aznkarateboi Posted July 14, 2003 Author Posted July 14, 2003 I disagree. but capoeira, wushu, and northern shaolin styles are very acrobatic and flashy
Synaesthesia Posted July 14, 2003 Posted July 14, 2003 Aznkarateboi, Not all of them. I practiced for a time a form of Honan Shaolin Wushu, and it wasn't particularly flashy. Although it had flying kicks most of the moves, particularly in the more advanced forms, were not particularly flashy. It stresses a lot of sticky-hand skill and military weapons training.
Prodigal Son Posted July 14, 2003 Posted July 14, 2003 When doing a comparative post, the same rules apply for replying. Please try to give some supporting details, not just an answer. Sorry Southern styles are better becuase they are generally more effective on the street - it seems logical that the most effective way to hit something is in a straight line, both feet on the floor, and without turning your back. >>>PS<<< p.s. (But not all martial arts WANT to be deadly fighting systems - some of them are for aesthetics - that's why they say Martial ARTS - some of them kinda work and look nice too... so this is not intended to diss flashy styles. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------Self-defense is only an illusion, a dark cloak beneath which lurks a razor-sharp dagger waiting to be plunged into the first unwary victim. Sifu Wong.
rb Posted July 14, 2003 Posted July 14, 2003 Hmmm, So you're saying that a "northern " practitioner only executes flying turning kicks ? There are so many chinese boxing styles. I find it hard how anyone could say in a matter-o-factory way that one regional style is all that much better. Why I don't think I'd be out of line to suggest that myself and all the rest of you are very ignorant about a lot of styles and a lot of things.
aznkarateboi Posted July 15, 2003 Author Posted July 15, 2003 "Hmmm, So you're saying that a "northern " practitioner only executes flying turning kicks ?" I'll be willing to give you lots of money if you show me when I said that Northern (yes, northern) practitioners only execute "flying turning kicks". "There are so many chinese boxing styles. I find it hard how anyone could say in a matter-o-factory way that one regional style is all that much better." True, and I didn't matter-of-factly state that one regional style is much better than all northern styles. "Why I don't think I'd be out of line to suggest that myself and all the rest of you are very ignorant about a lot of styles and a lot of things." First of all, I have no clue what that sentence is supposed to mean. I will assume that it means that we are very ignorant about many styles. Of course we are, who isn't? But the fact that most Southern styles are more linear, hard, and less acrobatic than most Northern styles remains the same.
Prodigal Son Posted July 16, 2003 Posted July 16, 2003 Nobody said "only flying kicks".... But none the less, Northern styles generally DO incorporate high or turning kicks etc. Not ALL of them. MOST of them. So perhaps we should ask, once again, "Are short and direct styles better than flashy ones ?". Everyone who are regularly on this forum already knows my opinion on this, so I'm not gonna bore anyone with it today. >>>PS<<< ------------------------------------------------------------------------Self-defense is only an illusion, a dark cloak beneath which lurks a razor-sharp dagger waiting to be plunged into the first unwary victim. Sifu Wong.
KwicKixJ1 Posted October 31, 2003 Posted October 31, 2003 i think northern and southern depends on the individual. just like any other martial arts. depends on your build, etc. some styles work for some people, some styles don't. its like the difference between karate and tae kwon do. one's hard and pretty linear, whereas the other is more flashy. but... you can't say one's better than the other because it all depends on the situation. i think if someone's more intent on fighting practicality... yeah... i'd say southern styles are probably more PRACTICAL in that sense. there's not as much excess motion. heh... wing chun is about as practical as it gets i think. there's ZERO flash, and ZERO excess. just one quick block, and one straight punch. i study mantis, and we work a lot with spirals. i enjoy it more tho, cuz i'm more comfortable fighting this way than straight line. anyways... its two in the morning and i'm rambling. hope you guys have a good halloween.
delta1 Posted October 31, 2003 Posted October 31, 2003 ...it seems logical that the most effective way to hit something is in a straight line, both feet on the floor, and without turning your back. ... So perhaps we should ask, once again, "Are short and direct styles better than flashy ones ?". As allways, we have to lok at the whole picture when we ask these questions. Immagine fighting in a very cold environment, where you are both dressed in heavy, bulky clothing. Ever see those pictues of Chinese troops in winter in the Korean 'Conflict'? Try throwing a good straight punch dressed like that. You couldn't get your elbow close to your side with straps, let alone keep it there through the early motion of a proper straight punch. But the large, looping strikes with plenty of body rotation are just the thing for effective fighting in this situation. Freedom isn't free!
paolung Posted October 31, 2003 Posted October 31, 2003 i don't think that southern systems are necessarily superior to northern. there are many northern systems that are useful... just as there are many southern systems. they just do things differently... not necessarily better or worse overall. "It is not how much you know but how well you have mastered what you've learnt. When making an assessment of one's martial arts training one should measure the depth rather than the length". - MASTER "General" D. Lacey
Recommended Posts