What would you teach next?

Discussion in 'Filipino Martial Arts' started by ap Oweyn, Nov 27, 2007.

  1. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    You've just taught your class their basic angles. One through twelve (or whatever). Now you've taken half your class and faced them off in a row against the other half of your class. Side A is going to do the basic attacks on Side B.

    Now. What do you teach Side B to do about it? As I've said, you've JUST taught everyone the basic angles. So it's early days in this class.

    What do you do?

    EDIT: Obviously, I'm looking for WHY here as well. If I get 10 one-word posts that each read "gunting" or "pluma" or "elastiko", I'm going to be sorely disappointed. And that means coal in everyone's stockings.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2007
  2. Peter Lewis

    Peter Lewis Matira Matibay

    I would teach the basic defences (block and check or parry according to system) against each angle and then have side B using each angle as a counter strike to each attack. ie. use angle 1 against all 12 angles, then angle 2 against all 12 angles etc. That gives a full understanding of what may and may not work for them as individuals, plus it greatly enhances footwork and distancing. Ensure that they are working at the correct range, even if the movements are very slow at first.

    Gumagalang

    Peter
     
  3. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    "According to system." I think that's part of my question. Not necessarily along system lines, mind you. I'm curious to know what type of blocking, checking, whatever would be your "go to" for the first experience a new eskrimador has in defending themselves.

    The idea of using each one against all the angles makes a lot of sense. I've done that in practice. But it didn't leap to mind as I was asking this question. Good point. And the footwork certainly. I'm interested to see at what point people have that discussion.

    Cheers Peter.


    Stuart
     
  4. Peter Lewis

    Peter Lewis Matira Matibay

    Hi Stuart

    I tend to go straight to the meat of the matter and don't teach blocks (weapon against weapon) at all. So, for example, against angle 1, the defence would either be a parry, followed by the selected countering angle, OR, the countering angle attacks the arm (or any other available target, while avoiding the incoming attack), OR, it may be evasion to let the attack pass and then counter with the selected angle. Each method (among many others) requires and develops different defensive attributes, including swaying, weaving, lateral footwork, zoning, etc. This can build up to quite a massive module of material, as each countering angle has so many applications, including parrying the attack.

    Gumagalang

    Peter
     
  5. shootodog

    shootodog restless native


    i don't teach but if i did, what would happened would be that they'd do it again.

    the why: the secret in fma (good fma anyway) is that it is basics done correctly every time, all the time.
     
  6. Freeform

    Freeform Fully operational War-Pig Supporter

    Maintenance of distance. As A comes forward to strike, B moves back.

    Don’t be there to be hit.
     
  7. february

    february Valued Member

    I don't teach, but think that the most important consideration at the beginners stage is good form. Regardless of the way you're going to parry and/or evade a strike, your posture, footwork, weapon angle and distance are going to be the most important considerations.

    For me, starting off with a basic defence against each angle ensuring correct form, posture, footwork, distance and weapon angle is the best way to drill those attributes. Once you have that down, you can move into more advanced evasive parries and strikes. If you don't drill those attributes you risk sloppy technicque at a more advanced stage.
     
  8. path_one

    path_one steps taken

    I agree with feb, I think its generally good practice to teach a counter to something you've just taught (in this case basic strikes). i'm not an instructor but this is what we usually do in class. ;)
     
  9. Scotty Dog

    Scotty Dog www.myspace.com/elhig

    I'm with Formy, Basic evasive footwork with cover.

    Get out of the way of the strike, but have your stick ready to block if need be or counter if the oppertunity presents itself. Once you can control the distance of the fight, then work on choosing how/when to close the distance.
     
  10. Freeform

    Freeform Fully operational War-Pig Supporter

    He always puts it better than I do ;)

    Rule #1: Don't get hit. Best way to do that is to not be there, but we all screw up at times which is why you should then add the cover.
     
  11. Scotty Dog

    Scotty Dog www.myspace.com/elhig


    << Blush >>
     
  12. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    Peter, Freeform, and ScottyDog are getting at the heart of my question. I agree wholeheartedly with other posters that form and attributes are essential. I was taking those as given. Whatever you do, you should be working on proper form and function. But from a technical standpoint, I was looking for actual movements that you'd drill next.

    To answer my own question, I think evasion and footwork are good answers. But (for better or worse) lately, my first impulse has been to teach elastiko as the most basic "blocking" system (and I'm using the word "blocking" in a very loose sense here). For a couple of reasons. 1) To get elastiko to work, you need good footwork and evasion anyway, so you're hitting that point. 2) The idea of hitting the incoming attack is very characteristic of FMA theory. And 3) I love the self-evidence of elastiko. There's no great leap of faith required to see the value of smashing all the guy's fingers as he tries to hit you. And self-evidence or transparency in technique is important to me. I don't like technique that requires too much "believe me, if I did this to you in real life, it would..."


