i have been practicing yang style tai chi for a little over a year now. However i also enjoy watching wu and chen style forms. first is that if there is anyone who knows more than one style ( yang wu chen sun) and which do you like better and why? Also what is the major differences in the styles.
part 1 The 5 major family styles are Chen, Yang, Wu, Wu-Hao and Sun. Yang and Wu are closely related, and having practice both I would conclude there are not any major differences. Though I'll come back to some of the general difference at a later point. Sometimes a lot will depend to what Yang style you are comparing to, the 'problem' being there are so many Yang styles around, this is due to a couple of factors 1. there have been a number of Yang family style masters as well as disciples/students and 2. the Yang family were known to have taught a significant number of different types of forms. Wu Hao and Sun are also closely related. Sun Style is basically Wu hao with some of Suns bagua and hsingyi influences here and there. This is something I'm trying to research a little at the moment as I have began learning the Sun form and exercises. However I would say that the differences are quite minor. Ok, so now we can come to the differences between the Yang and Wu in comparison to the Wu hao and Sun. The major difference here is that the latter are performed much more vertical & upright (without a lean in posture) and employ follow stepping. In fact the stepping is the major factor that produces a form more compact and upright in style. These styles are also taught to be performed between 25-30 minutes maximum - I also think this may have something to do with the stepping and small frame nature. The Wu Hao history claims that this form was originally practiced fast. The slow pace is required for learning and technical proficiency. Slower pace and longer form practice times as sometimes encouraged in other styles are discouraged in the Wu Hao style. This is due to wanting to keep a certain feeling of nimbleness, lightness and agility, and it is felt that going too slow can encourage stagnation and too much heaviness.. I'll have to come back to this a bit later, as there's a bit more to be said. The pittfall of posting from work. cheers
taiji I have been practising the same style for 27 years now. (Yang) I learned from Martin lee and his wife Emily. Who studied with late Kwo lien ying. They went to him at four AM while the rest of the students started at six AM. The difference is big. I have had people ask me "What did you do with the system"? Well nothing but practise. I also have several ways of diong this system. In the morning it is "Park style" slow and very intentfull for healing. In the evening I will ramp it up a few notches and practise combat style, Wich is very fast, loose and to stop intent. We also square off and apply some of the moves mixed with push hands , Judo, boxing, Grappling. Still fun. Be well.
Hi, I'll just quickly finish off by mentioning the Chen style and what I see as the differences, having already mentioned the other 4 major styles. Nowadays the Chen style encompasses more than one (sub) style, so to speak. There is the small frame style, also known as "hellujia", this name is taken from a nearby village where the style developed. It is quite close to the zhao bao style, and both these styles have some similarities with the small frame styles of Wu-Hao and Sun. The other frames that I'm aware of are the old frame (laojia) and new frame, which are more widely practiced and mainstream than the small frame style. The difference with the other styles are mainly in the Chen style emphasis on chansigong (silk reeling). The sets also retain fajin and stamping in them.
it is amazing how much tai chi and push hands help in the grappling art when standing in particular in the clinch. I have only been practicing for a year and only push hands for a 6 months but had done high school wrestling and when i work with my friends who are taking BJJ i am able to do pretty good when on the feet and especially in the clinch.
I said I'd come back to some of the differences between Yang and Wu styles, so.. Starting with grasp sparrows tail - peng, lu, ji, an are more clearly defined and differentiated in Yang (Cheng Fu) style. The older generation yang styles are a little more similar to Wu style. The feet tend to stay a lot more parallel through the form in Wu style. take stepping back in repulse Monkey. yang style place the rear foot down at a 45 degree angle, Wu style keeps both the feet pointing forward. Cloud hands in Wu style includes footwork where you pivot on the toes and turn on the heels. There are variation on how postures are performed, but other than that the "frame" of Wu style tends to be a little more compact.
thanks for all the input man it's been very informative and itresting. The way I thought it was that Chen has deeper stances while wu is more upright an yang is kinda in the middle I did some what notice the feet when watching demos and I am not sure I like that for combat.
