Chen and Yang styles are different?

[Lambert]

Greetings Sifu,
I studied under Sifu Andrew Lum in Hawaii over 20 years ago. I believe he taught us a variant of the Chen Man Ching Yang style ( I recall a lot of moves "down low.") I only got half way through before moving. Now that I am retired I would like to restart my study of Tai Chi but had some questions I would like to ask here.
There is no local sifu in my area ( western NY) Would you comment on instructional DVDs as an option to learning Tai Chi? While I have read your posts on the differences between Chen and Yang styles, which would you recommend for me? My other martial arts background is a year and a half in Kenpo under master Godin in Hawaii. To quote from an earlier post; I have no interest in standing around in a circle in tie dyed garb moving to a candle and soft music of a vaguely eastern origin. I am looking for a sound style with good movement with a strong background in the martial arts. Would you also give your recommendations on a source to purchase those instructional DVDs?
thank you in advance for your help.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Greetings Sifu,
I studied under Sifu Andrew Lum in Hawaii over 20 years ago. I believe he taught us a variant of the Chen Man Ching Yang style ( I recall a lot of moves "down low.") I only got half way through before moving. Now that I am retired I would like to restart my study of Tai Chi but had some questions I would like to ask here.
There is no local sifu in my area ( western NY) Would you comment on instructional DVDs as an option to learning Tai Chi? While I have read your posts on the differences between Chen and Yang styles, which would you recommend for me? My other martial arts background is a year and a half in Kenpo under master Godin in Hawaii. To quote from an earlier post; I have no interest in standing around in a circle in tie dyed garb moving to a candle and soft music of a vaguely eastern origin. I am looking for a sound style with good movement with a strong background in the martial arts. Would you also give your recommendations on a source to purchase those instructional DVDs?
thank you in advance for your help.

If you’re talking to me I am not a Sifu, Xue will do. If you’re talking to someone else please forgive my intrusion.

Western NY covers a lot of ground, near any particular city? If you do not want to post it PM me if you like.

Either style has martial arts in it, Chen tends to be lower stances more Qinna and more obvious fajiing. But don't let Yang fool you a good Yang teacher is very effective as well.

I will have to check but I think there may be a Chen guy around Rochester, but I am not 100% sure. And there use to be and may still be a Traditional Yang School in Buffalo but I have no idea what it is like.

Also depending on how close you are to the Canadian border the Wu family is in Ontario I believe.

Maybe this will help a little towards you're decision

Yang Style
http://www.answers.com/topic/yang-style-tai-chi-chuan

http://www.yangfamilytaichi.com/splash

Chen Style

http://www.answers.com/topic/chen-style-tai-chi-chuan

http://www.chenxiaowang.com/

Chen Zhenglei also has a website but I cannot currently locate it

Also look for Chen Xiaowang or Chen Zhenglei seminars that might be close to your area.

Tai Chi
http://www.answers.com/topic/tai-chi-chuan-2

Tai Chi Network
http://www.taichinetwork.org/list_search.cfm

 

[marlon]

i read recently that Yang lu Chang changed his tài c`hi that he taught at court so the Manchu`s would not have it and that now there is only exercise tài c`hi left from the Yangs and the original form has been lost. This seems very wrong and perhaps i misunderstood the wording (from the preface of the book Tài C`hi Classics by someone with the initials W.L. Even if the court story is true the original form should be a Chen form, no? I am knew to Tai Chi so forgive my ignorance

Respectfully,
Marlon

 

[Xue Sheng]

i read recently that Yang lu Chang changed his tài c`hi that he taught at court so the Manchu`s would not have it and that now there is only exercise tài c`hi left from the Yangs and the original form has been lost. This seems very wrong and perhaps i misunderstood the wording (from the preface of the book Tài C`hi Classics by someone with the initials W.L. Even if the court story is true the original form should be a Chen form, no? I am knew to Tai Chi so forgive my ignorance

Respectfully,
Marlon

If the martial art of Yang is lost then why can my Sifu through me around like a rag doll when he is half my size? :uhyeah:

Yes Chen is the original Tai Chi as we know Tai Chi today, but some Zhaobao people dispute this.

