37 Taijiquan Posture Applications

[wayne hansen]

In our school we do the 3 forms
37
58
108
The lower hand 18 is done quite differently to how the same moves are done in the 108
We also have a 300 movement follow step form

[Trick]

So it's something as the 37 is taught as an begginers form, the 58 as intermediate and then the rest are the advanced exercises? in this way one might see it as ZMQ only taught "simplified" TJQ in his later life?

[Bao]

in this way one might see it as ZMQ only taught "simplified" TJQ in his later life?

Much more easy to sell?

[wayne hansen]

The number of steps don't matter
It is the content and how it is practiced
Some people practice a simplified method no matter how many forms they practice
The 37 is the most advanced form we do
It just has some movements that are not there
No one in hsing I thinks lien Han is lacking because it only has 7 or 8 moves

[Trick]

in this way one might see it as ZMQ only taught "simplified" TJQ in his later life?

Much more easy to sell?

I don't think ZMQ was into teaching taijiquan commercially. If he were to I guess he would have added more forms(weapon) to his teachings?

[wayne hansen]

I think it was more about who and where he was teaching that effected what he taught

[Trick]

As I have understood it from earlier is that ZMQ only taught the 37 form, sword form and push-hands exercises and possibly som san-shou too. Now it's a long time ago I read R,Smith's "masters&methods" book, but as I recal he doesn't mention any other teaching of ZMQ than what I wrote above, I haven't read "Martial Musings" there might be other information. So I took a look at William Chen's webpage and see there that in he's NY school they teach a syllabus as I write above but instead for the 37form they teach a 60form but also sell DVDs with instructions of a long form, but no other weapons than the sword is included in their teaching syllabus.......In what other linages from Taiwan or mainland China do they teach ZMQ Yang-Taiji long form and the four weapons?

[Bao]

William Chen teaches the CMC form with very few differences. He just count the movements differently.

CMC’s philosophy and changes seem to favor the upright posture. I have also heard William Chen mentioning this. He said that this is the way Tai Chi should be performed, as the organs won’t move around and make pressure on eachother. IMO, it seems like a not very scientifically belief, similar to the medieval “four fluids” medical “science”. But from what I understand, this is probably also what CMC believed.

[windwalker]

This might help explain some of the rational concerning the elimination postures.

1. Elimination of Postures

It should be mentioned that there is confusion with the name Downward Punch, which is used for different movements that occur in the same place in the both the C.M.C. form and the Yang form. In the Yang form, “Downward Punch” is directed almost vertically downward. However, what is called Downward Punch in the C.M.C. form is the same as the movement “Punch Opponent’s Pubic Region” in the Yang form. In what follows, we will use the terminology of the Yang form and, therefore, use the name Punch Opponent’s Pubic Region for the movement called Downward Punch in the C.M.C. form.

In shortening the Yang form, Prof. Cheng removed seventeen postures: “Needle at Sea Bottom,” “Fan Through Back,” “Turn and Chop with Fist,” “High Pat on Horse,” “Turn and Strike with Sole,” “Right Foot Kicks Upward,” “Hit a Tiger at Left,” “Hit a Tiger at Right,” “Strike Both Ears with Fists,” “Left Foot Kicks Upward,” “Parting the Horse’s Mane (L),” “Parting the Horse’s Mane (R),” “Horizontal Single Whip,” “White Snake Puts Out Tongue,” “Cross Palms,” “Turn and Cross Legs,” and “Downward Punch” (see Table 1 for a comparison of the movements of the two forms).

http://www.chuckrowtaichi.com/CMCvsYang.html

a good comparison on the differences in postures

two styles, one art

The Cheng style is not alone in evolving into a more compact and formless style. Other noted styles of a smaller frame include the respected Wu style created by Wu Yuhsing and the Sun style created by Sun Lutang.

