Hey Empty Fist,
Push hands (five different varieties) were developed by Chen Wangting about 150 years before Yang luchan was born.
Ron Panunto
Ron,
Could show me your references to this? I read somewhere and I can’t recall the source, that Yang Luchan created push hands as a a form of two person exercise to practice Tai Chi Chuan.
Who created Push Hands?
I don’t think we will ever really know.
Chen TJQ practices it, so does Yang TJQ.
Many other styles also got a similar training method.
IF YLC did develop it was it during his stay at the village or after.
If after how did it go back to the Village.
Personally, I don’t think either CTW or YLC did develop it, but it was incorporated into the art from outside at some time.
We could always ask our Teacher’s about it. 
Either way who cares who developed it, it is a good and important training routine.
Cheers.
Nowadays, people focus on doing the modern style Yang 24/48/108 sets.
Those sets have a distinctly different flavor from older renditions of “Yang” style, as can be seen in photographic comparisons between Grandmaster Yang Cheng Fu and modern day wushu competitors.
At least to me, the major difference is that the modern style emphasizes physical beauty of the moves by deepening the stances and extending the limbs. Yang Cheng Fu and his disciple Cheng Manqing do not extend their limbs as far nor stand as deeply, though Yang Cheng Fu reportedly could do the longer stances in his youth.
The training methods are totally different too. One focuses on beauty of form, the other emphasizes efficiency in COMBAT.
That said, Yang Cheng Fu supposedly invented his 108 set as a form of exercise. But photographs clearly indicate that he was a fighter - and one with considerable combat experience, I’d venture.
In short, I feel that the old Yang style (Yang Cheng Fu’s form as well as Yang Lu Chan’s even older set) is a suitable vehicle for combat efficacy. My students have used some of this stuff successfully in real encounters.
A great book which points at some of these differences is Nigel Sutton’s “Applied Tai Chi Chuan”.
“Nowadays, people focus on doing the modern style Yang 24/48/108 sets.”
24 and 48 are NOT Yang style. In fact, there are 3 basic barehand routines in Yang style: Yang Chengfu’s routine (counted as 85 by some and varying numbers from 103, 108, etc… by others), the competition Yang routine created by the China Sports commission ( a pretty bad routine by many people’s opinion…and I concur), and the 88 Posture routine.
While 88 is NOT strictly Yang style, it IS the Yang sequence done with some different flavor. If it were anywhere other than China, the ‘creators’ of this routine would be rightfully accused of plagiarizing Yang Chengfu’s routine.
24 is based upon Yang style but has a number of very distinct differences. 48 is a Combined routine – having Yang, Chen, Sun, and Wu elements throughout.
I did NOT include Cheng Manching’s routine in this. It is derived from Yang but is significantly different in method as is Guang Ping to make them distinct.
“Those sets have a distinctly different flavor from older renditions of “Yang” style, as can be seen in photographic comparisons between Grandmaster Yang Cheng Fu and modern day wushu competitors. “
You don’t see competitors doing the Yang Chengfu set. It is known to some of them..but not done for photos or competition…first…it is simply too long. Second, it is truly for people wanting to do Taijiquan…not competitors.
“At least to me, the major difference is that the modern style emphasizes physical beauty of the moves by deepening the stances and extending the limbs. “
Not exactly true. The core of 24 and the goal is the same as Yang Chengfu’s…however, a LOT of people do it badly or just plain wrong. Similarly, a lot of Yang folks have NO stances and no martial intent….poor basics.
“Yang Cheng Fu and his disciple Cheng Manqing do not extend their limbs as far nor stand as deeply, though Yang Cheng Fu reportedly could do the longer stances in his youth. “
While Cheng Manching DID learn from Yang Chengfu, many in the Yang family (Yang Zhenduo, Fu Zhongwen, etc…) would disagree with you on the “Disciple” part.
The pictures of Yang Chengfu were taken later in his life. He is KNOWN to have suffered from deteriorating health and lost a lot of his strength by that time. There are quotes about how high he would raise his knees and how low his stances would be at one time and how they became poorer as he gained more weight.
However, look at pictures of other Yang Chengfu’s students – I have a few of them. The stances are lower and more powerful in many of them.
“The training methods are totally different too. One focuses on beauty of form, the other emphasizes efficiency in COMBAT. “
THAT depends entirely on the teacher. The Yang Chengfu routine is the most widely practiced Taijiquan routine in the world for HEALTH followed by either the Wu form or 24.
“That said, Yang Cheng Fu supposedly invented his 108 set as a form of exercise. But photographs clearly indicate that he was a fighter - and one with considerable combat experience, I’d venture. “
That is the routine that Fu Zhongwen did. He was NOT someone that ‘played’ at Taijiquan. (But he was a very nice man that liked a good meal). He WAS one of the people that handled challenges for his teacher, Yang Chengfu.
Absolutely no argument from me, GLW.
The only difference between us is that I’m going by standard nomenclature while you’re going by how things REALLY ARE.
Nice post.
Darn…you found out I am a realist…and I’ve been telling myself that I was just a slightly disillusioned Idealist all this time 
Has Master Ma had a lot of fights?
