opposing styles

[Boomer]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about opposing systems. Not as vague as "grappling vs striking", but specifically opposite strategies.
I'm hoping that some of you might help me come up with a few really idealistically opposite style philosophies for further study.

For example, Shotokan preaches that agressive defense will yield an offensive victory. Shito ryu says "ukete wa uchite" , that offense is the best defense.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about opposing systems. Not as vague as "grappling vs striking", but specifically opposite strategies.
I'm hoping that some of you might help me come up with a few really idealistically opposite style philosophies for further study.

For example, Shotokan preaches that agressive defense will yield an offensive victory. Shito ryu says "ukete wa uchite" , that offense is the best defense.

I wouldn't think in terms of opposite, or good and bad, but as different rules for different concerns, ranges, and outcome desires.
Sean

 

[still learning]

Hello, One area most martial art classes : DO NOT TEACH in a their major training is? Verbal defense! The art of descalations.

How to handle a person who is "woofing at you". Opposing the violent "verbal" attack, with common sense answers!

A. Blocking? opposing styles is Shotokan "hard style" of blocking and Kung-fu "soft style" of blocking. Research this? Also known as a fan style of blocking "soft"

B. Punching to the face? Standard way is with the fist....but palm strikes could be an opposing force of choice if hitting.

c. Kicks can be a snap/full power follow thru, or a Push kick/thrust style of kicking.

Not sure if this is what you were asking? as a rule of thumb? : Hawaiian
time is usually slower than standard time.

So when you visit "Hawaii" ....the locals are usually late!

Aloha

 

[theletch1]

I wouldn't think in terms of opposite, or good and bad, but as different rules for different concerns, ranges, and outcome desires.
Sean

Excellent point. The example that comes to mind would be karate: keep a certain distance so that punches and kicks have the range they need for maximum impact as opposed to aikido where taking control of your opponents energy/space is essential for redirection and throws. Neither is wrong, just different for what is needed for the particular defensive strategy of the particular art. OR the same art may have different strategies for dealing with an armed vs unarmed combatant.

 

[TheOriginalName]

Hello, One area most martial art classes : DO NOT TEACH in a their major training is? Verbal defense! The art of descalations.

How to handle a person who is "woofing at you". Opposing the violent "verbal" attack, with common sense answers!

Totally agree with this.... the best thing you can ever do in a fight is not get into a fight.

This may mean talking the bloke down, buying his a drink or whatever can be done to avoid conflict.

I once read that the last option for a martial artist is violence.

This is something that is often not emphisised enough.....but at other times we have no option.

 

[Steel Tiger]

The information I can give comes from the Chinese internal systems. Two, in particular, stand out in this context - xingyi and bagua. The differences between these arts is such that in many traditional schools they are taught together to produce a complete system.

Xingyi is linear, aggressive and seeks to penetrate an opponent's defences quickly and definitively.

Bagua is circular, counterattacking and tends to lead opponents into overextention and error thereby allowing their defeat.


Just as an aside, taiji, the third of the traditional internal arts (there are a few others nowadays), is usually considered to combined these two philosophical standpoints to produce a much stronger art.

 

[aplonis]

How about Tae Kwon Do and Shobudo Bujutsu Jujutsu? I have a 1st dan in the former and have only recently begun the latter, even though I do have some small prior experience in Hakko Ryu and a couple similar.

I find that while I could manage, just barely, to blend some approaches from Hakko Ryu into my TKD one-steps, forms and (at least theoretically, sparring) it does not work out with Shobudo. I am finding that they don't combine at all, that I am going to have to find a way of slipping fluidly from one to another and back.

It is the footwork which makes the difference. I could manage to do some few Hakko Ryu-ish things from a TKD stance. But Shobudo simply must be done from a Shobudo footwork perspective.

The engagement distance for Hakko Ryu was so close that TKD did not apply, so there was no real conflict. But Shobudo has mid-range engagment techniques which overlap TKD ones in scope and application. So one has to decide on the instant, which is best for this or that situation.

I really, really like having some grappling in my repertoir because, face it, striking is not always the best course either legally, socially or ethically. Many more occasions can be avoided or side-stepped. In-between ones can be met with a moderate amount of force. But once you punch or kick somebody, that's it. Count on the cops and lawyers to enter the fray at some point or other after that. Jujutsu can be applied subtly. Done with absolute skill it may not even look like anything much at all on a security camera playback. How cool is that.

Much as I approve of this concept. If there are two or more (which has never yet happend to me personally) then, in such event (hopefully never to come) all subtlety will have to be cast aside. TKD to my rescue then, for certain. But to handle any lesser situation, I'm hoping that my grappling may suffice.

That, anyway, is how I see them blendng together in my own, admittedly hypothetical, scenario.

 

[Langenschwert]

In WMA, people often talk about the difference between German and Italian longsword strategies. I feel some people over-emphasize them, but they are certainly there.

For example, the German school focuses on "hit first, hit hard, hit fast", using the proper geometry (the Master Strikes) to attack the particular stance he's in, and step around to the outside with the strike. After that, get in a bind and don't let the opponent depart from the bind without his getting hit.

The Italians like to cover and close the centre line, stifling an incoming attack. It is said that the Italians are more likely to counter than initiate an attack. In some way, the Italian school could be said to be more "defensive" than the German one.

All that is an oversimplification, but you get the idea.

Best regards,

-Mark

 

[CuongNhuka]

Something my Sensei once said to me comes to mind. "A novice seeks the difference, a master seeks the similarities".
However, if I were to point out a style that is the opposite in concept to Cuong Nhu I would have to say... well... I honestly cann't think of one. I can think of individuals and schools, but not whole styles. The reason is probably because of the nature of Cuong Nhu, but I suppose this is a side discussion.

