Really don't take this the wrong way, but...

[IronFist]

I feel like an ass writing this, but it's stuck on my mind.

Is Erle Montaigue crazy? Now, I've never met him, and I've heard mostly good things about him, and he seems to know what he's doing on his tapes.

However, this is concerning his "Old Yang Form." He says it was the original form, and Yang Chen-fu changed it to the lesser active version. In other words, he took out all the fa-jing movements etc. I don't have to explain here, because you guys all know the story.

But essentially, Erle seems to be the only one who knows this form (as far as I know, maybe there's big group of Old Yang style people somewhere I don't know about). Now, normally, assuming the person is of good credibility, which Erle seems to be, I would think "Cool, he must have been taught an uncommon form by some old taiji master." However, the following information is suspect (bolded is important, italics are my comments):

From his downloadable book on the Old Style, luchanbook.pdf:

"Those who were unfamiliar with it and who were perhaps a little jealous that this blue eyed westerner was perhaps one of the only people in modern history to have received such information, said that perhaps Erle Montaigue simply invented this form."

no problem yet. I can see how people could be jealous, can't you?

"Some even went to great lengths to find others who had trained with me many years back to try and gain fuel for this fire such was their evil intent!
This did not worry me and I was in a way slightly flattered to
think that such people should think that I was of such genius to
have invented such a perfect form of self-defense and self
healing. "

Now, there's nothing wrong with this per se, but the way he phrases it makes it kind of sound like he's deferring illusions of grandeur to downplay himself in other's eyes while he himself takes comfort in having invented (made up) a form that he will convince everyone else is so "perfect."

"However, as much as I would like to think that I
invented this form,"

Eh? I can't help but wonder why he would "like to think he invented" it?

"nowadays new information has come to
light with others producing books with very old Chinese
masters performing what amounts to the Old Yang Style."

"what amounts to," eh?

However, it does not really matter who invented this form, my
self,...

really...

"...Yang Lu-ch'an or my teacher, Chang Yiu-chun,

here he's saying it doesn' t matter, attempting to take people's minds off the fact that he could have made it up himself.

"the fact remains that whoever learns this form or even sees it performed looks on in awe at such a beautifully powerful and 'still' set of..."



Alright. I'm not trying to píss people off here or anything, so I don't want "stop questioning my teacher's authenticity!" as a reply. I just want to hear other people's opinions.

As far as my experience, Erle has been nothing but extremely helpful and polite anytime I emailed him, and never tried to force me to buy anything from him, unlike some other people ::coughjameslacycough::

So, I'm not trying to discredit Erle. I'm trying to get some opinions on what I've pointed out because I don't know what to make of it myself.

And also, I don't want to bother learning the old Yang form if it's not "real."

Note: There was something somewhere else on his site where he made refrence to the same thing (ie. "I could have made up this form.") but seriously I cannot find it again. If I do find it I'll post it.

btw the text I quoted is on pages 1 and 2 (book page numbers, not adobe acrobat pages) of chapter 1.

Iron

[Water Dragon]

If anyone's claiming to do the same stuff as Yang Lu Chan, they're either full of it, or carrying on a dead tradition. It's 200 years later, living traditions evolve.

[IronFist]

So are you saying the reason no one does the old form anymore is because it died out because it wasn't effective? ...and no longer a living tradition? So it's not worth learning?

Iron

[dubj]

Not very many people can live up to Yang Luchan these days. I would be pretty proud to know I was doing the same forms and training methods as him.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by IronFist
So are you saying the reason no one does the old form anymore is because it died out because it wasn't effective? ...and no longer a living tradition? So it's not worth learning?

Iron

No. You misunderstood. Arts change through time. They evolve. What works for you may not work for me and Vice Versa. Our stuff shouldn't look exactly the same, even if we study under the same teacher. Now, add 200 years into that equation.

[Braden]

I'm not getting the same things from those quotes you are; I guess it's a matter of interpretation. All he's really saying is, "look I got this form that I was told is old style, I don't think it really matters how old it is, I just think it's pretty good, alot of people say I made it up - how flattering that they think I'm able to invent something this good, and besides now they're learning about alot of other unrelated people doing similar stuff to me." What's wrong with that? Not to say that Erle hasn't said some 'remarkable' things to market his stuff - he has. I just don't see what the outrage is from those quotes. BTW - there ARE unrelated people doing essentially identical forms to him.

