Yang Style of Tai Chi Chuan not Good Enough from a Martial Aspect?

[Empty Fist]

Master Ma Hong is a nineteenth generation Chen Style practitioner. He has written numerous books and articles on the subjects of Chen T'ai Chi and internal power development. According to Master Ma Hong, the Yang style of tai chi chuan has lost its martial aspects. Here are some quotes from the interview:

MH: Now, as to the T'ai Chi that is popular these days, there are two kinds: one kind is too soft.

HJ: What kind is that?

MH: I'd rather not say. If I say, people might get upset. Without my saying, people should know which kind it is. Very slow, very soft. It has lost its martial aspects. Its basis. Originally, T'ai Chi Ch'uan was a martial art.

HJ: So, in your point of view, there's... what we do, Chen T'ai Chi, which is like the main stream, and there are also off-shoots from Chen T'ai Chi which are, in your opinion, too soft, placing more emphasis on health, holistic benefits rather than martial benefits? You are a firm believer in the martial aspects of the art?

MH:Now there are many different types of T'ai Chi which are very popular. Yang style, Wu style, Sun style, Chang style; many different types. But the character of each of these is different. Different in what way? In my opinion, there are some that tend to be too soft, and others which tend to be too hard. This is my opinion. I believe that which was taught by my teacher was just the right combination of hardness and softness. He spoke of Yin and Yang, T'ai Chi Yin Yang. He said that T'ai Chi must have hard, soft must have fast and slow, have insubstantial and substantial, open and closed. Also it must have... oh, there's just so much..., "I, Ch'i, Li", all of these must be combined together. That which is closed must be opened, and that which is opened must be closed. Entirely open is not good, and entirely closed is not good. (Demonstrates posture examples) Therefore I believe that which was transmitted by my teacher was more fitting to what was the original face of T'ai Chi Ch'uan.

HJ: In your opinion, as to those styles of T'ai Chi which are now very popular, why do they not fah jing in their solo forms practice?

MH:Originally, in Yang style and Wu style, they also used to practice fah jing. When Yang passed the style on to his son, they still would fah jing. But then, from the third generation on - Yang's third generation, Wu's second generation - they no longer practiced fah jing. After the Manchurians unified China, the nobles who practiced were unwilling to expend that kind of energy; they were interested purely in the "health" aspects of the art. So they got rid of these stricter requirements and softened everything. But the Chen style is the oldest, the most ancient. So it still contains a richness of martial content. Hsing I ch'uan is the same. Some people practice it very softly and cannot fah jing. Then there are others who practice it very hard, with a lot of strength. That just comes from different practitioners, different lineages.



Here is the link for those interested in the rest of the interview:

http://www.hsing-i.com/hsing-i_journal/ma.html

I like to see this Master Ma Hong mix it up with William C. C. Chen and then see what he thinks about the Yang style being too soft. While Master Ma Hong makes some valid points others are not justified IMO.

[Laughing Cow]

I must say I got plenty of respect for Ma Hong.

And I feel that I agree with him that too much TCC (Yang) is too soft.

Naturally there will be the exceptions like
William C.C. Chen, but lets face it Yang is the most widely practiced style and has few people like him.

Also I need to add that too often the beijing forms are sold as Yang, and that there are harder sub-styles within Yang.

Having done a bit of both for me Chen feels more like a Martial Art, maybe it has to do with the way I was taught in both schools.

I am not saying that Yang lacks those harder elements, just that it is often misunderstood and taught wrong.

Cheers.

[Empty Fist]

Interesting. The Yang form itself does lacks Fahjing elements that the Chen style incorporates. However, Fajing is displayed in push hands which I believe was invented by Yang Lu-chang the founder of the Yang style.

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by Empty Fist
Interesting. The Yang form itself does lacks Fahjing elements that the Chen style incorporates. However, Fajing is displayed in push hands which I believe was invented by Yang Lu-chang the founder of the Yang style.

Hmmm, interesting Chen is famous for it's push hands and the Tui Shou tourney in Chen Village.

IMHO, ALL tjq performed at a certain level should look the same and have the same qualities.

I have seen some of our senior Yang students perform the forms with Fa-Jing and even foot stomping.

One of our newest student in the Chen class studied for 8yrs in Taiwan and his TJQ doesn't differ much in quality and principles from ours( Fa-jing et al).

Cheers.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

I couldn't help but read between the lines and hear Master Hong chanting the usual mantra.. "my style's better than yours".. aside from that, he's pretty much right.. there is a pervasive "feel good" group that has gravitated to the Yang style.. However, that doesn't diminish the potential inherent to Yang Style's lineage.. Too few people were taught the martial applications and fewer are capable of "seeing the obvious" right in the form.. But, it's all there.. Probably, due to lack of real martial backgrounds, many practicioners are unaware of the devastating applications in each movement.. Sometimes people pass Yang up for the more apparent applications of Chen, Bagua, Hsing I, etc.. After 15 years of Yang training and 11 years of Chen, i find both to be equally effective as Martial Arts.. admittedly, i do sprinkle liberal amounts of ChinNa into the applications, but i feel it's appropriate, Tai Chi and ChinNa are natural partners..

Be well..

[Kevin Wallbridge]

Ma Hong is my grand-teacher so know where this comes from :) .

Ma Hong lives a city not too far south of Beijing. What Taiji is the most popular in that region? The Yang style, particularly that of YZD. Do YZD and his grandson Yang Jun teach lots of martial arts in their seminars? Not really, its all about the form. Ma Hong would never name names, but it is clear to me that it is YZD, and the wushu variants he is refering to.

I feel that you can find much more martially focussed Yang style in North America than in China, but thats a long way from Ma Hong. If someone mentioned Wm CC Chen to Ma Hong he'd say "Who?" The Chinese don't look over here for skills to match themselves against. They are still the Middle Kingdom, after all, though it may be hard for my neighbours down in the uber-power of the USA to remember this.

[Shooter]

The only people I've ever met who openly test and teach TCC fighting method are Yang style players. Haven't seen any Chen in the ring or on the mat yet.

oh, that's right...TCC is a 'killing art'. hello! :p

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by Shooter
The only people I've ever met who openly test and teach TCC fighting method are Yang style players.


Don't know what Chen kwoon you been to, but that is not my experience.

Pls, go to Wayfarer publication site and see how few Videos and Books are available on Chen applications and so on. Than count the same for Yang style.



oh, that's right...TCC is a 'killing art'. hello! :p

Don't know why you always need to add those remarks.

What 's your Yang style again and under who did you study?

10% of all TJQ Instructors only teach the real stuff, but 90% of all TJQ students study under those.
Hmmm.

