deal.

Thus, I think a bit of advice I read was right: Don't be picky but look hard, find and stick to a genuine of ANY internal teacher who is willing to really teach.

[kboggess]

RAF:

The VCDs do teach the whole forms. But like most martial art VCDs from the mainland, little application is shown.

Send me your email address. I'll send you a sample clip. Mine is kboggess@comcast.net. I'm leaving town for the weekend, so I want be able to encode a sample until the middle of the next week.

Keith

[Sam Wiley]

Most people who practice Taiji do so for health, and martial arts are a bonus. In that respect, over all, none of the various "old Yang" styles are going to overtake the popularity of the Cheng-fu forms. Besides that, many people who take up Taiji nowadays are looking for some low impact exercise that they can do in a few minutes and reap great benefit. The "old Yang" style, at least the one taught by Erle, is not low impact and is more difficult to execute, and it takes more time as well.

In addition, Erle teaches other components to the style besides just that one form, that I have yet to see in other Yang style curriculums. I have mentioned before, in a similar vein to Keith's statement, that it is possible that these "old Yang" forms were created by individuals other than Lu-chan himself as variations on what he taught. With so many people putting forth forms that are sometimes drastically different, and yet all calling them the Old Yang style, this may be the case. Besides that, Yang Lu-chan himself is said to have taught different versions of his system to different crowds. So it may be that every single one of these forms came from him anyway.

Erle's statement about whether the Chen form influenced Lu-chan or not is not one I totally agree with. Yang learned the Chen style, and found it extremely effective, by many accounts. He would not have dropped it completely when formulating his new style. However, Erle's statement is based on his experience with what he believes to be a precursor style to several of the internal systems. Having trained in this style, too, I can say that the Old Yang style as well as Chiang jung-chiao's Bagua style, are very similar in many respects to it, with many postures and applications repeated hroughout the three different systems. I have had very little experience with Hsing-i (still working on San Ti, Keith) but there are some similarities there as well. With very little experience with the Chen style, I cannot really say, except that what little I have seen so far of the Chen style bears less resemblance than the other styles. However, that may very well be from lack of experience with the Chen style. I do respect the Chen style, though, whether or not it came from the same roots (and if stories about Chen and Chiang exchanging martial techniques are true, then they may have after all), and I have found several Chen training methods useful.

All arguments as to where a particular form come from are moot. If it's good, it's good. Who gives a ****e whether it was made by Chang San-feng, Yang Lu-chan, Chen Chiang-hsing, etc...? Just practice what you like if it gives you what you want. All this political and academic crap is just that: crap. No matter what they argue about or how long they do so, they'll never reach the point of agreement. But the proof, as they say, is in the pudding...or sincere practice, as the case may be.

[Sam Wiley]

But if I were starting over, to answer the question, I would still go with the Lu-chan style.

[dre_doggX]

it has more content, I believe it might, since Cheng FU form is more modified for the public. However, he still could do empty force and send someone flying just by arching his back from what I heard.

the answer seems easy to me, with all do respect for Cheng Fu, but what would then say about choosing the 24 form over the 108 form.


SEE WHAT I MEAN.


I choose Yang Lu Chan form

[Walter Joyce]

I'd study chen, after all its what Yang Luchan studied.

[dre_doggX]

Iam not sure, according to Erle , Yang learn his art from a Daoist of the San Zan Feng leniage, directly will at the CHen village, the Chens had many contacts with Daoist but, Yang Luchan decided not to use the Shaolin like movements, Erle's claim becomes more believe when you study his stuff.

you see the things in his book Reflex Violence, and meditation on the Reptile Brain, studying Jing and stuff, I think I see a diference between Yang LU CHan Tai Ji with its Natural movementsna and CHen Style Tai JI with its unnaturally movements, I used to pratice a 57 movement chen form all the time.and it is on the lines of Shaolin, but the Yang Styles have certian things that differe them from of Kungfus(or external martial arts) the fist are always soft, and are held a a certained where as Chen style is like a Shaolin fist.

Erle says Chen Style is a external Shaolin art, I not completly sure about that

BUT I DO KNOW THIS.
Using the REPTILE BRAIN(Animal instinct part of the human brain) the Yang style dosent change in movement or appilcation, where the Shaolin and CHen style seem to. The Yang style is the same with or without reptile brain mode(which you can learn about inthe book reflex violence on his website).

