different styles of Tai Chi

[tshadowchaser]

I know there are at least 5 different styles of Tai chi. I would like those of you that practice more than one of these styles why you practice more than one, and to compare what you find to be the major differences in them
Do you find drawbacks in anyof them that bother you in any way

 

[pete]

I started my Tai Chi practice with the Yang short form, but eventually found a lack of compatibility with my instructor. While searching for a new teacher, i continued practicing alone using the Terry Dunn tape.

I then began taking instruction with Master William Ting, who I found to be an excellent teacher, however, he teaches a lesser known style called Wu Ji, which he brought with him from China.

From my first group class, and now though many private lessons, weekends, and seminars, i have become immersed into this style, and not only enjoy the form, but more over the characteristics that make it unique... its push hands and "4 corners" are a little different, as is its integration with Bagua (Pa-kua) walking to add a unique component not found in other styles. There is also a beautiful Sword form.

I love the style, and the emphasis on the martial applications and chin-na techniques we practice, but it is probably more attributable to the quality of the teacher than the style itself. Master Ting is a complete teacher of this art.

I do occasionally look back at the Terry Dunn tapes and "go through" the Yang form to retain the movements, more for the purpose of having it as a point of reference for the day i may begin teaching. I will remain with the WU JI style, but it is likely since Yang is so popular that a student may come in to a class with some background in Yang, and it may help for me to remain 'somewhat' familiar with the form.

pete.

 

[Taiji fan]

I have always been involved in Yang, though a number of variations. I started off with the Cheng Man Ching form...although not taught in the CMC style, instead it was performed in the manner of the simplified form.....I did later study with a senior disciple of CMC though. I also worked with the 24 simplified form for a number of years but it was only when studying with a teacher of Yang family taijiquan that I came to realise how lacking in any depth the variations were, in fact I would hesitate to really call either of them taijiquan, they are more like musical movement. No emphasis was placed on correct foot work or body structure, except some rubbish that my first teacher made up The simplified form emphasises 'holding the ball' which is very bad practise in taijiquan. I haven't felt the need or desire to study any other styles of taijiquan yet........it took long enough to find a knowledgeable teacher of Yang style.

 

[Ninway J]

Originally posted by Taiji fan
The simplified form emphasises 'holding the ball' which is very bad practise in taijiquan.

Why is it bad practice? I'm guessing your talking about one of the first few postures in Yang style? Or are you talking about a certain concept?

 

[Taiji fan]

Why is it bad practice? I'm guessing your talking about one of the first few postures in Yang style? Or are you talking about a certain concept?

I am talking about the concept....throughout incorectly taught Yang style forms, students are encouraged to 'hold the ball' as part of a transition move. This causes a break in the energy and a violation of the basic prinples or unite upper and lower body as the hands then become static. It also renders the application useless......when you look at taijiquan is is laregly based on joint manipulation the position of the hands is extremely precise, based on the hold you have on your opponant.....as soon as your hands become static in a ball holding posture, it is no longer taijiquan, just a series of movemnts that looks similar.

 

[7starmantis]

Its not allways done in a static position, so don't write off the concept as bad, because someone has done it wrong.

7sm

 

[Taiji fan]

the moment the ball holding position is adopted it is incorrect. Thats why the concept is wrong, not just that someone has done it badly. In Trad Yang Taijiquan...holding the ball does not exsist...the the government produced 24 step simplified form ( claimed to be based on Yang style) it is encouraged.

 

[lvwhitebir]

Originally posted by Taiji fan
the moment the ball holding position is adopted it is incorrect. Thats why the concept is wrong, not just that someone has done it badly. In Trad Yang Taijiquan...holding the ball does not exsist...the the government produced 24 step simplified form ( claimed to be based on Yang style) it is encouraged.

Wayyyyy off topic, but...

Hmmm... it's all over the place in my Long Form. I've even seen it in books (I'll check my Yang Jwing Ming book to be sure) that aren't Short Form books. According to what I'm taught, no move in Tai Chi is "static," they're all transition moves. In my Long Form it's a transition primarily into Parting the Wild Horse's Mane and Fair Lady Works at Shuttles. It's also used a few times transitioning into Grasping the Swallows Tail.

You make a very bold and definite statement. What proof do you have that it's not traditional and that it's wrong to do it?

WhiteBirch

 

[Taiji fan]

it's all over the place in my Long Form. I've even seen it in books (I'll check my Yang Jwing Ming book to be sure)

I know, its all over the place

The thing with transitional moves is that they are still part of the application, holding the ball is neither a transitory move nor an application. All it does is encourage the separation of the upper and lower body.

