37 Form Discussion

[tennytigers]

these two sections are from the 37 step not the 108

[Robert Bemoras]

these two sections are from the 37 step not the 108

I stand corrected. I just completed watching Cheng Man-ching complete his whole 37 move form on U-tube. I practice the Dong family version of the form. Cheng Man-ching kept the beginning and end of his form the same as the traditional Yang Cheng Fu form.
The one difference is that in the first section(1st video)the long form adds one more play guitar to brush knee to dump the bucket. My apologies for the misinformation...Bob

[Robert Bemoras]

these two sections are from the 37 step not the 108

I stand corrected. I just completed watching Cheng Man-ching complete his whole 37 move form on U-tube. I practice the Dong family version of the form. Cheng Man-ching kept the beginning and end of his form the same as the traditional Yang Cheng Fu form.
The one difference is that in the first section(1st video)the long form adds one more play guitar to brush knee to dump the bucket. My apologies for the misinformation...Bob

If anyone is interested, here is a clip of Dong Hu Ling (2nd gen. Dong family)performing the first section of the 108 form...Bob

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZHm-eNe ... re=related

[J HepworthYoung]

How is the title of master determined?

Short forms seem so well... short. CC chen and TT liang both added things like fighting practice, and San Shou to what Zheng taught them. This indicates to me that somehow they felt his teachings were incomplete.

My teacher told me that Cheng-fu taught many people the form and push hands, but that he only taught a few people taiji. I don't conflate the practice of a tai chi form with the practice of tai chi. If the short form was enough there would be a million masters alive today.

I think Zheng was very good at what he practiced but don't consider him as having recieved the complete art of the Yang family. A brilliant man to be sure, but I wonder how much veneration is due to true mastery and how much is due to fame and hiercharchy?

[taiwandeutscher]

Well, this is an old question, nobody will be able to answer objectivly. Having done lots of translation work for my own master, I just cannot imagine that ZMQ did all this work for YCF without being close.
Maybe ZMQ didn't get the whole transmisson and I don't know how good he really was (missed him by 7 years here in Taiwan), but I know several of his still living indoors, who are all rather good. Just yesterday, I read on EF that ZMQ adepts still rule most PH competitions in the US, same here in TW, so what he taught cannot be too bad. Still, he himself had also lost to other Yang guys here in Taiwan, in many years here, I never saw someone really unbeatable as Yang Wudi.
Training only 37, ph and a little sword may become boaring, so many have added stuff, here mostly from Xiong Yanghe, sanshou sabre, staff.
Having learned 37, 64 and 108, I tend to believe that the form is not that important, always depending what the sudent makes of it.

[black matt]

Short forms seem so well... short. CC chen and TT liang both added things like fighting practice, and San Shou to what Zheng taught them. This indicates to me that somehow they felt his teachings were incomplete

To say that William Chen and TT Liang may have felt Cheng Man Ching's teachings were incomplete because they added things like san shou is a very big assumption. William Chen's interest in san shou and competing in tournaments is well known dating back to the 50's. Simply because he gravitated toward a different aspect of the art than his teacher does not in any way indicate to me that he felt there was a problem with his teacher's transmission.

Regarding whether the short form is 'too short', I can't help but think that the principles, individual practice, and teacher are infinitely more important than the length of a form,

It's ridiculous to go through some of these questions when time is much better spent practicing. He's been dead for over 30 years, and Yang Cheng Fu has been dead for over 70 years.

[tennytigers]

i am of the cmc linage.
if
the 37 is too short do it 3 times without mind seperation between the repitions then it is the same length asd the 108.
although it misses some very important moves.
in our school the missing moves have been added to the form to create the 58 step,many of chengs students did that.
the reason many of his student went on to learn all aspects of the yang system is they got good enough to see the value in the entire curriciulm.
a system is a system for a reason,to lead you to understanding.
cheng developed the 37 to fit in with the teaching requirements of the nanjing milatery academy he was then able to see the zen siplicity of moore is less.
if you think short forms are of no worth dont ever take up hsing-i it is short and quick.
the broasdsword form is as short as the 37.
so is the pole, spear,sword and san shou.
they all have enormous value.

[J HepworthYoung]

Has there been a study of how many of the CMC students there are? I suspect they not only win most PH stuff, I bet that the majority of people entering them are CMC, that would also mean that the majority of people losing them are CMC.

Short in the CMC sense to me also means abridged, abbreviated, condensed etc, how long a form is has little to do with how complete it is. Ergo my dislike of short forms is not a dislike of forms that are quick, instead it is a dislike of what feels like fast food tai chi to me. Take a hsing-i move like wood fist and then remove 2/3 of it and then teach it as a more conveniant version of the move.

I know the short for leaves some moves out, I practice a CWM 108 among other things. I know the CMC short form though, have done it many times, thats likely why I feel it is so geriatric. I think the derrivations of energy are the same, but think CMC was not concerned with passing on a complete martial system.