[Shooter]

ok, I'll say it another way;

In my part of the world, I've yet to meet a Chen player (and I've met lots of them) who can throw down under any pushing format. I've yet to see or hear of a Chen player enter any kind of full-contact fighting event or compete in any open style sub-wrestling tournament.

Lots of Yang stylists are competing world-wide in various formats of full-contact fighting (san-shou/kickboxing, MMA, sub-wrestling) as a basic measure of their learning.



My "remark" is just to head off any responses which would excuse the validity of competitive fighting as a worthy avenue of pursuit in advancing one's learning.


Sorry, my lineage doesn't matter. I was taught to walk on my own legs and let what I know stand on it's own merits.

[Laughing Cow]

So you can't/won't even tell me what Yang style you studied.

Your type of competitions are not the only way to judge the effectiveness of a style and with your experience I would have assumed that you would have progressed more in your views about MA/styles and so on.

[jun_erh]

does a form having fa jing neccasarily make it more "martial"?

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by jun_erh
does a form having fa jing neccasarily make it more "martial"?

Not neccesarily.

If this about Yang vs Chen, there are plenty of Yang styles still taught today that have Fa Jing in their forms.

If I remember correctly there are 10+ substyles withing Yang.

Cheers.

[jun_erh]

No I'm saying why is something considered more of a martial art because it is somewhat more muscular. I thought that was the type of thinking that tai chi (and also brazilian ju jitsu) was trying to get one away from.

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by jun_erh
No I'm saying why is something considered more of a martial art because it is somewhat more muscular.


I can't answer that one, but I would assume it would have to do with the modern, western mindset that bigger, tougher and stronger is better.

There is a saying:

Westerners learn with their mind, Asians learn with their body.



I thought that was the type of thinking that tai chi (and also brazilian ju jitsu) was trying to get one away from.

Yes and no.

Chen was always 50/50 hard and soft, too many Yang people misinterpret softnes, relaxation and thus think that TJQ does not need strength, muscle and so on.

One thing that makes me cringe in most TJQ classes is when Sifu sez relax and the whole class go limp like bad seaweed.

Cheers.

[omarthefish]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
So you can't/won't even tell me what Yang style you studied.



What Yang Style? You mean like a style of a style? Yang is the style. :confused:

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by omarthefish


What Yang Style? You mean like a style of a style? Yang is the style. :confused:

So you don't see a diff. between YCF, CMC, Em, Guang Ping and similar.
There was recently a good article series detailing the diff. between the yang styles and training methods.

Chen has 5 recognised sub-styles.

Cheers.

[Shooter]

I would have assumed that you would have progressed more in your views about MA/styles and so on


I've always said that there are as many styles of TCC as there are players. The Chen stylists are the ones who insist on being distinct and 'truly orthodox/authentic'. The Yang dudes I'm referring to have a background in Yang's, as do I...that's the only reason I refer to them as Yang stylists. I just practice Tai Chi these days. My training partners are schooled in Yang's which I originally studied, but I guide them away from stylism asap.

[Vapour]

Well, firstly, there are different type of Yang style. Older form of Yang are said to contain expression of fajing. Secondly, standard Yang style may have advance form such as San Shou form or Kwai taiji form which contain more fajing that Chen cannon form.

Thirdly, Chen Man Ching developed a variation of Yang style which took focus on relaxation to extreme and his style contain no fajing in the form. However, CMC student's student, Mario Napoli, I think, (stan Israel's student) went to China and defeated the chen family in the push hands competition years ago.

On more serious note, my instructor practice both Chen and Chen Man Ching style. He is level two in Chen. He commented that at lower level of expertise, Chen stylist do not know how to swtich, which is probably to do with lesser emphasis on differentiating Yin and Yang.

[Empty Fist]

Here are some excerpts from Peter Lim's Taijiquan Resource Page about the Yang Style


Many have said that Yang Lu Chan softened the form to suit the unfit members of the imperial court, making the art easier and less effective, focusing on health aspects because guns were making martial arts obsolete. There is no proof beyond hearsay for this conjecture. Before Yang Lu Chan entered the imperial court, his boxing was already so soft and neutralizing that it attained the name `mien quan' (cotton fist) and we have record of a bout where Yang's skill was questioned because his form was so soft, a bout which he won.

Being in the Imperial Court as a martial arts instructor, it was imperative to turn out students of high attainment. It was literally a matter of life and death since with withholding anything from the Royal family was considered treason. Rather than causing the Yang art to be diluted, it probably added a lot more in terms of content due to the opportunity to meet and compare skills with other highly skilled martial artist in the imperial court at that time.

The Old Yang Form differs only on details with the standardized Yang Form of Yang Cheng Fu. One needs to note that Yang Cheng Fu himself did not standardize the form. Its just that he spread the form so widely that his method of doing the form became the accepted standard.

The Old Yang Form retains the 'strength explosions' (Fa-Jing) and jumping kicks (one only). We know that the sequence of the Old Yang Form and the standardized Yang Form is almost the same. From the old manual of Wu Yu Xiang also records a very similar sequence.

When Yang Cheng Fu began to teach in public classes he taught them from the basics. He removed the strength explosions (Fa-Chin) and replaced them with using qi to extend the limb instead. This is a basic practice which teaches one to bring qi to power the limb, only after this has been achieved can strength explosions (Fa-Chin) be done properly. He also smoothed out the form to emphasize flow, rootedness and relaxation which is primary to the art. Only after the flow, rootedness and relaxation are mastered can changes in speed take place without losing these qualities. These speed changes are evident in Yang Chen Fu's Taiji Long Boxing as well as Yang Shao Hou's small frame.

Other than a few minor variations, his form remained much the same as the Later Yang Form. Yang Cheng Fu travelled extensively throughout China promoting his art. Taijiquan was already well known at that time as a combat art with great curative powers. Its mode of practice enabled both old and infirmed to take up the art to better their health. Yang Cheng Fu himself was undefeated and was a great boxer, his reputation and ability caused the art to spread far and wide and made it what it is today: the most popular form of Taijiquan in the world.

The great popularity of his form and the huge numbers of people who took it up caused it to become the standard form for Yang Taijiquan. There are those who still practiced the older forms but Yang Cheng Fu's form became the hallmark of the style. Yang Cheng Fu taught and promoted his art as a combat art. There is little evidence other than conjecture that he promoted his art solely as a health art. Both his books focus on the art as a combat art and his writings all dealt with the practice towards achieving a combative goal. In practicing the art as a combat art, one gained the health benefits as well, both aspects of the art being inseparable.

Here is the link if anybody is interested:

http://web.singnet.com.sg/~limttk/historg4.htm

[Laughing Cow]

Empty Fist.