You make a very bold and definite statement. What proof do you have that it's not traditional and that it's wrong to do it?

well lets put it this way, I believe that the founders of my art know what they are talking about, I respect the years of refinement and development they have out in, so when the lineage holder of the art, (who is a grandson of the man resonsible for most of the bio mechanical development in Yang style....Yang Cheng Fu) says there is no ball holding posture in Yang style Taijiquan and cites the reasons being that the energy is inturupted, that there is no unity between upper and lower body that continuity of movement is broken, that understanding the arms and legs....one part moves all parts move....has not been achieved.....I respect his authority on the subject. When I talk about traditional Yang I am not talking of anyone elses variation (Yang Zwing Ming's, Earl Montaigue's, John Ding's, my ex teacher etc etc) I am talking about Yang family taijiquan as taught by the Yang family, most specifically Mr Yang Zhen Ji.

This is not my personal opinion on the subject, but part of a much wider problem in taijiquan where there are now so many variations on a theme that much correct practice has gone by the wayside and trying to get to the genuine article is a journey frought with many inaccuracies.:asian:

 

[pete]

nice to see you've cornered the market on accuracy!artyon:
next step: world domination %-}

let's try to get back to the question of why people practice different styles...

 

[Taiji fan]

I thought I had answered that question......till I got jumped on!

 

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by Taiji fan
I thought I had answered that question......till I got jumped on!

No one is jumping on you, but you didn't provide any proof aside from what you say. I'm not saying your wrong, just didn't provide proof when asked. Aside from that, it seems you feel as if you are an authority on the subject of all taiji. To authoritativly say that what someone is practicing is not valid is a strong statement to make expecially from not having seen it done.

7sm

 

[Taiji fan]

but you didn't provide any proof aside from what you say

proof such as?.......If you follow trad. Yang, the proof you require is in the practice of the style and understanding of the 10 essences. The 10 essences are the 'rules' for correct practice.......

seems you feel as if you are an authority on the subject of all taiji

nope I never said I was an authority on the subject of taiji. I am a student of tradtional Yang with a direct lineage teacher who has spent the last 9 years studying with the Yangs, both in China and when they are in the US.

To authoritativly say that what someone is practicing is not valid is a strong statement to make expecially from not having seen it done.

I don't need to see it done, if you are going through your form an using a 'ball holding posture' in transitions then I know you are practising incorrectly as far as Traditional Yang family taijiquan is concerned. At no point in the taiji forms applications do the palms face each other in a holding ball posture. This is what the Yangs teach.

 

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by Taiji fan
proof such as?.......If you follow trad. Yang, the proof you require is in the practice of the style and understanding of the 10 essences. The 10 essences are the 'rules' for correct practice.......

Thats still not any proof of what you are saying. To say, "I'm correct" and to provide proof of being correct are two different things. Proof could be an article written by one of the Yangs saying what you are saying. Maybe a video by them which states what you say. See what I mean by proof?

Originally posted by Taiji fan
nope I never said I was an authority on the subject of taiji. I am a student of tradtional Yang with a direct lineage teacher who has spent the last 9 years studying with the Yangs, both in China and when they are in the US.

Its funny that we both have teachers who teach traditional Yang style and yet they teach differently. I agree that most people who use that posture make it incorrect, but doing it correctly takes care of the problems you mentioned. My sifu has been stufying trad Yang for 20+ years both in china and the US. Studying with the Yangs as well. My Sigung for even longer. Now, we can make this a "my sifu can beat your sifu" thread, but I would rather not. You are writing off people as invalid from something you have no knowledge of. It is most often done incorrectly, but can have an advanced application if done correctly. Your saying done at all, it is wrong. Thats a strong statement. I'm saying done correctly, it is correct.

7sm

 

[Taiji fan]

It is most often done incorrectly, but can have an advanced application if done correctly. Your saying done at all, it is wrong. Thats a strong statement. I'm saying done correctly, it is correct.

then we will have to agree to disagree. I am sorry that you feel the only proof can come within a written statement or video......I do not have a translated copy of Mr Zhen Ji's book. I have only the spoken word of Mr Zhen Duo who at a seminar said to the participants.

this question was asked on another message board, based on someone elses experience at a similar seminar.........

I’ve been thinking about what is commonly referred to in taijiquan as the “ball-holding position”. At a taijiquan and sword seminar I attended last July, Master Yang Zhenduo remarked that this is not really a traditional concept in taijiquan, but a modern development. He pointed to some problems in the ball-holding idea, asking “How big is this ball? What kind of ball is it? What are you doing with this ball?” He further illustrated that in many of the close-up positions, the palms of the hands do not in fact face one another as though holding a ball, and that trying to model one’s posture too rigidly on the notion of holding a ball will result in a distorted form.

from the essences....

7. Synchronize Upper and Lower Body..........In the taiji classics 'Synchronize Upper and Lower Body is expressed as: "With its root in the foot, emitting from the leg, governed by the waist, manifesting in the hands and fingers - from feet to legs to waist - complete everything in one impulse." * When hands move, the waist moves and legs move, and the gaze moves along with them. Only then can we say upper and lower body are synchronized. If one part doesn't move then it is not coordinated with the rest.

