At least a video with an interpretation of these movements. But normally in kung fu forms all the techniques are connected to each other. But here it is shown as single applications. I find it good that here you can see at least an oppinion of those movements. But very efficient techniques become very unefficient when they are applied in a defensive way only. Like in the 500 years old saying "If you do not waste time defending, you will only need one technique, but if you are caught up in defending, you will end up needing ten.”
Good stuff, I am in Melbourne Australia. Where are you please, name of your school, do you teach foreigners? At last someone showing what tai chi was invented for. I don't know what this mystical unique to tai chi stuff is that other people expect. The system has swords and spears it was always martial and violent. I learned some of this decades ago. I can't find a teacher to teach me the lot.
zorbataichi65 there are a few in Melbourne mate - Changeskill in Coburg, Blackburn Tai Chi Academy & Bruno in Northcote. Cheng even came here in 89 I think
The application shown here is just like Wing Chun and many other external systems, not saying they are bad but if that is how you wish to fight, you should just go do external systems, and get results faster instead of wasting time doing Taichi in slow motion, there is no unique Taichi stuff shown here.
TriEssence Martial Arts Not sure If you knew, but this master is actually direct student of Cheng Tin Hung Master (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheng_Tin_Hung) who himself and his students won plenty of boxing championships back in the days. So its influence actually more from boxing than wing chun. Wing Chun focuses way more in guarding center line. If you're a serious taichi practitioner you'd know that the slow motion is actually less than 10% of what they teach. It's a misconception because most of the elders can only do the slow form and cannot train further than that. H TaiChi itself mostly focuses on endurance and inner strength training. If you want to train fight, it's still training speed/strength/accuracy, which is what Cheng's style training provides down the road too. Having said all that I'd agree if you just want "fighting" there are sure much better options. Cheers :)
Jeffrey Woo The way I see it, there should be a fundamental difference between internal and external system, and when an internal system is taking the approach that is the same as external systems, then for me that system has lost its true essence. Taichi suppose to be known for its internal power, it is not known for cunning techniques, so being focused on techniques instead of internal power when doing Taichi, then to me that is no longer Taichi.
Jeffrey Woo Sorry but Taichi did not come from Tang Dynasty, there is no record of such development at all, only rumors with no base. And during the Qing dynasty Yang Luchan did not teach imperial guards, he taught certain royal family members. The system that was popular among imperial guards are mostly external, with the exception of Bagua which were practiced by the head of the imperial guards such as Yin Fu and Gong Baotan. Chen family never set foot in Beijing until Republic era, so its not possible for any of them to be teaching imperial guards. And it has been clearly noted during Qing dynasty that the approach of Taichi is completely different from Shaolin, which is why eventually came the definition of internal systems including Taichi, Xingyi, Bagua as oppose to external systems that were based off Shaolin principles, so using Shaolin understanding to explain Taichi is very wrong. And sorry again but I do not see any internal power, and chances are your definition of internal power might be very different from mine. I do happen to come from a Yang lineage of Taichi in Beijing, and even when we talk about combat we do very different things to what is shown in this clip. One quality of internal power is known as "hanging painting on the wall", it has been mentioned numerous times in many old records, if one cannot do "hanging painting on a wall", then they are not doing internal power.
I apologise for my sloppy references, the tang dynasty reference was the earliest traits for Taoist based moves, which indeed are just rumours. And thank you for correction for Yang being taught to royal families. Its good to know that you train under the Yang style too. Wu style was also derived from Yang as you probably know and as mentioned, this is Cheng's further adaptation from Wu. So what you're saying is challenging the whole Cheng style as well. I am not sure who are we to say that Chengs training isn't TaiChi given he is a well respected TaiChi master here in the South?
Jeffrey Woo Ok I'm gona just be honest with you, and I will apologize in advance if what I'm about to say is offensive, but I believe one should be straight forward in the discussion of martial art or we will never reach any real conclusion. Obviously my personal level is pretty low, but I have visited many internal masters through out the years, and only a few have what I call real internal power, and as far as I know there isn't any in HK. I've tried to research into the subject and although I may be wrong, here is what I found, ever since Wu Gongyi brought Wu style to HK, there was already a lack of internal power, and I've seen a few branches of Wu style Taichi in HK including the current Wu family, none of which show any internal power, they all focus too much on techniques such as block, punches, kicks, locks and throws. Not saying those techniques are not useful, but it is not the same Taichi that I have encountered in Beijing. I've seen both masters from Yang and Wu lineage there, and although most of them aint good, there are a few who still possess internal power, its quite difficult to explain exactly what I mean by that, so let me just give you one example, my own master is much shorter and lighter than me, also much older so if we compete in muscle force, I will win for sure, however he could generate a strange power that would launch me flying back more than 5 meters, and no matter what I do I cannot stop that power from affecting me, there is no trick of balance or technique involved, just a power that he generate without momentum, and to anyone watching it does not even look like he used any force at all. Ofc I would agree that in real combat one would still need techniques, but Taichi's techniques are suppose to be just methods of transferring that power onto the opponent, in other word the techniques should serve the power instead of functioning on its own, and the better internal power a person has, the less complicated his techniques, because eventually no matter where he touches the opponent, he could uproot him.
Thanks for demonstrating the applications.
An excellent video - very practical, unlike most of the others I've seen. From a student of Ian Cameron, who was a student of Sifu Cheng Tin Hung.