Yang Luchan's son Yang Banhou was an accomplished Yang style fighter as were Banhou's Nephews Shouhao and Chengfu. Chengfu changed the family style to what we see as Yang style today. Chengfu taught Tung Ying Chieh who taught my Sifu who taught me and I have been taught the martial arts of it.

But I must apologize, to answer your question completely would take a very long post and I do not have time for it right now. If Eastwinds see this he can respond further.


Also if the martial arts of it were lost after Luchan then Wu style, Hao style, Tung/Dong style and Cheng Manching style would also be sans MA and that is not true.

But Luchan's form was first changed by his 3rd son Yang Jian Hou and later changed further by his son Chengfu

Yang Shao Hou (Chengfu's older brother) learned from Yang Banhou (Chengfu's Uncle) so it is much closer to the original Yang family style of Luchan (Banhou and Jain Hou's father), but this version of the Yang family style is incredibly rare today.

What has happened is that Chengfu had a WHOLE lot of students and it is practically impossible to confirm all that claim a connection to the Yang family. And then there was developed the Beijing (Yang) 24 form that really had nothing to do with the family. This leave you with a whole lot of alleged yang style schools that really are not.

The Chen family has maintained a MUCH tighter grip on who is and who is not teaching real Chen style. But then there are fewer people that have learned Chen.

But sadly there is some truth to what you say, but it is happening now. Many tai chi schools are not teaching the martial arts side much if at all and martial tai chi is dying.

And this was the short answer.

Yang Family Information
http://www.yangfamilytaichi.com/yang/history/

 

[Lambert]

First, thank you Xue Sheng for your help. I did spend some time looking around at the links you sent me. The Rochester Tai Chi Chuan Center runs classes in BOTH William C.C. Cheng Yang style and what they call Chen Pang-Lin style. I do not pretend to understand the differences between them but will attend an open house this weekend and see what I can learn. From their own descriptions, they are heavily focused on Tai Chi' martial arts applications. Any light you may be able to shed here on their differences would be appreciated as well. I have read many of this forum's discussions about stylistic differences. I can only conclude so far that I have way too much information. WIll let you know how it goes, many thanks again!

 

[Xue Sheng]

If the teacher is a student of William C.C. Chen check his sight to see if he is an approved teacher. If so I have great faith that they will teach the martial arts side well.

William CC Chen was a student of Cheng Manching who was a student of Yang Chengfu. However Cheng Manching changed the form considerably, to a point where I would not call it Yang style nor does the Yang family. I call it Cheng Manching style, but I like it and as taught by William CC Chen I like it a whole lot.

http://www.williamccchen.com/

Chen Pan Ling trained Shaolin styles from his father and also studied Yang style with Yang Shaohao as well as training Wu and Chen styles. He was also trained in Xingyi and Bagua. If you want more I may have it at home in an old book somewhere, but I will need to look for it.

http://rtccc.hypermart.net/cplstory.shtml

Chen Pan Ling, what little I know of it, is a conglomerate of at least Yang, Wu and Chen. But I know little else about it.

 

[East Winds]

Marlon,

Xue Sheng has pretty much summed it up very well. There is a huge disparity in Yang style teaching and I agree with Xue's take on how that came about. However the current Yang family do teach the martial side and they tend to call their system Traditional Yang Family Taijiquan to distinguish from much of the rubbish masquerading as Yang style. The current form (taught by Yang Zhen Ji, Yang Zhen Duo and Yang Jun) is exactly what Yang Cheng-fu left us as his final form. This can be proved by looking at films of Yang Shaou Hou, Chen Wei Ming, Fu Zhong Wen and Tung Ying Chieh. Cheng fu said of this final form "That is it. It cannot be improved upon. To change one thing would be to lose the essence of the form" . Cheng Manching of course did just that!!!!

Very best wishes

 

[grydth]

What specific misdeed(s) are you accusing "Cheng Manching" of?

 

[East Winds]

grydth,

I'm not accusing Cheng Manching of anything. When Cheng-fu said "....to change one thing would be to lose the essence of the form" he was stating just that. Change one thing and it would no longer be Yang style. I place Cheng Manching in the same league as Wu Chan Yu or Sun Lu Tang. They created a new system that had its roots in Yang. Cheng Manching style is just that - Cheng Manching style - it is not Yang. I have a great deal of respect for Cheng Manching style, there are many practitioners here in Scotland, but Manching changed so many principles from Cheng-fu's form that it is now a different system. I also hear now that someone wants to change the Manching form to add other parts to it? Will it still be Cheng Manching form?

