Cheng Man Ching

[Dr.Rob]

So smooth...so hypnotic. I never seen a whole form from him. Had to share.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCEXCHuN ... re=related

[Doc Stier]

To a great extent, Cheng Man-Ching's signature style of performing Tai-Chi Chuan shaped what most people in North America thought the art should look like for a long time. As a result, the general view seemed to be that if your TCC didn't look like Cheng's style, it was not soft enough and probably wrong, if not outright bogus.

[lazyboxer]

Which is why I, as an early follower of Cheng's method, was baffled when I first saw photos of the very different postures of Yang Chengfu, purportedly his teacher.

Since then, much more information has come to light, unavailable at the time. Strangely enough, many people still prefer the myths.

[ShortFormMike]

To a great extent, Cheng Man-Ching's signature style of performing Tai-Chi Chuan shaped what most people in North America thought the art should look like for a long time. As a result, the general view seemed to be that if your TCC didn't look like Cheng's style, it was not soft enough and probably wrong, if not outright bogus.

that is mostly true though.

[Doc Stier]

To a great extent, Cheng Man-Ching's signature style of performing Tai-Chi Chuan shaped what most people in North America thought the art should look like for a long time. As a result, the general view seemed to be that if your TCC didn't look like Cheng's style, it was not soft enough and probably wrong, if not outright bogus.

that is mostly true though.

Such views are now only true for practitioners of Cheng's Style Tai-Chi Chuan, who thus believe it to be the best style. Now that the five major family styles have received greater public exposure during recent decades, few outside Cheng's style believe that his method best represents what TCC in general, or Yang Style Tai-Chi Chuan in particular, should look like anymore.

[Wanderingdragon]

If you follow this clip to youtube you find some interesting takes on CMC's kung fu

[fisherman]

To a great extent, Cheng Man-Ching's signature style of performing Tai-Chi Chuan shaped what most people in North America thought the art should look like for a long time. As a result, the general view seemed to be that if your TCC didn't look like Cheng's style, it was not soft enough and probably wrong, if not outright bogus.

that is mostly true though.

Such views are now only true for practitioners of Cheng's Style Tai-Chi Chuan, who thus believe it to be the best style. Now that the five major family styles have received greater public exposure during recent decades, few outside Cheng's style believe that his method best represents what TCC in general, or Yang Style Tai-Chi Chuan in particular, should look like anymore.

From what I have encountered, and I am speaking solely based on that, there is too much emphasis on relaxation without the structure to back it up. Maybe CMC had it, but the problem as I see it is that too many of his American students don't understand the principles and try to embody what CMC looked like, not the actual principles that make him known.
IMO - this might be a good style to practice if you are looking for health benefits, but maybe not so good if you are looking for applicable Taiji. I would really like to be shown different, but at this point I have pushed with three people that have CMC Taiji as there primary focus, one of which is teaching, and I haven't seen anything all that impressive. Each time I have pushed with them they lack sensitivity due to a lack of peng jing and good sung structure. I find it sad that folks that have trained in the CMC style alone (at least around here) have the false notion that they have the ability to actually use their stuff effectively.
Too noodle-ly - not enough peng jing. Like I said, perhaps the old man had it, but I have not seen it in any of the folks training his style that I have come across.
Just what I have encountered though...
Chris

[mrtoes]

He has some nice qualities of movement... I didn't really think much of the application/push hands bit at the end of the video though.

[C.J.Wang]

To a great extent, Cheng Man-Ching's signature style of performing Tai-Chi Chuan shaped what most people in North America thought the art should look like for a long time. As a result, the general view seemed to be that if your TCC didn't look like Cheng's style, it was not soft enough and probably wrong, if not outright bogus.

That's the advantage of dominating the market early on and being the first to shape other's cocneption of what something "should" look/feel/taste like.

It's the same with Chinese food in this country. Sometimes I feel like kicking the butt of the guy who first began passing all the gooey, deep-fried, sweet-sour sauce coated mess as something that the Chinese actually eat everyday.

[Bob]

CMC is a hard pill to digest. I do beleive that the softness and movement of his taiji is indeed an important level of the overall Yang tiaji picture. My guess is that this is a very advanced level with regard to skill, however, without those training jibengong, exercises, and drills I don't think a student can reach that level of both stillness and power.

What I really don't know is if CMC was indeed that skilled at a high level. I have been told by more than one Taiwan practitioner that you should pay attention to his paintings, for that is where his real skills lie. His taiji was of average skill at best. On the other hand, a lot of people say he was extremely skilled, indeed at a very high level. I mean you got articles by Ben Lo or others indicating that CMC had even trained in dian xue in preparation for one of his challenges.

Frankly, after all of these years, I don't quite know what to believe about the man and his legend. I suspect he was highly skilled but left no clear trail as to how to reach his level.

[GrahamB]

Judge for yourself:





I'd say he was better than Stephen Yan

[GrahamB]

From what I have encountered, and I am speaking solely based on that, there is too much emphasis on relaxation without the structure to back it up. Maybe CMC had it, but the problem as I see it is that too many of his American students don't understand the principles and try to embody what CMC looked like, not the actual principles that make him known.
IMO - this might be a good style to practice if you are looking for health benefits, but maybe not so good if you are looking for applicable Taiji. I would really like to be shown different, but at this point I have pushed with three people that have CMC Taiji as there primary focus, one of which is teaching, and I haven't seen anything all that impressive. Each time I have pushed with them they lack sensitivity due to a lack of peng jing and good sung structure. I find it sad that folks that have trained in the CMC style alone (at least around here) have the false notion that they have the ability to actually use their stuff effectively.
Too noodle-ly - not enough peng jing. Like I said, perhaps the old man had it, but I have not seen it in any of the folks training his style that I have come across.
Just what I have encountered though...
Chris

It's hard to generalise about his lineage - they're all as different and contain as many extremes as every other Taiji style now. For example - no noodle soft going on here!

[ShortFormMike]

From what I have encountered, and I am speaking solely based on that, there is too much emphasis on relaxation without the structure to back it up.

this cracks me up because unless CMC was lying, yang chengfu himself told his students to relax far more than anything else. cheng wrote that his head felt like "an over-stuffed basket" from hearing it so much. this is also documented by cheng weiming.

-----
look, if someone sucks it is RARELY because of their method. it is because of their own level of gungfu which is inextricably linked to practice time.

go meet up w/ ben lo or william chen or henry wang and then tell me they put too great an emphasis on softness. the only main difference between them and CMC stylists like me who suck is the amount of work they've put in over time.

aside from a couple taichi retreats my teacher never practiced more than 14hrs/wk when he was "the absolute most fanatical" and he can definitely use his stuff. in fact his press is very powerful and unlike pretty much everyone i've met he can use it on the fly against experienced players. and w/o impeccable structure press is friggin worthless.

[ShortFormMike]

another way to look at CMC is even people who hated him said he was great. tt liang had 20 some teachers and he said CMC was the best. mind you, this is someone he said was "like hitler".

a lot of students who fall out w/ their masters end up claiming other lineages. i have yet seen this to be the case w/ CMC and several of his well known students were no longer even on speaking terms w/ him.

i think it also may offend some people's sensibilities that some guy could be a great artist and almost effeminate and yet be one of the best masters of his generation who beats people w/ complete softness.

[cerebus]

One of the things which I personally find to be most combatively effective about CMC Tai Chi IS the extreme relaxation. Of course correct structure and principles are essential as they are for any martial art, but as long as you do have that it's a VERY combat effective method...