    Stuart
     
  13. Peter Lewis

    Peter Lewis Matira Matibay

    Yes. I fully agree here Stuart.

    My guess is that if someone feels the need to make such comments:

    a) they have probably never had to 'use it' for real
    b) if they have 'used it' then no need to boast...gives us all a bad name
    c) it all depends on the circumstances 'at that time'

    I also fully agree with the idea of 'not getting hit' and 'evasion.' In reality, these are skills that can and do take time to develop, due to weight distribution, balance, mobility, etc. That said, of course these are good options... if we are not in a position to be hit, then we may not need to fight at all!

    Another concept that I sometimes use is 'thrust against a striking attack / strike the hand of a thrusting attack'

    Bearing in mind system differences, Stuart. Are you refering to a body swaying 'Elastiko' or a 'snapping' strike with the weapon? Or maybe something different again?

    Gumagalang

    Peter
     
  14. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    Great points Peter!

    I'm referring to the body swaying elastiko. Sorry. I should've made that clear. I learned the term in an Inosanto Kali class.

    My Doce Pares teachers tended to use the word witik to describe the sort of snapping, whipping strike I think you're referring to. Does that sound right?

    I like the idea of thrusting into a swing. It's something I was a lot more "physically cognizant" of after doing some fencing. (By that, I mean that I was aware of the idea before fencing, but fencing was where I got a better physical sense of actually performing it.)


    Stuart
     
  15. PlumDragon

    PlumDragon "I am your evil stimulus"

    Hmm, ok my answer to this is a bit different, probably because this is how I was taught:

    I wouldnt go so far as to teach all 12 angles right away. I would teach only the first 2 angles and have side A and side B go back and forth drilling with the force and against the force. First at long range, working stick to stick contact and then a bit closer range working the defang the snake, maybe with gloves on to protect the knuckles.

    If I had to teach all 12 angles to conform to the scenario above, id still probably only work with and against force in the same way, maybe up through angle 5 and just have the students work the 12-angle patterns on their own time for now...


    Thats the way Ive always heard the word used...Although, I think its spelled watik... :p
     
  16. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    Well to start with I personally teach them to block force against force, yes I know it can go against the grain sometimes but the reason I do this is two fold,

    Firstly it does teach them that no matter the strike they can with practice block the attack if need be, and secondly but more importantly it teaches them to get over the fear of the weapon, how many times to you see a begginer automatically back off and flinch from even a slow controlled attack? So I get them used to closing the attacking weapon down first, once they gain enough confidence and have the courage to close down the weapon, then I go on to evasions, parries and avoidance as I have found that if I teach evasion from the get go, they still tend to flinch if their timing is out that day and they find their evasion has not worked, where-as if they are used to blocking and closing down the weapon with confidence and their evasion does not work on that particular occasion, then they are still reletively comfortable in dealing with the on comming attack.

    Ths method seems to work quite well for me.

    Best regards

    Pat
     
  17. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    Good point. That's how the Patalinghugs got us started off as well, come to think of it.
     
  18. fire cobra

    fire cobra Valued Member

    I dont teach FMA but wonder if the size(weight and length) of the weapon and the size of the person(s) involved would make a difference to the defence/counter that you would teach?

    As a example what if you had a weapon the weight and length of a baseball bat and it was being weilded by a 15 stone male against a 8stone female with a rattan stick of average length,surely thaen evasion as opposed to blocking would be a key component? put the bat in the females hands and the stick in the males then what would be the defensive method taught?

    Wow so many variables eh! sorry if this isnt that relevent to the original post but just food for thought maybe :)
     
  19. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    No need to apologize. It's a good question!

    I don't think it necessarily changes what I'd teach first. But I certainly emphasize different things to different people depending on build, weapons, etc.

    As an example, there are a couple of brothers in the class. One is in his early 30s, I think. Big guy. About 6' tall, maybe about 240 lbs. (based on my 220 lbs.). Works as a bouncer and security detail. Background in wrestling.

    His brother. Late teens. Slight build. No wrestling, bouncing, or security background.

    I recommend that one close distance and that the other hit and run (obviously depending on the size of the other guy). And I try to show them each methods to actually do that.


    Stuart
     
  20. lhommedieu

    lhommedieu Valued Member

    Force against Force Blocking

    That's also how I teach beginners how to defend against simple, committed attacks. I use a "box" structure (high, sides, and low parries) and teach students that the stucture of their parry combined with the proper distancing will keep them safe. Later they can learn more advanced techniques that use angling or evasiive footwork in combination with counter-strikes instead of parries - but beginners need to learn that they can defend themselves simply by stopping the opponent's initial attack.

    Best,

    Steve
     

Share This Page