[bamboo_ leaf]

I my self don’t have any problem with Mr. Montague or any of his students that post here.

Most posting that I have read from them really show a dedicated sincere group of people promoting / defending their views of IMA. Mr. Montague must be a good teacher to attract and have such people represent him.

For TC we can all say the what was written by the past masters “classics” should be very definitive of what is and what is not. Each of us follows a way suited to their understandings and inclinations of these words.

The problem or disagreement that I would have is by the use of terms such as org. or true or any other exclusive term that tends to promote what appears to be a narrow viewpoint based on ours is better or more real. Even then I would say it’s more of an understanding then something absolute.


Most people say they come here to expand and learn from each other.

is it still? ;)

[Water Dragon]

Oh, and for the record:

I'm not claiming E.M. is a phoney, or that he doesn't teach a lineage of Taiji that is different than what was taught through Yang Chen Fu. I'm just saying that I'd bet money that it's not the same thing Yang Lu Chan was doing.

[Ky-Fi]

I'm not directing this towards any posts in this thread, but sometimes it seems that people on this and other forums divide teachers of their style into two categories:

1. My teacher/lineage
vs.
2. ignorant, conniving frauds.

It seems to me there's a lot of middle ground in there. I may not agree with every point or emphasis of EM, but from reading some of his stuff and reading Sam's posts for quite a while, I would conclude that he's very knowledgeable about Taiji.

As far as whether or not his form is Yang Lu Chan's original form---I would have to say I agree completely with what Water Dragon said.

My definition of "real" Taiji is someone who deeply understands the principles and training methods, and is able to manifest them via punching, kicking, throwing, chin na, qigong and weapons.

[Braden]

Bamboo - Erle's and his students' 'dedication' ;) to their lineage is certainly no more remarkable than that shown almost universally in the internal arts. Not that that makes it any more acceptable, but it certainly means he shouldn't be singled out regarding it.

[taijiquan_student]

Whether or not you like Erle's taiji, he's a great guy. I've e-mailed him questions before and he is very prompt and helpful in his reply. On one occasion I was buying a video from him, and he just threw in another free video (which was especially nice since they cost a fortune).

I've disagreed with his version of taiji history before, but that doesn't mean he's crazy.

I'm currently learning an Old Yang Family form (different from Erle's) that was passed down to only one disciple every generation (until now, otherwise why would I been learning it?), the lineage being: Yang Lu Chan of course, then Yang Jian Hou his son, then Zhang Qin Lin who was a regular student of Cheng Fu's but became a disciple of Jian Hou, then Wang Yen-Nian who is now 88, to my teacher. I believe it is authentic, and it works. I'm not saying my teacher's form is EXACTLY what Yang Lu Chan did, but because there are only 3 generations between Lu Chan and my teacher, it leaves less room for watering down.

Does that make me crazy? I certainly hope not.

[red_fists]

Old Form this, Old Form that.

Nobody alive was around when YLC was teaching, so nobody knows what he really did.

YLC only did verbal transmissions as he could not write.

So there will be lots of different versions of his old Form out there, IMHO.

Yes, and time, practicioners, changes played a role in that.
YCF did his Forms differently as a youth than as an old man.

What is authentic, nobody can tell and nobody got any real proof.

So where does that leave Erle. to be honest nowhere.

Look at his form execution, postures,etc do the follow the Tai Chi principles and rules.

If it does it is a valid Tai Chi Form, regardless of what it is called or who created it.

If you wanna learn it make sure that he can transmit it well.

If not don't care about it either way.
Just some thoughts.

[Zantesuken]

lol I'm surprised Sam Wiley hasn't decided to defend his 'sifu'. anyways it's high uncommon that he would learn it but thinking he invented it is a LITTLE ****y. the only thing that bothers me is that i visited his site and if he really does have a good reputation he seems to publicize how he'll never try using fa jing on someone again and all that.

i guess it's maybe because i haven't seen besides in his bad broad sword form or what he calls a 'knife', but his articles seem to protect him in that you can't really test him because he's claimed to have knocked this guy dead and sent this guy to a hospital and so on. heh I was just wondering who else here represents him because so far I've only seem Sam Wiley and this garry rommel guy who owns

www.pressurepointfighting.com

then again this may be just that bad broad sword video that soured my opinion of him :p. I have no problem with the fact that some westerner knows a 200 year old form. and i don't think yang lu chan made it any less active. if he slowed it down why are tai chi masters still powerful today? many practise the yang style. it's not just the form that makes it up. there's lots of philosophy behind it and it's based on the original 13 postures. tai chi forms all have the 13 postures in some form or another so in essence how can you lose?

