# Tai Chi 37 Form Yang Style



## George Martin (Sep 16, 2002)

Does anyone know of a decent book that has 37 form Yang style. I have the book by Zhang Fuxing and it only has 24 and 88.


----------



## theneuhauser (Sep 22, 2002)

George Martin

I dont think so, but there is an older book that is a possibility. look up TT Lang's(Liang?) 'Tai Chi for health and self defense" (or something to that effect), honestly, i dont remember much of the content, but it was good.


----------



## hubris (Sep 26, 2002)

I have a library of books on the short Yang form. I haven't found any of them as useful as a good teacher. I think that videos are more helpful than books. When I get home, I'll do an inventory of my books and tapes and let you know which ones I've found most helpful.


----------



## Dronak (Sep 26, 2002)

The 37 posture form?  Is that the Cheng Man Ching version?  If so I do have one book on it, but I can't remember any details about it off hand.  I haven't looked at it in years.  I can give you a reference if I remember to look it up when I go home though.


----------



## hubris (Sep 26, 2002)

Yeah, I think that's what it is. (chan men ching) Sorry, I misunderstood your question!


----------



## Dronak (Sep 27, 2002)

If you want it, the book I have that contains a/the Cheng Man Ching tai chi form is called _The Complete Book of T'ai Chi_ by Stewart McFarlane, consultant:  Tan Mew Hong.  It's a DK Publishing, Inc. book (back of the book gives their web site as http://www.dk.com/).


----------



## George Martin (Sep 27, 2002)

The 24 form that I have learned is Yang style. However I am not sure that the 37 form that we are learning is the same style however I think so as several of the beginning moves are pretty much the same.  I will check out these reference books and see what they contain.


----------



## Taiji fan (Oct 31, 2002)

> The 24 form that I have learned is Yang style. However I am not sure that the 37 form that we are learning is the same style however I think so as several of the beginning moves are pretty much the same. I will check out these reference books and see what they contain.


 The 24 forms also known as the simplified form is based (loosely)on Yang Shi Taijiquan, the 37 step form devised by Cheng Man Ching is often refered to as Yang style although is as far removed from the posture requirements of traditional Yang Shi.  Both of these forms contain embellishments and incorrect practices.  Such as the lack of distinction between open and closed posture, the line ups of the arms and legs, the application, the spirit etc, changes in body requirments.  Infact I have seen the 37 step performed and taught in an overly floppy manner and the simplified form taught and practised with students fully focussed on what their hands are doing throughout the form.  The simplified form has come to over emphasise the large frame of Yang shi and make large sweeping movements that lose the application, this is particularly eveident in the grasp birds tail section.  Both of these forms also emphasise the 'holding the ball' idea which violates the principle of ...one part moves, all parts move....Yang Shi Taijiquan has no ball holding, but instead completes the application, maintaining the principles throughout the form.  All in all if you are limited in what is available I would tend to go for the simplified form over the 37 as it is a bit closer to Yang style.


----------



## TkdWarrior (Oct 31, 2002)

i hav heard about Yang 38 form, not sure about 37...
-TkdWarrior-


----------



## Taiji fan (Nov 1, 2002)

all forms have any number of movemnts depending on how you count them, which is why I prefer to refer to the '24' step form as the simplified form because funnily enough if you count all the moves individually there are way more than 24, the 37 step form as the Cheng Man Ching form and we refere to our form as either the Yang family form or the tradtional form or the long form, we don't give it a number, sometimes it gets refered to as the 108 step, the 88, step the 103 step ..........phew its like counting sheep, it could send you to sleep.  And there are enough people who practise taiji as if they are half asleep already


----------



## sean_stonehart (Nov 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Taiji fan _
> 
> *all forms have any number of movemnts depending on how you count them, which is why I prefer to refer to the '24' step form as the simplified form because funnily enough if you count all the moves individually there are way more than 24, the 37 step form as the Cheng Man Ching form and we refere to our form as either the Yang family form or the tradtional form or the long form, we don't give it a number, sometimes it gets refered to as the 108 step, the 88, step the 103 step ..........phew its like counting sheep, it could send you to sleep.  And there are enough people who practise taiji as if they are half asleep already  *



Ditto... at my school, we're taught 4 different taiji forms. We're taught 2 Yang forms & 2 Chen forms. The two Yangs are called "short Yang" (24) & "long Yang" (37). The Chen forms are called "baby Chen" (18) & "big Chen" (Xin jia or 83). It keeps things simple & you focused on the form, not trying to count steps or motions.


----------



## Taiji fan (Nov 4, 2002)

Cheng man Ching taiji is not Yang style....well not yang family style anyway.  Cheng Man Ching may have spent some time studying with Yang Cheng Fu, but his 'developments' on Yang style take it as far away from traditonal Yang as you can get.  In fact the Yang family go blue in the face when you mention his name   If that is your first introduction to taiji you would be really surprised when you see traditional Yang, the body requirments are totally different.....And for those who claim to be teaching early Yang or Yang Lu Chans original form....well I guess you are practising Chen then!

Simplified 24 is slightly better, but relies more on asthetics that practicality and encourages overly large flowery movemnts.  If you are looking for a short from.  Each section of the long Yang form can be practised individually.  Section 1 has around 16 moves and makes a nice wee form on its own.....you want a challenge do sections 1 and 2 togther or 1,2,3 or 1 and 3 or even better don't worry about practising an entire form at all, but concentrate on refining individual moves


----------



## sean_stonehart (Nov 5, 2002)

I know CMC isn't the Yang style of Yang family per se, but considering YCF was his taiji teacher, by no other reason, he's grouped as Yang.


