# Ip Family Tai Chi Chuan



## Sunrise

Hello Tai Chi friends,
here is an announcement from Master Bob Boyd, regarding the Ip Family Style. On his homepage www.iptaichi.org you will also find a videoannouncement.

------------------------

*Welcome to Ip Family Tai Chi Chuan - the Snake Style*

  Grandmaster Ip Tai Tak was taken as Master Yangs male heir and adopted son (Disciple) in 1958. He was then taught the Yang Familys Snake System and became Master Yangs practice partner for the next 28 years

  Master Ip told me that Yang Chen Fu taught the snake style only to his eldest son, Yang Sau Chung, and that Yang Sau Chung passed on this system only to him. Master Ip taught me snake style system after I became his Disciple in 2001.

  Master Ip was an innovator, adding exercises, drills and martial variations to the body of knowledge passed on to him by his Master. He researched many different martial systems and worked with his Master to develop a more complete system of Zhan Zhong. Master Yang also gave Master Ip permission to personalize the Yang Family Long Boxing and weapons forms to suit Master Ips martial interests and beliefs. 

  Before his death, Master Ip gave me permission to teach his Snake Style openly and encouraged me to pass on this teaching throughout the world. This has become my mission as his Disciple. 

  In honor of his legacy, and to distinguish this system from all other Yang teaching methodologies, I am proud to announce the formation of *Ip Family Tai Chi Chuan* (from the Snake Style of the Yang Family).

  Sincerely Yours,
  Bao Tak Fai (Bob Boyd)


----------



## ggg214

is there any video uploaded online?
snake style, it's my first time to hear that!
could you give us more info?


----------



## East Winds

Here is Ip Tai Tak doing the form.

Make up your own mind whether this follows the Yang family principles or not!!

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=cWvmgDeBYSs

Very best wishes


----------



## Sunrise

ggg214 said:


> is there any video uploaded online?
> snake style, it's my first time to hear that!
> could you give us more info?



You can look at master Boyds website at www.iptaichi.org. There you find information and videos regarding the snake style system. 
And I have to absolutely agree with East Wind, make your own mind up. Visit a lesson or a seminar with Bob, and see for yourself about the work on the principles as transmitted by Yang Sau Chung.


----------



## Xue Sheng

First lets clarify Ip Tak Tai's Sifu was Yang Zhen Ming aka Yang Shou Zhong who was the eldest son of Yang Chengfu. But Ip Tak Tai was not the student of Yang Chengfu. Also other students of Yang Shou Zhong were Yang Zhen Ji, Yang Zhen Duo and Yang Zhen Guo who were also sons of Yang Chengfu and the younger brothers of Yang Shou Zhong. 

This always leads me to the same question why did they not ever mention these alleged other styles like snake. Nor did Fu Zhongwen or Tung Ying Jie who where senior students of Yang Chengfu at least one of which studied with Chengfu longer than Yang Shou Zhong

More here


----------



## Sunrise

Hello Xue,
these are valid points that you mention. Master Ip called it Snake Style for the reason of categorizing the movement to a certain animal that mostly fits to the movement. Everything comming from the trunk movement, and not from hand and feet waving (so snake contrary to tiger or crane).
One could also call it "disciple style" for it was, what (according to Master Ip) Yang Cheng Fu only taught to his son Yang Shou Zhong, and he in turn only to Ip Tai Tak.
It is to bad that we do not have a time viewing device to see what really went in the past. Buddha, Jesus, Mohamed, Chen, Yang, Wu and so on. All important turning points in history but we have to relay on hearsay. Then everyone tries out and learns as much as possible on the various variants and makes up his/her own mind.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Actually here it claims here that there were more than just him



> Yeung Chen Fu had over twenty Disciples, he only passed on the Snake Style to his family members



Yeung Chen Fu is Yang Chengfu. His family members would have been Yang Shou Zhong the rest were to young



> Yeung Sau Chung transmitted this martial system of tai chi to his daughters as well as his disciples



Yeung Sau Chung is Yang Shou Zhong 



> GMI &#8211; Yes, he left three daughters, Amy, Mary1 and Agnes. He also took two Disciples after me, Chu Gin Soon2 in 1977 and Chu King Hung3 in 1983. He also has three half brothers4 still living in China.