[red_fists]

Lets not forget that the Inventor of the 108 Form was:

Yang Chen Fu.

When asked why he created such a long form his reply was as follows:

"My Students I know you are lazy If I tell you do a Form 3 times you will do it 3 times, regardles of it'S length.
So for your benefit I created along Form".
P.S.: Prior to YCF there was only Tai Chi Chuan, no Family names was attached then.

Seeya.

[Zantesuken]

also 108 is an IMPORTANT TAOIST NUMBER!!!!

i can't remember but 108 is the total number of dieties or a combo of some type of gods in taoism.

[Brad]

What's EM's site address?

[Sam Wiley]

I doubt that you're going to get any closer to the original form than the one Erle practices. In my opinion, going any further back on the time line goes to the Chen style forms and the Wudang forms, as those are Yang's influences. I agree that over the years things have been changed about the form, as different teachers placed emphasis on different things, and even Erle practices the form differently now than he did several years ago. But barring slight variations between practitioners, the form itself has not changed.

Now, having said that, can I prove that this is the same form as Yang's original? Nope. Can I prove Erle didn't invent it himself? Nope. Do I care? Nope. People are free to ignore him and what he says and teaches if they want. For some reason, though, people can't leave the subject of Erle Montaigue alone. His detractors, no matter how insignificant they claim his stuff is, will argue until they turn blue in the face telling people how much of a fake he's supposed to be, how he's supposedly defrauding everyone, how his stuff is made up and his fa-jing is not real...but they can neither show who is the real deal, nor can they show the real stuff themselves. And to top it all off, they usually spout their abusive tripe from behind a mask of anonymity and a wall of half-truths, misquotes, and out-of-context statements. They cannot support their claims that Erle is a fraud, and in addition are themselves purposely misleading others in their attempt to downtread Erle.

Erle on the other hand, doesn't have anything in writing or any pictures or anything else that might prove he's telling the truth. So he just keeps teaching in the hope that those who recognize the value of what he's teaching will take what they want. And because of the relentless assault of his detractors, he has pretty much given up on trying to prove anything. He just says what he has to say and leaves it at that. And I don't blame him.

So anyway, that's why he wrote what he did.

[Zantesuken]

the form isn't everything. people may not be able to do it but if you are going to display yourself especially as a MASTER WESTERNER who got invited to the 1985 CHINA games i don't see how it's NOT questionable. Of course there's the possibility of i t happening but if he's that unfit then you can isntantly tell. if his fa-jing video on his site was what his fa-jin was 5-10 years ago then how'd he get rank of master in the first place? it's not smooth at all. And seeing as how you live in Georgia i don't see how you would spend 1500-2000 on a plane ticket to visit Erle regularly and continue your training unless you were some rich person.

tai chi masters are graceful. being able to do the old form isn't that important. you still develop it and it wasn't the form that made Yang Lu Chan great. it was the depth of his understanding of tai chi and that's more important than knowing a 200 year old form. Some people can do fancy flash kicks but if they don't understand it they'll never use it in a fight.

[Water Dragon]

Oh Boy, Here we go...

[Kempo Guy]

The old Yang style form that Erle teaches bears striking resemblance to the 99-step Synthesized form of Chen Pan Ling. Could there be a connection here?

Personally I have seen a modified version of the 99-step form as taught by Wang Shu Jin's lineage and it also looks similar to Erle's form, aside from some of the changes that has been made by Wang.

Just a thought.

KG

[red_fists]

Originally posted by Zantesuken
also 108 is an IMPORTANT TAOIST NUMBER!!!!

i can't remember but 108 is the total number of dieties or a combo of some type of gods in taoism.

Not just in taoism.

Also in Japan the 108 deities are respected. At New year each Temple strike their Bell 108 times, with an inerval of 1 minute which contains a prayer to the specific deity that the Bell is struck for.

I know it is done at Shinto shrines.

