# Pekiti Tirsia Multiple Attacks drill progression



## Charlemagne (Mar 16, 2017)

My PTK instructor, Dustin Denson, put together a few short videos on ways that the strikes from the Multiple Attacks method can be combined and drilled in solo fashion.  It's a nice example of simplicity of movement and it's relation to combative effectiveness. 

Part I





Part II





Part III


----------



## Blindside (Mar 17, 2017)

He says "execute" almost as often as Tuhon Tim does.


----------



## Buka (Mar 17, 2017)

No.  Especially not with sticks. Because good sticks are a complete game changer, if they're in your hands when the time comes. But will they be in your hands when the time comes? Not only is what he did not helpful, it's actually detrimental to fighting against multiples in my opinion. There is no footwork. He remains in a small box except for moving forward. He is only looking and moving towards what is directly in front of him. That might be okay if multiples only set up or attacked from in front of you (in your dreams) but they don't, never have and never will.

There is no mention, or thought, to the principles of fighting multiples. No sense of rhythm, broken rhythm, landscaping, time framing, field of vision, the obvious attack from behind, footwork and nothing whatsoever to do with _position_. What that leaves you with is Dead Man Walking.

You can train techniques all you want. But they'll not work against multiples unless you train them against multiples. Where are the people in these vids? Multiples mean multiple people. You can't train against multiple air. Not even with sticks.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 17, 2017)

Charlemagne said:


> My PTK instructor, Dustin Denson, put together a few short videos on ways that the strikes from the Multiple Attacks method can be combined and drilled in solo fashion.  It's a nice example of simplicity of movement and it's relation to combative effectiveness.
> 
> Part I
> 
> ...


I've admittedly only watched the first video (getting close to my data cap), but the movement seems suited to multiple attacks from a single opponent, rather than multiple attackers. As Buka points out, there's not enough variation in direction of either attack or attention. His movement would work to maintain distance control on a single attacker, but fails to control distancing on more than one.

Now, if this is just working on a sequence that is to be part of a larger practice that will expand to incorporate those points, those problems are smaller (but still problems, IMO, for training for multiples). One of the biggest issues is something Buka alluded to when he said you have to train multiples with actual multiples. An individual is only semi-predictable. Every person you add increases the chaos, so sequences designed for multiples don't have much value in my book. With multiples, drills for controlling distancing and grouping are the real key. Your techniques don't change (much), just your choices.


----------



## Charlemagne (Mar 17, 2017)

Multiple attacks is the method in pekiti tirsia that deals with changing energies in strikes, not multiple opponents, though it is easy to see why you would think it would mean that.  The attacks can be linked together in various ways, and that is what the videos are designed to demonstrate for beginners who are just learning the form for the multiple attacks method.  As for solo training with weapons, of course you can train solo.  You can train the strikes in the form, work the form with all of your foundational footwork, and then free the strikes up out of the sequence of the form, and link them in various ways.  That doesn't mean you don't then put things together in partner drills, and then live sparring.  Of course you do that as well.


----------



## Charlemagne (Mar 17, 2017)

Blindside said:


> He says "execute" almost as often as Tuhon Tim does.



Not possible.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 17, 2017)

Charlemagne said:


> Multiple attacks is the method in pekiti tirsia that deals with changing energies in strikes, not multiple opponents, though it is easy to see why you would think it would mean that.  The attacks can be linked together in various ways, and that is what the videos are designed to demonstrate for beginners who are just learning the form for the multiple attacks method.  As for solo training with weapons, of course you can train solo.  You can train the strikes in the form, work the form with all of your foundational footwork, and then free the strikes up out of the sequence of the form, and link them in various ways.  That doesn't mean you don't then put things together in partner drills, and then live sparring.  Of course you do that as well.