GMI is Yang Shou Zhong who is Ip Tai Tak



> 1   Master Mary Yeung teaches privately in Hong Kong
> 2   Master Chu Gin Soon teaches in Boston, Massachusetts
> 3   Master Chu King Hung teaches throughout Europe
> 4   Grandmaster Yeung Zhendao (second half-brother) teaches in China and throughout the world



Also here is the deal, my sifu has a pretty good idea who Ip Tai Tak and Gin Soon Chu are and he does not believe them. My sifu was training with Tung Ying Jie and knows much about the Taiji culture of the time. But my sifu, although he knew of and meant Yang Shou Zhong he was not a student of Yang Shou Zhong so it is possible I suppose that he would not know but I find it unlikely that his teacher would not know (Tung Ying Jie) and I find it unlikely that Fu Zhongwen would not know since he was, I believe, married into the Yang family.

Now if this is a form developed by Ip Tai Tak then that is different


----------



## Sunrise

> Also here is the deal, my sifu has a pretty good idea who Ip Tai Tak and Gin Soon Chu are and he does not believe them. My sifu was training with Tung Ying Jie and knows much about the Taiji culture of the time. But my sifu, although he knew of and meant Yang Shou Zhong he was not a student of Yang Shou Zhong so it is possible I suppose that he would not know but I find it unlikely that his teacher would not know (Tung Ying Jie) and I find it unlikely that Fu Zhongwen would not know since he was, I believe, married into the Yang family.



Here we are, two tai chi players with different backgrounds and experiences. You believe and trust your experience and master, and so do I with mine. That is the nice thing on diversity, ther is something out there for everyone.
GM Ip stated, that "the form" must not be changed, for it is the form that he learned from Shou Zhong and he in turn from Chengfu, but the longboxing and weaponforms where adaptable.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Sunrise said:


> Here we are, two tai chi players with different backgrounds and experiences. You believe and trust your experience and master, and so do I with mine. That is the nice thing on diversity, ther is something out there for everyone.
> GM Ip stated, that "the form" must not be changed, for it is the form that he learned from Shou Zhong and he in turn from Chengfu, but the longboxing and weaponforms where adaptable.


 
All forms change and no two practitioners do it exactly alike. Look at films of Yang Jun, Zhendou and Yang Shou Zhong they are not the same either.

And it is good to trusts ones sifu, if you don't you should not train with him. But in this case mine was there in Hong Kong at the time and I do not believe yours was but like I said my sifu was a student of Tung Shigong and not Yang Shou Zhong so it is possible I suppose

I am researching this further and I will get back to this.

For now I doubt the claim of any Yang style animal form but I am willing to say I might be wrong.


----------



## East Winds

Xue Sheng,

You are as usual correct with your statements. Fu Zhong Wen, Chen Wei Ming, Tung Ying Jie, Yang Zhen Ji, Yang Zhen Duo and Yang Zhen Guo did not know the "Snake Style" quite simply because it did not exist!!!! Like so much of modern Taiji, it is an invention. To call this a derivation of Yang style is quite simply a travesty. Why would Yang Chen-fu set so much store by his 10 essences and then violate them completely as we can see in Ip Tai Tak's snake form? 

Now if the form is an invention by Ip Tai Tak then I have no problem with that. When he starts to claim lineage from the Yang family as the basis for this form, then I have real problem with that. It is no more Traditional Yang Family Taijquan than 24 step is.

Very best wishes


----------



## grydth

Just to muddy the waters further....... where does John Ding fit into all of this, if at all?

I do know Ding is the editor of "Tai Chi and Alternative Health" which originates in Great Britain. He gave great plat to Ip Tai Tak, both in life and after death. Maybe it is my misreading, but it seems he claims to carry on the lineage from Ip Tai Tak.... so what relation does Master Ding have with Master Boyd.

One other observation, made in prior discussions with Xue and East Winds (both of whom I have come to respect highly)...... had the Yang family not sat in silence for decades, they would not now face the challenges they do on the question of legitimate successors. It has never been clear to me if their present activism represents revision or reawakening.