 

[Kosho Gakkusei]

I'm with CuongNhuka on this one.

In Kosho Ryu we are taught that a block is a strike is a block is a throw. With only minor adjustments in body mechanics a strike can become a block or a throw and the circular can become "linear" or vice versa versa. Often times the hard can be made soft by simply opening the hands. Matter of fact we are taught that there is no such a thing as a straight line just bigger and smaller circles. In other words the human body moves in arcs, a "linear" technique is a small portion of a very large circle and a circular technique is greater portion of a smaller circle.

Opposing styles are realy different view points from the same mountain it's all about what direction you're facing. For those who face north, it's sunny on the left, shady on the right, grassy ahead, rocky behind. For those who face south, it's sunny on the right, shady on the left, rocky ahead, grassy behind. What's the difference? Perspective. Which is better? All of them in their moment.

Direct attacks can be redirected by circular movement. Looping atacks can be circumvented by shorter direct movements. Grapplers can tie up strikers. Strikers can knock out grapplers. Kickers can keep their opponents at bay. Short range fighters can smother kickers. Stand up fighters can keep it on the feet. Ground fighters can bring it to the ground. Should I continue?

When you categorize the arts and fail to see the similarities, you will not be able to seamlessly shift your strategies and become what undoes your opponent.

_Don Flatt

 

[qi-tah]

The information I can give comes from the Chinese internal systems. Two, in particular, stand out in this context - xingyi and bagua. The differences between these arts is such that in many traditional schools they are taught together to produce a complete system.

Xingyi is linear, aggressive and seeks to penetrate an opponent's defences quickly and definitively.

Bagua is circular, counterattacking and tends to lead opponents into overextention and error thereby allowing their defeat.


Just as an aside, taiji, the third of the traditional internal arts (there are a few others nowadays), is usually considered to combined these two philosophical standpoints to produce a much stronger art.

Interestingly enough, my teacher was explaining last night about how Taiji is basically a later offshoot of long fist, which was something i didn't know. He told us that long fist (a traditionally hard, external and generalist style) and Taiji principles must be combined properly if we want our ba gua to improve to the higher levels. Just another way of looking at the circle i guess...

 

[CuongNhuka]

Interestingly enough, my teacher was explaining last night about how Taiji is basically a later offshoot of long fist, which was something i didn't know. He told us that long fist (a traditionally hard, external and generalist style) and Taiji principles must be combined properly if we want our ba gua to improve to the higher levels. Just another way of looking at the circle i guess...

And as I recall the only one to have ever gotten to a draw (let alone beaten) the founder of Ba Gau was the founder of Xing Yi. And that to truelly master either, you must train in the other. Or is that something else?

 

[Logan]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about opposing systems. Not as vague as "grappling vs striking", but specifically opposite strategies.
I'm hoping that some of you might help me come up with a few really idealistically opposite style philosophies for further study.

For example, Shotokan preaches that agressive defense will yield an offensive victory. Shito ryu says "ukete wa uchite" , that offense is the best defense.

I think the general philosophy of martial arts these days is the same - escape from conflict unharmed, improve health etc.

Strategy I view as a flexible concept which is dependant on the situation, context and desired outcome at hand. I think all styles encompass this in their techniques, which would be the manisfestation of strategy in action.

I think other things would generally be a comparison of technique.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Interestingly enough, my teacher was explaining last night about how Taiji is basically a later offshoot of long fist, which was something i didn't know. He told us that long fist (a traditionally hard, external and generalist style) and Taiji principles must be combined properly if we want our ba gua to improve to the higher levels. Just another way of looking at the circle i guess...

Taiji coming from Long Fist doesn't surprise me, almost every northern CMA has some LF influence.

Appliying the taiji principles to bagua is something I have been trying for years now. It definitely gives you greater insights into the depth of the art.

I have an excellent little book called "Secrets of the Taiji Masters", or some thing like that, which has old discussions and poems about the taiji principles. Really good. Worth having.

 

[qi-tah]

And as I recall the only one to have ever gotten to a draw (let alone beaten) the founder of Ba Gau was the founder of Xing Yi. And that to truelly master either, you must train in the other. Or is that something else?

As Xing Yi is many centuries older than Ba gua and the who the founder of Xing Yi is is a matter of some dispute, the fight story seems unlikely. Maybe it was one of the stories that revolved around Sun Lu Tang, who combined Xing Yi, Ba gua and Taiji to create Sun style Taiji?

 

[CuongNhuka]

As Xing Yi is many centuries older than Ba gua and the who the founder of Xing Yi is is a matter of some dispute, the fight story seems unlikely. Maybe it was one of the stories that revolved around Sun Lu Tang, who combined Xing Yi, Ba gua and Taiji to create Sun style Taiji?

Not a clue. I recall ready a story about the founder of one Chinnese soft style in a fight with anouther, and it being a draw. And from then on it was common to train in both. I thought it was Xing Yi and Ba Gau, but what do I know?

 

[Steel Tiger]

As Xing Yi is many centuries older than Ba gua and the who the founder of Xing Yi is is a matter of some dispute, the fight story seems unlikely. Maybe it was one of the stories that revolved around Sun Lu Tang, who combined Xing Yi, Ba gua and Taiji to create Sun style Taiji?

The fight between Dong Hai Quan and a famous practioner of xingyi, Guo Yunshen, did take place in Beijing some time after 1862. They fought each other to a standstill and went away friends. It is alledgedly why the two arts are so often taught together.

 

[CuongNhuka]

The fight between Dong Hai Quan and a famous practioner of xingyi, Guo Yunshen, did take place in Beijing some time after 1862. They fought each other to a standstill and went away friends. It is alledgedly why the two arts are so often taught together.

Yah, see that is what I was talking about.