Hi, no worries. You posed quite a challenging and broad question in some ways. What you mention regard stances is a case in point. Can be like that. If you take the most widely practiced methodology of those styles, that's likely to be the description you would make. On the other hand with Chen style you have the small frame and Wu and Yang are practiced with long and or low postures too. It's simply not as common. See the following form sets for examples Yang style using lower stances: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdJpTJyyKyg"]YouTube - Yang Taijiquan 1st section[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZHm-eNePI8"]YouTube - Tai Chi Classic Yang Style[/ame] Yang banhou low frame: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrIcXONHd2I"]YouTube - Banhou Large (Low) Frame[/ame] Low frame Wu style: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLr8rKqjTFY"]YouTube - Wu style Taijiquan Low frame[/ame] Chen style small frame (xiaojia) - you''l notice that the lower stances are much fewer through the form. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK9wavrxxbg"]YouTube - Chen Donghai - Chen Style Taiji - Small Frame (Xiaojia)[/ame]
Another difference I havn't mentioned lies between the Chen style and the Yang style (including it's direct derivatives - Wu and CMC) The Chen style is formed (pun not intended..) around 32 postures, the Yang style comprises 37 postures. Some postures like "buddhas attendant pounds the mortar" appear in Chen style but not in Yang style. There is however a majority of direct crossover in both - postures like single whip, brush knee twist step, repulse monkey etc
Just a question or 2 Cloudz:- 1) In general how does the PH (competitive and training) differ from style to style? 2) With regard to training PH drills. I haven't seen 9 Palace step outside of Wu - am I missing something? Then there is the wider picture of evasion drills of which 9 Palace is one. I understand that Sun has some elements of Bagua contained within it - so the evasion drills may be unique to Sun. 3) In particular regard to Da Lu - which I perceive rightly/wrongly/otherwise as the basic material for 13 tactics - how does Da Lu and 13 tactics interpretation vary from style to style. I did read somewhere that Da Lu is used in some hard-style CMA as well. (which could be incorrect.)
In a Paris park last summer I did see some elderly Chinese folk executing what would be either classic Northern Wu (as opposed to Wudang Wu of Cheng Tin Hung) or Yang Long form and Saber and Dian forms which were all very impressive but different from what I am used to. So how different are the Weapon forms and applications from style to style? I should have gone up and yacked with them, but I got caught training with a couple of Eskrima dudes instead. Recently, a Chinese gentleman (whose name escapes me) visited Edinburgh introducing Wudang TCC, as is currently practised from Wudang mountains. Charlie went to visit the fellow when here, and left with a very favourable impression. There would appear to be groups of folk practising Nejia ICMA around the Wudang mountains, but who seem to have been left out of the 5 style discussion/history - so it doesn't seem to be at all clear cut. This of course begs the question, what were these dudes doing all the time of Communism and the Cultural revolution? Were they allowed to just do their thing in isolation?
It depends really. Some are really quite similar, if not the same thing done slightly differently. Then you find some things in one style you don't find in others. However, all the major styles (pretty much) have fixed feet single hand methods, fixed feet double hand methods and double hand with stepping. The differences can be in movement patterns, to ways of using the body. Some examples. In chen style I've seen push hands done at low level - legs parallel to the floor. I havn't seen that demonstrated in any other styles. Having looked at visual media content for Wu, Yang and Chen re. the push hands, the one constant was what you know as "four directions". This is the double hand method of cycling through peng, lu, ji, an. This seems to be in every style, a version is described in the back of Sun Lu Tangs Taiji book for instance, and I've yet to come across a taiji style where this is missing. Though I havn't really researched Wu-hao push hands to really comment about what they do or don't do. They seem to have a fixed set that differs a fair bit to what I've seen elsewhere, but I really have to look into it a bit more. I've personally been taught in two Wu(QuanYou) styles - the Cheng Ting Hung lineage and a lineage from Ma Yueh Liang. The body method employed in the most basic of basics - basic single hand pushing was very different. The CTH method had more in common with some Yang style way of using the body that I'd learnt than it did the Wu style from MYL. In regards to the competitive pushing, it's pretty much the same thing rules wise, though I tend to see a bit more execution of percussive style of technique from the Chen guys, generally speaking. You are more likely to see a kao from them that'll put someone on their ass, than from any other group. I've seen something fairly similar in a Yang Jianhou set that I have at home. The stepping isn't identical, but I think the principle and what is being attempted is along the same lines. Evasion is certainly a big part of it. If we say that stepping off the line of force is directly linked to how we're applying the word evasion here, then a few of the moving step patterns in taiji involve some evasive element. Suffice to say I disagree with the last statement. In addition to 9 palace, seven stars and da lu that you're familiar with contain evasive stepping. I havn't come across Da Lu in other CMA styles though they may do something similar. Da Lu is "the great rollback", so a clue into it's emphasis is in the title - rollback! Though having said that, I also find kao and evasive stepping to be also high on it agenda. Tsai and elbow are also hiding in there. You have a fair point in that it contains basic material for all 13 tactics, though the ones I mentioned seem to me to predominate over the ones I havn't.. Apart from peng perhaps. What I've seen is quite similar between styles in regard to Da Lu, though interpratations of the 8 gates can differ from style to style. This can often be descriptive and when it comes to practice you find styles contain the same or similar material, but expressed differently and or found in different places in the cirriculums. We could dedicate a whole thread just to the 8 gates interpretations , and probably have at some point . In regards to Chen style, my mind is a bit hazy on the Da Lu, they have it I think but it may sometimes have a different name in Chen. I'll have to review that, as well as its performance.. Wu-Hao (and Sun I assume) styles don't have it, in fact from what I gather Wu Hao only has one form of moving step push hands pattern, and the stepping isn't evasive just forward and back. Sun stylists may have rou shou style exercises from bagua, but as their not strictly speaking taiji we should probably ignore that possibility. Hope that was helpful, will get back to you on your second post, cheers.