----------



## Xue Sheng

grydth said:


> Just to muddy the waters further....... where does John Ding fit into all of this, if at all?
> 
> I do know Ding is the editor of "Tai Chi and Alternative Health" which originates in Great Britain. He gave great plat to Ip Tai Tak, both in life and after death. Maybe it is my misreading, but it seems he claims to carry on the lineage from Ip Tai Tak.... so what relation does Master Ding have with Master Boyd.
> 
> One other observation, made in prior discussions with Xue and East Winds (both of whom I have come to respect highly)...... had the Yang family not sat in silence for decades, they would not now face the challenges they do on the question of legitimate successors. It has never been clear to me if their present activism represents revision or reawakening.


 
Ip Tai Tak did study with Yang Shou Zhong my sifu knows that and he knows of a lot of people that studied with Yang Shou Zhong, obviously not all only the ones that came into contact with his sifu. But neither his sifu nor my sifu ever talked about or heard of this snake form and my sifu has serious doubts at its validity

As to the Yang family and it's silence, IMO it is Yang politics which can be pretty nasty and a power struggle. Ask yourself how CMA lineages usually go. Usually the oldest gets the lineage after Yang Shou Zhong who is (was) the oldest the current and now long time head of the yang family Yang Zhenduo born in 1926? Actually no it was Yang Shenji Born in 1921 that died just last year and the Yang family has yet to update their site to officially acknowledge that. Also they claimed, until last year that none of Yang Shao Hou (Yang Chengfu's older brother) lineage survived and yet my sifu knows where they live in Hong Kong. They recently added the Yang Shao Hou line back into the family tree. 

There is also another thing to take into consideration, Yang Chengfu had a WHOLE lot of students some absolutely incredible some not good at all and a whole lot in between but it is hard to track them all considering there is a cultural revolution between us and him.  

But I am getting way off post here and getting back into Yang politics, which I try my best not to get into these days. 


My apologies to the OP for going off post :asian:


----------



## Sunrise

East Winds said:


> Xue Sheng,
> 
> You are as usual correct with your statements. Fu Zhong Wen, Chen Wei Ming, Tung Ying Jie, Yang Zhen Ji, Yang Zhen Duo and Yang Zhen Guo did not know the "Snake Style" quite simply because it did not exist!!!!



East Wind, do you ever read a posting, and not let it run through your filter of prejudice? Of course it dit not exist IN THAT NAME, as I have stated it very clearly above, GM Ip called the way of movement, that he learned from GGM Yang "the way a snake moves" aka Snake Style. It is a classification of a movement.


----------



## Sunrise

grydth said:


> Just to muddy the waters further....... where does John Ding fit into all of this, if at all?
> 
> I do know Ding is the editor of "Tai Chi and Alternative Health" which originates in Great Britain. He gave great plat to Ip Tai Tak, both in life and after death. Maybe it is my misreading, but it seems he claims to carry on the lineage from Ip Tai Tak.... so what relation does Master Ding have with Master Boyd.
> 
> One other observation, made in prior discussions with Xue and East Winds (both of whom I have come to respect highly)...... had the Yang family not sat in silence for decades, they would not now face the challenges they do on the question of legitimate successors. It has never been clear to me if their present activism represents revision or reawakening.



John and Bob are "brothers", John being the first disciple of Ip and Bob the second. John also teaches different aspects of King Hung Chu and Gin Soon Chu and mixes all three systems. He does not teach only Master Ip´s teachings, but mixes them all together.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Sunrise said:


> East Wind, do you ever read a posting, and not let it run through your filter of prejudice? Of course it dit not exist IN THAT NAME, as I have stated it very clearly above, GM Ip called the way of movement, that he learned from GGM Yang "the way a snake moves" aka Snake Style. It is a classification of a movement.


 
Actually you originally said it was a Yang family form



Sunrise said:


> Grandmaster Ip Tai Tak was taken as Master Yangs male heir and adopted son (Disciple) in 1958. *He was then taught the Yang Familys Snake System* and became Master Yangs practice partner for the next 28 years


 


Sunrise said:


> *Master Ip told me that Yang Chen Fu taught the snake style only to his eldest son,* Yang Sau Chung, and that Yang Sau Chung passed on this system only to him. Master Ip taught me snake style system after I became his Disciple in 2001.