Very best wishes

 

[Xue Sheng]

grydth,

I'm not accusing Cheng Manching of anything. When Cheng-fu said "....to change one thing would be to lose the essence of the form" he was stating just that. Change one thing and it would no longer be Yang style. I place Cheng Manching in the same league as Wu Chan Yu or Sun Lu Tang. They created a new system that had its roots in Yang. Cheng Manching style is just that - Cheng Manching style - it is not Yang. I have a great deal of respect for Cheng Manching style, there are many practitioners here in Scotland, but Manching changed so many principles from Cheng-fu's form that it is now a different system. I also hear now that someone wants to change the Manching form to add other parts to it? Will it still be Cheng Manching form?

Very best wishes

I agree with this.

I am a big fan of Cheng Manching style but I would not call it Yang style anymore than I would call Zhaobao, Yang, Wu, Wu/Hao or Sun style Chen. They all come from Chen they are all good styles but they are not Chen. Same with Cheng Manching and Yang.

MY Sifu learned from Tung and he teaches Yang style but some of what he teaches is not Yang style it is Tung style. The Tung/Dong family does the same thing these days. They teach Yang style but they also have thier own family style that they label as such.

 

[marlon]

Marlon,

Xue Sheng has pretty much summed it up very well. There is a huge disparity in Yang style teaching and I agree with Xue's take on how that came about. However the current Yang family do teach the martial side and they tend to call their system Traditional Yang Family Taijiquan to distinguish from much of the rubbish masquerading as Yang style. The current form (taught by Yang Zhen Ji, Yang Zhen Duo and Yang Jun) is exactly what Yang Cheng-fu left us as his final form. This can be proved by looking at films of Yang Shaou Hou, Chen Wei Ming, Fu Zhong Wen and Tung Ying Chieh. Cheng fu said of this final form "That is it. It cannot be improved upon. To change one thing would be to lose the essence of the form" . Cheng Manching of course did just that!!!!

Very best wishes

Interesting. i have seen Yang Jun do the form on You Tube and apparently it is different from what is now being taught. i know a student of a certified teacher (Serggio) in Montreal. The student corrected my movements considerably stating that that is the old way. I can understand returning to the original form but not saying that this is what the familty has always taught because...
sorry i began poloiticing forget it
marlon

 

[Xue Sheng]

Interesting. i have seen Yang Jun do the form on You Tube and apparently it is different from what is now being taught. i know a student of a certified teacher (Serggio) in Montreal. The student corrected my movements considerably stating that that is the old way. I can understand returning to the original form but not saying that this is what the familty has always taught because...
sorry i began poloiticing forget it
marlon

What Yang Luchan, Yang Banhou and Yang Shaohou and any of the Yang family that came before Shaohou taught and practiced was different than what Yang Jian Hou ended up training and teaching and all were different than what Chengfu ended up teaching and training.

What Chengfu taught is what the Yang family teaches today.

Originally it was higher and more compact then it got a bit lower and wider and then lower yet again and wider still.

The only person I know of that currently claims lineage to Banhou, that I believe, is Yang Jwing Ming. That does not mean that there are not others.

If I may ask who certified (Serggio) in Montreal

 

[Xue Sheng]

And I do not know why I did no tpost this much sooner

Chen and Yang styles are different? You be the judge

I beleive both of the Chen forms are Chen Xiaowang

Cxw laojia Yilu (old form 1)

Cxw laojia erlu (old form 2)

Yang Jun

Yang Taiji, Master Yang Jun, 1 part, 103 form

Yang Taiji, Master Yang Jun, 2 part, 103 form

 

[grydth]

I agree with this.

I am a big fan of Cheng Manching style but I would not call it Yang style anymore than I would call Zhaobao, Yang, Wu, Wu/Hao or Sun style Chen. They all come from Chen they are all good styles but they are not Chen. Same with Cheng Manching and Yang.

MY Sifu learned from Tung and he teaches Yang style but some of what he teaches is not Yang style it is Tung style. The Tung/Dong family does the same thing these days. They teach Yang style but they also have thier own family style that they label as such.