I agree that most people who use that posture make it incorrect, but doing it correctly takes care of the problems you mentioned

so enlighten me how you make correct a static position of the hands while in keeping with the essences? I have given you (repeatedly) my reasons for it being incorrect, how about you give your tuppence worth as to why you feel its correct to hold a ball?

 

[lvwhitebir]

I don't currently practice multiple styles of Tai Chi. I still feel I have a lot to learn from Yang Style and want to continue with that. But, I am learning other internal styles such as Liu He Ba Fa and Bagua. I think learning anything different helps to solidify what you already have learned.


Now back to your regularly scheduled argument...

Originally posted by Taiji fan
then we will have to agree to disagree. I am sorry that you feel the only proof can come within a written statement or video......

Without anything more than than your word, it's a he-said-she-said argument; a you're-wrong-because-I-said-so argument.. We'll have to disagree because I was taught differently.

Originally posted by Taiji fan
so enlighten me how you make correct a static position of the hands while in keeping with the essences? I have given you (repeatedly) my reasons for it being incorrect, how about you give your tuppence worth as to why you feel its correct to hold a ball?

1. I have been taught that nothing in the form is a static position. IMO if you're in a static position then you're not doing Yang Style Tai Chi. If it's not static then it doesn't break the rule. Therefore there's nothing wrong with the "Holding the ball" posture. Your witness counselor...

2. It's correct to hold a ball because I was taught that way. I have nothing telling me that the form I practice is is incorrect and I have several sources that have the same posture in their form. You are the one who said everyone is wrong, so the burden of proof is on you.

I really don't care about the outcome of this argument, so we can leave this here or put it into a new thread. It sounds like the bad joke of "How many Tai Chi students does it take to change a light bulb? 101. 1 to change it and 100 to stand around saying that we do it differently."

I just don't like blanket statements from people saying that everyone else is doing it wrong without anything to back it up. If you do the form differently, great! There's a lot to be said about variety. In the big picture, does it matter if one form differs from another? Does it make it any more "correct?" If so, then I think everyone's gotta be wrong because I don't believe two people can do the same form the exact same way.

WhiteBirch

 

[Taiji fan]

It's correct to hold a ball because I was taught that way. I have nothing telling me that the form I practice is is incorrect and I have several sources that have the same posture in their form. You are the one who said everyone is wrong, so the burden of proof is on you

I have quoted the experience of someone else who worked with Yang Zhen Duo, I have given you the very precise essence that this relates to and the reasons why holding the ball is incorrect.....what more proof do you want? I also have had incorrect instruction from teachers and read contradictory texts based on poor western translation, so unless your teacher works closely with the Yangs I can imagine that certain aspects that they emphasise may not have come your way.

bad joke of "How many Tai Chi students does it take to change a light bulb? 101. 1 to change it and 100 to stand around saying that we do it differently."

you are right that is a bad joke and partly why taijiquan is in such a state, there is way to much 'personal interpretation' making to many differences.

I just don't like blanket statements from people saying that everyone else is doing it wrong without anything to back it up. If you do the form differently, great! There's a lot to be said about variety. In the big picture, does it matter if one form differs from another? Does it make it any more "correct?" If so, then I think everyone's gotta be wrong because I don't believe two people can do the same form the exact same way.

I have backed it up and yes it does matter if one persons form differs from anothers. There may be differences in peoples ability, but everyones form should still follow the biomechanical rules and essences. A bow stance is the same for everyone as it should be hip width....it doesn't matter what the difference in size individual peoples hips are....hip width is hip width. The spine is aligned the neck is connected, the shoulder and hip Kua's are sunk, the spirit is raised, the form is continuous in motion and there is no bl00dy ball

just out of curiosity who are you learning Liu He Ba Fa with? A mate of mine studied it for a while a number of years ago.

 

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by Taiji fan
so enlighten me how you make correct a static position of the hands while in keeping with the essences? I have given you (repeatedly) my reasons for it being incorrect, how about you give your tuppence worth as to why you feel its correct to hold a ball?

First off, I said it was wrong to have any static position, so I'm not trying to defend any static stance. Remember I said "if done correctly". Why is it you think all "holding the ball" positions are the same, palms facing each other? Thats not the case.

7sm

 

[Makalakumu]

Kind of a funny story...

I've studied tai chi with three different instructors. Each instructor has had some dude come off the street and ask for a demonstration. Two of them got their butts whipped. One didn't. I do push hands with the attacker (who has now learned to yeild) on a regular basis. Consequently, the tai chi instructor who I have stayed with over the years in my current one.

And he "holds the ball"... Unless its a trick and they reteach everything when you become a confidant...

 

[lvwhitebir]

Originally posted by Taiji fan
just out of curiosity who are you learning Liu He Ba Fa with?

I studied with a woman named Jenny Lamm (I believe I remember her name correctly) in the Washington DC area.

WhiteBirch