- Joined
- Nov 28, 1999
- Messages
- 235
i never want to disrespect any teachers or style, because i know fighting ability does not know a style or teacher, but what is in that person.
as far as "authetic", anything you make is authentic. if a mexican guy in north dakota makes a style yesterday, it is authentic. it is when he says pilipinos are doing it or this is the ancient style, that is what takes away being authentic. so, while some people like drills, others prefer sparring and hitting patterns, they both can make good fighters. but what is done by most schools in the philippines? not the drills. drills, are an AMERICAN philippine martial art...thats not saying its bad, but dont think most of us are doing it. or that it was brought here. because if you want to find out where "hubad" came from, look at wing chun. "guntings" in every defense, look at ed parkers kenpo. i do not know him, but i believe that danny inosanto made most of those technques, and other teachers follows them, even i followed them when i was young. but never did i say i got them from home or my folks. anybody who ever met me can tell you i learn them from billy bryant, who learn them from danny inosanto. after i left him, i thought, wow, our style sure is missing a lot. i thought my grandfather is just old fashioned when he says he does not like them. when i travel home, nobody knows about them. the more i have seen and read about mr inosanto, i realize, this is HIS style! nothing wrong with that, but they did not come from the philippines. bahala na does not do them, serrada does not do them, mr sarmiento's group does not do them, didnt he learn from them?
so my point is, anything can be authentic, but lets not take something new (twnety or thirty years old) and make it something exported. that is my only point.
when i talk about other people's idea of the philippine art, they put american philippine art in the same category with philippine arts. there is a difference.
dave i agree with you that there are many people who want full contact arts, i talk to them everyday, and most of my students are in that group. i just dont thing that most of the people in the philippine arts are that way, i believe they like to show there stuff, talk tough (this is deadly), make up "new" ideas, and hide behind there knifes. all without looking for something imported, they want what they see in the tapes and the seminars, so the FOBs (fresh of the boat) do not get looked at. i met one guy here in california, he was with a small group in the philippines (i cant remember the name) but now he is doce pares, which is a very good fighting group, but he did it because he knows that will guaratnee him students. but guess what? he's here longer than me, and he still has no school, he teaches in a school, and then by seminars.
when i first started to teach the philippine arts, i had the same problem. i did "southeast asian knife fighting" seminars for jimmy kim ("kim's institute", now kim's karate) all over virginia and maryland, and then i did point sparring classes. then kickboxing classes. in dc they know me more for point fighting and kuoshu. i hated doing the seminars so i took the karate way, now i have a school, so i know you can do it without the seminars.
and it is not true philippine martial arts is taught in mostyl garages. nobody in the p.i. have garages. >)
by the way, i respect many schools, the "other martial arts" post was for empty hand schools, and i respect them all. the ones i remember are the ones i fought against or saw them a lot. pekiti tirsia, lsa(lighting scientific/kidlat), black knights. there are a lot of them, and they all practice the way i am talking about. except some of the pekiti tirsia separate themself from leo gaje, i halfway put him in the category of american arts only because of his compadres.
there is a quran saying, "a good muslim speaks only about what he knows from his experience and his eyes, never his ears". so to answer anybody questions about who is good or who i think is agood fighter, i can only say when i have fought them or i have seen them fight. but experienced fighters can somethimes tell ability when he sees someone move. that is why i defend greg alland whenever somebody puts him down. but anybody else popular in the philippine arts, i havent seen them fight. how many people here who say bruce lee or even danny inosanto (no disrespect) are good fighters? if i sound skeptical of everybody in the philippine arts or i doubt there ability, its because i really do, thats what fighters do, they want to try people out for themself, and they want to test new ideas. for those who say they are philippine martial artists, that is the important tenet of our style to challenge as much as possible. thats how you get better. i have study and finish less than five styles closely, and i only liked two of them. if you look around, probably the best fighters did the same thing. and if someone is serious about it, he will travel to get it. i wanted more philippine martial arts, so i went home to the p.i. when i was boxing i travel, even for a few days only to train at different gyms. now i am grappling, and i travel one hour each way to do it. i can go to a seminar, but i dont think those guys have the same seriousness about it that i do. so i understand seminars might be the only way to get it in your area, but if you are on the east coast, you have raffy pambuan in florida, bobby taboada in north carolina, grag in virginia, alice baugh in virginia, mr chai, mr marinas, dong cuesta and the mayo family in new york. in the midwest there is mr lastra (i forgot the state) and mrs. ruby in texas. then west coast you have people all over california and washington state. they say if there is a will, there is a way. if you dont travel, there must be no will.
i am getting long, so i will just say that for me origin is important, only for pride sake. honesty should be important for everybody. most of what i am talking about is not the technique of the art, but the spirit and the _attitude_. there are so many techniques and different fighting methods in the philippines, but the philosophy is the same with almost everybody, we focus on the end result, the bottom line. we like efficiency, and we have way to get it. if people add this and that, that's okay, that is how we got the art today. but strong basics, how to hit, how to move, how to react. those are what we have in common, not how many different variations we can come up with. and before a man becomes a teacher (sorry donna, a woman too). he has to fight. then the community knows that he knows what he is doing and he earned his respect. i dont believe that is happening here. and there's my problem. i feel like i earn my respect, and i want other people to earn it the pilipino way, if they say they are doing the PHILIPPINE martial arts.