[jon]

Ive just started Bagua under a Sifu William Ho he is also a Tai Chi master and his Tai Chi linage is though his father and grandfather who was taught by Chen Fu Yang.
He teachs a long fighting based form which ive talked to him about only very recently.
What i got from him was basicaly that this was the full fighting based form [plus two man set] from Yang style but that some had changed a lot over time for different practioners to suit different builds, he also stated that the fighting side of it was not often publicly demonstrated.
He showed me some applications and there was certainly a few surprises, the movements where very fast and whip like and he would also use fists i didnt know belonged to Tai Chi like the Pheonix eye[though not as tight] and a version of what looked like a leapord fist[again losser].
However it was still certainly Tai Chi and he never tried to make any claims of being the only one who knew it only that different people applied it differently and learnt it differently.
From what i could gather there is certainly still a heavy fighting component in Yang style but not that many know it and even fewer are willing to show it.
The form still looks to me quite similar its only in the application and the performance in crossing hands that you start to pick up on how its used effectively.
It is springy and fast but of course sticks like glue and is fluent which im guessing is why it was not publicly demonstrated much after the 50's. However some things really did stick out like much more active footwork a sence of not waiting so much but rather simply filling the gaps.
Im no huge expert but watching him do applications and moving though movements more quickly with jing it was quite easy to see what he was doing. Much Tai Chi is very difficault to understand and i would venture to say thats why its more frequently seen in this day and age. Still as i say the form is not where you notice it, you notice in the actualy application in fighting and sence of stratergy.
The two man set is also very interesting, i have never seen anything like it in Tai Chi before, ive also seen it performed fast and again you can see the way the systems works much more easily.
I dont think Earl has anything to special i just think he is possibly one of the few to actualy want to tell the world about it.

hehe as a silly side note my sifu constantly refers to it as 'old style mind' Tai Chi;)

[red_fists]

Hi Jon.

I agree I think that there is a lot more to Tai Chi than is commonly known.
For starters I know that my Sifu has only shown me a small selection of her own skills.
As for her Sifu(our Sijo) he keeps amazing us like anything.

Especially when he start to "play" with Tai Chi in front of us.

At last Years Seminar he lectured us about the importance of the training surroudings and than later on performed what he called the "Freestyle Capetown Form" adhoc.
Made up as he performed it.

Kinda mixed Form of Sword and Staff, but he used an extendable Whiteboard Pointer instead of a Weapon.

With a lecture afterwards on how the pointer can be used as a weapon, etc ...

From what I have seen and researched so far the art is HUGE and contains so much that my Head spins.

[Nexus]

If your concern is being a fighter then you are thinking far too much.

[Sam Wiley]

Z,
Go back and re-read that post. You missed something very important. Go back and re-read Braden's post, too. You missed something very important in it, too.

If you don't want to learn from Erle, then don't.

I'm not going to sit here and debate with you about whether his form is original or made up, because if you believe me then you believe me and if you don't then you don't, and no amount of arguing on my part is going to make you any more convinced than you are. There are many out there who don't believe it. Join them. It's no skin off my nose.

If you don't like Erle's fa-jing, then don't do it the way Erle does it. You don't like his forms or weapons forms, then don't do them the way he does. Hell, don't do them at all. Go do some other form, taught by some other master. Not everyone has to be Erle's student, ya know.

Kempo Guy,
I read somewhere that Chen Pan-ling studied the "old" Yang style from one of the Yangs. Though his combination form is not the same as the one Erle teaches, there are similarities, and this is why.

Anyway, no more lineage talk from me. It's too political and too frustrating.

[Chris McKinley]

Although this is a tired old retread of a topic, most of the questions/criticisms have at least been sincere and/or objectively benign. However...

Zantesuken,

Your contempt and hostility is so apparent, one might wonder if you are merely trolling us. Pray tell, what is your background that we might take your comments as something other than a troll?

RE: "and i don't think yang lu chan made it any less active.". No one has asserted that Yang Lu-chan made ANYTHING less active. That development came about through his grandson, Yang Cheng-fu, who, by his own admission, omitted certain of the more difficult martial aspects of his grandfather's style when developing his 108 Long Form. He also, btw, warned against any further such alterations for fear that the style could not bear it without becoming diluted.

RE: "if he slowed it down why are tai chi masters still powerful today?". This question contains a logically faulty assumption. Namely, that merely slowing down the form would make it less powerful. It is not the speed which is in question. Indeed, even the Yang Cheng-fu form can be practiced quickly. Instead, it is the omission of various jings, the most talked-about of which is fajing, that brings Yang Cheng-fu to task in making his changes to the form. Without the inclusion of these jings in the practice of the postures, the martial viability of the movements has been severely compromised relative to their intact versions. Additionally, there are two more points to consider regarding your statement here. First, we must know how you are defining "powerful"...the criteria you are using. Second, we must remind ourselves of the distinction between being powerful (that is, being able to emit the power of various jings correctly) and being skilled as a fighter.