----------



## East Winds (Nov 5, 2002)

Don't want to get into the useless "my form is better than your form" debate, but it was Cheng Man Ching who CLAIMED to have been a student of Yang Cheng-fu. You won't find his name in any of the Yang lineages!!! When Yang Cheng-fu changed Yang Lu Chang's form for the third time, he said "That is it. The form cannot be refined any further. To do so would be to destroy the essence of the form". Cheng Man Ching promptly changed the form!!

I personally don't like the look of the Cheng Man-Ching form,, but I have to say it is a very effective fighting form.


----------



## Taiji fan (Nov 5, 2002)

> I know CMC isn't the Yang style of Yang family per se, but considering YCF was his taiji teacher, by no other reason, he's grouped as Yang.


 I understand, but it does lead to quite a bit of confusion.  As the form itself is different and the manner in which its practised is so different, I have people turing up to class who have done CMC style but called it Yang and then felt  stupid when they hae found out that we are doing something totally different.  It would seem to make more sense to call CMC taiji CMC style, Traditional Yang- Yang Style and then I wouldn't have such a problem with it.



> I personally don't like the look of the Cheng Man-Ching form,, but I have to say it is a very effective fighting form.


 so to differentiate it from Yang would be no problem. I guess for the same reason that Yang came from the Chen style but was altered to suit Yang Lu Chan's ideas of fighting and then further changed by Yang Cheng Fu, so developed into Yang and the same for Sun and Wu, tht way CMC's developments can be personalised to his method of understanding and practice and the style recognised as its own.


----------



## sean_stonehart (Nov 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by East Winds _
> 
> *Don't want to get into the useless "my form is better than your form" debate, but it was Cheng Man Ching who CLAIMED to have been a student of Yang Cheng-fu. You won't find his name in any of the Yang lineages!!! When Yang Cheng-fu changed Yang Lu Chang's form for the third time, he said "That is it. The form cannot be refined any further. To do so would be to destroy the essence of the form". Cheng Man Ching promptly changed the form!!
> 
> I personally don't like the look of the Cheng Man-Ching form,, but I have to say it is a very effective fighting form. *



Eh I understand the debate & I'm like you. I don't feel like the "debate". The only thing I'll say about the Yang-Cheng relationship is, yeah you're absolutely right. He's not written in the lineage. That's fine & good. He still claimed to have studied  under YCF. Anybody who could've disproved didn't. Therefore, much like regular history books, the winner writes the history. He wrote the history & he wasn't debunked at the time when it _really_ mattered. Now it just makes for flame bait. 

The fighting part of it isn't bad at all. I've read (mind you a while ago so I'm easily correctable with this), but CMC also studied White Crane.


----------



## East Winds (Nov 6, 2002)

Couldn't agree more with you Taji fan! CMC form quite simply is  not Yang style. It is like the Taoist Tai Chi Society claiming that they teach a "modified yang" form. (Some would doubt that they are even teaching Taiji!)There is no such thing as a modified Yang form. It is either Yang or it isn't! I wonder if these people hang on to the Yang name as a way of trying to legitimise what they teach. I would have no problem with people saying they practise or teach CMC form. We would all know what they were talking about and there would be no confusion and no conflict.  I also agree with Taiji fan's synthesis of the 24 step. Good for what it is -  "simplified" taiji. (I hesitiate to apply the suffix quan). I have no problem with 24 step - I teach it! but use it only as an introduction to Taiji. Its easy and quick to learn. Nothing complicated and good as a  health exercise.


----------



## CraneSpreadWings (Nov 18, 2002)

I am pretty sure the Yang 38 form is Yang Chen Fu's form...I know one kind of this came to America with the Choy family in San Francisco and Choy Kam Man Academy there...
I am currently studying both this form and the Cheng Man Ching form (because my Chinese Medicine school teaches the CMC)... I'm not sure quite what I think about the whole difference yet, but... 
I have definitely picked up some basic mechanics from the CMC that have helped with the 38 form, but Yang Cheng Fu's form is stronger in 'implying' the opening and closing spirals (Chon Si) that are so at the core of what Taichi is all about. Of the two I like this form better... Just my two cents so far....   
To talk about the politics surrounding Prof Cheng gets pretty hairy. Many teachers and proponents of this style that I have met or read seem pretty hard pressed to say that 'All other taichi is wrong taichi' and prove the validity of the style etc...that may say something to the opposite in my opinion...
however, i like to play Prof Chengs taiji and i do believe that Cheng had medicinal benefits in mind that shine through in the form and may help illness and field distortion more effectively and faster than others....lets not forget that Tai Chi is medicine...

Anyway,Ive had some Cheng Man Cheng players thrash me all over the place in push hands...


----------



## East Winds (Nov 18, 2002)

CraneSpreadsWings,

I was not denegrating Cheng Man-ching form and I apologise to all CMC form players if that was the impression I gave. I was merely entering into a discussion about semantics (probably another useless discussion anyway" ). All I was trying to say was that there is no problem with people calling CMC style Cheng Man-ching form, but it not correct to call it Yang style. CMC still contains all the important priciples that qualifies it to be called Taiji and as I said it is a very effective fighting form. The difference is that its postural requirements are very different to Traditional Yang Family Tajiquan.  In the same way that the postural requirements of 24 step are very different to that of Traditional Yang. Both of these forms are well recognised as having all the basic principles of taiji unlike some of the new age flummery that pretends to be Taiji.

Best wishes


----------



## CraneSpreadWings (Nov 19, 2002)

East winds... I totally agree with your perspective...CMC is not Yang Shi taiji... I was just kinda dumping out my thoughts on the two forms...Great discussion by the way!!! Keep it up!


----------

