Thoughts on Vunak remarks

I have to agree with Some fo Vunak's comments with regards to sport fighting, all too often we see this kind of thing and it gives a bad impression as to what FMa is all about:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHI3Q68L3TU"]Upakan Bara Bara Double Stick Fight Nationals 06 - YouTube[/ame]

It's just too guys hammering each other as fast as they can. The armour and light sticks makes a mockery of many of the techniques that we drill for hours on end. These guys are fighting double stick well within boxing/kicking range.

This isn't an isolated video, just a good example, but a large number of schools from cetain styles seem to advocate training siniwali at this range for hours then padding up and hammering each other with abanico for 5 minutes.

Low armour competition however provides a much more realistic experience, promoting respect for the weapon and teaching you the benefit of the various strikes, defensive styles etc...

When sparring we always work low armour, simple pair of kali gloves, and a standard Kali helmet, coupled with a light cane we quickly learn to make use of distance, space and timing.

Re: Defanging the snake.

Yes it's an important skill, but it's only one of the skills that you may need to employ in self defense. It isn't necesarily going to be possible if you are unarmed against an armed adversary, and like another poster said, what happens if you miss?

As much as I respect Paul Vunak for his ability and knowledge, he is well known for these kinds of sweeping "Iam the law" statements.

One that comes to mind is that it supposedly take 3000 ours of training with a professional in an art before you can use if effectively in the street.

A nice concept but like a lot of things from Vunak it only holds up tos o much scrutiny.

 

I have to agree the video clip shows some scrapy fighting and is an example of two people just trying to see who can hit the fastest and you are correct in that you see this more often than not but there people out there that also try to stay as close to the art as possible whilst being restricted by the rules of the sport so please dont tar every sport fighter with the same brush.

But all that besides. The use of protection such as this can be a benefit to your training and the sport in which ever format you choose if used as a training tool will greatly enhance certain attributes.

And to try to give the impression that hardwood is somehow more traditional with rattan being a toy is quite simply ignorant of the fact that Rattan can do a lot of damage. If Mr Vunak is saying he is more traditional in his FMA training then surely he should be advocating training with live blade and stating that any stick, even hardwood is a toy in comparisom and we should all be fighting death matches with our students to stay within the boundaries of reality of the traditional FMA?

Best regards

Pat

 

youre right brother

 

Hey Pat OMalley,

During the post you covered from an effort was made not to quote the article too much. There are laws against that kind of behavior! Maybe the article can be found on WWW.BlackBeltMag.COM. The issue from April 2008 should be easy to find. Anyway I was just being carefull there by covering the context without mis-representing the article without quoting the whole thing.

If we have any legal experts here maybe they can tell me how much of the article can be directly quoted from?

 

Thanks mate,
I will try to track the article down.

Best regards

Pat

 

Pat,

You obviously feel strong about this and I agree with you to some degree. However, I interpreted the question from what I believed to be Vunak's view. If we compare sport vs. traditional, they both take difference approaches. I believe traditionalist think the live hand is the weapon hand, which really means...don't forget we have 2 hands. They is a lot more to FMA than swinging a stick which we all know. Lets see some people apply FMA in real time. Lets see the footwork, pivots, lock, thrust and destructions - grappling and striking.

Vunak was around during a time when the men bring the art to US where still living. I'm not against safety and I have see footage of Vunak's boys using protective gear too.

But full contract wearing hockey equip...isn't full contact to me. Sparing is not fighting. If we fought our training partners then we would end up hurting someone. Sparing is a training tool with an objective in mind.

Lets continue to discuss this.

 

Hi Rab,
I think you will find many sports fighters are also traditionalist too. Just because they compete does not mean they ignore the reality of real weapons combat.

But what they do have, if used correctly is a training tool that enables them to try their skills in real time under real pressure. Yes I agree many competitors during events are sport specific as they are interested in winning and the rules dictate how you fight and trust me it is a lot harder than it looks when some one is trying to take your head off.

I have played not only with the full armour but in various formats with padded stick, live stick and minimal protection. All have their lacking with regards to the art as a whole but they all have their benefits too and should not be discounted, especialy if you have no real expeariance of it.