 
It was later you said this



Sunrise said:


> *Master Ip called it Snake Style* for the reason of categorizing the movement to a certain animal that mostly fits to the movement. Everything comming from the trunk movement, and not from hand and feet waving (so snake contrary to tiger or crane).



This is a bit confusing did he learn something called the snake system from the Yang family or is this his interpretation of the Yang family long form


----------



## grydth

One other factor..... it has always appeared to me that the Yang teachers of the mid 20th century  were happy to spread their art widely. It is _possible_ that many  students were never intended to be any type of lineage holder or teacher, and yet they became that (or claimed to). Or, were they? What, indeed, does silence mean? 

In the USA, factually and legally, silence is variously seen as acquiesence or slackness........ is the same true in CMA? Or is silence considered stony condemnation and repudiation?  I doubt we will ever know for certain. We sometimes suffer the same misfortunes in the law when legislatures write vague laws and the higher courts won't clarify anything in their decisions.

Some time ago, in one of our exchanges on Cheng Man Ching, I believe the conclusion was for each to teach and practice whatever one wishes..... just don't mention Yang ... or qualify the art as a 'Yang Derivative'........ perhaps that would be best here.


----------



## Xue Sheng

grydth said:


> One other factor..... it has always appeared to me that the Yang teachers of the mid 20th century were happy to spread their art widely. It is _possible_ that many students were never intended to be any type of lineage holder or teacher, and yet they became that (or claimed to). Or, were they? What, indeed, does silence mean?
> 
> In the USA, factually and legally, silence is variously seen as acquiesence or slackness........ is the same true in CMA? Or is silence considered stony condemnation and repudiation? I doubt we will ever know for certain. We sometimes suffer the same misfortunes in the law when legislatures write vague laws and the higher courts won't clarify anything in their decisions.
> 
> Some time ago, in one of our exchanges on Cheng Man Ching, I believe the conclusion was for each to teach and practice whatever one wishes..... just don't mention Yang ... or qualify the art as a 'Yang Derivative'........ perhaps that would be best here.


 
Well I still feel Cheng Manching is a style of its own that came from Yang much the same way Yang came from Chen but I am not running into CMC schools challenging the sifus for the name. My Xingyiquan sifu teaches CMC as it comes form William CC Chen (which I have discovered is more than a bit different form CMC) and he calls it Yang and I didnt agree with him on this either but if that is what he wants to call it that is his call.

I do not agree with my Yang style sifu on CMC 100% I like the style he doesnt and I will leave it at that.

You have hit on a good point with the One other factor I have seen this is some cases. My sifu case here in the early 60s but he never did teach it to that many people and he has always maintained it is not a business it is taiji but not all that came here shared his view. But something else along these lines also occurred, American students going off on their own after training with a sifu for a few years and calling themselves masters without their sifus approval and before you know it you get variations on the style and name changes and things that are just plain not right when compared to what was taught by Yang Chengdu (and as note I do not put CMC in this category - it is to me worthy to be called a style of its own)

As to silence that is REALLY a problem. Many of these guys that are the real deal from China do not talk about it much. And to make things worse if they are from the north (and most taiji families are) they talk less. And they know in America things are very different then in China. I had a conversation with one of the Chen family on this very topic, but again I am going WAAAAAAY off post and should stop there. 

But I will end with it is the silence of many of these guys that has caused the problem in Yang style in the west that allows people to talk about secrets and additional things that may or may not have ever occurred. And it is much more prevalent in Yang that any other taiji style since it is more popular and been in the states at least a bit longer than the rest.


----------



## Xue Sheng

I have been looking into this and I have found there is a book by Ip Tai Tak that is out of print; however I am still looking for a copy. 

But I did find something that was referencing this book (this is how I found out it existed) 

Crane, Tiger, Snake appear to be pretty much the Yang Long form at different levels not different forms. 

Crane is a higher posture
Tiger is a lower, medium level posture
Snake is a very low posture

Basically what was explained to me many years ago as low, medium and high Yang.

Example I guess would be CMC could be thought of as Crane and Traditional Yang could be thought of as Tiger and Yang form Tung would be thought of as Snake kind of thing.

I am guessing it is not that simple I am guessing that snake is likely lower than what I do but it gets the point across.

