How would Kali fare versus Kendo?

[aseepish]

Hand to hand combat in WWII

Here are a couple of relevant anecdotes...

"Giron's adrenaline skyrocketed. One bayonet and katana came simultaneously at him. The samurai sword was in front of him while the bayonet was a little to the left. With Giron's left hand he parried the bayonet, he blocked the sword coming down on him, the bayonet man went by and his body came in line with Giron's bolo, which came down and cut his left hip. The Japanese soldier was retaliating with a backhand slash. Giron met his enemy's tricep with his bolo, chopping it to the ground. "Bakatari," yelled the Japanese soldier as Giron advanced forward. The men on each side would finish them off. Another Japanese soldier charged at Giron, who did an inside block and countered with a slash to the man's stomach. Giron's bolo bounced off, however, since the soldier was wearing a heavy leather pack strap from his waist to his shoulder. Giron returned with a slash to the back of the man's knee. As the soldier fell, Giron advanced forward to meet the enemy. More charged and the encounters ensued."

- Antonio Somera, The Secrets of Giron Arnis Escrima, pp. 8, 9.

Combat in WWII, especially in the Pacific theatre, was often hand-to-hand. While the bayonet was the most common weapon under these circumstances, some prefered shorter weapons. The Filipino guerrilas had their bolos, the Gurkhas had their kukris. I've got a somewhat humerous account of a kukri vs katana encounter, but it'll take me a while to find it...

-Tony

[aseepish]

Gurkha vs Japanese

'[The Gurkhas] became noted for being exceedingly proficient at slicing off an enemy's head with one swish of a kukri blade (as in the old Gurkha story of a one to one with a Japanese officer armed with a fine samurai sword and swearing that no stumpy kukri knife could match his glistening weapon as he winged the Gurkha in the arm and then cut off his hand. "Ah," replied the Gurkha, "I may be wounded, but you, sahib . . . I suggest that you do not nod your head!").'

-John Parker, The Gurkhas, p. xvi.

[sikal]

Originally posted by Shintake
Do your styles have kata, though? Where does one express his/her self with it?

Yes, actually, though in Silat they're called Langkah and Juru, also Kembangan ... and in Kali they're called, among other things, Sayaw.

However, kata (in any language) is not the only place to express his/her self. One can express oneself when finding applications within drills, when combining elements in different ways, when sparring.

We all must start with mimicry to develop understanding of *why* a thing works. Once we understand *why* then we can start expressing it in ways that, while sticking to the underlying principle, are maybe different than how we learned it ... but which suit us better.

A good illustration is this:
My primary system is called "Sikal" (hence my screen name on here) and it is a blend of elements from several systems of Filipino Kali and Indonesian Pentjak Silat. I tested for my instructorship with a fellow student, Bob. During parts of it, Guru Ken (our instructor) would ask for me (for example) to illustrate five techniques from Harimau (a system of Pentjak Silat). While I was doing my five, Bob had his back to me and couldn't see what I was doing. When Bob was asked to do five, he did five completely different techniques from what I had done. When asked for stick locks, we did a couple of the same locks, but we got to them completely differently.

The best example from our test, though, is probably this:
When showing counters to joint locks, I did a counter that I had never learned. I found it because it was there and I understood and utilized the principle involved in countering the lock ... the specific method I used wasn't one I had ever learned or one Guru Ken had ever seen. He had me do it several more times, then came over and felt it. After determing that it, in fact, was a valid counter based on sound principles, he accepted it. It's not part of our "system." I "created" it (I use quotes because I'm sure others have done it and it's probably a standard in some system[s] somewhere in the world).

This, in my opinion, is art. Using the same tools to create your own expression. Finding something that you've not been shown based on the principles you've been taught. Even finding a new way to *teach* a given technique, IMHO, would be "art" :-)

Mike

[Shintake]

No offense, but you and i obviously have differing views on what 'art' is.

[sikal]

Originally posted by Shintake
No offense, but you and i obviously have differing views on what 'art' is.

Yup. And that's part of what it's all about :-)

Something I think we can all agree on:
The arts and what people seek in them is different for each person. I think that if one is getting what they want/need from their training then it's good training ... though that same training may have little value for someone else. It's a continual process of growth. There's so much out there, that there's always something new to be learned.