Thanks for the info, read the link years ago.
Not sure about how much value I should put into those old Histories.

For a long time Chen Small Frame (my style) was considered as having gotten rid of the difficult movements like Fah-Jing, jumps and so on.
When in reality they are still there and we have a few movements lacking from the large(new) frame which I think was derived from the small frame.

Personally, I don't give to much value to what people tell me about TJQ unless it is the same as I hear coming from the sources (Chen Village, Yang Family, etc).

I have heard many TALL stories when it comes to TJQ and most of them are lets say ... cough bull cough sh`t cough.

Cheers.

[Ron Panunto]

Hey Empty Fist,

Push hands (five different varieties) were developed by Chen Wangting about 150 years before Yang luchan was born.

Ron Panunto

[Empty Fist]

Ron,

Could show me your references to this? I read somewhere and I can't recall the source, that Yang Luchan created push hands as a a form of two person exercise to practice Tai Chi Chuan.

[Laughing Cow]

Who created Push Hands?

I don't think we will ever really know.

Chen TJQ practices it, so does Yang TJQ.
Many other styles also got a similar training method.

IF YLC did develop it was it during his stay at the village or after.
If after how did it go back to the Village.
Personally, I don't think either CTW or YLC did develop it, but it was incorporated into the art from outside at some time.

We could always ask our Teacher's about it. ;)


Either way who cares who developed it, it is a good and important training routine.

Cheers.

[HuangKaiVun]

Nowadays, people focus on doing the modern style Yang 24/48/108 sets.

Those sets have a distinctly different flavor from older renditions of "Yang" style, as can be seen in photographic comparisons between Grandmaster Yang Cheng Fu and modern day wushu competitors.

At least to me, the major difference is that the modern style emphasizes physical beauty of the moves by deepening the stances and extending the limbs. Yang Cheng Fu and his disciple Cheng Manqing do not extend their limbs as far nor stand as deeply, though Yang Cheng Fu reportedly could do the longer stances in his youth.

The training methods are totally different too. One focuses on beauty of form, the other emphasizes efficiency in COMBAT.

That said, Yang Cheng Fu supposedly invented his 108 set as a form of exercise. But photographs clearly indicate that he was a fighter - and one with considerable combat experience, I'd venture.

In short, I feel that the old Yang style (Yang Cheng Fu's form as well as Yang Lu Chan's even older set) is a suitable vehicle for combat efficacy. My students have used some of this stuff successfully in real encounters.

A great book which points at some of these differences is Nigel Sutton's "Applied Tai Chi Chuan".

[GLW]

“Nowadays, people focus on doing the modern style Yang 24/48/108 sets.”

24 and 48 are NOT Yang style. In fact, there are 3 basic barehand routines in Yang style: Yang Chengfu’s routine (counted as 85 by some and varying numbers from 103, 108, etc… by others), the competition Yang routine created by the China Sports commission ( a pretty bad routine by many people’s opinion…and I concur), and the 88 Posture routine.

While 88 is NOT strictly Yang style, it IS the Yang sequence done with some different flavor. If it were anywhere other than China, the ‘creators’ of this routine would be rightfully accused of plagiarizing Yang Chengfu’s routine.

24 is based upon Yang style but has a number of very distinct differences. 48 is a Combined routine – having Yang, Chen, Sun, and Wu elements throughout.

I did NOT include Cheng Manching’s routine in this. It is derived from Yang but is significantly different in method as is Guang Ping to make them distinct.


“Those sets have a distinctly different flavor from older renditions of "Yang" style, as can be seen in photographic comparisons between Grandmaster Yang Cheng Fu and modern day wushu competitors. “

You don’t see competitors doing the Yang Chengfu set. It is known to some of them..but not done for photos or competition…first…it is simply too long. Second, it is truly for people wanting to do Taijiquan…not competitors.


“At least to me, the major difference is that the modern style emphasizes physical beauty of the moves by deepening the stances and extending the limbs. “

Not exactly true. The core of 24 and the goal is the same as Yang Chengfu’s…however, a LOT of people do it badly or just plain wrong. Similarly, a lot of Yang folks have NO stances and no martial intent….poor basics.


“Yang Cheng Fu and his disciple Cheng Manqing do not extend their limbs as far nor stand as deeply, though Yang Cheng Fu reportedly could do the longer stances in his youth. “

While Cheng Manching DID learn from Yang Chengfu, many in the Yang family (Yang Zhenduo, Fu Zhongwen, etc…) would disagree with you on the “Disciple” part.

The pictures of Yang Chengfu were taken later in his life. He is KNOWN to have suffered from deteriorating health and lost a lot of his strength by that time. There are quotes about how high he would raise his knees and how low his stances would be at one time and how they became poorer as he gained more weight.

However, look at pictures of other Yang Chengfu’s students – I have a few of them. The stances are lower and more powerful in many of them.

“The training methods are totally different too. One focuses on beauty of form, the other emphasizes efficiency in COMBAT. “

THAT depends entirely on the teacher. The Yang Chengfu routine is the most widely practiced Taijiquan routine in the world for HEALTH followed by either the Wu form or 24.

“That said, Yang Cheng Fu supposedly invented his 108 set as a form of exercise. But photographs clearly indicate that he was a fighter - and one with considerable combat experience, I'd venture. “

That is the routine that Fu Zhongwen did. He was NOT someone that ‘played’ at Taijiquan. (But he was a very nice man that liked a good meal). He WAS one of the people that handled challenges for his teacher, Yang Chengfu.

[HuangKaiVun]

Absolutely no argument from me, GLW.

The only difference between us is that I'm going by standard nomenclature while you're going by how things REALLY ARE.

Nice post.

[GLW]

Darn...you found out I am a realist....and I've been telling myself that I was just a slightly disillusioned Idealist all this time :)

[bob10]

Has Master Ma had a lot of fights?

[Empty Fist]

I'm not sure. I know when William C.C. Chen was younger he used to fight.

[Ma_Xu_Zha]

.....will teach that yang style hides its fajing and doesnt make it obvious like chen taiji. a true yang master is one who has fought and teaches fighting. He will teach some fajing as solo drills, but the form is done smooth and hiding power.

[jun_erh]

If I could make an analogy: take classical music. There's classical music that has emotion and variety and there's classical music that is basically elevator music. Meant to blandly entertain rich people in the garden parties of the roccoco period (1800's?). It has something to do with volume (fa jing) but more to do with it's function.

[TenTigers]

EMPTY FIST- could you please elaborate on your statement? You had mentioned that Old Yang form had fa jing and a jump kick. What movements had fa jing, and which kick is the jump kick? I basically learned the way Ma Xu Zha described-the fa jing was taught separately-referrd to as 'discharge drills' and re-inserted into the form. I am curious where you do these.