as far as "authetic", anything you make is authentic. if a mexican guy in north dakota makes a style yesterday, it is authentic. it is when he says pilipinos are doing it or this is the ancient style, that is what takes away being authentic. so, while some people like drills, others prefer sparring and hitting patterns, they both can make good fighters. but what is done by most schools in the philippines? not the drills. drills, are an AMERICAN philippine martial art...thats not saying its bad, but dont think most of us are doing it. or that it was brought here. because if you want to find out where "hubad" came from, look at wing chun. "guntings" in every defense, look at ed parkers kenpo. i do not know him, but i believe that danny inosanto made most of those technques, and other teachers follows them, even i followed them when i was young. but never did i say i got them from home or my folks. anybody who ever met me can tell you i learn them from billy bryant, who learn them from danny inosanto. after i left him, i thought, wow, our style sure is missing a lot. i thought my grandfather is just old fashioned when he says he does not like them. when i travel home, nobody knows about them. the more i have seen and read about mr inosanto, i realize, this is HIS style! nothing wrong with that, but they did not come from the philippines. bahala na does not do them, serrada does not do them, mr sarmiento's group does not do them, didnt he learn from them?
so my point is, anything can be authentic, but lets not take something new (twnety or thirty years old) and make it something exported. that is my only point.
when i talk about other people's idea of the philippine art, they put american philippine art in the same category with philippine arts. there is a difference.
dave i agree with you that there are many people who want full contact arts, i talk to them everyday, and most of my students are in that group. i just dont thing that most of the people in the philippine arts are that way, i believe they like to show there stuff, talk tough (this is deadly), make up "new" ideas, and hide behind there knifes. all without looking for something imported, they want what they see in the tapes and the seminars, so the FOBs (fresh of the boat) do not get looked at. i met one guy here in california, he was with a small group in the philippines (i cant remember the name) but now he is doce pares, which is a very good fighting group, but he did it because he knows that will guaratnee him students. but guess what? he's here longer than me, and he still has no school, he teaches in a school, and then by seminars.
when i first started to teach the philippine arts, i had the same problem. i did "southeast asian knife fighting" seminars for jimmy kim ("kim's institute", now kim's karate) all over virginia and maryland, and then i did point sparring classes. then kickboxing classes. in dc they know me more for point fighting and kuoshu. i hated doing the seminars so i took the karate way, now i have a school, so i know you can do it without the seminars.
and it is not true philippine martial arts is taught in mostyl garages. nobody in the p.i. have garages. >)
by the way, i respect many schools, the "other martial arts" post was for empty hand schools, and i respect them all. the ones i remember are the ones i fought against or saw them a lot. pekiti tirsia, lsa(lighting scientific/kidlat), black knights. there are a lot of them, and they all practice the way i am talking about. except some of the pekiti tirsia separate themself from leo gaje, i halfway put him in the category of american arts only because of his compadres.
there is a quran saying, "a good muslim speaks only about what he knows from his experience and his eyes, never his ears". so to answer anybody questions about who is good or who i think is agood fighter, i can only say when i have fought them or i have seen them fight. but experienced fighters can somethimes tell ability when he sees someone move. that is why i defend greg alland whenever somebody puts him down. but anybody else popular in the philippine arts, i havent seen them fight. how many people here who say bruce lee or even danny inosanto (no disrespect) are good fighters? if i sound skeptical of everybody in the philippine arts or i doubt there ability, its because i really do, thats what fighters do, they want to try people out for themself, and they want to test new ideas. for those who say they are philippine martial artists, that is the important tenet of our style to challenge as much as possible. thats how you get better. i have study and finish less than five styles closely, and i only liked two of them. if you look around, probably the best fighters did the same thing. and if someone is serious about it, he will travel to get it. i wanted more philippine martial arts, so i went home to the p.i. when i was boxing i travel, even for a few days only to train at different gyms. now i am grappling, and i travel one hour each way to do it. i can go to a seminar, but i dont think those guys have the same seriousness about it that i do. so i understand seminars might be the only way to get it in your area, but if you are on the east coast, you have raffy pambuan in florida, bobby taboada in north carolina, grag in virginia, alice baugh in virginia, mr chai, mr marinas, dong cuesta and the mayo family in new york. in the midwest there is mr lastra (i forgot the state) and mrs. ruby in texas. then west coast you have people all over california and washington state. they say if there is a will, there is a way. if you dont travel, there must be no will.
i am getting long, so i will just say that for me origin is important, only for pride sake. honesty should be important for everybody. most of what i am talking about is not the technique of the art, but the spirit and the _attitude_. there are so many techniques and different fighting methods in the philippines, but the philosophy is the same with almost everybody, we focus on the end result, the bottom line. we like efficiency, and we have way to get it. if people add this and that, that's okay, that is how we got the art today. but strong basics, how to hit, how to move, how to react. those are what we have in common, not how many different variations we can come up with. and before a man becomes a teacher (sorry donna, a woman too). he has to fight. then the community knows that he knows what he is doing and he earned his respect. i dont believe that is happening here. and there's my problem. i feel like i earn my respect, and i want other people to earn it the pilipino way, if they say they are doing the PHILIPPINE martial arts.