My definition of "martial art" was different a few years ago from what it is now. It may change again ... or maybe yours will :-)

Never know. I always try to keep an open mind and look at things objectively. If I find something that makes more sense to me than my current way of thinking, then I revise my way of thinking :-)

Regards, Mike

[MikeJKD]

Semantics

I think that the question "Which would win, Kendo or Kali?" has to be a little like asking "What art would win in the streetfight, basketball or streetfighting?" And whether or not it's referred to as Kendo or Kenjutsu, or Iaido or Iaijutsu, or "Japanese Swordsmanship" really has little to do with it. Harley made the point that Kendo vs. Kali already happened. Whether the name of the art stands in the way or not, he is correct. The Japanese got their asses handed to them, along with arms, legs, heads, and anything else that got in the path of Filipino Bolos and Krisses. For that matter, so did we Americans, and so did the Spanish. I don't think it's accurate to say that Kali (exactly as such) did that either, but I'm sure that the Japanese who fought made no distinction or care whether the men chopping them down were using Arnis, Escrima, Kali, or Silat to do it. They plain and simply died, because their blade arts and technology were not capable of preparing them for what the blade arts and technology of the Filipinos brought to the table. It isn't and shouldn't become a matter of whether or not Kendo is a good style. Of course it is. But the fact remains that no one, ever in recorded history, has ever been able to use bladed weapons better or more consistently than the Filipinos.

Mike

[sikal]

Re: Semantics

Originally posted by MikeJKD
I think that the question "Which would win, Kendo or Kali?" has to be a little like asking "What art would win in the streetfight, basketball or streetfighting?" And whether or not it's referred to as Kendo or Kenjutsu, or Iaido or Iaijutsu, or "Japanese Swordsmanship" really has little to do with it. Harley made the point that Kendo vs. Kali already happened. Whether the name of the art stands in the way or not, he is correct. The Japanese got their asses handed to them, along with arms, legs, heads, and anything else that got in the path of Filipino Bolos and Krisses. For that matter, so did we Americans, and so did the Spanish. I don't think it's accurate to say that Kali (exactly as such) did that either, but I'm sure that the Japanese who fought made no distinction or care whether the men chopping them down were using Arnis, Escrima, Kali, or Silat to do it. They plain and simply died, because their blade arts and technology were not capable of preparing them for what the blade arts and technology of the Filipinos brought to the table. It isn't and shouldn't become a matter of whether or not Kendo is a good style. Of course it is. But the fact remains that no one, ever in recorded history, has ever been able to use bladed weapons better or more consistently than the Filipinos.

Mike

Personally, I think there are others (the Ghurka come to mind) ... but the Filipino blade arts are definitely top notch.

All arts have something to offer, though ... depends on what one is looking for :-)

To continue the thought MikeJKD started (or maybe I'm just taking a tangent to it):

No "art" is ever better than another, though :-) The "arts" don't fight ... people fight. The "arts" just give us tools and/or a grinding wheel to hone those tools. Some tools will suit some people better than others.

Mike

[Harley]

Oops, Sorry I'll leave this to the experts!

I am just playing guys. I dont know what I'm talking about, i just read a few good books, meet a few interesting people and like to talk about what i learned, thats all.
I'll leave this topic for those more informed and well trained souls who obviously have a better handle on things than i do.
Harley
P.S. BTW, The Sayoc seminar was AWESOME, i'll post on it another time possibly.

[MikeJKD]

Don't Know Anything???

Harley,
If you're just a guy who read a few books, I am seriously in worlds and worlds of trouble. I think maybe some others should read a book or two now and then in addition to being super duper badass fighters. History can teach a lot, eh?

Mike

[kruzada]

This is the first time I've gotten involved in a thread in a long time.

I have heard many stories that I could relate to this discussion, all from reliable sources who lived and fought in the Philippines during WWII mind you, but these are the accomplishments of men from a different era, who lived in very different times; politically and socially. However, if I'm not mistaken, we are attempting to compare the arts of Kendo and Kali as they exist today, not in times past. A comparison of the arts as they existed in the past would never end. Soon we would be taking this discussion into a Kendo forum, and new stories would surface, and new arguements would ensue.

The only way to find out is to try it out. But even then the result would never be absolute. Not after one challenge, not even after one thousand.

I think an appropriate equivalant to the original post would be what is the ultimate bladed art, Kendo or Kali? Even as a dedicated practitioner of the FMA I could never state with absolute certainty that a practitioner of Kali would always triumph over any practitioner of Kendo, any time. The point is therefore moot. No one can win all the time. The UFC competitions have proven this. Renzo Gracie cross trained in Boxing and Muay Thai to improve his chances, with commendable results, after realizing the limitations of his abilities.

This thread has obviously brought to the surface some glaring differences of opinion. Yet no ground has been gained or lossed on either side of this arguement. So why argue? Why is this so important?

I hope to never have to use my skills to cause harm to another human being. Even in Sport. It isn't important for me to prove my art superior to any other because my pride is not invested in whether my art would win or not 100 percent of the time. Pride in one's art stems from the loyalties one assumes from his/her lineage, in the comraderie of practice, and in the growth of one's compassion and understanding of life; not in the growth of one's ego, through the accumulation of victories. You can learn alot more by losing than you can by winning. A victory is always won at the expense of anothers loss. What "artist", martial or not, would revel in the pain and suffering of another; be it physical or emotional.

