JB, I understand where you are coming from. Though I don't think your analogy applies. I think a better way to state it would be: "The fruit vendor won't let us have apples here. What do you think?" Where I replied; "Go to a different fruit vendor if you really want apples." You may feel that is not a helpful suggestion. But if his instructor is not going to let them spar, he's not going to let them spar. He could go off and do it on his own, but then he runs the risk of developing bad habits/technique without the watchful eye of a good instructor. If he wants to go through the motions, he should stay. If he wants' more realistic FMA training, he should look elsewhere...imho of course.
I feel very much the same way as Haumana and believe that the FMA's should be kept pure and combative as they were intended. Not a watered down group of stick based twirling techniques that are passed off as FMA's. I am not of Filipino heritage, but like Haumana, I get irked to no end about the watered down, incomplete stuff I see out there used as an add on in some schools, and passed off as real & complete Arnis, Kali, Eskrima. Also, the paper tigers who go to a couple of seminars and are all of a sudden seasoned instructors. One example: There is a well established school not too far away that teaches a popular system from the middle east. They teach Arnis classes as an addition. In a conversation about FMA's with an instructor there, his response to my going into a detailed explanation of footwork in the FMA's....."There's footwork in the Filipino martial arts?" My jaw hit the floor while my blood pressure took off. This type of attitude and propagation creates the "stigma" that Humana refers to.
To further another point Haumana made:
Quote:
|
Now Dredd 1990 I understand your position with regards to your training progression, however that is a Japanese methodology and is opposite of what we believe in FMA. We start with the weapon first, then move to hands.
|
The distinguishing characteristic of the Filipino martial arts is the principle that weaponry is instructed first and then progresses into the final stage to empty hands skills. The strategic reasoning behind this structure is that:
1. The nature of warfare is the utilization of weaponry - not empty hands.
2. Attribute Development - the use of weaponry and bladed weapons in particular,
develops and enhances combative attributes and application at a more intensive level and faster rate than empty hands training.
3. The Filipino methods of empty hand combat are derived directly from the application of weaponry verses having completely different styles of empty hands skills and weaponry technique. This principle of parallel methodology and transferable technology in its truest form can only be found within the Filipino martial arts. These methods and skills transfer from bladed, impact and other edged weapons to empty hands combat and directly back to weapons.
Quote:
|
A point that I need to make however is that you do not teach your "secret techniques" of how to kill via takedown before they even hit the ground. I am highly speculative on any empty technique that can kill before you hit the ground or secret death points or the like. But In Bob Orlando's book "indonesian fighting arts and fundamentals", he brings to light an interesting point to ponder. Even Aikido the Harmonious way is constantly lifting opponents and slamming them on their head repeatedly (anyone who does bnot know how to breakfall) all the while stating this is not to hurt which compley denies what each technique really does and is meant to do. so rather than trivializing each move no matter at an advanced or beginning stage should we not take the stance of a firearms instructor from the get go and teach to respect the weapon and what its meant to do right away?
|
Well, with that firearms training, you should take it to the point of actually firing the weapon. Not going through the motions and then yelling BANG!!!
William