Baguazhang Fighting Techniques?

Tom Bisio does a good job presenting the combat applications of the Liang bagua he learned in these DVDs.

DVD'S - Internal Arts International
I agree that Tom Bisio has legit bagua DVDs and only recomend them since you have a background in bagua. I was able to pick up quite a few apps and structural details from his DVDs but I will warn you when hes doing the forms or palm changes their not broken down in to super detailed step by step instruction. They still are the best bagua DVDs I've personally viewed though.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
Bagua, if trained correctly is good for fighting....however most these days to not train it for fighting, they train for form. Problem with Bagua,, like Taijiquan, is that the forms look good and many only train for the forms.

I'm one of those who like to practice forms - I think I'd like to learn some of these - thanks Xue Sheng.
 
Bagua, if trained correctly is good for fighting....however most these days to not train it for fighting, they train for form. Problem with Bagua,, like Taijiquan, is that the forms look good and many only train for the forms.

Go back in Chinese history and it was a good style for dealing with multiple attackers. It was also one of the preferred styles for body guards on the silk road.

There is also a story about Cheng Tinghua during the boxer rebellion taking on and defeating sevarl German soldiers.... however he chose to walk away after beating them and the got back up and shot him
Heeey I was going to say that! Also Bagua practioners are known to carry knives. Having trained in BGZ for most of my 35+ years in the arts I've had only one occasion to use it outside of sparing. It serves me very well. Now I just do it for helth and spar with it every once in a while.

Sent from my H710VL using Tapatalk
 
I don't disagree - I think bagua excels as a means for cultivating health and longevity and in how it develops the body- but haven't seen anyone really make the jump to using its moves as a fighting art - kind of like how yoga can help the martial artist in terms of opening the hips, more range of motion, balance, proprioception, etc. - it's for exercise and training - but you don't use its moves to fight.

I practiced Bagua years ago and unfortunately our teacher moved. He taught Bagua to be very applicable. Sort of a western boxing blend. We sparred more than we practiced form. I can say training like this it was very effective for real world self defense.
 
My understanding is that those that tained with Park Bok-Nam do the martial arts of it. However I do not know this for sure since I never trained with Park Bok-Nam > I know Park Bok-Nam learned it as a fighting art.
 
I'm one of those who like to practice forms - I think I'd like to learn some of these - thanks Xue Sheng.
If you do learn them, make sure your teacher is teaching you the foundation material first, upon which the forms ought to be built. If you jump straight into the forms without understanding the foundation, then your forms will only be superficial and less valuable even just as exercise.

With the foundation, then you have the tools to develop it for fighting if you close to do so, even if you are mostly interested in health etc.
 
If you do learn them, make sure your teacher is teaching you the foundation material first, upon which the forms ought to be built. If you jump straight into the forms without understanding the foundation, then your forms will only be superficial and less valuable even just as exercise.

With the foundation, then you have the tools to develop it for fighting if you close to do so, even if you are mostly interested in health etc.

Thanks Xue Sheng and Flying Crane. Despite being the one who asked about applications, I quickly defaulted back to using baguazhang (along with yoga and qigong) for its beneficial effects on my health, energy, balance and proprioception. I did read Park Bok-Nam's book, and agree that there are some good applications there. Spending more and more time on martialtalk I've started to see the divide in my own practice between practical fighting techniques and arts that have supreme benefits that are not directly related to fighting. For now, baguazhang is back in that latter category for me.
 
I have never met a Bagua practitioner who could fight. I have sparred with a few and they could not apply what they learned because they never sparred hard or conditioned their bodies.

Yes, Bagua practitioner can't fight till now.
 
I have never met a Bagua practitioner who could fight. I have sparred with a few and they could not apply what they learned because they never sparred hard or conditioned their bodies.
Yes, Bagua practitioner can't fight till now.
If we look at both 1928 and 1929 Chinese MA tournaments, there were no Bagua fighters in those lists (There were no Taiji fighters in those lists either).

1928 National Guo Shu fighting Competitiion

朱国福(上海 形意)、 Xing Yi
王云鹏(河南 少林)、Shaolin
张长义(上海 形意)、Xing Yi
马裕甫(山东 查拳)、Long Fist (Cha Quan)
张英振(山东 查拳)、Long fist (Cha Quan)
窦来庚(山东 太乙门)、Tai Yi Men
杨法武(山东 摔跤、查拳)、Long fist (Cha Quan) Shuai jiao
杨士文(山东 迷踪拳)、Long fist (Mi Zong)
顾汝章(江苏 少林)、Shaolin
王成章(上海 洪拳) 、Hong quan (not sure if northern or southern
朱国桢(河北 形意)、Xing Yi
张维通(山西 六合拳)、Xing yi liu he Quan
朱国禄(河北 形意)、Xing Yi
马承智(安徽 少林)、Shaolin
胡炯(江西 字门拳)。Zi Men Quan (This is the only southern style)