Okay, so it's a sequence of delivering attacks, then? That would make more sense of what I see in the video.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 17, 2017)

These are 'basic' fundamental movements and weapon manipulation for learning multiple attacks not vs multiple opponents. In the second video the turning footwork will be utilized later in part vs multiple opponent situations. It is 'fundamental' training of the footwork to get the practitioner turning and striking.
This is Beginner training. The student has to start somewhere and at that point isn't ready for fighting a single opponent much less multiple opponents.
It is out of the first method in a series of 12 methods to develop the practitioners footwork, ability to manipulate the weapon, and eventually to fight.


----------



## Charlemagne (Mar 17, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Okay, so it's a sequence of delivering attacks, then? That would make more sense of what I see in the video.



It's an example of how different ways of manipulating the weapon (for beginners, not advanced manipulations, of which there are several) can be linked together in ways that make sense, and in a different sequence than is shown in the form. It's also a way of changing the energies of the weapon from one to the next, for someone who has not trained before.  As noted by Danny, these are from the very FIRST method of the Doce Methodos, which is the foundation system in Pekiti Tirsia, and is one of the very first things that someone new to training would learn.  

However, these attacks, then combined with footwork and performed with proper timing can very effectively be used against multiple opponents.  Doing that at full speed is something we drill in class on a regular basis.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 17, 2017)

Charlemagne said:


> It's an example of how different ways of manipulating the weapon (for beginners, not advanced manipulations, of which there are several) can be linked together in ways that make sense, and in a different sequence than is shown in the form. It's also a way of changing the energies of the weapon from one to the next, for someone who has not trained before.  As noted by Danny, these are from the very FIRST method of the Doce Methodos, which is the foundation system in Pekiti Tirsia, and is one of the very first things that someone new to training would learn.
> 
> However, these attacks, then combined with footwork and performed with proper timing can very effectively be used against multiple opponents.  Doing that at full speed is something we drill in class on a regular basis.



That point about being able to use them with multiple attackers later - that should be true of most early training, of course. We should be using the same tools, just having to make different choices with them and wrap them into a different strategy.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 17, 2017)

Another thought...
This is attribute development. If one is unable to manipulate the weapon (at this point a rattan stick) properly for striking at multiple strike angles/targets with footwork, body rotation, and body displacement at full speed one isn't going to be in the fight for long. Pekiti is a bladed weapon system the training builds from stick manipulation to bladed weapon manipulation therefore most of the stick action is based upon it being a blade and a large function of the fundamentals is learning to yield the weapon in a manner so as not to cut yourself with your own weapon.


----------



## Charlemagne (Mar 17, 2017)

Danny T said:


> Another thought...
> This is attribute development. If one is unable to manipulate the weapon (at this point a rattan stick) properly for striking at multiple strike angles/targets with footwork, body rotation, and body displacement at full speed one isn't going to be in the fight for long. Pekiti is a bladed weapon system the training builds from stick manipulation to bladed weapon manipulation therefore most of the stick action is based upon it being a blade and a large function of the fundamentals is learning to yield the weapon in a manner so as not to cut yourself with your own weapon.




I would certainly agree with that, but it is also more.  In most martial arts, including most FMAs, there is little to any discussion of how to attack properly.  That is something which fundamentally sets PTK apart from other arts.  If one is threatened (someone has drawn a weapon, etc. against you) do I want to wait for them to strike, or do I want to attack when the threat is detected?  The latter is obviously a better choice, otherwise you are focused on counter-offense, behind in the timing, and in serious danger right off the bat.  This is even more true of situations when there is more than one assailant. 

So, when does one learn to attack and how does that happen?  The answer (and I know you know this) is that it begins in Doce Methodos 1, Multiple Attacks.  While much of the early part of the system is about what to do when you are behind in timing and someone else has attacked you, in Multiple Attacks, you get the first taste of how to attack someone with proper mechanics.  In addition, the tactical understanding of when to use certain strikes is introduced (what are the strengths of the horizontal jab, when would you use it?  How do you strike if you have managed to quarter your opponent and you can no longer perform fluid strikes? How can strikes be linked together in such a way that manipulation of the weapon can get you ahead in timing if they manage to counter the first strike?). 