We can only conclude that the differences in style between the Yang and the Cheng are merely two paths attempting to achieve the same objectives. Both styles justify their efforts through recourse to the classics; however, each style has its individual interpretation and manner of expression. The Yang and Cheng styles are indeed different, but both equally worthy of respect. In the end both are one tai chi chuan.

http://www.taichiandqigong.com/yang_compare.php

[Trick]

Never heard that before about the taijiquan upright posture but makes sense somewhat

[windwalker]

:

Body Vertical Versus Leaning Forward. It is clear to me that Prof. Cheng’s purpose in having the body erect rather than leaning forward, as do many Yang-style practitioners, is to help the body to relax.

When the body is leaning in any direction, muscle tension must come into play in order to keep the body from falling in that direction. Having the body “stacked” vertically takes almost no effort. When exerting force on an opponent, it might be necessary to lean to keep from falling backward. When doing the form, however, the necessity to exert force is absent, and leaning forward is therefore unnecessary.

Propulsion of Force. Even through Yang Cheng-fu is not upright, his back is straight, and most interestingly, the extension of the line of his spine intersects the center of his rear foot (Fig. 3). Note also that each line drawn from the center of each of Yang’s feet to his forward palm is along each respective shin bone (Fig. 4). These relationships appear to be essential for expressing the martial power for which Yang Cheng-fu was renowned.

That is, the forces from Yang’s feet are directed along his shins and vector into his forward palm. Nevertheless, Prof. Cheng did not seem to have much trouble in exerting forward force without leaning forward (Fig. 5). Note in Fig. 5 that a line drawn from Prof. Cheng’s rear foot to the arm being pushed by others is along his rear leg and through the center of his body.

http://www.chuckrowtaichi.com/CMCvsYang.html

A good write up, he seems to miss a couple of points.....that I use in my own work,
not really related to the topic of thread.

Used to teach the 37 step as taught by people who were direct students of ZMQ in Taiwan
until meeting my last teacher.

Found it to be quite challenging coming from the tung/dong taiji, it was
quite different.

[Bao]

Never heard that before about the taijiquan upright posture but makes sense somewhat

It makes sense from a beginners/learning POV. First, you must learn how to always keep the centerline, how to always return to zhongding. From this perspective, learning to first feel the upright posture through all of the movement is good, it will let your waist free to “turn like a wheel”...
... However later ...

[Trick]

Never heard that before about the taijiquan upright posture but makes sense somewhat

It makes sense from a beginners/learning POV. First, you must learn how to always keep the centerline, how to always return to zhongding. From this perspective, learning to first feel the upright posture through all of the movement is good, it will let your waist free to “turn like a wheel”...
... However later ...

I was more referring to - "CMC’s philosophy and changes seem to favor the upright posture. I have also heard William Chen mentioning this. He said that this is the way Tai Chi should be performed, as the organs won’t move around and make pressure on eachother"

[Bao]

Never heard that before about the taijiquan upright posture but makes sense somewhat

It makes sense from a beginners/learning POV. First, you must learn how to always keep the centerline, how to always return to zhongding. From this perspective, learning to first feel the upright posture through all of the movement is good, it will let your waist free to “turn like a wheel”...
... However later ...

I was more referring to - "CMC’s philosophy and changes seem to favor the upright posture. I have also heard William Chen mentioning this. He said that this is the way Tai Chi should be performed, as the organs won’t move around and make pressure on eachother"

But you said that it makes sense. It doesn’t.

...IMO.

[wayne hansen]

Chu Hong bin the head of the CMC assn in Taiwan teaches the San shou
I have video of his instructional tapes given to me by his no 1 student
William Chens form is not just a recounting of CMC,s form
The sequence direction and postures are different just after fist under elbow it does needle and fan for one
I may have a different video to others ,it was sent to me by William
I haven looked at it for years
As I have said before the Malaysian lineage differed greatly to others due to the political situation
Huang who asked our grandmaster to help him out in Penang taught long and short form spear,long pole,short pole,knife,sword,walking stick and fast form but most of his students teach hardly any of these
Just because some lineages choose to simplify it does not change history.
Just think of the type of students he had in NY and what stage he was in his own development
I see the logic of his minimised form but I also see its limitations