# Need some advice.



## Ronnin (Jan 9, 2007)

I am thinking about learning Tai Chi Chuan. But I really want the art I chose to be applicable in everyday life, also hold tradition. Now what I am wondering is, is Tai Chi Chuan an effective art? I know the advantages to to life and health, again I also want practicality. I choose not to do the Shaolin style because, well I want to stay away from Wushu. Now please everyone, lets not get in an uproar here, I'm not saying Wushu doesn't have it's place in martial arts, but I have little interest in performing for judges on form. Having said that, or would I be better off looking into Wing Chun. I know that is quite practicle, but for me it lacks the traditional aspects I also seek. And I've read about the 5 different families of Tai Chi. Which would you say is more the "martial" side as opposed to the healing side? Anyway what's your advise ?


----------



## charyuop (Jan 9, 2007)

Firs of all I tell you immediately that I practice Tai Chi, but not as Martial Art.
I will try to divide my answer in 2 categories.

Health. Tai Chi is nowadays recognized to be a very healthy exercise. The movements keep in continue exercise joints and tendons so that they tend to avoid the stiffness that comes with age. It was also found very effective against cronicle deseases like Arthritis. When you learn correctly Tai Chi with the correct breathing (that might take some time) you will be able to slow down your breathing thus the heart beat. This was proven to be good for heart and blood circulation, in some cases helps even with blood pressure. The fact that the forms are performed in low stences (some styles more some less) will keep the legs muscles in a constant training, plus when you go ahead with the training and start training weapons that will help also the muscles of the top part (even a light weapon like a sword with slow long movement is a good training).

Martial Art. Well while I guess everyone will agree about the health benefits of Tai Chi for every style, when it comes down to MA there are several opinions. First of all let me tell you that learning Tai Chi as a Martial Art is a very long process and there are no short cuts. Every Tai Chi pratictioner (no matter what style) will confirm you that it is an effective Martial Art, but if you are looking to it for an immediate self defense tool, you are on the wrong path. As you mentioned there are 5 main styles (the ones recognized officially by China), but inside every style you can find differences...I guess this is true for every Martial Art.
The most taught style is for sure Yang style which comes directly from the Chen style. Yang style was the first style which was taught to outsider of China thus the most known. According to the practioner's styles they will tell you which one is more MA style and which one is not. But as a general belief the Chen style, which has usually lower stences thus more physically demanding, is the style which is supposed to be more effective in Martial Arts. Regarding the Yang style there is a little thing to say. There are mainly 2 Yang styles, one which was created streight from the Chen style and one which was modified by the Sifu Yang ChengFu. The second branch of the Yang style was (as many define it) watered down. Yang ChengFu got rid of some of the most difficult movements so that even old people or people with physical problems could be doing Tai Chi and enjoy the health benefits. Some people think that the only effective Yang style in Martial Art is the traditional (and even the hardest one to find a teacher of), while the ChngFu version is useless for self defense. Personally I think all 5 main styles are very effective in Martial Art, but this is just my opinion. You must know that Young ChengFu was said to be an excellent fighter, very hard to defeat. Now, it is true that he had mastered the traditional Yang style, but I find hard to believe that a man with his knowledge would create a style which is useless (and actually reading his writing about his style he seemed very convinced about its effectiveness).

This is just a little about Tai Chi...hopefully you will find it usefull as a start. But remember, finding a "good" Tai Chi teacher is a very important thing, even more important of the style you choose, since those good teachers are very rare.


----------



## Infinite (Jan 9, 2007)

My GF and I are doing Tai Chi as a form of exercise till I Can start up my art again.

The difference in Tai Chi and any other martial art is that Tai Chi does not teach application directly. It is effective the fighting forms are still there but they don't tell you WHY the form is effective or what the purpose is.

My guess is that with an instructor that stuff will be made more clear but at least for the first little while you are doing slow rythmic forms.

Unless someone else wants to educate me?


----------



## pete (Jan 9, 2007)

*Ronnin,* 
   find a teacher, regardless of style, that you trust and connect with personally that teaches the complete art (ie, physical, energetics, meditative, academic, and martial aspects).  the principles of tai chi are universal and although appear very different from style to style, at the core they are more similar than they appear. 

*Infinite,*
   if _"they don't tell you WHY the form is effective or what the purpose is", _or better still  SHOW YOU HOW to make the forms effective for SEVERAL PURPOSES.... Don't walk, *RUN* to find a new teacher.

pete


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 9, 2007)

pete said:


> *Ronnin,*
> find a teacher, regardless of style, that you trust and connect with personally that teaches the complete art (ie, physical, energetics, meditative, academic, and martial aspects). the principles of tai chi are universal and although appear very different from style to style, at the core they are more similar than they appear.