Well, I cannot take offense with, or disagree with, the sentiments either of you personally express...... but are neither of you troubled by the quote of Yang Cheng Fu? To me it illustrates that even great individuals can have questionable ideas and sayings. Perhaps I am interpreting it incorrectly?

 

[Xue Sheng]

... but are neither of you troubled by the quote of Yang Cheng Fu? To me it illustrates that even great individuals can have questionable ideas and sayings. Perhaps I am interpreting it incorrectly?

Not bothered by it nor do I agree with it, nor have I heard that he said that before. He also died saying that there should be a fast form in Yang style and was working on it, but died before it was much more then in the early stages of development. So how complete did he really feel the system was?

 

[grydth]

themadbuddha,

Sounds like your sister found the Taoist Tai Chi Society!!!! Your description fits them perfectly!!! :erg:

Avoid at all costs.

Very best wishes

Does anyone know the full story on this so called Taoist Tai Chi Society? I note you are writing from Scotland, but I'm in upstate New York and they are here, too!

A friend visited the local society office once, and was told all they had was a 108 posture form and he was handed some type of contract. This document included a no competition clause. Other than small ads on the back page of our weekly paper one does not hear too much of them....the library system here purports to offer opportunities to learn Tai Chi - but it is on closer inspection, "Tai Chi Chih"...... talk about things to avoid!

 

[grydth]

Not bothered by it nor do I agree with it, nor have I heard that he said that before. He also died saying that there should be a fast form in Yang style and was working on it, but died before it was much more then in the early stages of development. So how complete did he really feel the system was?

But I would ask both you and East Winds this:

It is a given that humility and a continuing willingness to learn and improve are vital for all martial artists, from beginner to very learned.....

Are not these traits also vital, perhaps even more so, for system founders? Does the Yang Cheng Fu quote - and for discussion purposes I accept its accuracy - demonstrate these?

 

[Xue Sheng]

But I would ask both you and East Winds this:

It is a given that humility and a continuing willingness to learn and improve are vital for all martial artists, from beginner to very learned.....

Are not these traits also vital, perhaps even more so, for system founders? Does the Yang Cheng Fu quote - and for discussion purposes I accept its accuracy - demonstrate these?

I cannot accept the Yang Chengfu quote as accurate because I have no confirmation that it is. To discuss something that I do not know is valid or not is to me pointless. We could just as easily have a discussion about what would the world be like if the Yeti was proven to exist. So therefore I will not discuss a quote as accurate when I am not sure that it is.

As I have already said, I have not heard that he said this before and I also have said that he was working on a Yang Style fast form, (which was finished by his student Tung Ying Chieh) therefore I do not think that he believed that was it for Yang style. If he did then, at least to me, he would have seen no need for the development of a fast form.

If this is a quote from the Yang Family I do not agree with it and in an attempt to be diplomatic I will not comment further on this in an open post. I would be happy to PM you my thoughts on this if you so desire. (And no I am not angry or upset in anyway just attempting to be diplomatic for a change, something new for me)

And all martial arts evolve, some for the better, some for the worse.

 

[grydth]

I would enjoy discussing this, I consider it a worthy topic on what we expect of our Founders and system heads...... perhaps if East Winds will cite the source we can proceed.....

 

[East Winds]

grydth,

The Taoist Tai Chi Society are a registered charity. Their Instructors teach for no fee. You can become an "Instructor" in as little as 18 months of starting to learn and be let loose on an unsupecting public. Instructors are expressly forbidden to take part in any other form of Tai Chi or to discuss or participate in any form of martial expression. Having said that, they purport to teach Sword, Sabre, Xing-Yi and Liu Ho Pa Fa. (Without any martial intention??????) :erg: Although these are usually taught under the auspices of sister organisations Fung Loy Kock and Gei Pang. The founder the late Moy Lin Shin claimed to be a Taoist monk from mainland China but spoke Cantonese. It was originally claimed that the form they taught was developed by Moy from ancient teachings he received in his monastery. However they now concede that it is the Yang family long form modified slightly by Moy. You are required to join the Society and pay a monthly fee whether you attend classses or not.

I could write more, but I think the above says enough to give you a flavour of what they are doing.

Very best wishes