azure,
striking is a big part of shuai chaio in it’s combative aspect; but not in competition.
… if you ask me who i think the top martial artist of the 20th century is, i’d answer, “Chang Tung Sheng”. - (whose chosen art was shuai chiao.)
as is said about most great martial artists, it is said that he was unbeaten in combat. (grain of salt) and, he also was a BIG advocate of striking first, and he was also very big into iron palm training. - that is what made his strikes effective.
sure, if you see him demo somthing, he may very well omit the strike; and against someone of much less skill than himself (almost everyone) he may have been able to utilise the throws omiting the strike, but that has to be attributed to his highly developed skill.
but, as i understand it, whenever it came to any sort of “challenge” (using the term loosely) he would employ striking.
… now, some shuai chaio schools are leaning towards a more competition oriented setting, and it is my understanding that striking is much less emphasized in the classroom setting. (very likely partly in consideration of insurance purposes.)
(striking isn’t that complicated anyway. - even someone with no training can make a fist and beat someone’s skull in.)
(but, s.c. does have strikes)
i don’t know about ‘all’ shaui chaio schools, but i know some still empahsize striking in their teaching, and also teach iron palm.
in competition, you need to first ‘offbalance’ your opponent to open the window of opportunity fot the throw. - in combat, the strike would serve the purpose of the offbalance, opening the window of opportunity. - without that, the person can resist, escape, counter, or strike.
- you can’t offbalance without first making contact with your opponent, but against a striker if you’re close enough to make contact, you’re already in striking distance, and it would put you at a major disadvantage to try to go for a grab and offbalance. - just look at the ufc’s where the “grapplers” would eat hits on their way in against the “strikers”. (not the ideal way to do it. - and it’s even worse if the guy trained iron palm.)
combatants don’t ‘clinch’ when begining a street fight.
(does that make sense?)
s.c. has only a very few strikes, as compared to some other systems, but they are very widely useful against any type of fighter. (e.g. a highly skilled s.c. player would be able to utilise s.c.'s strikes against a boxer, as well as a grappler, etc.) … and i definitely think that having a small number of techniques is a distinct advantage.
(how many strikes does boxing have? - does that make it bad?) - hsing-i is another very effective system that i really like, that is primarily a striking art that has only a few strikes. (5. - as in the 5 element fists. - i don’t count the various animals (12) as i see the 5 elements as being the real heart and soul of hsing-i.)
even tai chi does not have very many strikes. - everything is kept as simple as possible; and that is the beauty of the art.
- they say that at the highest levels, all martial arts look the same. - but yet there can be variation. if you look at boxing as an example. - boxing is boxing, and you’ve got your jab, cross, hooks, and uppercuts; yet different boxers have distinctly different styles. and some boxers are better at some things, … you get the idea…
i hope you’ve been able to fish out your answer from somewhere beneath my ramblings…
peace outside.
Ma.