Yang Lu Chang may of studied Chen style, but I believe that he may of learned from someone else who was not a Chen, but a Daoist.

It is fact that the Daoist did Soften the CHen families martial arts. and that there where more then one visits of Daoist Hermits to the Chen Village.


I was slow to accept this, until I started praticing it for myself.

I like the Chen style butwhen I praticed the YangLu CHan style, and studied the knowledge from it I looked at aspects


1) Chen Wan Ting was a Warrior, like the Samuria of Japan, his martial art was made to grapple and disarm people. this is probably why both Jujutsu and CHen style Tai ji use alot of Chin na(locks, and stuff)San Zeng Feng and the Daoist hermits where Hermits, they wondered China, and Asia but probably didnt take part on the battle feild, Erles claims that there is not grappling in the Internal martial arts,.

2) Now look. in Erles rules of fighitng he says its better to strike down your opponent, will you see if I was Chen Wang Ting or a Samurai my opponent would me armed, and he would have a armor, hence you would need Chin-na techinques to disarm him and flying fancy kicks to battle people on Horses, NOTE if alot of the CHen styles strikes do not hit pressure points to the body where armor would be,then what does that tell you. I havent studied the oringal Chen Wen Ting form only the one made my Chen Fa-ke,but maybe I should Elre has and he said Yang style has more postures. But look at how the Yang form seems to have more dim-mak then Chinna. On the street where hermits would more likely be, Dim mak is what you would use. But on the Battleflieds of China, Chin-na would be great for disarming a warriors weapon then attacking him in an unarmed part of his body.

3) FINALLY, lets talk about the Postures. Chen Fa-ke said that Chen Style is based on the thirteen postures, and even if you took Shaolin Cannon fist of the Chen family and studied that I-Ching, and based it on Daoism with the push hands and the softnes, if it isn based on the thirteen postures then ITS NOT TAI CHI, Erle doesnt consider Chen Style to be Tai CHi, but I do only for this reason. Wudang vs Shaolin, and Tai chi can be said to come from both. how do we know. hmm
lets us look at styles they made,

Wudang has Xing YI QUan and Eagle claw master general Yueh popularised it but we get the ideal the this art exsisted way before he was born. Then you have Bagua Zhang which has a history with more shadows and questions, one legend says that Tung learned it from a Hermit who revived him well freezing in a cave close to Wudang.

Both seem different and opposite to each other, but finally San Zeng Fangs martial art, people say it was Tai CHi but, thats not true(even though the Wudang certianly has a Wudang Tai CHi), he took Shaolin Martail arts and made 12 Qi disruptive forms.(according to Erle) and this was the ancestor to ALL INTERNAL MARTIAL ARTS again according to Erle.
He as an interview with a village of people who are descendants of San Zeng Feng, the do not teach there art openly to the public because Westeners, and Easteners alike have watered down martial art styles of almost every popular form. But according to Erle these 12 movements are in Yang Lu Changs forms,. (You can get Wudang 12 M videos from him to).

In sort BaguaZhang and XingYi Quan we know them to be more Wudang even if they may of been influence by Shaolin, however, when looking at

THE YANG LU CHAN STYLE and comparing it to Bagua Zhang and Xing Yi QUan. the doing the same with Chen style TAi chi, what looks more the same.


I found it to be the Yang style having both characteristics of BaguaZhang and XingYiQuan.



but all this I accepted only after praticing it I called myself a Chen style practioner and really like the Chen style but decided any real artist would not be narrow minded, so I took an honest look, and the rest is history.

the Yang Lu Chang form has 3 forms, the other 3 have "small frame" fa-jing so small and complex to be taught by a video or book, so I am going to learn the 2 other forms from Erle or one of his pupils.

peace
www.taijiworld.com

[jon]

lol the funny part about all of this is...

Does anyone here honestly believe that by studying some long lost sequence of movements that were USED by a great fighter that one day they will somehow reach this skill level?

I seem to remember all of these old fables about how Yang Lu-Chan walked around with a sign on his back saying "Yang the undefeatable" which was simply an encouragement to challengers?
Could it POSSIBLY be that Yang Lu Chan was so good becouse he trained against active resisting opponents who where actualy trying to do him harm or at the very least make a name for themselfs?
Could it also be possible that his level of skill was just as developed by his constant practical useage as it was his forms practice?