Another area of interest in terms of stylistic difference is the San Shou (very generic term, I know) aspects of each and how they get worked into PH and applications. I am only familiar with the boxing patterns and drills/limited Shiao Jiao and Chin-na of Cheng Tin Hung lineage.
I don't study or reasearch any tai chi weapons forms i'm sorry to say, so can't be of much help there. What I would say from what I've seen and heard/ read is that the form variations or flavour is more or less about as varied and different than that of the empty hand forms. It's not until you practice different styles of the same art that you can appreciate the similarities over the differences. Talking of empty hand forms, the sequences and the basic shapes are pretty much the same. I'll come to applications later - san shou (free fighting) can be used as an umbella term for various application drills and free sparing in my experience. What tended to happen is that people practiced their martial arts behind 'closed doors' (private), it was kept low key and 'amongst friends' so to speak. I think the reason they are left out is that their tai chi hsingyi and bagua isn't regarded as having come from there, but brought there from visitors. Much of their tai chi resembles composites of Yang and Chen. The Wudang discussion is an interesting one. On one hand you have many monks that are 'new' so to speak. But this doesn't mean a lot of good things didn't get passed down in the smaller or more remote temples. Take a read of this thread for a better idea of the issues surrounding Wudang Mountain martial arts. Some would argue that there's no such thing as Wudang taiji or bagua etc. http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11627&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=wudang Well my opinion is that tai chi drills and applications can and should cross the style bounderies within tcc. Much of the Shiao, Chinna and striking I've seen is applicable across styles. What you see 'on the ground' however is that styles and teachers favour or specialize in certain areas. The Chen guys from the village tend to be good at the Shiao, the Chen guys in Beijing tend to be really good at chinna and their demonstrations seem to reflect that. Wu style tends to have good Shiao compared to the Yang style which seems to have a mish mash of everything - probably due the the sheer numbers of Yang style practitioners. Some are better in the striking, some are better all rounders - it's hard to really say anything definitively in this area. Wu is pretty well rounded, but the consensus seems to be that the Chen guys don't focus as much on striking, particularly the big name seminar teachers - most of them focus on teaching forms anyway. On the whole there's a good variety of application in tcc, maybe with the exception of kicking in which the variet is not realitively great. The other areas are well covered I think. One thing I've noted is that certain application go under different postures across the styles. So you may see style x demo y application for z posture, then another style demo the same app under a different posture. When looking at snapshots it can seem that there's more variation in application that there really is when you step back and look at more and more applications across styles. How applications are practiced and how they are drilled depends in large part to the instructors and lineage. In the CTH line I tend to see a lot more lively and practical drilling, due to the fact that since the time in HK and that part of Asia CTH liked to mix it up and enter fighters into Full contact tournaments, that trend has continued through into Dan Dochertys school todat so that tradition has been kept going. You don't really find that in a lot of other tai chi to be fair, though there are of course exceptions, probably in every style. Dans school is one of those in the case of Wu (Quan You) style, and perhaps the most prominent across all tai chi chuan to be fair, it's certainly the biggest group that gets involved in this sort of thing, in my experience.
Thanks for the input Cloudz on behalf of myself and anyone else interested choosing a TCC style. I am about to go back to Paris to work again, and as I am studying Mathematics as well, I may not have much time for training (if any) - so my training and MAP activities are likely to take a temporary hit. I am slowly making better understanding of TCC, but still finding some of the subtleties and variations- even within CTH lineage - , not simple to navigate - I did not find these complications to the same extent in Aikido or FMA. These posts summarise quite a lot in a digestible form.