I have had many broken bones and injuries competing in events such as these over the years but have always treated the sport as a tool that enhances certain skills and trust me their where times when you realise why you wear protection.

And I have been around just as long as Vunak and still train in the traditional side of the art with many of the old Masters in the Philippines and I can honestly say the sport has enhanced my skills in the art.

I think Mr Vunak should first step on to the mat and try the sport at senior level before making rash coments and to suggest that we must all train and fight with hardwood and no protection is, well...

Best regards

Pat

 

Ok lets throw this into the equasion and I think you will see why I disagree with Mr Vunaks theory.

You have got yourself into a style argument and you are faced with 2 practioners of that style and you have no choice but to fight one of them in a NHB stickfight.

Now you know both people are the same weight, same hight and have trained for the same amount of time with the same Master in the same traditional style. Neither has fought in a real stickfight outside their school, but one of them has also competed in the sport at senior level to a degree of success over the years.

Which one do you choose as your opponent? And why?

Then explain how the sport detracts from the art?

Best regards

Pat

 

If you watch some of the best WEKAF guys their ability to break in and out at speed is very impressive.

 

Oh and they are identical twins and the Master has deliberatly prevented one from having anything to do with the sport and allowed the other to participate as he wishes to see which one will become the better fighter and now is his chance to see what happens.

So who do you fight?

Best regards

Pat

 

I took this from another thread and I know it may be considered cross posting but I do feel it is relevant in this instance:

Now do we have double standards here?

Does the boxer and Thai/Kickboxer remove the gloves and shin guards and go full on?

Does the wrestler/grappler actually put the joint locks and chokes on you properly so your arms and legs etc break and you die because of lack of oxegyn or blood to the brain because he will put the chokes on for real?

Also who would you rather fight in a real confrontation? The Boxer or Thai/Kickboxer who has honed his skills in the ring or the guy who has only hit the pads and sparred in the class?

Would you rather fight the grappler/wrestler who has fought in UFC or would you rather fight the one who has only rolled on the mat?

Also by the same thinking that rattan is a toy and protection is detracting from the FMA, does this mean that people like the Dog Brothers and Black Eagles are not really true to the art and are not training realistically?

Who would you rather fight, the Dog Brother who has fought on a regular basis at their gatherings or a person who has only trained at a Dog Brothers Martial Arts Club?

Is the Dog Brothers / The Black Eagle Society and other groups like them simply a sport and therefore are detracting from the art as a whole or are they training as close to reality as possible?

If we are to be more traditional and use hardwood and no protection then why have we not seen groups such as the Dog Brothers and the Black Eagle Society take off the helmets, gloves and groin guards and swap their RATTAN TOYS for Bahi or Kamagong and go at it with no rules and no time limits, surely this is what they should be doing according to Mr. Vunak's recent point of veiw?

Put it this way, just because someone is a proffesional world champion boxer who has fought for years in the ring, does this mean in a real street confrontation they will not kick, punch and bite you, or even use a weapon on you when the need arises or do they stick to the Queensbury rules?

If a WEKAF fighter ends up in a real weapons encounter, do they play by the WEKAF rules or do they fight properly using the attributes they have learn't in the tournaments to their advantage?

I know who I would rather fight, what about you?

I think you can see why I disagree with Mr. Vunak's comments in this instance.

Best regards

Pat

 

I know this has nothing much to do with the topic;
but personally, I would fight both.
"I train to fight the wolf pack.
they don't train to fight me".

Think about it..

 

Excuse me... its better to talk techniques.way of praticing,the many system of F.M.A.-etc.etc.
If someone? want to measured his skill on FIGHTING I can help!!! The first man you meet on your way(street)
Tell him your are a bull s***….(JUST IMAGINED) 3 are enough then you begin and use your skill on fighting,if they take you in the hospital YOU’RE A GOOD FIGHTER,but if you been killed YOU’RE A MESS your skill are not good enough (its a big mistake…)

WE CANT' MEASURED THE HIGHEST MOUNTAIN TO THE DEEPEST SEA...NOT THE SYSTEM IS THE BEST BUT THE PRACTITIONERS...


peace....

the little man

 

The old 'kill em all and let God sort em out' ploy. I agree with the mentality but it's a cop out answer. The whole point of the question is to get a solid explanation on how the critics of the sport version of FMA detracts from the skills of a traditionalist practioner.

