# Angles of Attack- Modern Arnis vs Balintawak



## bloodwood

Does anyone know why Professor Remy used the present strike location for the twelve angles of attack in Modern Arnis as opposed to what he had learned in the Balintawak system. Strikes 1,2,5 + 12 are the same but all the others are reversed? 
Was it mechanics, personal preference, or just to be different from Balintawak as he formed his new system?
When training Balintawak drills that I have acquired from different sources I have to rewrite them into Modern Arnis format as not to make myself nuts. Do you guys who train both systems find this confusing, or do you just get used to it?


----------



## Sifu DangeRuss

Wait til you start translating drills from Doce Pares or Combat Arnis or a host of other systems.   Seems each teacher had his own personal preference of flow when developing thier own numerado system.  The reality is, there are only a finite number of directions and angles from which you may swing your trusty stick.  I think (Assumption here) that like many fencing masters, each endeavored to stamp his own unique "signature" for posterity purposes, as well as to track how and where their teachings spread.  You just have to reference the old addage..."When in Rome......"  It is sometimes a challenge when you work with others from different but similar systems, we have developed a unique form of "notation" which reads almost like sheet music.  I have blank pages with the "Templates" already laid down, so that all I have to do to archive new drills and techniques is scribble a quick form of shorthand to archive new routines.


----------



## pesilat

Yup. Some angling systems evolved as they did because of the weapon of preference being trained. Some evolved as they did because of the environment in which they were used. Some evolved from personal preference of the person making them (may have been arbitrary, based on some sort of numerology, or based on what the instructor felt were the most and lease used angles).

For instance, GM Giron (I either heard this by word of mouth or read/saw it in an interview somewhere, never had the chance to meet the man in person, unfortunately) put his 12 angles together based on the way a machete is used to cut through foliage. So Angle 1 is a downward diagonal stroke from right shoulder to left hip, Angle 2 is an upward diagonal back across the same line (I believe I've got those angles right). And it's like that because when you're hacking through foliage, you want to keep cutting along the same path. 

Similarly, Dr. Gyi's 6 angles in the Boar system do the same type of motion (i.e.: return along the same paths) because it's a heavy weapon system and it's more logical to let the mass of the weapon carry through then follow its natural return swing than to try to change angles.

When I teach, I use a set of 12 angles that I put together myself. The reason I did this was that my instructor drew from several systems and used the angling system that he got the material from. As such, we had to learn 4 or 5 different angling systems (and were exposed to a few others). I took the elements of those angling systems that I liked and put them together. The first 5 strikes encompass the most likely strikes people are likely to attack with whether with a blunt instrument or a blade. The 6th & 7th strikes are uppercuts to the ribs. I've only seen a couple of systems that have uppercuts in their angles, and I really liked the concept so adopted it. 8 - 11 are slightly less used angles. 12 is a very common angle (vertical down toward the crown of the head), but I didn't want to move it because that's where the 12 shot is in most of the angling systems I've been exposed to so it helps keep me from getting confused  Ironically, the 12 angles I wound up with are exactly the same that GM Cacoy uses in his Eskrido system, but they're in a different order. I didn't realize that until after I'd put mine together and drew them out on paper. Then I looked at it without the numbers and thought, "Hey, that's the Eskrido angles."

Like DangeRuss said, there's only so many angles that can be used. I mean, theoretically, you could swing or thrust at any of the 360 degrees of a circle. And, theoretically, you could go down to 1/2 degrees or 1/4 degrees. But realistically, the entire circle can be covered in 8 or 9 angles. I think 12 is a commonly used number in FMA because it has numerological significance. One of the explanations that I've heard is that the number 3 is considered a very powerful number. Therefore, multiples of 3 are considered good. And, with 12, you've got it as a multiple of 3 *and* the digits (1 + 2) add up to 3. 

I think the angling systems (many are 12, but I've also seen 10 and a couple that were over 12) basically come down to personal preference based on background, environment, and weapon. So, why did Remy set his up the way he did? Probably have to ask him which, unfortunately, can no longer be done. Maybe someone asked him before his death and has an answer.

Mike


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by bloodwood _
> *Does anyone know why Professor Remy used the present strike location for the twelve angles of attack in Modern Arnis as opposed to what he had learned in the Balintawak system. Strikes 1,2,5 + 12 are the same but all the others are reversed?
> Was it mechanics, personal preference, or just to be different from Balintawak as he formed his new system?
> When training Balintawak drills that I have acquired from different sources I have to rewrite them into Modern Arnis format as not to make myself nuts. Do you guys who train both systems find this confusing, or do you just get used to it? *




BloodWood,

I have to agree to a point.

I train in both Modern Arnis from GM Remy Presas and Balintawak from Manong (GM) Ted Buot. The numbering at the beginning can be difficult. (* Which Balintawak Lineage are you from? if you do not mind me asking.  *) I know the Villasin Lineage uses Drills. Manong Buot does not use any drills other than Abecedario and Seguidas.


