The use of the triangle is known in a lot of martial arts, but specifically in Silat, what do you know about it's use and how important do you think it is?
Not specifically from Silat, but I started training alot of Kali and the amount of footwork they train is alot and it's all from the triangle, broken and fluid. From Jim Ingram we also got some patterns for drilling footwork but not as extensive and dynamic as I'm learning now. I think it's very important to train footwork in any form, mobility is in my opinion very important.
Good for you Dylan9d footwork is very important. Although in my experience with Kali practitioners (we have quite a few of them in our groups) their footwork can be quite different. But any type of footwork is better than none. Too bad there are no other responses yet, would love to have an actual discussion about content instead of just flaming styles, but i'm not sure there are too many pure silat practioners on here any more. It seems a lot of practitioners just train it as a module on top of their other (JKD, KALI etc.) skills, which does not do Silat enough justice. Ah well, perhaps need some patience
On another topic there were a couple. Not sure were they are now, maybe busy training @DSilat , maybe your take on this topic I actually meant, that Kali doesn't only use the triangle as footwork, but the principle goes beyond that, it goes into the strikes and blocks (with or without weapon). It's something I haven't seen in the stuff that Jim Ingram taught me, he didn't teach me authentic Silat or Pukulan but also fragments of authentic styles, so maybe that's the reason I haven't seen that in Silat yet.
Apologies for the length of time it has taken me to get to this. In the Cimande I teach Lanka Tiga is fundamental to the system. We actively refer to triangles and triangular concepts constantly, particularly with reference to angles of attack and unbalancing, disturbing, footwork etc. etc. so in simple terms VERY important. In the Silek Tuo I teach its a very different approach. While you can extrapolate the concept (of course since as humans there is a finite number of ways of moving, hitting etc.), it is not mentioned at all, the approach to combat is very different, the principle of Gelek (and please don't think of this as just 'twisting', there's so much more to it) is at the core of everything, there isn't an active recognition of Triangles at all, so in simple terms not important at all. it is intriguing just how different Silat styles can be
Thanks DSilat for your answer. Can you elaborate a bit on Gelek, especially on referring to footwork? You mean things like Sempok /Depok or something else?
I believe bukti has a specific use not only of the term, but also of the applications of the tiga. I do 3/4 styles of silat as you know, and triangles are used in all of them, to varying degrees. In Arnis we also use triangular footwork. Maybe if you expounded on your understanding of the tiga and its uses it would give the rest of us something to debate from and discuss.
For me 'Tiga' is about footwork, relative position, usage of leverages, angles of attack, way of hitting. But it can be as far as you want, even up to the spiritual level. To name a bit if you look at the triangle, like in Arnis/Kali they use the female and male triangle. In Bukti as a general rule you don't step back similar in the way some Kali practitioners do (by the way rules are there to be broken in some circumstances). Here some video on Kali footwork: Here something different on Wing Chun footwork which might match some other styles of silat: If you look at the first video he uses the triangle to explain some variations. Some of it like diagonally stepping in is similar to Bukti Negara way. He furthermore also uses variations to create or keep distance to the opponent which is something we normally prefer not to do. If you step to the side of an incoming attack you only missed the hit but a trained attacker will know plenty of ways to follow up on his initial attack (for instance Jab-Cross-Lowkick). Or if you step back when the opponent is too close you are very vulnerable to a follow up as well. Offcourse using a stick gives you an edge in bridging a distance so perhaps that's why they explain it like this. All of the shown variations can work with an uncommitted untrained attacker or a guy just presenting his arms after a single attack. Or you can use these strategies when you are too late, but then the room for error than becomes practically zero. An expert practitioner can basically make everything work with the proper timing and intent. But then I'm talking about serious high level practitioners. We always think....what would an experienced boxer, kickboxer, streetfighter or mma guy do when he attacks, and reality is, it is rarely a single uncommitted attack with no follow up. If a guy attacks you seriously you will quickly notice that using angle is different than just choosing a random angle and counterattack. Some angles are better than others, especially in the beginning. Perhaps people have different insights in this and I would like to hear from them.
I think that is a particular style of footwork and is understood by must escrimadors if not utilised by all of them. Each art seems to have a preferred range so i think arnis keeps a weapons range maybe even in unarmed situations. Many styles of silat dont espouse stepping back- Lincah Gayong and Pukulan Madura don't- however needs must etc. Why are some angles better than others? what dictates that and based on which principles? We have differnt answers so your insights would be interesting