[Brad]

I thought I'd remembered somewhere that the Yang family had said that before the 108 Yang form, the Yang familly's Taiji was basically single moving postures. Anyone else know what I'm talking about?

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by Brad
I thought I'd remembered somewhere that the Yang family had said that before the 108 Yang form, the Yang familly's Taiji was basically single moving postures. Anyone else know what I'm talking about?

AFAIK, there were multiple forms prior to the creation of the 108.

Which makes sense considering that YLC learned the Chen TJQ forms when he studied there.

Training method was different I believe.
A student spend many weeks learning one posture and only when that was mastered was the next one taught and connected to the first one, and so on.
I think I read somewhere that it took 5~6 years to learn a long form like the 108 using this method.

Cheers.

[Empty Fist]

EMPTY FIST- could you please elaborate on your statement? You had mentioned that Old Yang form had fa jing and a jump kick. What movements had fa jing, and which kick is the jump kick? I basically learned the way Ma Xu Zha described-the fa jing was taught separately-referrd to as 'discharge drills' and re-inserted into the form. I am curious where you do these.

TenTigers,

Unfortunately I can’t answer your question. Your best bet is to visit Peter Lim’s Tai Chi Chuan website at http://web.singnet.com.sg/~limttk/ and ask him.

[Seraph]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
So you can't/won't even tell me what Yang style you studied.

Your type of competitions are not the only way to judge the effectiveness of a style and with your experience I would have assumed that you would have progressed more in your views about MA/styles and so on.
how then would you judge your martial ability? Unless you are constantly street fighting, what other way is there to judge YOUR abilities?
The "effectiveness of a style" is irrelevent, as opposed to the effectiveness of the player. What your "master" can do doesn't mean squat. What YOU can do, does. As an example, after my last fight, (where I got schooled badly) I remember exclaiming "MY Taichi f****ing sucks!!!!" not "Taichi sucks! "

[Laughing Cow]

Seraph.

I agree it does not matter what your Sifu or any of the acestors can/could do.

FWIW, my TJQ so far has done well in the few altercations I have been in.

But and that is my honest belief that a Competition or sparring or Tui shou will NEVER equal a REAL fight.

You will NEVER know if what you learned wil work until it comes to the crunch and each crunch is different.

Just because it worked in 1 or 2 fights there is no guarantee that it will work in the 3rd or 4th fight.

And this is something I learned from personal experience and watching friends getting into fights.

There are NO guarantees, nor can there ever be confidence that what I learned/know will work.

Keep winning tournaments and competition sooner or later there will be someone fitter, tougher, stronger, bigger and better this a given.
And what do YOU do then?

MA for me is not about winning fights but adding value to my life.

Cheers.

[jon]

Originally posted by Seraph

how then would you judge your martial ability? Unless you are constantly street fighting, what other way is there to judge YOUR abilities?
The "effectiveness of a style" is irrelevent, as opposed to the effectiveness of the player. What your "master" can do doesn't mean squat. What YOU can do, does. As an example, after my last fight, (where I got schooled badly) I remember exclaiming "MY Taichi f****ing sucks!!!!" not "Taichi sucks! "

* My nomination for best first post by a newcomer in the internals forum.
Welcome to the board:D

[Seraph]

thanks jon. But I cannot take credit. Those ideas have been drilled into me by my training with Shooter, for quite a while.
Laughing Cow, I agree that sport is not the same as Real Life, however I still think that sport can prepare one mentally and physically for confrontation.
"Keep winning tournaments and competition sooner or later there will be someone fitter, tougher, stronger, bigger and better this a given.
And what do YOU do then?" I am not quite sure what the point this statement is. If you compete long enough, you will lose at some point.

"And this is something I learned from personal experience and watching friends getting into fights.

There are NO guarantees, nor can there ever be confidence that what I learned/know will work."
What is the point then of studying? If I want to add value to my life I would not waste my time studying something that did not impart confidence. As for myself I am confident that my in-the-ring skills are terrible, but on the street I am confident that I will prevail, which is where it really matters. That is not to excuse my poor ring(sport fighting) skills, and want to rectify that situation.:)

[Laughing Cow]

Seraph.

I guess like the majority of people out there I study because I enjoy the process, I fully know that with my current life style, age, injuries, etc I will never be a very good MA or become a master.

IMO, it is wrong to be too competitive in anything in your life, may it be MA, work or whatever.

I can see from your posts that you study under shooter, your ideas and opinions are identical.

As for confidence I feel that when you are no longer even a little scared going into a fight than that is where you start loosing.

Without doubts and some fear there can be no longer forward process in your studies.

Cheers.

[Vapour]

I have to disagree in some respect LC.

I might agree that being good at pushing hand does not necessarily mean you are good at fight. But if your pushing hand suck, that surely mean that your taichichuan suck. Plus, if you are pretty good at tuishou, it is likely that you can handle yourself if the opponent is untrained.

I have started a thread in other forum for the exact topic. Here is a very insigtful reply.

[Quote]

I can understand the view of pushing hands as sumo. I saw some of this at a competition a little while back. However, I would make another observation from this same event. These people did not get very far.

Within each weight category, there might be 16 people. Of those some were relative novices and were thrown around easily by the strength guys. However, none of the people just relying on muscle made it past the last 8. Sometimes someone using muscle plus a little technique did well - maybe even winning in some categories.

But let us be honest and say that, if the taiji principles of sung and zhan, nian, lian, sui (stik, adhere, continue, follow) are indeed superior to other approaches, then what is at fault in the above is a lack of skill amongst the rest of the competitors.

We all know the theory that the highest level of skill is borrowing the opponents force so that whatever movement they try, is turned against them and takes them further off balance.

We therefore need to practice against different people, different styles, different abilities, and different degrees of muscle in the technique.

If we lose, just turn around, thank the opponent, and practice harder. If I may quote my teacher:

"I learnt that the Taiji Classics are not mystical tracts but a strictly practical guide to survival under attack. "Pushing hands" is not merely "sensitivity training" (though it encompasses this) but a step by step initiation, through "feeding power", into the realisation of the techniques encompassed by the set-form. It is not a quaint and outdated co-operative exercise, but the key to "understanding power" (ting jing), both from within and without. "Sticking" allows this power to be controlled and redirected. "Pushing" is controlled striking so that injuries may be avoided."

===

so, competitive pushing hands gives us an environment in which we can test our understanding and ability, see where we are lacking, and take this away, work on it, and integrate it into our form work.

