didn't make the vids yet. In the meantime, have a look at these...the contrast is basically what we have talked about -
keep in mind, these are training kata. full of stylistic movements in order to concentrate on disciplining the particular body mechanics for that style.
Goju - Gekisai Dai Ichihttp://www.spokanekarate.com/kata
Matsubayashi - Fukyugata Nihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q79Yo7mSyZo
* hourglass vs natural stance/stepping. straight stepping must be swifter, but believe me, cresent stepping has alot more utility.
* Matsubayashi whips the hips whereas Goju tends to rotate it's core. (but Goju does use like whipping usually during turning throws as in Aikido - similarly, Shorin systems do seem to have core rotation as well, assuming when the application calls for it).
* Goju tends to plant a split second before a strike. MB seems to stop it's forward momentum with the front foot right at the end of a strike.
note: when hitting a bag, I notice the Goju method stayed the same - yet in the MB method, in order to conteract the recoil, I had to tighten slightly with the rear leg.
in other words, the mechanics changed when hitting something other than air using the MB natural stance. whereas the Goju mechanics didn't change. thought that was an interesting find.
I have to conclude that just by looking at these most basic methods in either style and trying to extract tactics, I come up with the following:
1. Range optimization. Shorin seems optimized for 1 arm length away. Goju seems optimized for closer. (that doesn't mean ineffective in the other range...it just means optimized for a particular range - and at this particular stage of learning: beginner).
2. The speed/stability tradeoff...can't get something for nothing. If you are a bit further away, you have a need for more agility and speed...particularly lower body.
3. I noted the differences in the stress of training drills as well. Goju tends to do more strength building exercises (heavier on the hojo undo-weight training)...whereas Shorin seemed to focus on speed and stepping drills more than mass building.
No doubt that as a student progresses in either style, the range proficiency evens out, and in fact, some Shorin styles begin with naihanchi...which definitely contains close fighting principles. so thats interesting because then it seems it just becomes a preference or rather, a question for the instructor..."what range do you want students to start in?". If my theory holds, then it would also make sense for the people starting with naihanchi to be heavier with the weight training, initially.
If you tend to have new students with grappling experience - formally or informally as part of kid culture perhaps, then close-in would be the best place to start. If you tend to get boxers or fist-fighters as new students, then starting at that range would make sense....or so I'm thinking.
reportedly, Okinawans grew up with wrestling as part of it's schoolyard culture...whereas in the west, boxing/fist fighting is the cultures roughhouse of choice. It may be a culture decision to decide what range to start in. I don't know, I'm just suppossing.
keep in mind a couple things (eg:disclaimer), the particular MB club I was with didn't do very much impact training - I did that on my own. so what I found might not hold true for ALL matsubayashi. plus, as I mentioned and can't stress enough, I was only studying MB for a single year.
Thats pretty much all I have on the subject...I'm interested in hearing your comments/arguments/disagreements etc.
for lazy people that skip to the end, a summary
: What I found as the only main beginner's difference between Goju and Matsubayashi were: range optimization.