It's not just sticks and knives.

K

kilugan1

Joined
Dec 10, 2000
Messages
30
Upon having finished reading the threadf about F.M.A. practitioners versus N.H.B. practitioners, I felt obliged to say a few things about the less glorified aspects of F.M.A. technique. First, we aren't merely knife and stickfighters. Filipino empty hand technique is very effective and lends itself to a multitude of possibilities. Second, F.M.A. training includes such styles as Domog and Silat, both of which can work well versus N.H.B. fighters. Third, F.M.A. stylists tend to be taught to improvise, and important skill in any fight.
Please forgive any anger that may have leaked into my words. I love the Filipino Arts very much and find the implication that we are one trick ponies offensive. In my own training, I have learned the blade and cane, but also the grapple, the throw, the destection, the trap and even the break. We can stand on even-keel with other styles without our blades, we just happen to gain most of our notoriety for our experitse with them. That needs to be reitterated, as many people I have known, from other styles know us only for our stick and blade work. We are soo much more than that.
 
kilugan, i agree with everything you said. but i think the lost of respect for the philippine fighting arts happen when most of the guys who do them learned in a rush rush way, and got certified after very low standards (like no fighting). what we end up is like in kenpo, where it is a fighting style but there are more people who can only demonstrate there techniques on a demonstration attack, but cant do their thing for real. really you can judge a book by its cover (if you see the person move), and most fighters look at a few people who represent the rest of us, and they say "you gotta be kidding that guy aint no fighter!" or many of our "experts" are just not willing to fight to prove that their technique is any good.

as far as empty hands, you are right too that we have very good empty hand fighting also, but how many people really push it to their students? they rather talk about how deadly their blades are, because of course not one person will actually fight with them, so they can speak in concept and theory without proof. so most of what we see as philippine hands techniques are one guy going "okay, he feeds me a jab..." then he defends against an arm that is just stuck out there. the bad thing is the students learn the same way, now what we have is a generation of inferior martial arts and inferior fighters.

so i do agree that the philippine arts are very good, but i feel like we have to many poor representatives and that is what makes the difference between what they call a good arts and a bad one, if somebody ass really gets kicked using it. the way i see so many people teaching, we are just as bad as ninjitsu. (no offense ninja people, but i have met so many ninjas, but i havent seen one fight yet)
 
Than you for your response.
In the school, where I train, we fight stick and knife bouts, full contact and with the Dog Brother's rules. We fight empty hand with the same rules. There are no points, winners or losers. We go until two minutes elapses or someone gives up. This takes pride and false confidence in technique to a substantial low.
I believe that if one wants to learn the F.M.A. in the true spirit, they have to fight. It is the style of fine warriors and has ingenious methodologies behind it. All one needs to do is have the courage and wisdom to take the chances and fight.
I also agree with your assessment about people getting certified without fighting. I would let someone show me technique that didn't fight, but in an informal setting. I wouldn't award rank or teaching certification to people who couldn't employ the curriculum in it's arena: a fight. One doesn't have to be Remy Presas, just competent.
 
kilugan & kuntawman,

Well said! My style of Lucaylucay Kali has a complete and very effective empty hand system, that covers striking, kicking, grappling, control holds and locks and groundfighting.

I have to agree about the sloppy rush to "Learn that stickfighting thing". I have seen several karate and tae kwan do schools in my state that are very proud and jealous of their history and legitimate credentials. These same shcools attend a couple of FMA seminars, learn some siniwalli drills and then add 'stickfighting' to their class agenda.
 

"My style of Lucaylucay Kali has a complete and very effective empty hand system, that covers striking, kicking, grappling, control holds and locks and groundfighting."

Protector, can you tell us a little more about Lucaylucay Kali? In what way is it very effective and how does one find out and actually prove this? Just curious.

Regards,
Chariot
 
Thank you Protector. You have addressed one of the more infuriating habits that many schools have developed. One seminar's material is a bonus technique to a class, not an addition to the school's training curriculum.
I have been to FMA seminars where the bulk of the populace studies FMA in addition to their primary style (usually something unrelated). They tend not to grab the drills and concepts to the level they think they do. Consequently, those of us that are full-timers, tend to perform with a great deal more proficieny.
The bottom line: claim the knowledge that is yours! Don't boast the knowledge that you THINK is yours.
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by kilugan1:
Filipino empty hand technique is very effective and lends itself to a multitude of possibilities. Second, F.M.A. training includes such styles as Domog and Silat, both of which can work well versus N.H.B. fighters. Third, F.M.A. stylists tend to be taught to improvise, and important skill in any fight. </font>
Click to expand...

Great thread you guys. Kuntawman pretty much summed up how I feel about this. The problem I see is with the word "training". Not many schools train. Most of them "practice". Once I started fighting, I stopped practicing and started training. In empty hands, if you wnat to train for a fight, then you should include dealing with real things that happen in a fight. IMO, if your MA can't work against a boxer, it probably isn't much. A boxer is someone that will only use his two hands to punch with. A boxer will make most MA stylist look silly because he actually spars everytime he goes into the gym. Notice words like 'most' and 'probably', because their are exceptions to the case and different "scenarios", but speaking of the probabilities here, not the possibilities.


------------------
Chad
Full Contact Stickfighting Hawaii
www.fullcontacthi.com
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Chariot:

"My style of Lucaylucay Kali has a complete and very effective empty hand system, that covers striking, kicking, grappling, control holds and locks and groundfighting."

Protector, can you tell us a little more about Lucaylucay Kali? In what way is it very effective and how does one find out and actually prove this? Just curious.