This later is key - pushing hands is but one part, competition but one part of that. It should reflect one's overal position and level, not trained seperately and considered seperately. If things are seperate, this is the way the form stays full of fluff and lacking the martial, while pushing hands degenerates into wrestling, judo, sumo - and nothing else. (Not to denigrate these arts - see above on honesty if defeated)

Some people at the competition I witnessed, had spent the whole of the preceeding 6 months training specificaly for this event. Personaly, I do not consider this to be increasing the standard of their Taiji - their pushing hands will improve for sure. But if the pushing hands does not come from the form, and the results and experience not fed back into the form, we have not the unity that the philosophical symbol of Taiji embodies.

===

Yes, the rules suck at times. Yes the format could be better organised with public publication of poole tables, everyone pushing in a poole of number of pooles, ranking from this into a knock out etc.

What particularly interested me was a recent change in the moving step rules (was not like this last year) that banned reaching behind the back and leg sweeps. Essentialy this must have been introduced to keep the judo players from stomping all over the taiji guys.

This misses the point about honest competition.

Ah - but it's not taiji!

Ah - but neither is what you are doing if you lose so easily!

RT

[Quote]

The title of the tread was "Better at PushHand, Better at Taijiquan?"

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..


What is the point then of studying? If I want to add value to my life I would not waste my time studying something that did not impart confidence.

Perhaps, Life is more than the competition, more than the narrowly focused search for Martial prowess.. True, at its best, Tai Chi is a formidable Martial Art, but.. it is so much more as well.. imagine confidence so well grounded that the fight never happens.. confidence so superior that "losing face" is a laughable concept (there's nothing to lose).. Sure, there may be the rare occasion when physical conflict is unavoidable.. but, even then if your training is what it should be, the outcome was decided years ago.. when you started this journey with unconditional sincerity and perseverance..

The need or desire to win is counter-productive to knowing it is already done.. There is a difference between confidence and knowing.. if you don't "know", keep training.. you will..

As for adding value to my life.. Tai Chi and its related disciplines (ie: QiGong, Meditation, philosophical endeavors, ChinNa, etc...) has given me the opportunity to live life in "present moment" (not that i always have the clarity to take advantage of that opportunity).. and THAT, is a value that no other path has produced.. not to mention the almost mystical quality of acquaintences made on this journey.. the friends made along the way are perhaps the most subtle value added, perhaps the most important.. Tai Chi is empty dance until we exchange energies, listen to others, and marvel at the wonder that we are ALL engaged in the dance.. some more aware than others..

Yikes, why do you guys let me get so sappy.. but, it is even the acquaintences made in this forum that have added much value to my own life.. <respectful bows to ALL>

Thanks, and.. Be well..

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by Vapour
I have to disagree in some respect LC.

I might agree that being good at pushing hand does not necessarily mean you are good at fight. But if your pushing hand suck, that surely mean that your taichichuan suck. Plus, if you are pretty good at tuishou, it is likely that you can handle yourself if the opponent is untrained.


You are right if your school only does Tui Shou, we also do San Shou which I think not too many schools do this days.

Cheers.

[Seraph]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Seraph.

I can see from your posts that you study under shooter, your ideas and opinions are identical.

lol ! I wouldn't say that. I would say that I agree with what Shooter talks about. Shooter is the original thinker. (yeah Shooter, I know, nothing new under the sun:) ) I put a lot more stock in what he teaches anyways, due to the extensive stress testing his ideas have undergone. As opposed to the "Masters" who have never, ever tested their theories.
to claim his ideas as mine would be wrong however, so I just wanted to clarify.

[Laughing Cow]

Seraph.

What are the fighting records for he coaches for people like Mike Tyson and similar?

A good fighter does not neccesarily make a good instructor/teacher.

I take someone with the right knowledge and the skill to develop it in me over a certified multiple competition winner that is a bad teacher.

Anyhuh, I wish you all the best on your path.

[Seraph]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Seraph.

What are the fighting records for he coaches for people like Mike Tyson and similar?

A good fighter does not neccesarily make a good instructor/teacher.
I couldn't agree more.
I take someone with the right knowledge and the skill to develop it in me over a certified multiple competition winner that is a bad teacher. I guess my question to you then is how do you know what the "right" knowledge is? I understand your point, but for me I would feel more confident taking instruction from someone who has experience vs. someone who "thinks this should work".

[Laughing Cow]

Seraph.

I judge an Instructor by his/her students and their abilities.

Cheers.

[Tainan Mantis]

Hi Laughing Cow,
I live in Taiwan now and I saw that you wrote earlier on your post about one of your class mates having lived here for 8 years.

Where did he stay and who did he study Taiji with?

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by Tainan Mantis
Hi Laughing Cow,
I live in Taiwan now and I saw that you wrote earlier on your post about one of your class mates having lived here for 8 years.

Where did he stay and who did he study Taiji with?

I will get the exact details of him tomorrow.

Cheers.

[StickyHands]

Originally posted by TaiChiBob
Greetings..



Perhaps, Life is more than the competition, more than the narrowly focused search for Martial prowess.. True, at its best, Tai Chi is a formidable Martial Art, but.. it is so much more as well.. imagine confidence so well grounded that the fight never happens.. confidence so superior that "losing face" is a laughable concept (there's nothing to lose).. Sure, there may be the rare occasion when physical conflict is unavoidable.. but, even then if your training is what it should be, the outcome was decided years ago.. when you started this journey with unconditional sincerity and perseverance..

The need or desire to win is counter-productive to knowing it is already done.. There is a difference between confidence and knowing.. if you don't "know", keep training.. you will..

As for adding value to my life.. Tai Chi and its related disciplines (ie: QiGong, Meditation, philosophical endeavors, ChinNa, etc...) has given me the opportunity to live life in "present moment" (not that i always have the clarity to take advantage of that opportunity).. and THAT, is a value that no other path has produced.. not to mention the almost mystical quality of acquaintences made on this journey.. the friends made along the way are perhaps the most subtle value added, perhaps the most important.. Tai Chi is empty dance until we exchange energies, listen to others, and marvel at the wonder that we are ALL engaged in the dance.. some more aware than others..

Yikes, why do you guys let me get so sappy.. but, it is even the acquaintences made in this forum that have added much value to my own life.. <respectful bows to ALL>

Thanks, and.. Be well..