But then I could be way off as to what the OP meant but if this is it then I have fewer problems with it since then it is just semantics


----------



## grydth

The book by Grandmaster Ip Tai Tak is titled, "Tai Chi Chuan Revelations - Principles and Concepts"........ it has been sold in paper cover for L 29.99 and Limited hard cover for L 55. 

The ads run in Master John Ding's Tai Chi and Alternative Health magazines with some regularity. Ding has always played up his association with Ip Tai Tak, which is why I wonder where Boyd comes in.... and who is the lineage holder.... and what the association between Ding and Boyd is, if any.


----------



## Xue Sheng

grydth said:


> The book by Grandmaster Ip Tai Tak is titled, "Tai Chi Chuan Revelations - Principles and Concepts"........ it has been sold in paper cover for L 29.99 and Limited hard cover for L 55.
> 
> The ads run in Master John Ding's Tai Chi and Alternative Health magazines with some regularity. Ding has always played up his association with Ip Tai Tak, which is why I wonder where Boyd comes in.... and who is the lineage holder.... and what the association between Ding and Boyd is, if any.


 
Thanks I wil see if I can get the book from there.

As for the lineage. It is my understanding that Ding was the #1. But East Winds would know more about that I think.


----------



## East Winds

Xue Sheng,

The concept of the three levels of Yang Family Taijiquan (High Medium and Low) is well known and referred to by Yang Cheng Fu, Chen Wei Ming, Fu Zhong Wen, Yang Zhen Ji and Yang Zhen Duo in their respective books. And I would have been quite happy to accept your idea that this was all that Ip Tai Tak meant and that it was indeed a matter of semantics.

HOWEVER- In the original post here is the quote that matters "_*Master Ip told me that Yang Chen Fu taught the snake style only to his eldest son, Yang Sau Chung, and that Yang Sau Chung passed on this system only to him." *_Therefore I think it is clear that he is implying something entirely different form the well known three levels.

Very best wishes


----------



## Xue Sheng

East Winds said:


> Xue Sheng,
> 
> The concept of the three levels of Yang Family Taijiquan (High Medium and Low) is well known and referred to by Yang Cheng Fu, Chen Wei Ming, Fu Zhong Wen, Yang Zhen Ji and Yang Zhen Duo in their respective books. And I would have been quite happy to accept your idea that this was all that Ip Tai Tak meant and that it was indeed a matter of semantics.
> 
> HOWEVER- In the original post here is the quote that matters "_*Master Ip told me that Yang Chen Fu taught the snake style only to his eldest son, Yang Sau Chung, and that Yang Sau Chung passed on this system only to him." *_Therefore I think it is clear that he is implying something entirely different form the well known three levels.
> 
> Very best wishes


 
Sadly I have since found that you are correct

I was here and I felt that this was what was meant but at this point I am fairly certain the OP did not mean this.

However I will be buying Ip's book and finding out more abot this


----------



## grydth

East Winds said:


> Xue Sheng,
> 
> The concept of the three levels of Yang Family Taijiquan (High Medium and Low) is well known and referred to by Yang Cheng Fu, Chen Wei Ming, Fu Zhong Wen, Yang Zhen Ji and Yang Zhen Duo in their respective books. And I would have been quite happy to accept your idea that this was all that Ip Tai Tak meant and that it was indeed a matter of semantics.
> 
> HOWEVER- In the original post here is the quote that matters "_*Master Ip told me that Yang Chen Fu taught the snake style only to his eldest son, Yang Sau Chung, and that Yang Sau Chung passed on this system only to him." *_Therefore I think it is clear that he is implying something entirely different form the well known three levels.
> 
> Very best wishes




Another possible dimension of that quote.... this is Boyd purporting to be quoting Ip Tai Tak..... Now, both Tak and Yang Cheng Fu are deceased. So - is there deception in what Tak himself claimed.... or possibly in what Boyd is now claiming?  It should be interesting what light, if any, Tak's book sheds on this.

Since when did CMA lineage read like a suspence novel?