[Shadow Dragon]

Does it matter what Form, style and lineage you learned/belong to?
Or what some people consider to be the true Art?

That is all 'ego' for people who either:
1.) consider themselves good
2.) need re-assurance that they are learning good MA.
3.) think that the stuff will make up for lack of skill and understanding.

In the end what you learned must work for you when you need it.

That is the bottom line and the only think that should matter.

Lineage, styles, etc do not guarantee good MA skill, but good persistant training and advancing oneself and their understanding/knowledge do.

Even if Chen was/is not TJQ and/or internal, they still got a good rep for having a style that has prooven itself in many real conflicts and was respected trhough the ages.

What YLC practiced was what worked for him, every new generation of MA has to discover what works for each of them.
There are no instant "Magic Pill" MA or even a guarantee, it is all about getting it to work for YOU.

As for modern day TJQ mostly being about health aspect.
Hmm, lest see modern man are quiet unhaatlhy, stressed and generally unfit.
You can't fight unless you are fit/healthy enough to take the punishment of such a fight.

Cheers.

[Walter Joyce]

I couldn't care less about what Erle says about the foundations of taiji. Even the Yang family recognizes that Yang Luchan learned from the Chens, and if you read the literature of scholars who have done the research and try to present the historical data into a coherent thread and not a marketing scheme, you might change your mind. Try looking up Douglas Wile works.

As for the wandering taoist, there is well researched scholarly work that totally discredits the San Zeng Fen (sp?) as you call it, theory.

But, feel free to believe whatever you like. You really ought to broaden the scope of your reading though.

And I really should stop caring about what other people believe about taiji. Afterall, it doesn't effect my practice.

[RAF]

Shadow Dragon:

Your partially correct, lineage is not necessarily a good proxy for skill, however, it helps serve quality control.

Do you know how many so-called martial artists I've met that claim their teacher trained in a shaolin temple? Or how they pawn off karate as a secret system of shaolin martial arts?

You find that their teachers were born in the late 1930s or early 40s and you ask, a shaolin temple? What about that little war going on?

History and lineage aren't claimed to prove skill---they are claimed to help insure that what is being taught is relatively authentic.

I have seen far too many take classes for 6 to 9 months and then open up a school with the most far out claims regarding their material.

Lineage is probably the best indicator we have of quality regarding material being taught. Yeah, I know the old Masters never liked to talk about lineage but they also weren't living in an overly commercial world where the buyer must beware!

Get suckered once or twice and you'll find out why knowledge of lineage can become obssessive!

[Shadow Dragon]

Originally posted by RAF
Do you know how many so-called martial artists I've met that claim their et suckered once or twice and you'll find out why knowledge of lineage can become obssessive!

I don't think people need to get suckered to become obsessive.
Becoming obsessive often is a knee-jerk reaction.

There are plenty of MA that study their 1st style and they are obsessed about lineage soimply because they study under a famous Instructor or swallowed the Styles propaganda hook, line & sinker.

Maybe it is just me, but I normally watch look beyond all the fancy trappings and glitery stuff before I make any decision MA or non-MA related.

Cheers.

[Chris McKinley]

There are several styles of Taijiquan out there....I say, why choose? (hee hee)

More seriously, I've practiced a version of Yang Lu-chan Taijiquan for just over 20 years now, among other things, and there are a couple of things I've learned. 1) It's far more important HOW you train than WHICH of the styles you choose to get you there. 2) Each of the styles has far more to offer that is of value than any shortcomings, faults, or inherent flaws it might contain. Those two ideas apply to ALL of the versions, no exceptions.

Is my particular variant the REAL YLC style? Is it the BEST YLC style? Is it better than all the other styles of Taijiquan? If I am to be truly intellectually honest about the matter, I am forced to say that I don't know. I am also forced to conclude that neither does anybody else, official Taijiquan family members included. What members of the lineage families enjoy over some of us is the advantage of a committed, congruent belief in their style which allows them to put away the silly, endless internet arguments over lineage superiority and get their Yi back where it belongs....to improving their practice of their chosen style. There's a lesson to be learned there.

Another danger that these sorts of arguments tend to facilitate is a form of academic inbreeding. Put bluntly, while the pointy heads are celebrating their 10,000th argument over lineage superiority, the Bagua and Xing Yi guys are out there congruently training to kick all of your asses anyway. ;) So are the Hung Gar, Wing Chun, Bak Mei, Mantis, Shaolin, etc. guys. And I don't even need to mention the contemporary MMA guys....you get the point.