 
Very true.

Please allow me to add

First there are 6 families now recognized by the PRC

Chen Style
http://www.answers.com/topic/chen-style-tai-chi-chuan

Yang Style
http://www.answers.com/topic/yang-style-tai-chi-chuan

Wu Style
http://www.answers.com/wu style Tai Chi Chuan

Hao Style
http://www.answers.com/topic/wu-hao-style-t-ai-chi-ch-uan

Sun Style
http://www.answers.com/topic/sun-style-t-ai-chi-ch-uan

Zhaobao
http://www.answers.com/topic/zhaobao-taijiquan

Tai chi is a martial art and a very good one if trained properly

The problems are first finding a good teacher and second (and this is a big issue) the student must be patient, it takes time. 

And all Tai Chi schools are going to have an aspect of health it just comes with Tai Chi and that is a good thing.

If you train Wing Chun you can probably be able to defend yourself in about a year. You still have a lot to learn but you can use Wing Chun to defend yourself.

To understand Tai Chi, if you prescribe to what Tung Ying Chieh said (and I do), it takes about 3 years. But that 3 years is based on the old way of training, seeing your Sifu every day. 

If you want the martial arts of Tai Chi it takes time and you must be patient. 

You are likely to see more schools teaching Yang style Tai Chi for health than any other, but you are likely to see more alleged Yang style schools than any other. But if you find a good Yang school you will get martial arts. If they teach only Yang 24 and Tai Chi 48 form then likely you will not get martial arts, but it may not be a bad place to start. The first thing you need to look for in a Yang style school is whether or not it is traditional Yang and, as much as I would like to believe this is not an issue, what is the Sifus lineage. 

If you find a Chen school it is more likely to teach you martial arts due to Chen postures being lower and harder to do at first. But I have seen some bad Chen schools

I cannot speak for wu or hao styles but my guess is they are about the same as Chen. There are just fewer schools for these styles and you are more likely to find the real deal. 

Sun style hard to find but to the best of my knowledge it most Sun schools teach martial arts

Zhaobao, if you can find a Zhaobao school it will very likely be teaching martial arts.

Another style not listed is Yang style as it comes from Cheng Manching. If you find a school that teaches this style and the Sifu is William CC Chen or one of his approved teachers then you also have a martial arts school. I do not know anything about any other students of Cheng Manching and their dedication to martial arts; I just know William CC Chen is a martial artist and a very good one. 

Also the Yang style of the Dong/Tung family has been martial arts as well. 

But with that said if you are looking for a quick fix then Tai Chi might not be for you, if you have the time and patients to dedicate to it Tai Chi is a great thing to learn.


----------



## Ronnin (Jan 9, 2007)

hhhmmmmm...........well thank you very much everyone for your input. Now which style would you say uses more Qinna, Chen  ?


----------



## Infinite (Jan 9, 2007)

Hmm I have learned something... 

I guess my view wasn't deep enough I'm still learning Tai Chi but the difference I found is simply that,

In Karate when you punch you know you are punching.
In Tai Chi you move slowly and deliberetly in your form but the punch is never identified for what it is a punch. 

Perhaps I need a new instructor  comments?


----------



## pete (Jan 9, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> First there are 6 families now recognized by the PRC.


 this is quite true... however, there are many lesser known styles that have either been derived from these family styles and/or hybrid-ized with other internal arts or philosophies. again, my advice is to those looking to begin is to decide based on the best teacher available that matches their personal goal and level of effort they are willing to expend... regardless of who the PRC formally recognizes.



Xue Sheng said:


> And all Tai Chi schools are going to have an aspect of health it just comes with Tai Chi and that is a good thing.


 this is also in my experiences quite true... however, health benefits are a by-product of comprehensive practice of the physical, energetic, meditative, academic, and martial aspects of the complete art. if my desire was to train the complete art, i'd be wary of a school or teacher that presents it as 'tai chi for health'. 

if that is the _yin_, i'd also be wary the excessive _yang_ or what seems to be getting very popular as 'tai chi for combat'. again, the martial aspect should be taught and students should learn how to utilize the function from the form, but not at the expense of the other aspects of the art. in truth, the martial aspect of tai chi is only as effective as it remains in balance with the physical, energetic, meditative, and academic.