Anyone can be taught to emit power correctly; that does not make him/her a skilled fighter by any stretch of the imagination. Likewise, anyone can be taught to be a skilled fighter; that does not mean he/she is able to correctly demonstrate/manifest the jings correctly.

As a side note, your post here might be far more interesting if the timing were different such that Gary Romel were not away serving in the war but were here to defend himself. Unfortunately he won't be back until March and by then this thread will be covered with dust.

In your second post, you wrote, "you still develop it and it wasn't the form that made Yang Lu Chan great. it was the depth of his understanding of tai chi and that's more important than knowing a 200 year old form. Some people can do fancy flash kicks but if they don't understand it they'll never use it in a fight.". I am entirely in agreement with the points expressed here. In fact, these statements do more to support Erle Montaigue than they do his critics. Erle has attested that he has used his skill in real confrontations. I can neither confirm nor contest that; however, I can attest to the fact that he CAN do so if he needed. My assessment of many other Taijiquan instructors has not been so favorable. My experience is that most, at least in the U.S., can't fight very well at all...even if they CAN express p'eng jing correctly. To paraphrase your comment, "some people can do fancy uprooting demonstrations but if they don't understand it IN CONTEXT they'll never use it in a fight".


Kempo Guy and jon,

You both brought out the important point that neither Yang Cheng-fu lineage stylists nor Erle Montaigue hold a monopoly on Yang Taijiquan. My own instructor taught us a form he explained was Old Yang, not the Cheng-fu version. It is indeed very similar to Erle's form, but there are minor differences. However, it is roughly the same basic form. Both Erle's and my instructor's interpretations are VERY different from the YCF/CMC version, and both are FAR more martial in content and application. Which one is real? Who in the bloody hell knows for sure? The YCF people have the most documentation, and even they can't prove beyond doubt that their stuff is even similar to Yang Lu-chan's work, nevermind faithfully identical. I agree with the assertion that, in the end, expressing the principles correctly is the final arbiter of what is real Taijiquan, since even the classics speak of moving beyond the form to spontaneous expression at the advanced levels.

To take that idea further, it is entirely conceivable that someone might come along, develop sufficiently advanced skill and understanding, and create an entirely new form that nonetheless holds completely faithful to the correct principles of Taiji. Just something to consider.

[Zantesuken]

i'm not trolling. in one of his articles erle wrote something about slowing it down and i saw it mentioned on this board as well and someone said how it wasn't as good as the old yang form. I'm not trolling in particular but just saying that the form isn't everything.

and sam wiley it's not like i don't want to learn from e.m but no matter who you learn from everyone's always a bit skeptical because they've never seen the person before.

agh i hate having to alt + <- cause i just lost half the stuff i wrote. okay and gary rommel blah. i also saw this Chris Mkinley guy on the board so that now makes a total of 3. In another discussion i said that erle had the application down and i'm sure he can but i still am not gonna pass opinion on his fa-jin cause you can't tell from a video.

there are a lot of mcdojos in north america. the people i study under come from mainland china and hk but that's not relevant.

the only thing i'm curious was that is erle montigue really 'that good' because i only have his site to look at. i never intended to start out to flame him and then get bashed on in return. i was just asking because i wanted to find a second source. but the issues about the forms aren't also that important. if someone learns to generate power you train chi kung to control it. i have all this down in my head in chinese but it'll sound like chunky english if i translate it. blah i would say go erle but then some people seem to idealize him like he's the best tai chi master in the world. i don't like his broadsword form so yeah i'm not gonna do it his way. so it's not like i'm flaming him when i ask sam wiley what move does erle do that's so advanced that sam doesn't wanna try to do it.

i think it came out the wrong way. and what's trolling? if it means flaming then i used it in that context but if it's not then what is it?

[bamboo_ leaf]

“YCF/CMC version, and both are FAR more martial in content and application”

Hi Chris,

Some good points made, just wondering how do you characterize martial.

In the interest of view points when you say most in the US and other such statements how do you quantify such a thing?

Is it the most that you have met? or all the ones in the US?

