Of course it's also completely possible to argue that short forms are superior to long forms - they potentially contain all the 'bits' of 'Tai Chi-iness' but without the unnecessary repetition within the form (Hmmm - guess why I like Liu He Ba Fa - oh yes, long form with 'no' repetition) and short forms are quicker to learn so the student can practice more, learn quicker and 'get it' sooner...
If you remove all the redundant moves from the 108 moves, you will get around 48 moves. You can say your 48 moves is complete, but you can't say your 24 moves is complete.
Hi 'You...' - define complete... in what way is '48' moves complete? I have learned - probably thousands of moves - in different martial arts in my 44 years of training - now IF I was gifted and had total recall, would I have a 'complete' knowledge of martial arts HECK NO !!!!
There exist no "complete" MA system on earth. A "complete Chang/Yang Taiji" system is not a "complete" MA system.
Mr. W's comment is in the context of the movements/techniques/whatever ya wanna call 'em in the Yang long form.While the long form may be counted as 108,88,116,etc the actual number of differing "postures" is less than that but more than 24.As he says,around 48. Good example is "Hit Tiger", it's not in the 24 and there is nothing in the 24 that encompasses the same motions/functions/mechanics,even when taking into account the variations of execution of "Hit Tiger" amongst Yang practitioners. So the Yang derived 24 is incomplete compared to it's parent.
It doesn't matter if you learn the form first or learn it at all. If there's anything I've learned from people I've met who are skilled at Tai Chi and other martial arts, it's the fundamentals of the system which are important. Sure, the long forms may be good exercise and a suitable way of drilling the fundamentals while alone, but partner work is always preferred, whether it be pushing hands or free sparring or drilling moves in general. I would love to find a Tai Chi school which doesn't practice a form and spends all of its time drilling fundamentals, doing push hands and sparring. Maybe to some it wouldn't be the same, but that, I think, is what Tai Chi Chuan is all about.
I do not agree. I think the forms are important too. My GM says something like "you learn forms to know yourself, you do push hand to know your opponent." (I would consider partner drills part of push hands practice.) If taught properly, forms are also a part of teaching fundamentals and principles. Both are necessary to fully understand Tai chi. To skip either is missing part of the complete system.
That's one way of looking at it. However, the way I see it, the forms really only teach you the push, pull, directional forces, and the stances which would best be used in the ideal execution of that certain directional force. And those stances are an ideal situation, not the kind which you'll find in a fight. In addition, while practicing striking on a punching bag or on mitts, you practice combinations and figure out which techniques naturally will transition into each other; with the form, you're given a set combination of techniques which may or may not be in an order which makes sense to use in combat. I also think that the fundamentals of a system, any system, will naturally lead you to the techniques. A friend of mine did wrestling in high school. When I asked him to show me some wrestling stuff, he just explained to me that sinking beneath an opponent's center of gravity is necessary and whatever you do from there to get them on the ground is perfectly fine. While he could've just shown me a double leg takedown, he told me the theory behind it and I could naturally come to that conclusion (the takedown). So while you might be practicing the form to better understand your own limitations and body mechanics, I don't think there's much benefit you can gain from it beyond what you would get from in-depth study and practice of the basics: proper stances, proper striking technique, and proper weight distribution. I feel like that approach would make more competent fighters, more quickly.
"Only"????? Well, if that is all you get out of forms, I would say you aren't being taught fully about forms. Forms are full of techniques and principles - if taught properly. Ah the same ol' argument. Stances are also about leg strength and conditioning. Stronger legs make you a better fighter. I am not arguing that other aspects are not important. If you have read my posts on MAP, even what I said on this thread, you would know better. I am saying that incomplete training is what got us into this mess with TCC as it is being taught today. People skipped the drills and push hands and lost the martial aspect of TCC. But I believe the answer is NOT going the other way and focusing only on that and skipping teaching the forms. Let's not let the pendulum sway too far the other way. You know- Yin and Yang? Both in balance with each other? Lose that and you lose the whole of TCC on a fundamental level IMO. I believe both are needed to teach the complete system of TCC. Again, those fundamentals are not taught to you when you study forms? Just how are you taught forms? Don't they mix drills in with your forms training? Like practicing the martial application of a move in a form? I just don't understand why you are separating forms practice from things like fundamentals and techniques. They shouldn't be so separated. And even when going over a form or a part of a form without a drill, don't you still discuss the martial applications and how it affects the move? Don't you focus on the fundamentals, technique and intent when doing your solo form? Forms and drills can be taught together you know. You don't have to break it down like they can't be taught together. Like you do a technique or a series of them in a form, then drill them? Then go to the next part of the form, then drill that? Then put several parts of the form together, but with a thorough understanding due to a complete way of studying it? Well, that isn't what I said. So as that is a straw man, I won't say more. Again, you mean that that is not imcorporated into your forms training? I can only say your idea of forms training is very different than how I am taught. Why study a traditional art if you want to skip a major part of how it was taught? Seriously, why not study MMA or some style where forms are not a part of the training? There are plenty of good ones out there.
The forms do drill fundamentals. That is why we do them. While it would theoretically be possible to learn Taiji without forms, it would be a lot harder, because you'd be missing one of the main training methods. Personally, I think that the student would miss out on a lot of benefits that the form can give. But if you really don't like doing the form, then maybe Taiji isn't the ideal MA for you?
