Yang Lu Chan’s big innovation was to take all the various jin’s and hide them away. He figured out a way to make everything less apparent.
I guess that 's why it feels more powerful and less complicated…take nothing away from chen though, because is a devestating style of it’s own
It’s the opposite experience for me,
I’ve never seen a chen practicioner in person.
Yeah.
Sometimes I just get really tired of the Chen Taiji “nutriders” going on all day about only Chen style has the big fa jin…blah blah blah…only Chen style really focuses on fighting . .. . .yawn …only Chen style has Chan si jin really well developed …:rolleyes:
Somehow older and more original = stronger, more practical, yada yadda yada…
How do the two compare/contrast in their manner of bringing a rank beginner to the level of fighting ability?
How much of their methodologies run parallel to each other, and where do they diverge? Why?
Is it being argued that where the two differ is where one acquires the fighting ability?
ON AVERAGE, the chen guys are probably right in that you will ON AVERAGE find more peopel training hard enough to fight among Chen players.
Real practical Yang Style Taiji is probably extremely rare. But that’s just another way of saying it’s really really big among the Taiji “dancers” but is kind of irrelevent to anything particular to the style its self.
Sure, with any martial art you will get a low percentage who are really there to learn how to fight, versus just being there to develop the idea that they are there learning how to fight, which can provide many psychological benefits. And of course physical benefits as well.
And with tai chi, you can throw in a group of people who can get that nice feeling without having to work as hard as the “external” arts.
So, there is probably a smaller percentage of people who are really wishing to develop real fighting skill who study tai chi.
Does it matter if you are there just to practice the art for the sake of enjoying the movements, versus there to really focus on fighting?
Is there a danger of losing what are art was
originally intended for, or is there not also room for other motives to train? Are these considered a threat?
I’ve been a practitioner of Yang style long form for sometime now.
Also know Staff and Sword forms.
I’ve been keeping an eye out for Chen form teachers. It does interest me. Has a stronger military background than Yang.
One of the main differences I’ve noticed between Yang and Chen is wrist movements. Chen incorporates ALOT of wrist action throughout the form.
As for the million dollar question everyone asks regarding Tai Chi… ‘How long does it take to be an accomplished Taijiquan artist?’
Tai Chi trains and conditions the subconscious mind for combat. Once you understand that the subconscious mind takes a long time to teach, you’ll understand how long it takes to become an accomplished Taijiquan artist.
‘Makes you wanna go out and learn Chen style.’
Chris, I dont know if you’ve seen the intro to the film drunken tai chi (with Donnie yen) but if that doesn’t make you want to learn chen then nothing will
Originally posted by Midnight
I’ve been keeping an eye out for Chen form teachers. It does interest me. Has a stronger military background than Yang.
And your basing this on . . . . . . ?
I do happen to place time into the research of the martial arts that interest me you know.
Chen was developed in the 16th century after the fall of the Ming dynasty, and into the early years of the Qing dynasty.
Chen developed this form of tai chi, as type of combat practice.
Yang wasnt derived from Chen style until the 19th century.
So?
16th century or 19th century. All that says is that Chen is older. You still haven’t connected it to the military in any way. You said it had a stronger military background. Tell me what military was using it? What army? What evidence?
What does older have to do with having a more military background?
Actually what I said has complete relevance.
The crashing of the Ming dynasty was a period of military action. Chen was schooled extensively in both militry weaponry and boxing styles. When the civil wars ended and Qing dynasty began, Chen took his combative knowledge and compiled a Tai Chi form from it.
The Yang family on the other hand, developed the yang form not based on personal militry experiences. It was simply derived from the already existing Chen form.
he’s right…chen is traditionally geared more toward combat..I’ll find you some info…but for a begginner western external practioner, yang is probably much more easy to apply…chen is great for combat but until you get “the flow on”, yang has more applications you’ll easily be able to incorperate.
Well, I know I’m going to alienate a lot of people with this post and have held my tongue on this subject ever since I started cruising these boards just for the sake of good relations. But what the hell, it’s just a BBS so here’s a more honest post than I usually put up:
Despite his failure to present any relevent evidence he MAY be right but you are not.
more geared towards combat
Why? Because they stomp around a bit and you can see what their doing better? Because you’ve never met any really highly skilled Yang players? What dod you think Yang style was invented for? A class at the YMCA? Yang Lu Chan, after thouroughly mastering Chen style taijiquan, actually found a way to IMPROVE it. He made it harder to read. He concealed the movements. He made everything more subtle.
for a begginner western external practioner, yang is probably much more easy to apply
This is especially odd. First, what does “western” have to do with anything. Second, seeing as how the moves of Chen style are more obvious and, by the proud admission of many online Chen stylists, more strenuous, it would seem like a more natural transition for an external stylist to make.
Midnight,
What Emperor hired what Chen style teacher to teach troops or use in military combat? Examples please, not apocryphal history. And what do you know of Yang Lu Chan’s background?
I can give at least two examples off the top of my head for Yang style. Yang Lu Chan was hired to teach in the palace and Zhang Xiang Wu, a noted warlord of the Guomindang was also a Yang style lineage holder.
I didn’t say that Chen in any way trained the military. He formed the art sometime after his militry training. I don’t think he could have trained the military. Once having developed the form, it was kept a strict secret to those that lived in his village. No outsider was allowed to learn it. The first one to ever learn from it was the Yang family, in the 19th century.
Yang then took a form that was geared around a time of war and made his own style.
At the Chen Village a variety of arts(Hsing Yi, etc.) were/are practiced and taught.
Chen Wang Ting(he was military) and is said to have hidden in the Village to escape a murder charge where he is said to have created/combined the forms.
The Chen Village was also famous for fighters that they supplied to escort caravans, protection for surrounding villages and similar.
Also some members of the Chen Village studied at Shaolin temple and other sites.
Yang Lu Chan taught at the palace and also at a school outside the palace. It was common for the palace to have PLENTY of Instructors teaching their bodyguards at the same time as they wanted to get as much exposure to as many fighting systems as possible.
I have heard one theory about the differences between Chen and Yang:
Chen fought often armored guys and thus relied more on grabs, throws and similar as they couldn’t do damage through the armor.
The Imperial guards, OTOH, were often faced with unarmed attackers that were traditional court dress and not fighting armor.
Looking at this I would a heavier emphasis on weapons in Chen over Yang and more moves/techniques to get to the kinks of the armor, etc.
Did one person create the whole art, personally I doubt it but rather think that it evolved over generations and later one personage was “designated” as the founder/originator, yes, the same person most likely provided a major contribution.
Will we ever know the answer, I don’t think so nor do I think that it will/should have any impact on your skill.
I am beginning to think the only conflict in opinion here, is being developed based on personal opinion.
I consider the creation of a form, which was built around military tactics. To be a stronger military background then taking the form and teaching some troops. My opinion on the Chen form having a stronger military background is based not on number of troops taught or size of army, but on heritage, and overall creation of the form.
Actually not disagreeing with you at all from what I can tell. I just thought that was a pretty remarkable statement you made. You said it had a “military” background. Something I’ve never heard before and it seemed at odds with Chen’s basic reputation as a village style.
Well…we still disagree on why the 2 styles are as different as they are but we havn’t actually debated that. I assume we disagree there just by some of the implications of your historical assesment.
Can anyone comment on the characteristics of Chen Qing Zhou’s old frame compared to that of the other big Chen style names? It would be appreciated; thanks.