What if there where some ideas that many have misunderstood but a few really know about, as Zantsuken, tried to express about Fa-jing most would discount it. It is useless to even try to talk about it. Because until you feel it most won't belive it or can concive it. it's out of their box.

[Chris McKinley]

bamboo_leaf,

RE: "...just wondering how do you characterize martial.". Ah, a vital question if the statement is to have any meaning. In the context of this statement, I am characterizing it as that which falls more toward one end of a subjective spectrum. On one end might be interpretations which include pure qigong results practiced solo, or at least movement performed which results in anything from the pure Yin of solely yielding to neutralize to the least harmful projection one can apply and still survive a real physical assault. At the other end of the spectrum would be those interpretations which result in serious injury and/or the death of the attacker.

RE: "In the interest of view points when you say most in the US and other such statements how do you quantify such a thing?". I don't. I'm not attaching hard numbers to it in this context.

RE: "Is it the most that you have met? or all the ones in the US?". When I wrote, "My experience is that most, at least in the U.S., can't fight very well at all...even if they CAN express p'eng jing correctly," my intention was to convey that it was in "my experience" that I found basis for my statement. I have not travelled to China, so I may not logically comment on the abilities of Taijiquan instructors to be found there. To clarify, it is my experience that most of the Taijiquan instructors that I have met (all of which have been in the U.S.) have not had the ability to fight very well. This of course leaves open the possibility that the U.S. contains a great number of highly skilled fighters who use Taijiquan as their fighting style. I have simply yet to meet more than a handful of such individuals.

Additionally, this appears to be a less than unique perspective on the overall status of Taijiquan fighting skill in the U.S. if the overwhelming majority of opinions I've received in a majority of U.S. states is any measure. I daresay this is also the common view among martial artists who do not practice Taijiquan at all. One may argue that those outside of Taijiquan do not understand it enough to know if its practitioners can fight well or not, and there may be some truth there. However, it is rare for martial artists from the entire diversity of styles available in this country to reach concensus on much of anything at all the way they do in respect for their regard of Taijiquan practitioners' fighting ability. So perhaps there is some truth there as well.

[IronFist]

Wow I'm getting some good info from this. Thanks guys.

Iron

[Kaitain(UK)]

we keep hearing the same line - 'Yang style has no fajing'

it does, we train it, it's always been trained by the Yang family. The fact that when then the Yang form is performed it doesn't express fajing the same way that Chen style does, does not mean that it isn't there.

Often what is missed is that the different styles have different emphases on how to fight with the system. If another style doesn't have the same emphasis as your own, don't assume it is ineffective - we look for what we are taught is right and effective. Maybe asking a practitioner first might help.

The system I train is an effective fighting system - I've used it in real and simulated situations to good effect.

I used to go in for Earle bashing but what's the point? I think that he is beneficial for Taiji in general in that he raises awareness of its martial aspects - anything that stops the hippy contingent who try and tell us that Taiji is primarily for relaxation is a good thing.

What good is the adulation of your own style if it is at the expense of someone elses?

[brassmonkey]

"The system I train is an effective fighting system - I've used it in real and simulated situations to good effect. "

Peculiar statement. How do you use a yin chi kung form to fight?? Your joking right?

[Kaitain(UK)]

yin chi gung form?

I wasn't aware that you were an authority on what or how I train? The form is as much Yin as Yang - you train it how you want it - there is more to training than just the form

I can fight with the system I train - so yes, I stand by my statement

[wind]

You are right.Yang style has fajing. each movement of ycf's form can be issued with fajing. also there is another form in ycf style called changquan. it's a fast form , the movements almost same as the slow one but different footwork. i think ycf's form is more advanced form to train on jing. it produces real taiji jing.

[taijiquan_student]

Brassmonkey--Sorry if this has been explained already, but what form is the "yin chi kung form" that Kaitan does. I hope you don't mean the Yang style long form (or CMC form cause not everyone who does it is a tree-huggin hippy;) :mad: )

If you did mean the YCF form, I would be much obliged if I could hear the Great Grandmaster's wisdom on the superior fighting form and correct method of practice.

[taijiquan_student]

Also...Yes, there is indeed fajing in the Yang style. It is just more subtle (notice I don't say BETTER) than the Chen style and most people don't know about it.

