I have read that beijing style requires more strength, while Pao ting is faster. Also, beijing style also has some solo routines in it. Are there any other differences betwwen the two? Thanks in advance.
I have read that beijing style requires more strength, while Pao ting is faster. Also, beijing style also has some solo routines in it. Are there any other differences betwwen the two? Thanks in advance.
Overall not really. But you must realize that you are opening a can of worms as about 95% of the people in the US are from Chang's camp, and about 100% of the people on the board are Chang's lineage.
Each teacher focuses on certain things. My teacher was a student of Pu Liu, but he is really, really small. So he focused much more on Kuai Jiao (Fast thows) set up off of punches and kicks. I have trained with many of the SC cats in north America and they all have different approaches. Not good. Not bad. Just different foci. Some relied on a lot of strength and power. While others flowed a bit more.
Cheers
Jake
I did Chang's lineage under Jeng Hsin Ping (a long time ago, I'm old) and now we have a Beijing lineage guy teaching short term in the school. All things considered, pretty similar actually. Maybe, big MAYBE, Beijing is a little more aggressive, Chang's via Jeng's a little more "sneaky" ..... but I would cautiong that it may rather be JENG's flavor, seen different flavors among even Chang lineage
Exactly my point! Each teacher will bring something different to the table. Why it is okay to have variations on the same theme in MA! Too bad so many people are short sighted and do not understand this!
Jake
heh heh, don't want to de-rail someone's thread, but the reality is, it's all shades of gray. I have my guys doing the Beijing lineage stuff now. They see throws that to them are similar but different than what they have done in my San Da program. To me, actually, all the same, but they focus of course on the differences. Then, to make matters worse, I have to confess to them that what I do is a BLEND of all my influcnes, not just Shuai Jiao or Lama, but Hapkido, Judo, Sambo, wrestling, etc etc etc. I get more confused every day, old age setting in :p
I don't think it's a big deal. There are no styles in fighting anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by lkfmdc
another glorified kickboxer! :p:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Fa Xing
yeah, I'd have to say in my tradition, I mean not only my experiences but Chan Tai San's as well, every teacher has a certain flavor.... and combining flavors creates even more diversity, all for the better IMO
sweet, glad I'm not the only one...that's why I end up just grabbing them and showing what I'm trying to say...plus that's more fun for me :DQuote:
Originally Posted by lkfmdc
Haha, I have to agree and disagree with you guys. From what I've researched and know, Chang's Baoting style is a mix from his Taiji and Xingyi experience as well as a few others but its a more practical approach in terms of actual combat and fighting usage. But it developed into a more just Shuaijiao competition later on when Sanda or Sansou wasn't as popular in the United States.
As for Baoting Kuaijiao, or just Kuaijiao, I'm not sure of its origins or the true meaning of its name, but word for word it just means "fast feet". It comes from Baoting from what I understand but I don't know if its a substyle or just an emphasis on quick setups for throws and takedowns because I don't think there is a style called Manjiao or Gangjiao which would be "slow feet" or "strong feet"which would counter or supplement the other style.
The Beijing style comes from more of a history of competition, demonstrations, and the entertainment part of Chinese Shuaijiao (Shanpuying Era). I think it is more formalized and a more uniform style in terms of how training and practicing is setup and how (i think) almost all possible moves techniques are termed and defined. But the Beijing style is mostly for competition usage as they do not focus on self-defense, kicking, punching, etc. The throws, yeah you can arguably say you can use in a real life situation, but they do not teach those parts of the application. You often won't see as many of these fighters transition into Sanda or Sansou fighters compared to those that learn Chang's Baoting style because that is how it is setup.
Correct me if I'm wrong but that is what I have come to understand so far. There aren't many books on just Shuaijiao so it's hard to try and put everyone's story together.
LOL. It's sad when people call us that, especially when they bull**** things with "too deadly to spar" comments. I've told people who act like that, that we can fight and I won't care if he "kills" me but they never take me up on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by lkfmdc
If you don't spar how do you know whether or not you are okay with getting hit in the face? Do they think attackers are just going to follow along like the drills you do in class? C'mon!
SJ Nation (remind me of your name again?) - :confused:
You said basically the same thing I did ;) Everyone brings there own experiences to the table. As for Kuai Jiao's origins I have no clue. Commonly used term though. Though I stand to be corrected, but the versions I have seen are the same hanzi for Shuai Jiao, no?!?! Makes sense though, fast feet to enter as most of the throws are self defense based (all I mean is not so dependent on grabbing a garment, and often set up off of strikes / kicks), so therefore one would have to enter quickly, and incorporate their footwork / leg positioning into the throw.
But what do I know :p
Cheers
Jake
The "jiao" in Kuai Jiao is "throw" not "feet"...
No question Chang's SJ had Tai Chi and Hsing Yi influences (also Lo Han) and because of Chang's profession(s) he was very application/fighting minded... but it was still Shuai Jiao, and the techniques the Beijing people are doing "for sport" are still pretty much the same.
Whatsup Jake, it's Emeric. yeah, i'm not too sure on all the different styles and such but its just more of a difference in subtle emphasis on each system. From the forms and applications learning part between of Beijing and Chang's style is more obvious than others but I'm still trying to understand the bigger picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Harmonies
I'm reading some good input here though.
I believe the difference is:
- 撕 Si (tear apart) - not commonly used in Beijing style.
- 崩 Beng (elbow crack) - not allowed in Beijing style.
- 捅 Tong (punch to shoulder) - not allowed in Beijing style.
Chang was essentially a shuaijiao adept who saw that 'modern' forms lacked any martial intent. Through his experience he could/would regularly point out problem with other styles!
He did learn taijiquan and xingi later due to his various teaching engagements at local academies and through exchanges with other masters was able to incorporate martial structure to the well known performance arts, as many systems were merging what we know as wushu today!
Many contemporaries of shuaijiao were Mongol, Manchu or Hui.