It is required for Abecedario (1 - 12 and the appropriate block ), learning and teaching. In Seguidas ( 1-12 in a non consecutive order ), it is good to remember, to help yourself place the right block with the right strike. Yet, as you step into Corraidas - The mixing bowl, the instructor feeds you strike and as there is no order, your defense is almost automatic. With Cuentada, you have a game plan and are thinking a few moves ahead and setting your opponent up.  This is a very simplistic explanation, so please be patient.

So, in the end the numbering differences have not been as big a difference or deal to me as I would have expected.


----------



## pesilat

I don't know which lineage that BloodWood is referring to. I know that what he said about the differences is accurate as far as Bobby Taboada's lineage. The 12 angles that Bobby teaches are:
Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone
Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone
Horizontal backhand to right waist
Horizontal forehand to left waist
Forehand sungekete (curving thrust) to abdomen
Backhand sungkete to upper right chest
Forehand sungkete to upper left chest
Diagonal down forehand to left knee
Diagonal down backhand to right knee
Backhand thrust to face
Forehand thrust to face
Vertical down to crown of head
[/list=1]

Are these the same angles used by GMs Buot, Atillo, or other Balintawak lineages? Bobby's is the only Balintawak I've ever seen (except for some drills from Atillo that Guro Dan Inosanto brought out at a seminar).

Mike


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by pesilat _
> *I don't know which lineage that BloodWood is referring to. I know that what he said about the differences is accurate as far as Bobby Taboada's lineage. The 12 angles that Bobby teaches are:
> Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone
> Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone
> Horizontal backhand to right waist
> Horizontal forehand to left waist
> Forehand sungekete (curving thrust) to abdomen
> Backhand sungkete to upper right chest
> Forehand sungkete to upper left chest
> Diagonal down forehand to left knee
> Diagonal down backhand to right knee
> Backhand thrust to face
> Forehand thrust to face
> Vertical down to crown of head
> [/list=1]
> 
> Are these the same angles used by GMs Buot, Atillo, or other Balintawak lineages? Bobby's is the only Balintawak I've ever seen (except for some drills from Atillo that Guro Dan Inosanto brought out at a seminar).
> 
> Mike
> *



 

This is what I have, and it looks the same, which is why I did not comment with BloodWood.

1 -12 as taught by Manong Ted Buot
Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone
Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone
Horizontal backhand to right waist
Horizontal forehand to left waist
Forehand sungekete (curving thrust) to abdomen
Backhand sungkete to upper right chest
Forehand sungkete to upper left chest
Diagonal down forehand to left knee
Diagonal down backhand to right knee
Backhand thrust to face
Forehand thrust to face
Vertical down to crown of head
[/list=1]

:asian:


----------



## pesilat

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *This is what I have, and it looks the same, which is why I did not comment with BloodWood.
> 
> 1 -12 as taught by Manong Ted Buot
> 
> Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone
> Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone
> Horizontal backhand to right waist
> Horizontal forehand to left waist
> Forehand sungekete (curving thrust) to abdomen
> Backhand sungkete to upper right chest
> Forehand sungkete to upper left chest
> Diagonal down forehand to left knee
> Diagonal down backhand to right knee
> Backhand thrust to face
> Forehand thrust to face
> Vertical down to crown of head
> [/list=1]
> *





Cool. I don't know if Bobby is still teaching this way or not (my instructor trained with Bobby over 10 years ago and Bobby may have restructured his curriculum, I don't know). And some of these elements were taught simultaneously to me, even though I'm listing them sequentially.

Starts with the 12 angles full stop (i.e.: you don't swing through) to learn stick control. 

Cuentada (basic counters) against the 12 angles - also full stop on the counters. 
Full power 12 angles. 

"No control" Cuentada (you strike with power and on target, but with control so you don't actually connect) and you return to chamber.

Grouping System 1 (which focuses on the concept of "lifting and clearing")

Butting (each angle is countered with a punyo strike, mostly to the hand but #12 is to the shoulder and head)

Random Cuentada (the angles are fed at random and have to be countered)

Closing against cuentada (i.e.: you answer their counter with a block structure)

Secondary butting (you counter, they close, you attack their secondary weapon [i.e.: the live hand] with your punyo)

Grouping System 2 (which focuses on awareness and dealing with punyo strikes)

Grouping System 3 (which focuses on dealing with thrusts)

Semi-advanced striking (preemptive striking before they strike, then you counter their strike - there are actually several levels to this, but I'll only list it once)

Grouping System 4 (which focuses on developing rapid response time with proper body mechanics)

Grouping System 5 (which focuses on dealing with the opponent's other hand)


There are also agaws (disarms) against the 12 angles taught throughout. 
And the "Combination Applications" (focus on using combinations and some countering for counter) against the 12 angles.
And there's a "Shadowboxing" form that's taught throughout. Then there's "Mobile Shadowboxing" which focuses on mobility and some multiple opponent awareness.
There's also a short form that we learned that was mostly for coordination purposes.