----------



## Sunrise

grydth said:


> Since when did CMA lineage read like a suspence novel?



well, basically always, but the tai chi community in general was a bit ignorant of that


----------



## grydth

Okay........ but it would appear that we have 3 possibilities with respect to the  family art you announced:

Ip Tai Tak and Bob Boyd are/were being entirely truthful in what they claim. There may not be Yang writings to support that, but the Yangs were very lax in those years, and who writes everything down anyway? Bad record keeping by the Yangs is no reason to disparage these men.

Ip Tai Tak never made any false claims. But Bob Boyd, figuring both Ip Tai Tak and the old Yang Masters are dead, figures it is safe to exagerrate or 'puff' the new art he's selling.... With nobody alive to contradict him, why not add a little faux legitimacy to the new art and make it more saleable? The new art may be beneficial and worthy, but claims of a Yang pedigree are false.

Ip Tai Tak made up some of his study and key claims as pertains to Yang masters. Boyd, knowingly or unknowingly, is peddling these in modern times. What a hoax!

Now I do not know which of the three is correct - but you might. You appear close to Boyd - Hell, you may even be Boyd - so I'd appreciate anything else you can add. If you know, I would also like to know what relationship, if any, Boyd has with John Ding.

Ignorance flourishes when knowledge is hidden.


----------



## Sunrise

Hi Grydth,
well first of all, I am definitely NOT Bob, but a german student of his. My own website is at www.iptaichi.de and you may call or skype me at any time to validate that, or have a general chatter about tai chi chuan  

The three points you brought up are all reasonable, and without the often sought time viewing device not really discernable.

So I explain it from my pov. 
I did tai chi always in the Yang Sau Chung lineage (short form not counting). At first I learned the way of Chu, king hung, the last disciple of YSC. Since I came from a fighting art before that, I found it lacking in the martial sector, to splintered to be calls a whole system (for me) but relaxing and fun to do anyway. 
The I came in contact with the Chu Gin Soon lineage. And wow was I happy, this was so much more martial and clear feeling then what I had learned before that I switched completely over, and studied this way further on, making my body more flexible and healthier than before. the martial applications also made sense, big time, so I was mostly happy, except for some issues in leg movement and body movement that did not quite fit, as well as the difference in executing the hand form and the weapon forms. Therefore we had different training sets like power push hands, Wa Pu (moving root stepping) and so on, so the gap was somehow bridged. All in all it was a great structure training and also lots of fun.

Then I met John Ding, the 1st disciple of GM Ip, on a workshop and was really impressed with his softness and great martial skill. I was also impressed at that time with his "no touching" application, but not with the way he used it on the people, but that is a purely personal thing. By now I know that a great deal psychology is involved in these things, so whatever. I asked him if what he was teaching was master Ip´s style and he said yes, but based on the Chu King Hung form. So after some workshops with John and some phone talks I came to think that GM Ip taught a mixture of Chu King Hung and Chu Gin Soon style. It was more complete, soft and powerful than I experienced before. Still Yin-Yang singing in the Form, also Power Push hands and so on.
Then appeared the video of GM Yang Sau Chung on YouTube, and it looked so different. Then John said the Form of Ip Tai Tak was only for experienced students that had great skill in the form - meaning much much later *bg*

By chance I came in contact with Bob Boyd in early 2006 and we had lengthy discussion over the pond, on tai chi chuan and Ip Tai Tak, and he told me that Ip did a whole different form internally, that looked more like that what I saw on the YSC video on YouTube. So I invited him over to do a seminar on Snake Style and it simply rocked. This was what I searched for all the years, no difference in stepping and moving in either hand, sword, saber or spear form, no yin-yang singing or bridging sets to cover gaps in the different forms, a more "fluid" long boxing form, nice and "soft to brutal" MA applications, great preliminary workout sets to enhance the body, and so on. I totally droped all previous tai chi knowledge and train only Master Ips style since. I also changed my whole school teaching curriculum to it, and all my students feel it is more natural and lively then the "stuff" we did before. Also my medics, doctors and physio therapists that train with me are more than happy, for now all the micro muscles in the deep layer of the body are involved also, and the benefit for the body is much much bigger, as they say.

As to John Ding and Bob Boyd. They are Kung Fu brothers, have been trained by the same Master at different times, but have no contact with one another.
John Ding is now teaching the best of the three masters he trained with, as he says. 
Bob teaches only what Ip taught him, and dropped everything else.

Best,
Sascha


----------