Yes and no.You don't need to learn and practice a sequence of all the postures linked into a form to be able to use function. You do need to practice a whole lot of things solo to instill them into your body before you'll be able to utilize them against another individual. I'd opine that one learns much more about oneself when faced with an opponent,whether in ph,sparring,or fighting than in solo practice of whatever sort. By the by,there are a lot of partner drills,esp technique execution, which can't be considered ph practice of any sort. Individual "postures" and combo sequences of the same,yes. But as I stated above you don't need to learn/practice what we commonly mean by a "form" to use function. And also freefighting. You forgot that part. If an individual can actualize it in combat I fail to see how they've lost the whole of TC on any level. You can practice exactly what you're speaking of without ever practicing what we commonly refer to as a form. They're called combinations.See comment immediately above. That's how they should be approached,fer sure. How it was taught? "Traditionally"? Which tradition? The way much training was done in the 19th century the linking of the postures into a continuous long form wasn't taught/practiced until one was already accomplished. It was a training method for the advanced practitioner.Which shows that learning/practicing a "form" isn't needed to be a boxer. Seemed to work for them.
Or possibly it developed that way because it was seen as an improvement on the way they taught before? That may or not be the case, but I think it would be a mistake to just automatically assume that the 'old ways were the best ways'. They might have seen it as progress.
No,teaching the "form" early on was a result of the popularization movement. Basically it comes down to this.Which is more beneficial for ability to express function early on,spending an hour practicing a posture or three linked or spending the same hour going through a form which you've also had to spend time simply to memorize the sequence of? The former is the fundamental training which includes putting the gungs into the postures. Of course,we're supposed to practice individual moves/sequences like that anyway.
Ask your opponent to - run toward you with full speed, - full force, and - tries to knock your head off. You try to use one of your Taiji moves to stop him from coming closer. If you can repeat that 100 times daily, in 3 years, you will have developed some good Taiji skill. After you have developed 40 of those Taiji moves, one day you link it into a sequence, you get yourself a nice Taiji form. If I can live my life all over again, that will be the way that I want to learn my Taiji system.
Which is what the training I was speaking of was.You learned the solo moves,combos, function,& the ability to use it. After that you learned the linked solo form. I was waiting for you to see this thread.I knew I could count on you,Mr.W!
Now, now, I never said I dislike the forms. They're good entertainment and decent solo practice. But what's said about training your legs during the forms is only a partial truth. Surely stances and motion between stances are worthy of study, but the fact is that doing squats will strengthen your legs better than doing a horse stance just like lifting weights will strengthen you better than doing push ups, and doing committed stretches for each area of the body designed solely for increasing flexibility will make your more flexible than practicing your form. So it seems that doing the form is neither better for you physically nor better at preparing you for fighting than more modern means, and possibly ancient means. I will expand on that statement now. I may not be of exceptional skill nor knowledge, but what I mean is that after reading many Tai Chi Chuan manuals, it has become obvious to me that the method of form practice is a relatively modern phenomenon. In origin, if what I've read is correct, individual techniques were drilled (as they are in modern combat systems) and were also practiced in short combinations (as they are in modern combat systems). How can it be claimed, if this is true, that form practice is the traditional method or even anywhere near "necessary" for Tai Chi Chuan practice? I personally believe that someone will more quickly and effectively learn the Tai Chi fighting skillset by spending a year practicing their push hands daily than they would spending two years practicing their form daily and push hands once a week. But, I am also of the opinion that all martial arts, internal or external, are primarily about fighting, and that if there is some spiritual or health-based aspect of the art, it is most efficiently found elsewhere, whether that be in reading Tao Te Ching or in running a few laps and lifting heavy weights. It is only after we remove everything from the system which can be found readily and effectively elsewhere that we come to truly understand what it is that defines the system and makes it unique, and that is what I think is worth studying.
Different excercises strengthen our bodies in different ways. For example, running will strengthen the legs and so will playing squash, but if you play five-a-side football for the first time in ages then you will ache like mad the next day. That's because you are using your muscles in a subtly different way. You are right when you say that nothing will strengthen the legs quite like squatting heavy weights. But while that is beneficial it will not in itself prepare you for every possible type of physical activity. Having done plenty of heavy lifting and plenty of Taiji forms during the course of my lifetime, and as someone who runs regularly, I would say that forms strengthen and condition our bodies (especially the legs) in a different way to anything else that I have done. I can't offer any scientific explaination of how it all works, that is simply my own entirely subjective viewpoint based on personal experience. You seem to be arguing with yourself when you keep repeating that forms are not necessary for Taiji practise. I don't think that anyone has said that they are strictly necessary, simply that they are very useful. There is often more than one way to achieve a particular objective.
That's why I comment after your post. Single voice can be lonely sometime. When you first learn how to - catch a basket ball (or base ball), did your opponent threw that ball to you in "slow speed"? - swim in the river, did that river water slow down for you? Why should TCMA learning be any different? You need to adapt to the environment. You can't expect the environment to adapt to you. What's the environment that you need to adapt to? It's someone who tries to knock your head off. It's not you need to punch into the thin air.
I think that just about every physical activity is taught slowly and simply at first, then speeded up as the beginner progresses. Especially when learning complex movements. The idea that Taiji is some kind of bizarre exception to this is laughable, to be perfectly honest.
Whilst I totaly agree almost everything is broken down and taught slowly bit by bit I think there is usually a drive to speed it up as soon as possible. I Don't train in tai chi but it seems from an outside perspective like the slow is emphasised and the speeding up coming in much later. In judo for example a technique is taught slowly but usually you are trying to use it in randori within a few hrs if not less. Getting the raw mechanics (slow training) is vital but the randori is where it all comes together. It's an exams from a very different system sure but that model works very well for many other styles aswell. Might it not also apply for tai chi?