Perhaps Tai Chi for you has become some kind of an esoteric or spiritual hidden meaning of life (true cliche). It's a medium that you picked to pursue whatever your intentions are for your journey. But for others, they've picked other mediums and spectrums to follow the path. And some simply have none, as blunt as that. But regardles, Tai Chi didnt become all encompassing for them than a mere MA or health program. And it's not only Tai Chi or any other MA, almost anything in life has some sort lesson in prosperity or philosophical etiquettes if the person makes their goals to do so. Did people forget existance of religions already? So it's a little redundant to state the desire to win is counter-productive and Tai Chi itself has been blessed to us to find the true path to life. I mean naturally, we are still in the whole survival of the fittest animosity. It's usually the morality due to socialism holds us back and tells us to share and be nice. But I have a feeling recently, we are going back to instinctual primitive greed in a world gone mad. Personally, I love being polite and watching people behave nicely.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

I am not advocating that Tai Chi is the end all/be all.. i was simply sharing some personal insights.. Tai Chi is far from "all encompassing" for me.. like anything, it is a tool.. a means to an end.. and, from my personal perspective a well functioning and well reasoned tool.. Certainly, others experience it differently than i do, but.. that is the diversity that engages us these dialogues.. its the variable that keeps things in motion..



Perhaps Tai Chi for you has become some kind of an esoteric or spiritual hidden meaning of life (true cliche).

No, Tai Chi is Tai Chi..it has contributed to many other experiences that shape my inclinations and notions.. for me, the meaning of life is to experience it, fully and without harmful intentions.. nothing more. The path i've chosen includes Tai Chi, primarily due to the balanced training of body, mind and spirit (and, yes.. its superiority as a tool for self-preservation)..


But I have a feeling recently, we are going back to instinctual primitive greed in a world gone mad.

I sense that we are pushing the previous limits of the human experience at both ends of the spectrum, that seems to be the balance of things.. it seems that we evolve and devolve proportionately.. the downward spiral into "primal greed" seems to be complemented by a growing spiritual awareness.. but, the mass communication industry finds it more rewarding to focus on chaos.. it easier to make insecure people happy, than to make happy people happier..

All in all.. its just another day in paradise, make the most of it..

Be well..

[StickyHands]

Great, you had to say that didn't you? lol. What is happiness really? I think the feeling of security and comfort is probably the best way to describe it. Because we really dont know what makes us happy, after we are bored with one success, we go for another. Boredom isnt such a bad thing, it's a zone of serenity unrivaled by threats, yet most of us do take it for granted and label it as pathos as chaos, and pershaps that's why we succumb to chaos. Eitherway, I think there does need to be a balance between boredom and excitement, and more inclusively, happiness and misery. Because you cant possibly recognize happiness without a drop of misery. Now too much misery is obviously a bad notion, no kidding, but just enough to not have any sideaffect or becomes detrimental to mental or physical health to oneself or others. And happiness in the side, perhaps 80/20 or 90/10 happiness/sadness, and Id call that the best formula to human satisfaction. But ummm we dont live in that utopian world of Eden, so more than likely, most of us are predisposed to the opposite ratio of the formula. lol. But the very conception that we do need misery in our lives is frivolous, yet functional and good for us. hehe, weird huh? And I guess good Tai Chi gives that sense of balance? But what are the odds of learning "the" good Tai Chi in one's area and such? It's like anything else, we are always critical of ourselves to a degree of exaggeration, that's not healthy.

[Laughing Cow]

Stickyhands.

I have to agree with Taichibob on the following:

Tai Chi is Tai Chi

If you approach it(like many other things) with a set mindset of what it is supposed to be you will walk away with diminished benefits.

Tai Chi can offer many benefits, most people simply choose to close their minds to a lot of them due to their pre-conceived ideas.

Many manage to empty their cups and look at it with an open mind later on and realise the full spectrum of what it can offer.

Cheers.

[StickyHands]

Im sure, but my point was, Tai Chi, like almost anything else in life worth commiting to, has different interpretations and thus different feedback. I cant exactly say that it should be the same for everyone, even if one misses the whole precepts of what Tai Chi is all about.

[dre_doggX]

I went Boxing for my first first time (against an opponent). Now I new that Tai chi and Boxing where related, Yang style appears to have more incommon wit western boxing. I found that after I was done boxing, my yang style Tai chi movements came out more fluid, and just better, not only that, but when it came to yi, It was felt like I could really use the moves in a braw fight. they became more automatic, as if I didnt have to think of them, and as if they where just LIKE BOXING. Yang Style Taichi I practice Erles Form and I havent really found a posture thats not related to these postures in any Tai chi styles, Internal martial arts, or martial arts in general. I am looking(not yet practicingat a school that doesnt teach Tai Chi as a martial art. but a sifu I know teaches it as a martial art.


When I do Erles form, it has some Fajing, in it. but when iam done, I shadow boxing using most explosive ,wipping movements


It just depends on how you learn Tai chi.

Iam and hope to forever be "STILL LEARNING"

peace
respond back

[The Willow Sword]

Yang style tai chi has become this watered down art. It WAS originally a MARTIAL ART. Not some new age dance. I took yang style tai chi for years and got really nothing from it.
we also have to understand that Communist china re-created some of these forms and turned into a more soft aspect.

most of the people that i have run into who take tai chi have no clue as to the martial applications or that tai chi is a fighting art originally. these are mainly hippi types that are "non-violent people" and what they learn is fine for them.

but i dont think that Ma hong is saying my art is better than yours. what he is saying is that tai chi has become watered down to the point where it has lost much of what it was.

thats why there is this debate as to the validity of it in fighting. and THIS country treats it more like a new age dance rather than an effective means of defending yourself or cultiviating your inner health properly. it would be nice to find a legitamate school in austin that does a lot of combative training on tai chi. so far nothing really.
there just isnt a market for it and thats the reason why in this couhtry tai chi is watered down like it is .
MRTWS

[jun_erh]

It seems there are vastly different ways of teaching Yang style tai chi. Some are brutally hardcore, some so "soft" they are like nothing. weird

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by jun_erh
It seems there are vastly different ways of teaching Yang style tai chi. Some are brutally hardcore, some so "soft" they are like nothing. weird

I think a lot of it depends on what they paying public demands.

Problem is that too often the PRC forms are billed and sold as "Yang style", thus many people will claim to be doing yang TJQ.

Over here I found that about 90% of the Yang schools tend to be doing either PRC forms or CMC short form only.

There are a few Yang Guang Ping teachers but they mostly teach in parks and are not mainstream.

Ratio might differ if you get closer to Chinatown, which is a good distance away.

In general I would say that there are very few teachers that teach actual Yang style.

[StickyHands]

Do Yang styles have wuji, Silk reeling and fa jing? How do you compensate if it doesnt?

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by StickyHands
Do Yang styles have wuji, Silk reeling and fa jing? How do you compensate if it doesnt?

Yes, they do have silk reeling and fa-jing.

Actually there is a very good silk reeling article on the Yang Family website.

Yang when compared to Chen tends to try to hide the coiling energy and similar more.

Cheers.

