I am wondering which Chen style DVD’s featuring applications are good by people who have the quality of Chen XiaoWang? I would like to show various people some Chen DVD’s and say “this is good quality Chen style Tai Chi.” For forms I like Chen XiaWang but also don’t know which DVD or tape is good for that.
Ray
Chenyu, son of Chen Zhaokui (grandson of Chen Fa ke):
http://www.taijigongfu.com/chenyupreview.html
http://www.taijigongfu.com/chenyuerlu.html
http://www.taijigongfu.com/products.html
I have not seen a better Chen Taijiquan application video offering yet, but I am rather biased.
Is it true that Chen Yu’s students did very poorly in form and pushhand competitions? That’s what I read recently in another discussion board.
Yer not that biased, Mo… CXW’s vids were rather disappointing, IMO. I think Chen Yu is better overall, actually. Alot of people give CXW way too much lip service because he’s the “GRANDmaster” :rolleyes:
Actually, there is no “grandmaster”. Notice how several or them, Chen Zhenglei, and Zhu Tian Cai as well are being referred to as “grandmaster” as well these days?
Originally such a title would have referred to a “head” of the clan or head of the fist lineage, which in this case there is none anymore. Certainly it is not Chenxiaowang, skilled as he may be, there is no ONE leader of anything in Chen’s fist since Chen FaKe and the 1949 revolution.
If a rumor of the success or failure of anonymous students efforts in unknown tournaments relieves me of the need to put DVD’s in the mail to ya, I think I can survive the break, no problem.
To my knowledge, Chenyu’s discs have the most (by a large margin) applications and method revealed on video of any authentic Chen practitioners…
Besides which the methods shown are solely Chen taijiquan methods, actually work, and are not imaginary.. no one is playing along. Every person who has seen these DVDs has been very impressed, I am pretty sure there is nothing even close to this available to the public and this probably should not be either in my opinion.
Weather a teachers students lose or win really doesn’t matter much, at least they are out there getting experiences that they feel they need and the teacher is allowing them to do so.
Compare and judge for your self. the only real reliable way has and has always been by first hand experience which in gen. Only serious people seek out and find. Teachers like Chen Yu and others are very kind to share their knowledge through the medium of DVD and such, others such as my own teacher prefer to remain quite, this I respect and understand.
For those teaches openly sharing people should be very thankful.
"Actually, there is no “grandmaster”. Notice how several or them, Chen Zhenglei, and Zhu Tian Cai as well are being referred to as “grandmaster” as well these days?
Originally such a title would have referred to a “head” of the clan or head of the fist lineage, which in this case there is none anymore. Certainly it is not Chenxiaowang, skilled as he may be, there is no ONE leader of anything in Chen’s fist since Chen FaKe and t"he 1949 revolution."
These teachers are recognized as such by their peers and by the other practitioners of their art, as well as the government, FWIW. This is your opinion, not established fact.
It would behoove you to stop trying to build up your teachers rep by denegrating others. Show some wu de.
"a rumor of the success or failure of anonymous students efforts in unknown tournaments "
I’ve read the post again. The students were Chen Yu’s disciples and the Tournament is the newer version of the Chen Village Tournament, which is the premiere Tai Chi tournament in China, especially for Chen style.
Why would Chen Yu want to enter some third-rate students to an ‘unknown’ student and to lose? Be real Mo Ling!
"a rumor of the success or failure of anonymous students efforts in unknown tournaments "
I’ve read the post again. The students were Chen Yu’s disciples and the Tournament is the newer version of the Chen Village Tournament, which is the premiere Tai Chi tournament in China, especially for Chen style.
Why would Chen Yu want to enter some third-rate students to an ‘unknown’ tournament and to lose? Get real Mo Ling!
“It would behoove you to stop trying to build up your teachers rep by denegrating others. Show some wu de.”
Herb,
Would you take a moment amidst your complaint to specify.. here… in what way, in what words did I denigrate ANYONE?