1929 Hangzhou Leitai Tournament

1. Wang Ziqing (skilled at shaolin & shuai jiao)
2. Zhu Guolu (xingyi and boxing)
3. Zhang Dianqing (fanzi quan, shuai jiao, yiquan)
4. Cao Yanhai (originally studied Mizong quan. Learnt Tongbei from Ma Yingtu, pigua from Guo Changsheng, later studied under Sun Lutang)
5. Hu Fengshan (originally studied xingyi under Tang Shilin., later became Sun Lutang’s disciple)
6. Ma Chengzhi (originally shaolin,later studied xingyi under Sun Lutang)
7. Han Qingtang (praying mantis, taizu long fist, especially expert at qin’na)
8. Wan Changsheng (learnt Cha quan from Ma Jinbiao)
9. Zhu Zhenglin (learnt Tai Yi Men under Yang Mingzhai)
10. Zhang Xiaocai (learnt Cha Quan under Ma Jinbiao)
11. Gao Zuolin
12. Yue Xia (bagua under Zhao Weixian)
13. Zhao Daoxin (yiquan)
14. Li Qinglan
15. Shang Zhenshan

1933 National Nanking Guo Shu Competitiion

Don't have name list for this.
 
Last edited:
Spending more and more time on martialtalk I've started to see the divide in my own practice between practical fighting techniques and arts that have supreme benefits that are not directly related to fighting. For now, baguazhang is back in that latter category for me.
I like to kill 2 birds with 1 stone. I prefer to train fighting skill, at the same time I can also get the health benefit.
 
Last edited:
If we look at both 1928 and 1929 Chinese MA tournaments, there were no Bagua fighters in those lists (There were no Taiji fighters in those lists either).

1928 National Guo Shu fighting Competitiion

朱国福(上海 形意)、 Xing Yi
王云鹏(河南 少林)、Shaolin
张长义(上海 形意)、Xing Yi
马裕甫(山东 查拳)、Long Fist (Cha Quan)
张英振(山东 查拳)、Long fist (Cha Quan)
窦来庚(山东 太乙门)、Tai Yi Men
杨法武(山东 摔跤、查拳)、Long fist (Cha Quan) Shuai jiao
杨士文(山东 迷踪拳)、Long fist (Mi Zong)
顾汝章(江苏 少林)、Shaolin
王成章(上海 洪拳) 、Hong quan (not sure if northern or southern
朱国桢(河北 形意)、Xing Yi
张维通(山西 六合拳)、Xing yi liu he Quan
朱国禄(河北 形意)、Xing Yi
马承智(安徽 少林)、Shaolin
胡炯(江西 字门拳)。Zi Men Quan (This is the only southern style)

1929 Hangzhou Leitai Tournament

1. Wang Ziqing (skilled at shaolin & shuai jiao)
2. Zhu Guolu (xingyi and boxing)
3. Zhang Dianqing (fanzi quan, shuai jiao, yiquan)
4. Cao Yanhai (originally studied Mizong quan. Learnt Tongbei from Ma Yingtu, pigua from Guo Changsheng, later studied under Sun Lutang)
5. Hu Fengshan (originally studied xingyi under Tang Shilin., later became Sun Lutang’s disciple)
6. Ma Chengzhi (originally shaolin,later studied xingyi under Sun Lutang)
7. Han Qingtang (praying mantis, taizu long fist, especially expert at qin’na)
8. Wan Changsheng (learnt Cha quan from Ma Jinbiao)
9. Zhu Zhenglin (learnt Tai Yi Men under Yang Mingzhai)
10. Zhang Xiaocai (learnt Cha Quan under Ma Jinbiao)
11. Gao Zuolin
12. Yue Xia (bagua under Zhao Weixian)
13. Zhao Daoxin (yiquan)
14. Li Qinglan
15. Shang Zhenshan

1933 National Nanking Guo Shu Competitiion

Don't have name list for this.
How is this at all meaningful? Just because nobody with Bagua background entered those tournaments, you think they didn’t exist, Bagua people could not fight?
 
How is this at all meaningful? Just because nobody with Bagua background entered those tournaments, you think they didn’t exist, Bagua people could not fight?

For that matter it does not even mean any Bagauzhang people entered. If that can be taken as any proof then every other Chinese martial art that is not listed can be said to have no fighters...
 
How is this at all meaningful? Just because nobody with Bagua background entered those tournaments, you think they didn’t exist, Bagua people could not fight?
The official Chinese MA tournament record shows no Bagua people's fighting in those tournaments.
 
Last edited:
The official Chinese MA tournament record shows no Bagua people's fighting in those tournaments.
That doesn't mean that bagua can't fight though. It just means no bagua chose to fight. It would be different if 50 Bagua people fought, and all of them lost the first round, but them not being there shows nothing more than no bagua guys chose to enter that tournament. It would be the same as claiming hung gar practitioners, or fu jow pai practitioners, can't fight because they were not at the tournament those two years.
 
I cannot find any record to prove that Bagua guys can fight. Of course you can say that I cannot find any record to prove that Bagua guys can't fight either.

To me, no record -> no prove.

So, then to you no record to prove they could or could not...so your post then seems irrelevant since it can neither prove or disprove baguazhang folks can fight.....so why post the fight record then?

Cheng Tinghua, boxer rebellion... look it up, I shall say no more. Sadly Youtube and video cameras did not exist in old China to satisfy your need for proof. Believe whatever you wish too.
 
No record means no record. Nothing more, nothing less.
1. I can't prove that ghost exist -> my conclusion is that ghost doesn't exist.
2. I can't prove that ghost doesn't exist -> my conclusion is that ghost exist.

IMO, logic 1 makes more sense than logic 2.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top