[brassmonkey]

My statement was an attempt to be like the senior students of Montaigue on here in theyre thinking. Here's what they believe or so they have written:

YCF's form is a yin form a chi kung form
OLD Yang or YLC form is the yang form a fighting form

Now here is the funny twist on YCF I've seen 2 different versions from Montaigue's senior students here on why he died:

1. Yin dullness which is odd considering he practiced the yin form or promoted you'd think he'd die from yang dullness

2. Practicing Repulse Monkey too much which causes you to gain weight

Note I don't believe any of the above which is entertaining none the less.
So all who took this the wrong way I apologize I have respect for all who practice Yang TCC.

[Braden]

bm - Don't be silly.

[brassmonkey]

Perhaps my memory is off am I making this up or do I have the details wrong? Too bad I didnt save those specific threads because I don't have the patience to wade through all of Sam's posts nor Gary's nor do I think the search will work for alot of the older threads but outrageous statements like I listed I remember well.

[brassmonkey]

"Mr. Montaigue and his students teach fighting applications from the form which you are alleging he and his students claim has no fighting applications. Clearly, this directly invalidates your allegation. Evidence of this is clearly shown on Mr. Montaigue's website. "

This thread I say nothing of his applications though from I've seen you can teach anyone the postures from the form and they can make up theyre own applications from day 1. Does this mean its TCC? Who am to say, perhaps someone with an understanding of the classics can tell.

"You may have gotten this yin/yang classification of forms by misreading something Mr. Montaigue wrote regarding the difference between the long slow form (be it YCF's or YLC's) and the cannon fist form. However, it is plainly misrepresented here."

No actually as I said I got it from senior students of his who post here, perhaps they misread something, don't know don't care.

[Kaitain(UK)]

some people have definitely spouted off the 'Repulse Monkey made him fat' line a few times

but anyone who doesn't do Yang Taiji and is trying to argue against its validity comes out with that one - I think Sam used it once but I can't remember. It was probably in response to me saying Earle sucked ass though :P

[brassmonkey]

Nice edit job Braden after my reply where were to say these things were silly when Samy Wiley originally said them nor when I had a thread where you defended 13 points or 8 I brought up that were screwy that I found and you didnt refute these then.

[Braden]

Hi brassmonkey. I deleted a few posts when I remembered I had no interest in arguing with you. Since you quoted everything I said verbatim, it really has no effect but to make it clear that I'm not interested in the discussion. Being tired does funny things sometimes, my apologies. If you have any specific questions for me, please state them and I will try to answer as best I can.

[Sam Wiley]

Brad,
Sorry I missed it before...Erle's site address is http://www.taijiworld.com

Now...I don't like Yang Cheng-fu's version of the form. I practice it at certain times, but I like the Old Yang form a lot more. One of the reasons I still practice Yang Cheng-fu's form is because there are some qigong methods in it that are not contained in the Old Yang form. One these methods is Fist Under Elbow, which when done the way it is in YCF's form, HELPS you to gain weight. It does not MAKE you do anything. This is a qigong recommended to people who are underweight and need to gain some to stay healthy. YCF may not have gotten fat simply because of this, but in my opinion, it may have been a contributing factor. Another reason I do not like YCF's form as much as the Old Yang form is that I almost always feel lethargic. I hate walking around talking like Caine from Kung Fu and feeling like I have been drugged. So I rarely practice it unless it is for health reasons or I want to practice late at night and not wake anyone up.

The Yang Cheng-fu form is okay in my opinion, but only okay, when it comes to the martial area. The Old Yang form has more variety, technique-wise, contains more athletic movements in some parts, is more balanced physically, and in my opinion teaches people to use Taiji in a more aggressive manner. That said, the form alone is not the fighting art of Taiji, nor is it the healing art of Taiji. There are other methods that are used in conjunction with the forms to train in both aspects. In the Old Yang STYLE, there are several fighting forms as well as San Shou training, plus a great many other fighting and training methods that teach a MUCH more brutal and savage and extremely aggressive side of Taiji than is normally seen in those schools that teach the newer Yang style. So in my opinion, for these and a few other reasons, the Old Yang style of Taiji is better. Period. Fault me for that opinion if you wish, but it is nonetheless my opinion.

[patriot]

"Fist Under Elbow, which when done the way it is in YCF's form, HELPS you to gain weight"

Can you please explain the principle behind this statement? What is the evidence? Can you give me a reference?