Regards,
Chariot</font>
Click to expand...

Chariot,

How does one prove anything? Just curious.

Is it done by convincing someone else, that it is true?

Tom
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Liveblade:
Chariot,

How does one prove anything? Just curious.

Is it done by convincing someone else, that it is true?

Tom</font>
Click to expand...

That's why I ask. There's a lot of people that say "my self-defense is extremely effective" "I train the best self-defense" etc etc and my question is rather simple: HOW do you KNOW?

Now since we're unabable to actually test our styles under real life circumstances, the next best thing's gotta be some type of fullcontact-pretty-much-anything-goes-sparring, and unless you do that, you DON'T know...

So because of that I ask "how do you know, ", not to offend Protector (who I know got a lot of experience) or anyone else, but because I'm curious.

You worked a lot with FMA, please tell your views on doing something as effective and close to realiy as possible. I'm sure we all can learn something.


------------------
Bow to the Bowie!
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Chariot:
That's why I ask. There's a lot of people that say "my self-defense is extremely effective" "I train the best self-defense" etc etc and my question is rather simple: HOW do you KNOW?

Now since we're unabable to actually test our styles under real life circumstances, the next best thing's gotta be some type of fullcontact-pretty-much-anything-goes-sparring, and unless you do that, you DON'T know...

So because of that I ask "how do you know, ", not to offend Protector (who I know got a lot of experience) or anyone else, but because I'm curious.

You worked a lot with FMA, please tell your views on doing something as effective and close to realiy as possible. I'm sure we all can learn something.


</font>
Click to expand...

So, I think you're saying a NHB fight is a way to prove an art is effective?

But doesn't that only prove it was effective against whoever you were fighting on that given instance, under those given circumstances.

How do you separate the individual element and the lack of real life emotions, from the equation?

In other words, one fighter could be in better shape, or a tougher mentality, and a NHB fight is nowhere close to a real situation emotionally.

The bottom line is you can't prove anything about an art, talking about how effective it is on a message board. And in a face to face NHB confrontation, it is really not much easier to "prove" anything about how good an art is.

The only thing that can be proven is one man can beat another and even that may turn out different the next time.

Everyone who trains has to trust in his training, trust that it will provide what is necessary when the time comes. There is no way to really prove it will work.

You may believe that if you beat some other guy in a NHB match that your art is effective. Well, that is what it takes to prove it to you, but it still doesn't mean it will really work.

"my self-defense is extremely effective" "I train the best self-defense" etc etc and my question is rather simple: HOW do you KNOW?

Answer: you trust in your training.
because there is no way to KNOW

But I'll tell you my way to get the faith that what I'm doing is effective, is I train as close to real as possible.

That means when we leave the training, many of us are hurt and bleeding, bruised or have broken bones. I also believe in going out and getting in real situations in order to train, I have purposely worked in violent Nightclubs and Bars the last ten years, for two reasons. 1) I like the action and fighting. 2) It is good training.

The great thing about getting in fights in bars and back alleys is there is a lot of adrenaline and emotions, anything can happen, and there is no mat or rules and no referee to stop the fight. This makes a big difference because you realize that if you make a mistake and get knocked out, or just slip and he gets the better of you, there is no one there to stop the fight, he stops when he gets tired of hitting you. That's pressure.
The bad side to this training is you will get killed or arrested if you don't know what your doing, and even if you know what you're doing it still might happen.

I have talked with many prominent Filipino Martial artist, and told them that that is the way I like to train, and also it gives me a reference when I'm teaching others.
They look at me like I'm some kind of Cro-Magnon, or at least uncivilized in my approach to training, but like I said before, the only person you have to prove it to is yourself.

Tom Kier
SAYOC KALI
 
Chariot,
I have 15 years in law enforcement and 22 years in various martial arts. I have done work as a concert bouncer and plain clothes security details. I have tried various types of full contact matches over the years as well.

I did not win every fight, but I did win all the important ones that let me go home to my family. One of the keys to honestly judging the quality of my particular FMA system for me, is to truly analyze why I lost the fights I did lose. In every instance it was not a failure of Lucaylucay Kali/JKD, but a failure on my part. Almost all of these failures were awareness failures or tactical/macho failures (meaaning I should have called for back-up or runaway and didn't). I firmly believe the quality of the art and the comprehensive training Guro Ted insisted on helped me get out of the losing situations in one piece, more or less.
 
Thekuntawman said: "no offense ninja people, but i have met so many ninjas, but i havent seen one fight yet"

In the 2nd of the famous and controversial "Ultimate Fighting Championships," there was a guy (an American practicing RBWI) calling himself a ninja who had the smackdown laid on him. It was horrible; he didn't even get one punch in -- he rushed his opponent (a kickboxer), who promptly took him down and pounded his head about 15 times, knocking him out.

I remember it distinctly because RBWI is based locally, and I had a friend who was in it at the time and knew the ninja guy personally. Like the above posts say, it wouldn't be fair to judge ninjutsu from this one performance, but it does at least shatter the image of ninja invincibility...
biggrin.gif
 
That kickboxer was Pat Smith. He's laid a smackdown on LOTS of people. Very impressive. Attributes like his in an opponent are a nightmare...
 
So you saw that one too, huh? Brutal, that one. It was scary watching it the first time, but successive viewings of it kinda desensitized me to the point of it becoming almost comical. Like some Japanese Anime!
 
Robert Bussey Warrior International.
There fighter Scott Morris in UFC 2 advanced to the semi-finals to face Patrick Smith. Ending up on the ground, Morris got cut/knocked pretty hard with a flurry of elbows from Smith.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top