So I ask again. You can only fight ONE of the two in a REAL NHB stickfight and you have to consider who you would have the best chance of beating. Who would you choose and why?

Best regards

Pat

 

I understand what you are saying Bro and I totaly agree but some people are trying to claim that competing in the sport versions of FMA detracts from the skills of the traditionalist and that using rattan to fight with is like using a toy gun in a shoot out?

I want to know based on their expeariance and any evidance they have to prove this statement how they come to this conclusion.

Best regards

Pat

 

Let them talk Bro.Competing important too,because you can learned something like:
1.stances/footwork defensive and offensive
2.faking
3.striking
4.impact
its need to prove the skill,not for winning just for expierences,i dont catch what they want to be means traditionalist? its not because you used bladed weapons or hitting the tree your traditionalist?

*competing in the sport versions of FMA detracts from the skills of the traditionalist* it is thier version.i have my owned version too...

have a nice day bro and keep on hitting

the little man

 

To tuhon Pat O Malley
I forgot Bro they can say what they wanted too in thier home/land.in my place in Mindanao what you say YOU NEED TO PROVE IT.someday bro i take you in MINDANAO TO SHOW YOU THE ARTS...

same....

the little man

 

I absolutely agree with your response to my statement.
I also think I may stay out of this one due to being a little biased.
From the time I first started training;the sport aspect never entered my mind until many years later.
I personally felt my reason for getting into the martial arts in general was to be able to fight. Not score points.
Although I have found enjoyment in the sport aspects.

But I shall concede and say that I may not be qualified to speak on this subject due to my personal bias on the subject and that I am not fully educated in these areas to give a general opinion......yet.
I shall keep reading and learning along the way

But one thing I have been taught by a certain "cat" is; concentrating on one particular aspect causes you to lose sight of the art itself.
One example given is a particular instructor(and I use the term loosely in this case) who is damn good at the sport; but he is total crap at the art because he only concentrates on the sport and nothing else.


Please continue.
I am getting an education out of this....


Damien

 

There is nothing wrong with being biased for or against the sport regardless of the format. I think you probably know which format I personally prefer and yes you are also correct in that if you soley limit yourself to the sport you will loose out on the greater aspects of the art as a whole which will lacking in the real combat applications and I am pretty sure you know my thoughts on that, but that is not what is being stated here is it? And that is my point.

I am actualy not surprised by the theory given here as this has come up time and time again since the sport was invented and is usualy put forward by those who have little or no real expeariance of the sport.

What does surprise me is who is promoting this theory. Think about it. I always thought JKD practitioners embraissed inovation and where totaly against getting stuck in traditionalism, you know the classical mess thingy. At least that is what I was always told in my many years in JKD.

Surely the use of protection so you can spar in a more realistic fashon is something even Mr Vunak promotes? And we know that the sport can isolate the training of and improve certain attributes of you fighting skills. Is this not something JKD and more importantly Mr Vunak endorses? Well actualy I remember him on one of his videos called 'Attributes' stating it is a vital part of your MA training.

As I said before, is this a case of double standards? Why the sudden push to be more traditional in your training? What ever that means? Why the sudden move against something if utilised correctly can improve your skill in actual combat?

That is why I ask, in what way does the sport detract from the art as a whole? Will someone please explain?

Best regards

Pat

 

From what I've seen your posts have proven insightfull and read exactly like someone that does have the knowledge to participate in this discussion.

When speaking of personal bias it seems difficult for me to imagine that anyone does'nt have clear preferences in thier methods of training and favored techniques. While on the subject of bias I have often made remarks that clearly reflect my being a fan of most of Vunaks work. That's why I never immediatly agreed with his assesment of too much sport in many FMA schools. Also I am by no means knowledgable enough to make comments about the going-ons in the sport-type events.

Yet I have seen exactly what Vunak might have been refering to in the artcle mentioned. Sometimes people have so much protective gear thier reaction to being hit is nothing like it would be normally. The opponents just wail away at each other until growing tired or the round ends. There's just no perception gained from not responding in a realisitc manner. The idea of not wearing protective gear and using hardwood sticks does'nt sound feasable. Some kind of middle ground is necessary.