[Sam Wiley]

I don't quite understand it, myself. However, doing Fist Under Elbow the way it is done in the Old Yang form is supposed to make you lose weight if you are over weight. I don't think it's the posture itself so much as the energy it raises. If you do it the Old Yang way, as a fa-jing movement, you feel energized and want to go out and do things. Doing it the other way, you do not. I experimented with Yang Cheng-fu's form a few months ago, practicing it more than any of my others, to see if it could be used to raise extreme yang energy as some of the others could. While I didn't see that happening, I did notice a lot of weight gain; about 20 pounds. It's coming off slowly now, but only after almost completely eliminating YCF's form from my practice regimen. I may even go so far as to eliminate it completely.

[Sam Wiley]

Oh, and for the record, I was not eating any more than normal, and was not exercising any less otherwise.

[bamboo_ leaf]

Interesting, just some leaf thoughts, :)

I would like to share some insights that I tend to concur with written by Jou, Tsung Hwa. A noted TC historian and practitioner.

He talks about the Yang form and writes his opinion about how the form came about and some of the rational.

“Let us first consider the fact that Yangluchan practiced the Chen I and Chen II to forms for more than twenty years. After that, he finally had enough enlightenment about the daoist philosophy. “Softness can conquer hardness” that is why the yangs forms highest goal is being 100% soft”

I would say that with out traveling the same road it is very foolish to comment on the work of others with out being at or near the same level. We can compare practices ideas and achievements but to comment on the work of past masters with out being close I don’t understand this.

Even the current Yang family standard bears from what I have read never publicly comment negatively about Cheng Man Chings interpretation of the yang form. They just point out for the most part that it is very different and not considered part of the yang family from things that I have read.

As to the practice of different forms I think they can have different effects depending on what you’re looking for. I also think that some can be mistaken and lead far from the path by what looks like obvious use or development of power.

I feel the problem that some people have run into is that what is taught by some the outer from, dose not really reflecting an inner awareness. This can be seen by those that attempt to express fa-jing into what they do with out understanding the inner process or others that are very soft but hollow inside.

This takes much time and dedication to really develop. Even for people looking it’s hard.
You must have some idea of what your looking for and expectations of what it means to call something IMA.


A very interesting but had road for those that travel it.

[wind]

chengman ching's student pushing hands in Taiwai .

www.pushinghand.com

[IronFist]

Eh? Didn't we already have a conversation about losing and gaining weight through various "postures" in taiji? I refuse to practice anything if it's going to screw with my weight.

Iron

[IronFist]

Hmm, is that why a lot of old internal masters were overweight?

Iron

[bamboo_ leaf]

Please define overweight.

By who’s standard?

Thanks for the push hands demo, nice :)

[Zantesuken]

WHERE IS THE PUSH HANDS DEMO?

and it doesn't exactly make you fat but you do gain weight. the stomach part isn't gaining weight but rather your intestines loosening to chi can flow more freely to and fro from ur tan tien

[Kaitain(UK)]

Sam - I can only conclude you've been taught a bad version of the form I study. Or that I have been taught a different version to the standard Yang version.

When I finish the form I'm completely buzzed and wild-eyed - the last thing I feel is lethargic. I'd also say that the form can be performed athletically or not depending on your own preference. Thighs parallel to the floor through the form is fairly athletic, if a little masochistic.

One criticism levelled at the Yang form is that the kicks have all been slowed down - yet I train it both ways and it is far more taxing to perform Sweep Lotus slowly than it is to perform it with whippiness and snap. One tends to improve the other... For me this is true anyway.

Not sure where you're coming from with regards to the applications/aggressiveness side - I'm taught that any application can be Yin or Yang in execution. Aggressiveness is surely down to personality - I'm extremely aggressive with application, as is my instructor. Other students are a bit more subtle. It's preference what someone uses though.

In some ways I guess you are providing an effective 'glass houses' lesson - EM is often lambasted by people (like me in the past) who haven't trained with him or his school. Sam is making sweeping generalisations of the Yang system and I'm feeling indignant..... but he's not even being specific to my instructor

Guess the shoe's on the other foot

[Sam Wiley]

Erle seems to like the Yang Cheng-fu form okay. He doesn't think of it the way I do.

I will admit that I had one instance where my whole body felt energized after doing the form. It took me about an hour or maybe a little less to complete it, in a very low posture I might add, and after I felt almost...I can't think of a word. But it was good. The point is that I feel that way all the time after practicing Yang Lu-chan's form.

I don't see what slow kicks would have to do with anything, though. Half of the kicks in the Old Yang form are slow, the other half snap or whip with fa-jing.