We are not children, we are Martial Artists and should respect each others opinions and leave bickering to the likes of sports casters who talk but never participate. This debate would never end if we did not accept that there is no way to answer such a question, and I suggest, there is no need.

[thekuntawman]

your right kruzada.

threads like this one is a waste of time. unless your just bored.

fighting cannot not be argued or discussed, only proven.

[SD fma]

Kendo vs. Kali

Hi everyone,

I must say, this is an interesting topic. My instructor, Master Narrie Babao, fought in an open weapon tournament in the late 70's. He dueled against a shinai wielding kendo fighter and beat him. However, he would be the first to tell you that it is not the weapon or the art-it's the fighter. The fighter his/herself determines the success of the encounter based on their training, skill, and resolve. Yes, the Filipino guerillas did in fact fare well against the Japanese during WWII but I think everyone would agree that on any given day, losing could happen. I agree with Kruzada, and I hope I'm ready if I need to use my skills if under attack.

Just my opinion.

[MikeJKD]

How Do You Express Yourself Without Kata??

Sorry to drag this back into the thread, but I just read it and it kind of perplexed me a little. Someone asked how a style without kata could allow its practitioners self-expression. I would have to ask the opposite: How is it that doing a set of movements developed by someone else in a prescribed order and done by millions of other people exactly the same way is expressing YOU? I see its value for developing strong kihon as well as overall fitnes and conditioning and focus, but artistic expression through the mimicking of someone else? I can't really understand how it is artistic. Kali and escrima use several drills, and even have something similar to kata, but the real expression, at least to me, comes from the interaction with the opponent or partner, and through carensa or shadowboxing by yourself. Making things up as you go, listening to what your "inspiration" tells you to do moment to moment...isn't that more like art than repeating something? After all, (not trying to take this on a religious / spiritual tangent) but if God created Man in His own image, and God is a Creator, then Man too is a creator, and creation is the product of inspiration, not repetition.

Mike

[kruzada]

A style of martial art usually begins with the creative vision of one man/woman, or a group of individuals. This expression is given form (no pun intended), the process being artistic; and the end product being a work of art. The purpose of mimickery, in this case a form, is to retrace the original physical/mental footsteps of the style's founder(s), and thus recreating the work of art almost exactly as it was originally discovered hundreds of years ago. The process is artistic, although one may not claim the end result as his own, many may experience a connection with the style's history that cannot adequately be expressed in words. The experience may be limited, but it is a viable means to fostering one's own creativity.

At a level when one practices without preset patterns of movement or thought, abandoning all notions of style but not form. This freedom is born of the basics, the forms, preset drills, abecederio. We echo the movements of those who came before us, and enmesh our own uniqueness to this. But we should be careful not to confuse this experience with creation. To quote Grandmaster John Lacoste, "Only God can create from nothing".

Forms are a distillation of someone elses expression, someone else's art. But this does not diminish it's artistic value. Forms can however be an obstacle to discovering your own creative potential if you cling to them to tightly.

Inspiration can be liberating but must always be well grounded in practical theory. Any martial art is ultimately bound by the guidelines of our limited human physiology. Therefore much can be gleaned from forms, as they are a wealth of knowledge if one is patient enough to look.

We cannot judge anyone's art, because art is subjective after all. I believe that true art stems from one's own experience, and to deny yourself the freedom of self-expression is indeed a grave sin. But we shouldn't forget that we are all standing on the backs of those who came before us, and equal effort should be expended to preserve their art, as well as adding "what is uniquely your own".

[pcarney]

Re: An interesting reply, Sikal

Originally posted by Chuzo
The word "Martial Art" means an Art that is Martial, not training that is both art and martial. This word has been generalized in meaning any form that causes pain to your opponent. When I practice kendo, I do so as a sport and not as they did little over 200 years ago on the battlefields to kill and "cut" the throats of their opponents(or carotid artery).
This is a flaw I see in some of the attitudes of those who train. If you are training to kill or do harm to your opponent, what are you doing for yourself? All arts are different but those meant for positive mental growth are (in my opinion) those that are more defensive, striking hurt upon your opponent to the extent that is reasonable in the situation, whether they are played as a sport or not.
Is your personal growth in "confidence, security, ability, maturity, and others" based on the idea of your butt-kicking ability? Is this an Art at all? Why not just train in boxing?

----Shintake-san, doshite henji wo shinai no?

Chuzo, is your view of the martial arts common in Japan (to the extent of your experience)? It's interesting to see how MAs are viewed elsewhere, particularily in a country like Japan.