if he learned from Chang Yiu-Chun in 1978, why does he not mention it in an article about him published in 1997?
He had to ask himself why the modern day master he had met did not possess the power and ability of the original master. He decided that rather look for a more realistic quick answer system, to research the history and the methods of the original master.
Erle from this point on began a self teaching phase where he spent much training time on developing his own style and looking deeply into the past masters. It was at this time after learning all the skills, Erle had to practice with others of similar expertise and put his skills to the test, as well as this he had to train up assistants to practice with so as to earn by teaching them and from this, while teaching, it was all about gaining through practice.
contrast that to the later story where he says he was practicing as taught by Chu and met Chang Yiu-chun who taught him "real" taiji.
I asked him and he told me contradictory information, he literally told me that when the article was written that he was worried about Chang Yiu-Chun's privacy and needed permission to mention him, when i mentioned that the article was published 10+ years after Chang Yiu-Chun was said to have died (1986), Erle told me he forgot about the article and that his teacher must have slipped his mind... at this point he stopped trying to get his story right and offered me free merchandise...
now he is said to have learned the qi-disruption forms in 1995, again there is no mention of them 2 years later...http://www.taijiworld.com/taiji-qigong/ ... UTANG.html
in this article, it is claimed that Chen village style is based entirely upon Wu-dang style, there is no mention of known history, that Chen style has Shaolin and Taoist influences...http://www.wuji.com/Classics/YangShouHou.pdfhttp://www.taijiworld.com/chang_yiu-chun.htmlhttp://www.taijiworld.com/chang-yiu-chun.html
maybe Erle told the truth and just forgot his main teacher when he was interviewed for the article and said he was self taught... who knows why he did what he did or said what he said, he was a character, no doubts there
i can tell you his system is martial, but that does not mean it is historically accurate
I think it is what he said it was in the article:a more realistic quick answer system
based on his research of old master and methods
and while i think that, i do not think he invented in out of the blue, but rather based it on real material he picked up here and there and developed in his own way through trial and error
remember he was not a product of the WTBA, the WTBA is a product of him, he learned from several teachers and practiced with many people and had a lot of experiences, does it matter that he was so confused about the man he claims was his main teacher? maybe not