Xue Sheng said:


> If you train Wing Chun you can probably be able to defend yourself in about a year. You still have a lot to learn but you can use Wing Chun to defend yourself.
> 
> To understand Tai Chi, if you prescribe to what Tung Ying Chieh said (and I do), it takes about 3 years. But that 3 years is based on the old way of training, seeing your Sifu every day.
> 
> ...


not sure that i agree with either of the specfic timeframe milestones given, or any predetermined timeframe for any martial art (too many variables) but definitely agree in concept... 'external' arts are more obvious and will get you to a decent level of self defense quicker than 'internal' arts, however, it is not uncommon for students to begin applying the martial qualities of tai chi in a year or less. naturally, these skills would be rudimentary and not as effective as they become with ongoing practice and guidance from a good teacher.

good stuff this tai chi is. and good information being shared...

pete


----------



## pete (Jan 9, 2007)

Ronnin said:


> hhhmmmmm...........well thank you very much everyone for your input. Now which style would you say uses more Qinna, Chen ?


read my posts again, and then answer: not the style but the teacher.!.!.!


----------



## Ronnin (Jan 9, 2007)

pete said:


> read my posts again, and then answer: not the style but the teacher.!.!.!


 
but i also understand that different styles such as Chen vs. Yang, one will have more of "something", or less of "something" then the other. in this case I'm wondering about Qinna.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 9, 2007)

Ronnin said:


> but i also understand that different styles such as Chen vs. Yang, one will have more of "something", or less of "something" then the other. in this case I'm wondering about Qinna.


 
If you are looking for more obvious Qinna applications I general you look to Chen and Zhaobao.

But qinna exists in varying degrees in all Chinese martial arts. 

And as pete stated it often depends on the teacher.

My sifu does not emphasis Qinna but another Yang sifu might.


----------



## Ronnin (Jan 9, 2007)

I see okay, so find a sifu that does emphasise those aspects.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 9, 2007)

pete said:


> this is quite true... however, there are many lesser known styles that have either been derived from these family styles and/or hybrid-ized with other internal arts or philosophies. again, my advice is to those looking to begin is to decide based on the best teacher available that matches their personal goal and level of effort they are willing to expend... regardless of who the PRC formally recognizes.


 
This is true, this is why I said recognized by the PRC.

I could have listed a multitude of other family styles but I saw no point those schools tend to be more rare than the 6 listed, even in the PRC. And many are variation of one of the 6. But then to be historically correct all are pretty much variations of Chen. 



pete said:


> this is also in my experiences quite true... however, health benefits are a by-product of comprehensive practice of the physical, energetic, meditative, academic, and martial aspects of the complete art. if my desire was to train the complete art, i'd be wary of a school or teacher that presents it as 'tai chi for health'.


 
Also true



pete said:


> if that is the _yin_, i'd also be wary the excessive _yang_ or what seems to be getting very popular as 'tai chi for combat'. again, the martial aspect should be taught and students should learn how to utilize the function from the form, but not at the expense of the other aspects of the art. in truth, the martial aspect of tai chi is only as effective as it remains in balance with the physical, energetic, meditative, and academic.


 
true and this sounds similar to something I said before?




pete said:


> not sure that i agree with either of the specfic timeframe milestones given, or any predetermined timeframe for any martial art (too many variables) but definitely agree in concept... 'external' arts are more obvious and will get you to a decent level of self defense quicker than 'internal' arts, however, it is not uncommon for students to begin applying the martial qualities of tai chi in a year or less. naturally, these skills would be rudimentary and not as effective as they become with ongoing practice and guidance from a good teacher.
> 
> good stuff this tai chi is. and good information being shared...
> 
> pete


 
see this post for a more of my point, 
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43682
I just did not feel like typing the whole thing. 

And I do agree whit what you are saying here.


----------



## Ronnin (Jan 9, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> If you are looking for more obvious Qinna applications I general you look to Chen and Zhaobao.


 
so does anyone know of any of these schools in the orange county area to recommend ?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 9, 2007)

Ronnin said:


> so does anyone know of any of these schools in the orange county area to recommend ?


 

maybe, maybe not

Orange county where on the left or right coast and what are the names of the schools?

But the best way to find out is to go watch a class and talk to the sifu. 

Ask who the sifu's teacher was, ask if they teach tai chi with the martial arts intact. They should answer your questions.