0
Very good applications - greeting
成個機械人太極拳😪
方拳，是改良了教學法，是現代化。
At least a video with an interpretation of these movements. But normally in kung fu forms all the techniques are connected to each other. But here it is shown as single applications. I find it good that here you can see at least an oppinion of those movements. But very efficient techniques become very unefficient when they are applied in a defensive way only. Like in the 500 years old saying "If you do not waste time defending, you will only need one technique, but if you are caught up in defending, you will end up needing ten.”
未得真傳
請問各位，知道此館的地址及資料嗎？
Good stuff, I am in Melbourne Australia. Where are you please, name of your school, do you teach foreigners? At last someone showing what tai chi was invented for. I don't know what this mystical unique to tai chi stuff is that other people expect. The system has swords and spears it was always martial and violent. I learned some of this decades ago. I can't find a teacher to teach me the lot.
zorbataichi65 Hello mate, this school is located in Hong Kong (徐煥光太極學會), unfortunately, I only know the UK branch that taught foreigners
ANYBODY ANSWERING ON THIS SITE?
zorbataichi65 there are a few in Melbourne mate - Changeskill in Coburg, Blackburn Tai Chi Academy & Bruno in Northcote. Cheng even came here in 89 I think
何敏
示範中的那位朋友, 眼神很差,要注意身体啊!👌👌
大少爺？
The application shown here is just like Wing Chun and many other external systems, not saying they are bad but if that is how you wish to fight, you should just go do external systems, and get results faster instead of wasting time doing Taichi in slow motion, there is no unique Taichi stuff shown here.
TriEssence Martial Arts Not sure If you knew, but this master is actually direct student of Cheng Tin Hung Master (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheng_Tin_Hung) who himself and his students won plenty of boxing championships back in the days.
So its influence actually more from boxing than wing chun. Wing Chun focuses way more in guarding center line.
If you're a serious taichi practitioner you'd know that the slow motion is actually less than 10% of what they teach. It's a misconception because most of the elders can only do the slow form and cannot train further than that. H
TaiChi itself mostly focuses on endurance and inner strength training. If you want to train fight, it's still training speed/strength/accuracy, which is what Cheng's style training provides down the road too.
Having said all that I'd agree if you just want "fighting" there are sure much better options.
Cheers :)
Jeffrey Woo The way I see it, there should be a fundamental difference between internal and external system, and when an internal system is taking the approach that is the same as external systems, then for me that system has lost its true essence.
Taichi suppose to be known for its internal power, it is not known for cunning techniques, so being focused on techniques instead of internal power when doing Taichi, then to me that is no longer Taichi.
Jeffrey Woo Sorry but Taichi did not come from Tang Dynasty, there is no record of such development at all, only rumors with no base.
And during the Qing dynasty Yang Luchan did not teach imperial guards, he taught certain royal family members. The system that was popular among imperial guards are mostly external, with the exception of Bagua which were practiced by the head of the imperial guards such as Yin Fu and Gong Baotan.
Chen family never set foot in Beijing until Republic era, so its not possible for any of them to be teaching imperial guards.
And it has been clearly noted during Qing dynasty that the approach of Taichi is completely different from Shaolin, which is why eventually came the definition of internal systems including Taichi, Xingyi, Bagua as oppose to external systems that were based off Shaolin principles, so using Shaolin understanding to explain Taichi is very wrong.
And sorry again but I do not see any internal power, and chances are your definition of internal power might be very different from mine. I do happen to come from a Yang lineage of Taichi in Beijing, and even when we talk about combat we do very different things to what is shown in this clip. One quality of internal power is known as "hanging painting on the wall", it has been mentioned numerous times in many old records, if one cannot do "hanging painting on a wall", then they are not doing internal power.
I apologise for my sloppy references, the tang dynasty reference was the earliest traits for Taoist based moves, which indeed are just rumours. And thank you for correction for Yang being taught to royal families.
Its good to know that you train under the Yang style too. Wu style was also derived from Yang as you probably know and as mentioned, this is Cheng's further adaptation from Wu. So what you're saying is challenging the whole Cheng style as well.
I am not sure who are we to say that Chengs training isn't TaiChi given he is a well respected TaiChi master here in the South?
Jeffrey Woo Ok I'm gona just be honest with you, and I will apologize in advance if what I'm about to say is offensive, but I believe one should be straight forward in the discussion of martial art or we will never reach any real conclusion.
Obviously my personal level is pretty low, but I have visited many internal masters through out the years, and only a few have what I call real internal power, and as far as I know there isn't any in HK. I've tried to research into the subject and although I may be wrong, here is what I found, ever since Wu Gongyi brought Wu style to HK, there was already a lack of internal power, and I've seen a few branches of Wu style Taichi in HK including the current Wu family, none of which show any internal power, they all focus too much on techniques such as block, punches, kicks, locks and throws.
Not saying those techniques are not useful, but it is not the same Taichi that I have encountered in Beijing. I've seen both masters from Yang and Wu lineage there, and although most of them aint good, there are a few who still possess internal power, its quite difficult to explain exactly what I mean by that, so let me just give you one example, my own master is much shorter and lighter than me, also much older so if we compete in muscle force, I will win for sure, however he could generate a strange power that would launch me flying back more than 5 meters, and no matter what I do I cannot stop that power from affecting me, there is no trick of balance or technique involved, just a power that he generate without momentum, and to anyone watching it does not even look like he used any force at all.
Ofc I would agree that in real combat one would still need techniques, but Taichi's techniques are suppose to be just methods of transferring that power onto the opponent, in other word the techniques should serve the power instead of functioning on its own, and the better internal power a person has, the less complicated his techniques, because eventually no matter where he touches the opponent, he could uproot him.
For those of you arguing internal vs external styles, stop doing drugs!