Were you referring to the fact that expressed that I think Chenyu’s video offerings are the best available? I honestly think that is the case, and expressing that has nothing to do with Wu De, but everything to do with the quality of material or willingness to share on video format, but you may not have seen this material, have you?
If that is not what upset you, then regarding grandmasters, again, there aren’t any.. whatever the government says, but you, like me are entitled to your opinion arent you?
Do you think this meaning, this use of the term grandmaster (in chinese- dashi) is anything but totally modern? Since when was it up to the government to determine this stuff 
My statements here are coming from a study of Chinese language and history.
If I am wrong, I would be interested to be shown how, but that wont be because the PRC said it is so, nor because someone decided to use this term this way in the last 15 years and people agreed because it was good for marketing. You want to say I am wrong, I am happy to be shown the truth, please convince me.
Now, if you can cite who or what I have denigrated, I’ll read it, otherwise are you just feeling competitive? This has absolutely nothing to do with the skill level of people like CXW, CZL etc… no need to get defensive, everyone knows they are very good.
Mr. Shrub,
This subject is not important to me, and I am not sure why it is to you. I am personally aware of Chen Yu’s skill level so I dont rely on this type of information to clarify it.
Mr. Mo Ling,
You can’t have it both ways.
On one hand, you are constantly telling people you are the absolute authority by virtue of your association with Chen Yu. On the other hand, you so quickly want to dissociate yourself from your fellow disciples on a minor setback. I think that shows very poorly on your character and a total disrespect and disloyalty to your fellow students. Do you think you are better than them and you could have done better?
Although I have no direct knowledge of Chen Yu’s skill, I assume he is very good. I particularly admire his humility in actually openly admitting to the poor results in the competition. That is one quality that is totally lacking in you.
Shrub-little troll…
I would not care if all of Chenyu’s disciples that I know failed in the greatest tournament in the world, I would still value them as friends. I am not hiding anything regarding this alleged tournament, I simply dont know about it, was not there, and it does not effect my views on Chenyu.
seeing as you said “I particularly admire his humility…That is one quality that is totally lacking in you.”
You are interested in humility? open-ness? then show some humility and open-ness and state your name, school affilliation and experience… Unless you have some personal agenda hiding in the shadows to such a degree that you must repeatedly push this topic that no one but yourself finds important on a clearly totally unrelated thread
you may show your troll-ness by not answering
lost my response
I typed up a lengthy response to Marin’s defense of his post, and apparently it got eaten by my browser. Which is just as well. I’ve already made my point, and arguing gets one nowhere.
Mo Ling is resorting to his name-calling trick again. I’ve also made my point. So there. The end.
Well, true, arguing get us no where, but you owe me an opology or at least an acknowledgement. I have NOT insulted or denigrated any of your teachers, or any other teacher in this thread.
I simply stated my view regarding what is offered on Chenyu’s DVD.
And this: “there is no ONE leader of anything in Chen’s fist since Chen FaKe and the 1949 revolution.” and “grandmaster” as a term did not mean what it does here in the states until recently.
Perhaps you are just totally misunderstanding, or perhaps you are just trying to manage a market presence, I have no idea. Either way, if you want to come online and publically critique my “wu de” then you ought to have the decency to clarify and respond.
Regarding argument, if you start an argument by criticizing someone else (without clarifying why or even what) then dont feel the need to clarify, that is just plain obnoxious, regardless of the motive.
“arguing gets one nowhere”, (but apparently vague critique does) and you have made your point, in a very childish way.
Edit:
Shrub-troll,
You win ok? I am not sure what you won, but you can have it. I really dont know what your point was. You dont want to admit who you are, that is your decision, and that is what internet trolls do… but you won.