CMC style seems to teach a short form and push hands, not the 13 postures. I am entitled to my opinion, he seems like a brillant professor, but his contribution to tai chi seems like a valid question to me. I practice all the time, questions have nothing to do with this. Does it not say in the classics to question every talented voice?

Was CMC a sworn student? It is my understanding Cheng-fu had a very small amount of sworn students and a lot of people he ended up teaching a form and push hands. I read his words once where he said that people who wanted the form up front, instead of the classic methods of training one posture at a time, were impatient and prone to specific problems in learning the 13 postures.

I have seen several people conflate forms practice with tai chi practice, even teaching that the forms, not the postures, constitute the art!

Maybe I should mention that I feel similar about long form practice, it is good but don't practice the form to do the form and think you are doing tai chi. The form was taught to teach certain things, not those things taught to teach the form.

How many CMC people are there in the world now do you think?

[tennytigers]

i only stated i was of the cmc linage to not seem like i was wearing a wolfs cloak.
i agree with what you say it is not what form you practice but how you practice it .
our linage comes through the penang branch of the yap sui ting linage.
we do the whole yang style curricilum.
standing
walking
form,37,58 108,
over 100 pushing exercises
san shou,as solo forms with numerous applications for each move of the88,and as a prolonged two man set.
and free style application and sparing
we repeat each step above for
pole
spear
knife
and sword
we also have fighting set.
now i know all cmc schools dont teach this way,you must realise there is as much divergance in the cmc linage as there is in the yang and tai chi as a whole.
i think many of todays cmc people have been overly influenced by films of cheng,on second guessing what he taught through the magnifing glass of his writings.
were many of his students like the yangs who trained little while their teacher was alive and tried to make up for lost time later.
i dont know,but each practicioner must be taken on an individual basis not as part of a school.
i have had students who dont get it,students who do,fighters,non fighters the whole gambit i am sure cheng was the same.
look at those you know today the ones with the most profile are not always the most true to form or the best practicioners.

[Scott M. Rodell]

...Short forms seem so well... short...

I began my practice under Robert Smith, Zheng Manqing's (CMC) first non-Chinese student. Smith explained on several occasions that Zheng condensed the form, removing repetitions & several movements that in his experience were less martially effective, while he was teaching taijiquan at the Military Academy in Nanjing. He didn't shorten the form to make it easier, quite the opposite. Zheng observed that the young officers were not strong enough to do the form properly, as his teach had taught, truly separating their weight & taking empty steps (not just light steps). In essence, they were cheating their way thru the form. He so condensed the form to the essentials & demanded they do it properly.

To be honest, Smith classes were not easy, these "Short" form classes were some of the most demanding classes I've ever been in & I was in my 20's & coming off 6 years of wrestling.

[tennytigers]

i find the missing movements to be more martial if anything.
high pat the horse
wild horse flings its mane
needle/fan
white snake spits leather
hit tiger
two winds

[J HepworthYoung]

I am impressed by the practices you mention, (Laoshi and TennyTigers) they don't strike me as short by any means.

I know the CMC 37, I have to admit I have done it many times. While it is not a major focus of my practice I have learned from doing it.

You know Laoshi, that 'cheating their way through the form' anecdote makes perfect sense to me. I know that I had done the image of forms many times but have come to understand (via my body and mind) the empty and full in the footwork and only in the last couple of months. I'll admit that I have spend tens of hours a week doing just the sparrows tale sequence over and over to help learn it.

Perhaps I have been foolish in my consideration of CMC and his work.

[Scott M. Rodell]

... Perhaps I have been foolish in my consideration of CMC and his work.

I don't think it is ever foolish to ask tough questions, or the questions that some might not want one to ask. However, since we all have our egos & knowing how the martial world can be if students of a lineage think their school is under attack (mistakenly or not) it is generally wise for all of us to be as polite as possible.

All the best...

[xingyi24]

Mr. Rodell, much respect and agreement on your statement long ago on studying more than one form of the same system. Studying xingyi from the age of 12 to 16 under the same teacher, and then having to find another when he passed, and then another when we moved, I had several teachers from 16 to 21, and then stabilized until the economy made me continue to move for the next 8 years. Consequently, I studied one art many ways. Doing so I found that every teacher has been taught a system that shows a different elemental form, which is the rough equvalent to the shortened 37 form. My first teacher was the only one I have ever met who could analyze a student enough to make a new form based on their needs, just like what was done for the army. Not only did this help those of us learning, but it caused all of us to study the form enough to analize our own styles to expand back into the original manuals and beyond by maybe modifying the form as our skills progressed.

In short, if the martial brain is like a sponge pour the water on at a pace it can absorb, and don't try to pour it through the plastic wrapper. The best teachers are the kind that teach you not to need them but continue with them out of respect, humility, and appreciation.