----------



## charyuop (Jan 9, 2007)

Infinite said:


> Hmm I have learned something...
> 
> I guess my view wasn't deep enough I'm still learning Tai Chi but the difference I found is simply that,
> 
> ...


 
First of all we have to point out something. True the beginning process of learning Tai Chi is through the learning of the slow form. This is done for many different reasons...the good inprint on the memory muscle, the chance to study and undertsand all the forces involved in the Art (every part of the body is subject to forces which will be balanced by another part of the body...if not wrong it is called Duai La) and so on.
But in a fight your opponent won't be moving slowly, thus thinking about Tai Chi only as a slow Martial Art it is wrong. As next step in learning Tai Chi as MA you will work on the speed and using Tai Chi at a faster speed. There are in each style fast forms of Tai Chi, they are just not as well known as the slow form.

As per the attacking part not being visible I have read something in regard. There are 3 levels inside Tai Chi. The first level is applying the movement to what it looks clear its purpose is. In the second level the application is not 100% visible in the form, but it is understandable through the study of the form. The third level is the invisible purpose of the movement which is understandable only through the teaching of your Sifu.


----------



## oddball (Jan 10, 2007)

I did a search in yahoo local a month or so ago (was looking for kung fu in OC for my friend), and found two tai chi places. They also mixed the curriculum with a little Northern Mantis, I believe... so, I think that might have the martial mixed in as well? (Not meaning to say that taichi isn't martial, just maybe the other aspects are taught with the other parts of class?) Edit: Finally figured how to phrase this right - What I was meaning to say is that since there are other aspects of the curriculum more oriented towards combat martial arts, it's slightly more likely to not have a health only taichi place.

There is also a tai chi class (2 days a week, friend doesn't remember what style and just started) being taught at cal poly pomona if you happen to go there.


----------



## Ronnin (Jan 10, 2007)

thanks a lot, although Pomona is a bit far for me. the schools around here are : Lau Kune Do ( which I have no idea what that is ) OC Fight Center does Tai Chi from Yang Chang-Fu, some other one i don't know the name of headed by a Sifu John Bracey. that's about it i think. everyone out here seems to do the Yang style.


----------



## East Winds (Jan 10, 2007)

Ronnin,

Plenty good advice from the guys here (particularly from Pete). It is always difficult for a beginner to know whether a school is good or bad!! That knowledge only comes from experience. My first three years in Taiji were a complete waste of time :erg:. But at the time I thought the teacher was brilliant!!!! Quite by accident I went to a workshop with a visitng Master and immediately found out my teacher was a fraud :shrug:. Find out if your prospective teacher has any sort of lineage and whether he/she teaches (eventually) the martial aspect of the art. But as others have said, don't expect to be a martial artist after a couple of years of taiji study. If you want to learn to defent yourself quickly, go for one other external arts. Incidentally, speed in Taiji comes from practicing applications with a partner, not by doing fast forms.

Very best wishes and let us know your progress.


----------



## Ronnin (Jan 11, 2007)

Thank you everyone, and I do understand the patience required, I do have quite a few years of experience in different arts. The thing is, is I'm trying to avoid waisting 3 years of my time before figuring out my teacher is a fraud. I'm hoping I can gather all of your guys advise so I don't go in knowledgeless. The problem is, is everyone ( when I say everyone I mean the Sifu's I spoken to here ) says "yes Yang style Tai Chi is more health, but it has many martial aspects in it, it's up to the student". Then Chen style Sifu's will say the same thing. So............. you know what I mean. I guess it's just different from what I'm used to, in the Japanese arts they're very regimented, very "this is different from that because of this". You know, it's all very obvious. Sorry if I'm being a bit elementary.


----------



## Ronnin (Jan 11, 2007)

What do you guys think of Wu Style.......woohoo yellow belt !.......sorry


----------



## pete (Jan 11, 2007)

Ronnin said:


> What do you guys think of Wu Style.......woohoo yellow belt !.......sorry




http://www.amazon.com/Classical-Nor..._bbs_sr_1/102-3020078-3778553?ie=UTF8&s=books


.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 11, 2007)

International Wu Style Tai Chi Chuan Federation - Wu family Site
http://www.wustyle.com/en/index.html

Wu Style comes from The Yang style of Yang Ban hou who taught Wu Quan-yu. I did some Wu style briefly and I liked it a lot but there were no qualified Wu style teachers in my area. I no longer do the form because if I do everything becomes Wu. My yang style starts to look like Wu and back when I did Chen style my Chen style stated to look, in places, like Wu. 

But that's all I got on Wu


----------