[Empty Fist]

Originally posted by The Willow Sword
Yang style tai chi has become this watered down art. It WAS originally a MARTIAL ART. Not some new age dance. I took yang style tai chi for years and got really nothing from it.
we also have to understand that Communist china re-created some of these forms and turned into a more soft aspect.

most of the people that i have run into who take tai chi have no clue as to the martial applications or that tai chi is a fighting art originally. these are mainly hippi types that are "non-violent people" and what they learn is fine for them.

but i dont think that Ma hong is saying my art is better than yours. what he is saying is that tai chi has become watered down to the point where it has lost much of what it was.

thats why there is this debate as to the validity of it in fighting. and THIS country treats it more like a new age dance rather than an effective means of defending yourself or cultiviating your inner health properly. it would be nice to find a legitamate school in austin that does a lot of combative training on tai chi. so far nothing really.
there just isnt a market for it and thats the reason why in this couhtry tai chi is watered down like it is .
MRTWS

Good observation. I think that could be said about Tai Chi in general- that it has become more of a New Age Dance rather than a martial art. Also just because the Yang style is more softer than the Chen style does not mean its not effective as a martial art.

I am fortunate that my teacher teaches the martial aspect of Tai Chi Chuan. Finding a teacher that teaches the martial aspects of Tai Chi are hard to come by. My teacher’s sifu was William C. C. Chen who is a big advocate that Tai Chi is first and foremost is a martial art.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Yang Style Tai Chi like most other historical styles was and is a Martial Art.. That some (or most) schools don't promote this aspect, doesn't diminish what it is.. it only demonstrates the crippling power of capitalism, and poor understanding of the general consumer/teacher.. What diminishes the Art is debate and dialogue wherein people make claims that assert the weaknesses as being attributes of the Art rather than misconceptions of the majority of its practicioners.. If we blame the Art potential contributors that could help revive its prowess may well move into other Arts (ie: Aikido, Kung Fu, knitting, etc..) We should always present Tai Chi as what it is, a Martial Art.. then, we can also present the many other beneficial aspects.. like any good complete system, Tai Chi is not just One thing.. a balanced curriculum is the best approach.. It has been my experience that i can address most of the interests that students have in Tai Chi, from combat to philosophy to health and meditation..

Sometimes we have to look inward to see if we, ourselves, are promoting the Art as the well rounded system it is.. Sure, it takes more time, more research, more commitment to study the Martial, philosophical, meditative and health aspects.. but, in the end, i think that is what the consumer wants.. a smorgasbord where they can pick and choose according to their interests and still be exposed to the other aspects as well.. this approach may be how we educate the "new-agers" as to the true heritage of Tai Chi.. It doesn't take long to interest even the most peaceful new-ager in the dynamics of energy-play during push-hands..

But, to address the Topic of this Thread.. My training and research and personal combat experience has led me to believe that Yang Tai Chi has all the elements and potential to demonstrate that its legend as the "Great Ultimate" is justified.. only its practicioners can diminish that perception, the Art itself is all that and more..

Be well.. you know.. i'm going broke putting in all these $0.02.. :)

[GLW]

Pet Peeve time...

The Great Ultimate translation for Taiji is GARBAGE...in relation to what you may interpret as being an ultimate fighting method.

Taiji is more of a contraction of the two characters...wherein putting the two together makes them mean something more than each character by itself simply stuck together.

In this cast - the Grand Terminus, the Grand Pivot...or whatever else you wish to call the concept of Yin and Yang...the Taiji....

Yielding the translation Taijiquan - the Fist method based upon the concepts of Yin and Yang.

But then again, it is also a pet peeve of mine that people say they do Taiji or Tai Chi... Now, exactly HOW to you do Yin and Yang? :)

Also, keeping in mind the connection of Taiji - Yin and Yang - when practicing makes a number of concepts and techniques more apparent....FWIW

[The Willow Sword]

If we blame the Art potential contributors that could help revive its prowess may well move into other Arts (ie: Aikido, Kung Fu, knitting, etc..)

Are you saying that there is a Martial art based on Knitting? and it has a prowess like characteristic?;)

TWS

[Laughing Cow]

GLW.

I got those very same pet-peeves.

I prerfer to translate TJQ as " Great Polarity Fist".

I think too many saw "Great Supreme Fist" and started adding things to the art in their mind and when it didn't meet their expectatios they called "fraud" and similar.

Cheers.

[GLW]

That translation works too....

It definitely tells the person doing the art that they should be aware of the extremes at all times..

Full and Empty

right and left,

up and down,

and that all movement is accompanied by an opposing movement...

The Grand Ultimate is not only a bad translation, but does not remind the person of those things from the beginning.

One of the things that is at fault with applications is NOT the art but how people approach it.

Traditional training emphasizes Jiben Gong - basics - first. You then add forms and such ...NOTE, I said ADD...

What this means is that you would begin practicing basics...say you did this an hour a day to begin with for a random number.

then, when you were ok in basics, you add learning the forms...and that means an hour of basics and drills, and then the extra time on forms and such.

When you have progressed to a level, you ADD things like Tuishou...and so on...with each level being an addition.

This is not the way a lot of people learn. They often jump right into form...no basics...and so they have no root or foundation. Obviously, their form WILL suck.

Then, they may get fixated on Tuishou and not do form...so they quit digging for understanding. And...they will often make the mistake that Tuishou is fighting instead of a training method.

Then, some will move to Sanda...but quit doing form, tuishou, or basics....when you have to do all of them.

I would much rather take a person with solid basics and good form and then teach them application than a person who thinks hey have good applications and teach them basics and principles.

I think that this is one of the reasons that you see people doing "Taijiquan" and fighting but in their fighting you see almost nothing that would tie back to what they train in the form.

Now, I realize the fighting is NOT going to be as neat as form, but you should at least see something that resembles the techniques in the form ...and the concepts in Tuishou...when people fight... Otherwise, the form and Tuishou part of training serves no purpose and you could do it all simply by fighting.

[Laughing Cow]

GLW.

My Chen TJQ teacher always sez we are taught the traditional method, but they should be similar across styles.

We start off with 1 movement in the form and work on it, teacher emphasises different points which we work on.

Later on we get another movement added on and work those, this way we build the form slowly and keep going back to earlier movements too do correct flaws and add next level in too.

During all of that we are supposed to Silk reeling and Zang Zhuang plus other exercises on our own.

Class time is solely for corrections and teaching us new stuff.

Takes quiet some time to learn the whole form and even more before we start on Tui-shou. Weapons and similar are only taught when Teacher reckons we are ready for them.

Not sure if this meshes with what you consider good trainig methods.