I’m not sure. I know when William C.C. Chen was younger he used to fight.
a true yang taiji fighting master
…will teach that yang style hides its fajing and doesnt make it obvious like chen taiji. a true yang master is one who has fought and teaches fighting. He will teach some fajing as solo drills, but the form is done smooth and hiding power.
If I could make an analogy: take classical music. There’s classical music that has emotion and variety and there’s classical music that is basically elevator music. Meant to blandly entertain rich people in the garden parties of the roccoco period (1800’s?). It has something to do with volume (fa jing) but more to do with it’s function.
EMPTY FIST- could you please elaborate on your statement? You had mentioned that Old Yang form had fa jing and a jump kick. What movements had fa jing, and which kick is the jump kick? I basically learned the way Ma Xu Zha described-the fa jing was taught separately-referrd to as ‘discharge drills’ and re-inserted into the form. I am curious where you do these.
I thought I’d remembered somewhere that the Yang family had said that before the 108 Yang form, the Yang familly’s Taiji was basically single moving postures. Anyone else know what I’m talking about?
Originally posted by Brad
I thought I’d remembered somewhere that the Yang family had said that before the 108 Yang form, the Yang familly’s Taiji was basically single moving postures. Anyone else know what I’m talking about?
AFAIK, there were multiple forms prior to the creation of the 108.
Which makes sense considering that YLC learned the Chen TJQ forms when he studied there.
Training method was different I believe.
A student spend many weeks learning one posture and only when that was mastered was the next one taught and connected to the first one, and so on.
I think I read somewhere that it took 5~6 years to learn a long form like the 108 using this method.
Cheers.
EMPTY FIST- could you please elaborate on your statement? You had mentioned that Old Yang form had fa jing and a jump kick. What movements had fa jing, and which kick is the jump kick? I basically learned the way Ma Xu Zha described-the fa jing was taught separately-referrd to as ‘discharge drills’ and re-inserted into the form. I am curious where you do these.
TenTigers,
Unfortunately I can’t answer your question. Your best bet is to visit Peter Lim’s Tai Chi Chuan website at http://web.singnet.com.sg/~limttk/ and ask him.
Originally posted by Laughing Cow
[B]So you can’t/won’t even tell me what Yang style you studied.
Your type of competitions are not the only way to judge the effectiveness of a style and with your experience I would have assumed that you would have progressed more in your views about MA/styles and so on. [/B]
how then would you judge your martial ability? Unless you are constantly street fighting, what other way is there to judge YOUR abilities?
The “effectiveness of a style” is irrelevent, as opposed to the effectiveness of the player. What your “master” can do doesn’t mean squat. What YOU can do, does. As an example, after my last fight, (where I got schooled badly) I remember exclaiming “MY Taichi f****ing sucks!!!” not "Taichi sucks! "
Seraph.
I agree it does not matter what your Sifu or any of the acestors can/could do.
FWIW, my TJQ so far has done well in the few altercations I have been in.
But and that is my honest belief that a Competition or sparring or Tui shou will NEVER equal a REAL fight.
You will NEVER know if what you learned wil work until it comes to the crunch and each crunch is different.
Just because it worked in 1 or 2 fights there is no guarantee that it will work in the 3rd or 4th fight.
And this is something I learned from personal experience and watching friends getting into fights.
There are NO guarantees, nor can there ever be confidence that what I learned/know will work.
Keep winning tournaments and competition sooner or later there will be someone fitter, tougher, stronger, bigger and better this a given.
And what do YOU do then?
MA for me is not about winning fights but adding value to my life.
Cheers.
Originally posted by Seraph
how then would you judge your martial ability? Unless you are constantly street fighting, what other way is there to judge YOUR abilities?
The “effectiveness of a style” is irrelevent, as opposed to the effectiveness of the player. What your “master” can do doesn’t mean squat. What YOU can do, does. As an example, after my last fight, (where I got schooled badly) I remember exclaiming “MY Taichi f****ing sucks!!!” not "Taichi sucks! "
- My nomination for best first post by a newcomer in the internals forum.
Welcome to the board:D
continuation
thanks jon. But I cannot take credit. Those ideas have been drilled into me by my training with Shooter, for quite a while.
Laughing Cow, I agree that sport is not the same as Real Life, however I still think that sport can prepare one mentally and physically for confrontation.
“Keep winning tournaments and competition sooner or later there will be someone fitter, tougher, stronger, bigger and better this a given.
And what do YOU do then?”
I am not quite sure what the point this statement is. If you compete long enough, you will lose at some point.
"And this is something I learned from personal experience and watching friends getting into fights.
There are NO guarantees, nor can there ever be confidence that what I learned/know will work."
What is the point then of studying? If I want to add value to my life I would not waste my time studying something that did not impart confidence. As for myself I am confident that my in-the-ring skills are terrible, but on the street I am confident that I will prevail, which is where it really matters. That is not to excuse my poor ring(sport fighting) skills, and want to rectify that situation.
Seraph.
I guess like the majority of people out there I study because I enjoy the process, I fully know that with my current life style, age, injuries, etc I will never be a very good MA or become a master.
IMO, it is wrong to be too competitive in anything in your life, may it be MA, work or whatever.
I can see from your posts that you study under shooter, your ideas and opinions are identical.
As for confidence I feel that when you are no longer even a little scared going into a fight than that is where you start loosing.
Without doubts and some fear there can be no longer forward process in your studies.
Cheers.