That’s a pretty convoluted arguement. I owe you an apology or acknowledgement? Don’t think so. Nice shot at my motives for my initial post. “Market presence”. Maybe thats how you think all the time, but I don’t. I could care less what you do for business, Marin. But if you make offhand remarks about my teachers, I will respond. Beyond that, do as you like.
herb,
“if you make offhand remarks about my teachers, I will respond.”
apparently you are responding, so perhaps you have some time to do so, yet not respond with anything useful in determining why you are upset.
You feel I insulted someone, but you wont say how or where… you (we) will never know if there is a misunderstanding or a miscommunication, but you prefer to leave it at that, casually reprimanding me for lack of Wu De:rolleyes: without an option for coming to an understanding.
This is rude, and effectively antagonistic (read: passive aggresive).
I do not know what your problem is, what you think was trying to say, but if you wont be mature enough to try to sort it out and only want to exploit this as an opportunity to insult, then by all means justify it to yourself, I have lost respect for you, I am sure that is of little consequence to you.
The simple answer is:
A) "I (or whoever) am insulted because you said “xxxxx”
B) “Oh, sorry thats not what I meant, that is the trouble with internet forums”
A) “now I understand…huh”
care to try that?
If not, be insulted, but that is a two way street.
Such unwillingness to discuss misunderstanding, with a zeal for public reprimand is not an admirable character trait combination.
OK Marin, just to clarify:
"Actually, there is no “grandmaster”. Notice how several or them, Chen Zhenglei, and Zhu Tian Cai as well are being referred to as “grandmaster” as well these days?
"
Thats what I was responding to. These people are known worldwide as Grandmasters, whether you care to acknowledge the title or not. Your wording implies that they are not Grandmasters. Thus, it reads as a denegration. You should not make such comments about your elders- which is where the Wu De comment came from.
Thats it. I hope thats clear enough for you. Because this is over.
Have a nice day!
Would you like it to be over so that you can remain upset about it and convinced that I insulted someone?
Anyhow, you will read this, and that is perhaps when it will be over.
The original statement:
"Actually, there is no “grandmaster”. Notice how several or them, Chen Zhenglei, and Zhu Tian Cai as well are being referred to as “grandmaster” as well these days?
Originally such a title would have referred to a “head” of the clan or head of the fist lineage, which in this case there is none anymore. Certainly it is not Chenxiaowang, skilled as he may be, there is no ONE leader of anything in Chen’s fist since Chen FaKe and the 1949 revolution. "
The statement and the intent behind it is that the original use of such a term as “grandmaster” is basically reserved for ONE individual in a clan who is the head of the system. The last person who occupied this position in the traditional sense as far as I know in Chen clan was Chen Fa Ke. Recently the term “grandmaster” is thrown around a lot in English but in China, and in Chinese one almost NEVER hears it.
I have great respect for Chen Xiaowang, Chen Zhenglei and Zhu Tiancai. I dont know who decided to call them grandmasters. To state that they are or are not “grandmasters” is not a measure or issue of skill.
The issue I brought up was the term, its traditional useage, and its meaning. I would love to hear more on this issue if anyone has any better information not coming from the PRC standards.
Now, if you can understand the logic here and accept that maybe others have different experience and opinions regarding history and tradition than yourself, then perhaps you can accept that when I discuss the useage of the term grandmaster as applied to anyone.. it is not an insult.
Scroll back up to the first post of the thread, and you can see the question I responded to:
“Alot of people give CXW way too much lip service because he’s the “GRANDmaster””
So it would seem that I was carifying that Chen XiaoWang was not the ONE and only “grandmaster”… do you get it now?
I would think you would feel relieved since his being the “one and only” would also cause problems for your own teacher Chen zhenglei being called grandmaster wouldn’t it?
Now you can publically apologize or achnowledge a misunderstanding and rush to judgement, or silently nod to yourself … either way, you read it.
Please take a moment to consider, then discuss before misfiring online in the future.
M
To get back on the original topic of the thread, I’ve seen some DVD footage of Joseph Chen (Chen Zhonghua) on applications. This was pretty interesting as I didn’t have any prior exposure to the Hong Junsheng methodology.
w.