Attn: Apoweyn, other Kali practitioners

[red5angel]

I was checking out a couple of these articles and wanted to get your opinion, especially on the top article.

http://visayanmartialarts.com/articles.htm

[apoweyn]

Wow. That first article is all over the map.

His point about double stick is well taken but (IMHO) badly stated.


the double sticks are an often used and emphasised aspect of Arnis/Escrima training but are unfortunately usually misunderstood by most people.

No argument there.

I think the author is right that many people have the misapprehension that FMA is all about the sticks. Particularly the double sticks. Eskrimadors themselves often insist that it's all about the knives. Me, I think it's all about whatever it's all about. For me, that's empty hand. For the next guy, that's his call.


The point must be made that Arnis/Escrima is foremost an empty hand art and that the sticks are to be considered simple training tools. Some older Filipino Arnisadors/Escrimadors consider the rattan sticks as cheap punching bags and view the movements performed by the Escrimador in sinawali training as simple punching combinations.

This is where he loses me. I understand and support the contention that kali aims to use the same principles for stick, blade, empty hand, knife, etc. But principles aren't actually delivery. In principle, cars should stop at a crosswalk. When I'm walking, I'm still well advised to make sure they do before I stroll into traffic.

The fact is that people in the Philippines did (and still do) fight with sticks. And knives. And empty hand. That's why we train sticks, knives, and empty hand. And while general concepts port over from one to the other, working with a stick isn't going to teach you magically to properly align your fingers for a knifehand strike. Or your wrist for a jab cross combination. Those skills are better learned specifically.

There are lots of mechanics that don't port over directly from one weapon to another. It's impossible to thrust with a stick in a way that mirrors punching. There's an extra joint involved with a stick. And that matters. Bladework involves less momentum and more drawing, where drawing with a bludgeon avails you nothing. The mechanics are different. And claiming that they aren't and that one skill can be learned by the exercising of another, that's every bit as misleading as the idea that eskrima is just sticks.


Some people however misunderstand and consider the exercises as only stick and sword work. They never see or are told to imagine the exercises in an empty hand aspect.

Well, those skills shouldn't really be imagined. They should be trained.


The student of Arnis must be shown from an early point in their training, that the movements can be naturally translated or naturally changed to whether you may have or may not have a weapon. i.e. If you have a single weapon you still have two hands, if you have two weapons you still use two hands or your two empty hands can be used by simply using the same movements.

Yes. But you'd be better served (IMHO) by actually running drills with a stick in one hand and a boxing glove on the other, actually training those skills in a specified manner. Not just by "reimagining" sinawali.

Personally, I don't even think that sinawali constitutes the biggest part of learning to fight with two sticks either. That's actually what I thought the article was going to address. It's a pattern. And the objective of anyone performing it is to preserve the pattern. That's a good starting point, but personally I would've benefitted from more than that.

That's the first article, I guess. Whaddya think?


Stuart B.

[apoweyn]

Like I said, I think his point is well taken. His point, I believe, is that eskrima runs deeper than just the stick. That's certainly true. And I'm basically okay with the practice of translating stick maneuvers into empty hand maneuvers. But I'm unclear whether he thinks that can be achieved by simply training stick and conceptualizing it as hand (the interpretation I took from my first reading). Or whether he thinks that the translation should then be trained itself.

When he says that a stick is simply a cheap heavy bag, it makes me wonder. Boxers don't pick up the heavy bag and hit their sparring partners with them. They work on the heavy bag. So why would hitting someone with a stick be sufficient to teach you how to hit them without a stick? And why, by that logic, wouldn't it make more sense to put a stick in the ground and practice hitting that with your hands?

Why? Because stick is a valid skill. Double stick is a valid skill. As are blade, punching, kicking, and wrestling (dumog). Each have peculiarities that need to be addressed.


Stuart B.

[yenhoi]

:rolleyes:

Stick(s) are a valuable coordination tool, and can be a refrence for general motions and body mechanics.

Besides that I have nothing good to say. Ap is right, you have to train things for them to work.

Inosanto and Sayoc and probably Dog Brothers all train the hand cannon as a 'projectile' weapon at some point also.

:confused:

[apoweyn]

Ap is right

I would go so far as to say that I've taken the correct, made it my prison b*tch, grown tired of its company, and traded it for two packs of Newports and a back issue of TV Guide.

...

But that's just me. :)

[Xebsball]

Hey man

i heard you have an eye problem and attention disorder, is that true? :(

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Xebsball
Hey man

i heard you have an eye problem and attention disorder, is that true? :(

Rumours of my problems with... Ooh! Shiney! Er, I'm sorry. What was the question?