Before some of you reflexively type out an admonition to me that there is more to practicing Taijiquan than learning how to fight, let me state that I am quite aware of that fact. Most practitioners of ANY style of Taijiquan don't delve into the depths of theory and/or health aspects of the art to the extent that I do, so save the lecture for the newbies. In contrast to that tired refrain, I'd like to point out that there is also far more to practicing Taijiquan than simply the physical, mental and/or emotional health aspects of it. There is an incredibly deep FIGHTING art there, one that takes lots of consistent specific training to develop. It is truly "skill developed over time". So, to those who need to hear it, get to it and start training. You can finish convincing the world that yours is the real Taijiquan later.

[dre_doggX]

I wanted to sure the book reflex violence with everybody

its at his downloadable book site,

www.taijiworld.com

put will made Chris, we need to train cause they are training.


Iam really sick of Karate people telling me Kungfu is dancing with kicking and punching, KNOWING that what boxers and wrestlers then about Karate. so lets train,


fa-jing anyone

got qi,


lets go.

[RAF]

Discussions of lineage and fighting skills are not mutually exclusive. Everyone knows how to fight; good authentic martial arts brings refinement, efficiency and effectiveness. You can have it all: training, lineage and fighting skills. You just have to be able to discriminate BS from authentic material (Note: not original, not THE system etc.. There are a lot of variations on forms and systems and no one system comes out THE WINNER)..

Adam Hsu's Sword Polisher book is a good place to start. Hsu was once a professor of Chinese Literature and Humanites in addition to being a good martial artist.

Whether you agree with Hsu or not, there's not much you can BS him with and some opinions are far more informed than others. Not all ideas, theories or speculations are of equal value and it takes more than training to sort out the Bullshyters and commerical hacks from authentic instruction.

The Cartmell and Miller book on Xing Yi is a perfect example of lineage, history, philosophy, fighting techniques etc..

Jarek's research, history and lineage research is another fine example.

Sometimes martial artists need a good dose of history that comes from outside the martial arts circles in order to bring them back to 21st Century reality.

If you want more than a narrow experience of Chinese martial arts you have to also study the culture and history and its people.

Hell, most hacks can't even properly pronounce the art they practice and preach.

Regarding the last statement, someone e-mailed and let me clarify; that last statement refers to no one specific teacher or system (at least not nationally or internationally). My comments are not directed at specific masters, lineage holders or teachers. Sometimes there is more than meets the eye and many good traditional martial arts teachers deny their skills publicly and can surprise you privately. I sort of like that.

[bob10]

It's a nonsense question, a) because the idea that something is "YLC style" is largely unsupportable by any evidence - in any event Chen people will say his form was Pao Chui;
and
b) because when you see YCF style do you mean the style that contains large frame form, medium frame form, solo fa jing drills, three circle exercises, staff training, spear solo and two person form , sword, broadsword, two person set, long form, etc, etc as taught by YCF's family descendants today? Or by the students of Cui Yuishi, one of YCF's top students?

Visiting the local YMCA class or whatever and basing judgment on that is not a strong starting point for an argument.

[panda]

Nothing wrong with YCF style, I am training in China and my teacher has over 50 years experiance in lots of different Nei Jia styles including Xing yi Bagua Chen Tai Ji. He prefers to practice Yang stlye as taught to him by a student of Yang Cheng Fu and his students are very effective at using the style for fighting. I am intrigued ?do you think that Erle was taught the stuff like reptilian brain from his chinese instructor, or is it something he has developed.

[kboggess]

Panda,

Erle learned his signature taiji attacking methods from Chang Yiu-chun. The term reptilian brain is his own way of better explaining the process with the modern triune brain theory.

Keith

[panda]

kboggess

Thanks Kboggess, ?Does anyone have any links to photos of Chang-Yiu-Chun training. I had a look at Erle site but did not see any.

[kboggess]

Erle has one photo of him that I've seen, but Chang is not training. Erle also has a couple of translated interviews that one of the Chinese martial art magazines did.

http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/FirstYang.htm
http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/chang2.htm

Again, no action photos.

keith

[dre_doggX]

Liked them, this explains alot to me, thanks