So while there are certainly major aspects of Multiple Attacks that have to do with attribute building, and that is much of the idea behind drilling them in solo fashion, there are legitimate applications of these things which are important and viable.  I know that you are aware of all of that, but I thought it important to bring out for purposes of the discussion.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 17, 2017)

Charlemagne said:


> I would certainly agree with that, but it is also more.  In most martial arts, including most FMAs, there is little to any discussion of how to attack properly.  That is something which fundamentally sets PTK apart from other arts.  If one is threatened (someone has drawn a weapon, etc. against you) do I want to wait for them to strike, or do I want to attack when the threat is detected?  The latter is obviously a better choice, otherwise you are focused on counter-offense, behind in the timing, and in serious danger right off the bat.  This is even more true of situations when there is more than one assailant.
> 
> So, when does one learn to attack and how does that happen?  The answer (and I know you know this) is that it begins in Doce Methodos 1, Multiple Attacks.  While much of the early part of the system is about what to do when you are behind in timing and someone else has attacked you, in Multiple Attacks, you get the first taste of how to attack someone with proper mechanics.  In addition, the tactical understanding of when to use certain strikes is introduced (what are the strengths of the horizontal jab, when would you use it?  How do you strike if you have managed to quarter your opponent and you can no longer perform fluid strikes? How can strikes be linked together in such a way that manipulation of the weapon can get you ahead in timing if they manage to counter the first strike?).
> 
> So while there are certainly major aspects of Multiple Attacks that have to do with attribute building, and that is much of the idea behind drilling them in solo fashion, there are legitimate applications of these things which are important and viable.  I know that you are aware of all of that, but I thought it important to bring out for purposes of the discussion.


I think the reason there is little emphasis in most arts on attacking is that it's hard to be certain you must fight until they attack. If they have a weapon and aren't yet attacking, it can be more dangerous to attack (while they are completely centered) than to wait for them to bring some momentum with an attack. Unless, of course, you have a weapon to nullify their advantages, then attacking is an advantage.


----------



## Charlemagne (Mar 17, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I think the reason there is little emphasis in most arts on attacking is that it's hard to be certain you must fight until they attack. If they have a weapon and aren't yet attacking, it can be more dangerous to attack (while they are completely centered) than to wait for them to bring some momentum with an attack. Unless, of course, you have a weapon to nullify their advantages, then attacking is an advantage.



I think the reason is that it simply isn't part of the arts that most people study.  That is not intended as as pejorative, just an observation.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 17, 2017)

Charlemagne said:


> I think the reason is that it simply isn't part of the arts that most people study.  That is not intended as as pejorative, just an observation.


I think that's why it's not part of the arts.


----------



## Charlemagne (Mar 17, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I think that's why it's not part of the arts.



Maybe.  I honestly think it is a mindset issue, not a tactical issue.  I believe that, at some point, a decision was made to teach responses to attack and to focus on that versus the initiation of an attack when threatened, probably due to philosophical reasons of some master throughout the history of the art.  

Again, that is not intended to be a pejorative statement, merely an observation.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 17, 2017)

Charlemagne said:


> Maybe.  I honestly think it is a mindset issue, not a tactical issue.  I believe that, at some point, a decision was made to teach responses to attack and to focus on that versus the initiation of an attack when threatened, probably due to philosophical reasons of some master throughout the history of the art.
> 
> Again, that is not intended to be a pejorative statement, merely an observation.


I'll use NGA as an example, since that's what I know best. We use the momentum they give us, so attacking takes away many of our tools. Add a weapon in their hands (especially a knife), and there's not a good argument for attacking. Much better to wait for them to commit an action, which opens up many opportunities, rather than trying to get in to control a knife that's static (meaning they can move it in any way they wish). Now, put a knife in my hands (and I'm not a highly trained knife fighter), and the situation changes. Now, it may be useful to attack, even when they have a knife.

It's not a mindset issue - it's a matter of practicality. We play for percentages, and moving at a static knife is a low-percentage move when you are unarmed.


----------