I also agree that fighting will not be as nice as form works, but the higher level the practicioner is the more it should look like good TJQ.

Cheers.

[GLW]

That is it...one move over and over is basics.

The only thing I would add...and you probably do it...are the overall warm ups, stretching, conditioning, stances...

Such things SEEM to go without saying...but truly not that many people do them.

I learned from one teacher a long time ago...where you did not learn the next part of the first form until you had the previous parts exactly correct. It took me a year to learn one basic routine that a number of other people with other teachers in the same style learned in 3 or 4 months. Yet, to this day, my form on that routine is so ingrained that I CAN'T do it wrong.

This level of detail removes the body from the equation and lets you go to the WHY of the movement and its use.

However, I had about 6 or 7 classmates start with me. A year later, I was the only one left of that group.

Not too many westerners can handle that type of training.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

The training methods you speak of are consistent with my own.. and i wholeheartedly agree that fighting without observable evidence of internal training simply says the training was not too good..

But, to refer to someone's interpretation of Tai Chi as "GARBAGE" (ie: Great Ultimate, Grand Ultimate, whatever..) is, in my opinion, inappropriate.. My own teacher and my own research have led me to interpret Tai Chi as "Grand Ultimate Process".. if my contraction of the phrase to "Great Ultimate" "peeves" you, perhaps you should be less hostile and a little more interested in understanding that not everyone shares your precise concept of a particular phrase.. nor should they.. Unreasonable expectations based on a phrase is just a fact of life, it occurs at every level of communication, as teachers it is our obligation to demonstrate that it's metaphor, not a description.. a metaphor for a process that never ends and can offer "great ultimate" rewards..

Again, this is just my own understanding.. not a claim of "truth"..

Be well..

[GLW]

Grand Ultimate PROCESS is not too bad...but the pet peeve is GRAND ULTIMAT FIST...which many take to mean that Taijiquan is the most developed and unbeatable style around....usually this is by the folks who have the poorest understanding of what the PROCESS really is.

It is THAT translation (GRAND ULTIMATE FIST) that I take exception to.

If you focus on the Grnad Ultimate PROCESS - the connection of Yin and YAng and the transformations from one to the other in the body, then you DO get it.

It is amazing how much difference the inclusion of one word (PROCESS) can make.

My statement of it being garbage was the sloppiness of Grand Ultimate Fist as a translation... that gives rise to a group of people that train a little....and delude themselves a lot. I was NOT referring to ANYONE posting...but to the wording.

[The Willow Sword]

details of the translation of Tai chi chuan?

the literal translation is simple

Tai= grand or large or great

chi= energy

chuan= fist

besides the words are 3rd grade anyway,,like the poems that explain the movements and the names of the postures.

it was well known that at the time, the martial practitioners were illiterate. the poems were like rhyming songs to help them remember what they were practicing.

so get off it already,,go train or something.:rolleyes:

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by The Willow Sword
the literal translation is simple

Tai= grand or large or great

chi= energy

chuan= fist

I disagree the 2nd Character is "polar" not energy, while both are pronounced "CHI" the Character and meaning differ.

Which is common thing in both Chinese and Japanese as they have a limited number of sounds to match onto thousands of characters.

[dezhen2001]

the 2nd character means polar or extreme... not Qi. They look totally different and sound it too :)

dawood

[GLW]

Yielding "Most Extreme...or Grand Extremity Fist...

Sounds like Yin and Yang to me...

The idea that the second character is the same as the character for Qi is quite common...and quite incorrect.

[dezhen2001]

its really annoying then if it is... coz the whole principle of the skill is in the name...

dawood

[The Willow Sword]

:rolleyes:

[jun_erh]

I can see how yang could be seen as too soft. For me, I started learning it for that reason. I was coming out of a year of doing both Hung Gar and Kuo Shu (chinese military type training). The hung gar was mostly forms, but artisticly it's southern style kung fu, so you know everything is very forcefull. The other class was great but, well it was kind of like being in the army!! I sprained all sorts of limbs. I had been doing 8 section brocade since the begining and felt that purely as an activity, tai chi would be less stressful and stuff. Not trying to give the world my biography, just explaing the appeal of the idea of yang style.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

I train in both Yang and Chen styles.. common to both is the need to research more and more into teachers with authentic knowledge.. seek them out, whatever the price.. after a while your own understanding begins refining itself.. At some point you will find that Yang style has as much coiling, spiraling and FaJing as Chen.. but knowledgable Yang teachers are more difficult to find than good Chen teachers.. Chen is proud of its prowess, Yang has concealed it almost into extinction.. I hope we can revive it..

Be well..

[Kumkuat]

no tai chi is pronounced tai JI. And in pinyin it is spelled taiji.

[Crushing Step]

kumkuat- Great point. It bugs me when karate people who add tai chi to their curriculum say "tie jee kwon". Worse yet is seing it done as if a hard style! Nothing against fa jing, that is beautiful. What I mean is the stiff angular movements you would expect from a hard stylist.

I don't speak or read Chinese. But when I see that modern pinyin has two words that sound alike, and are spelled "Qi" and "Ji", then I know that their Chinese symbols and therefore their meaning must be different.

That brings me to my second TCC pet peeve. It's when the same type of people say the "chi" of "tai chi chuan" is the same "chi" as in "life energy". :rolleyes:

[Kumkuat]

yeah. and tai ji's ji is pronouced ji with a hard "J" sound (like in John). QI is pronouced chi (like child). I don't know why most westerners can't tell the difference. I guess I hang with too many chinese people (and yes, they confirmed the pronoucation). Not to mention that when I was a child when I was learning German, I had this really strict teacher that was real anal about pronouncation so I'm kinda anal about that as well. But I still can't figure out the tones though in Chinese.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Tai Chi Chuan, Taijiquan, Tai Chi.. words that point to an experience.. pay attention to the experience.. I learned Chen from a gentleman that spoke so little english that communication was almost void, when he did speak we didn't know if he was telling us the name of a move or to leave because we were to stupid to learn Chen.. We persisted and the form was taught mostly in silence with sign-language of our own design.. What i'm getting at is that most of us don't communicate in Chinese, so much confusion is wrought from differing interpretations of Chinese words/phrases.. Why don't we simply state what we mean in english.. Life-force, Breath, Muscle energy, Intent, Spirit, etc.. We actually propogate confusion in the effort to understand a foreign language that is based on imagery and esoteric concepts..

The one that gets it right is the one that transfers the concepts into their own experience.. and that can be done with english or with no words at all.. so to get all academic and authoratative over a complex and confusing system of communication seems as counter-productive as the perceived academic "mis-conception".. especially when the misconceived person actually has the concept... " a rose by any other name is still a rose"...

Be well..