I apologize if I missed any elements (it's late and I'm starting to wind down) and I know I didn't get some things into the order that they're taught, but this should give you an idea of how Bobby's system is (or, at least, was) taught.

If anyone has more recent info on how Bobby's curriculum is structured, I'd be interested to hear. I've heard that there've been some changes, but I don't know what they are.

Mike


----------



## lhommedieu

> _Originally posted by bloodwood _
> * When training Balintawak drills that I have acquired from different sources I have to rewrite them into Modern Arnis format as not to make myself nuts. Do you guys who train both systems find this confusing, or do you just get used to it? *



I do the same thing:  while training Bakbakan's sinawali patterns I had to translate the Tagalog (?) terms for the strikes into San Miguel Eskrima angles in order for them to make sense; I am currently learning Pekiti Tirsia's espada y daga system and when taking notes I rewrite the drill sequences according to the angle numbers that I understand.  The problem is that it's very difficult to translate them _back_ the other way.  

Sometimes, I have found that referring to a numbered strike in your own terms (eg., "high forehand horizontal strike," or "arcing thrust to the left temple") is easier than using a number system.   For example, in the image below the attacker on the left is using an "upward diagonal strike to the left hip" of the opponent (angle #7 in our system - but a different number in another system).








Best,

Steve


----------



## bloodwood

Rich + pesilat 

A couple of years ago I came across a Balintawak web site run by Sam Buot. He is Ted's cousin and teaches the same system, so the angles I'm referring to are the same as you use. The drills are the 1 thru 5 groupings. Once I translated the angles I started plugging these groupings into the tapi-tapi drills that I had gotten from the Professor. The tapi-tapi drills that the Professor was teaching were usually one sweep, lock or trap then back out to sinawali. The Balintawak grouping drills were tight and in close, and mixed in well with what I was doing in the tapi-tapi. They also looked great and most people would say, what the hell was that, and can you show me that.
From a teaching point of view the strike designation helps while getting started but as you've said once you get going it's just reacting to the strikes from where ever they originate.
Thanks for the enthusiastic responses. By the way you guys jumped on this thread it looks like we need more Balintawak discussion here on MT.


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by bloodwood _
> *Rich + pesilat
> 
> A couple of years ago I came across a Balintawak web site run by Sam Buot. He is Ted's cousin and teaches the same system, so the angles I'm referring to are the same as you use. The drills are the 1 thru 5 groupings. Once I translated the angles I started plugging these groupings into the tapi-tapi drills that I had gotten from the Professor. The tapi-tapi drills that the Professor was teaching were usually one sweep, lock or trap then back out to sinawali. The Balintawak grouping drills were tight and in close, and mixed in well with what I was doing in the tapi-tapi. They also looked great and most people would say, what the hell was that, and can you show me that.
> From a teaching point of view the strike designation helps while getting started but as you've said once you get going it's just reacting to the strikes from where ever they originate.
> Thanks for the enthusiastic responses. By the way you guys jumped on this thread it looks like we need more Balintawak discussion here on MT. *



I like Sam Buot's Website, as does Manong Ted Buot.

As for the discussion of Balintawak, I would not mind.  


Could you guys explain the 1 - 5 groupings? I am not sure I understand your meaning of this. 

Thanks


----------



## bloodwood

Here is Sam's site.    

http://www.balintawakeskrima.faithweb.com/new_page_1.htm

Go to Techniques heading, then to section G, Training reflexes through grouping of moves.


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by bloodwood _
> *Here is Sam's site.
> 
> http://www.balintawakeskrima.faithweb.com/new_page_1.htm
> 
> Go to Techniques heading, then to section G, Training reflexes through grouping of moves. *




Thanks!


----------



## pesilat

> _Originally posted by bloodwood _
> *Here is Sam's site.
> 
> http://www.balintawakeskrima.faithweb.com/new_page_1.htm
> 
> Go to Techniques heading, then to section G, Training reflexes through grouping of moves. *



Cool. I didn't take an extensive look at the page (I should be asleep already). But from what I saw, it's the same grouping systems that I learned from my instructor (who learned them from Bobby Taboada).

Mike


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by pesilat _
> *Cool. I didn't take an extensive look at the page (I should be asleep already). But from what I saw, it's the same grouping systems that I learned from my instructor (who learned them from Bobby Taboada).
> 
> Mike *



Well in the Balintawak I have learned there are no specific groupings. There are optimal moves, set up moves, moves for when you are late, your back up move and your this is my last option move. All depending upon your timing.  


So, I will try to study this stuff and see what I can see.


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by bloodwood _
> *Does anyone know why Professor Remy used the present strike location for the twelve angles of attack in Modern Arnis as opposed to what he had learned in the Balintawak system. Strikes 1,2,5 + 12 are the same but all the others are reversed?
> Was it mechanics, personal preference, or just to be different from Balintawak as he formed his new system?
> When training Balintawak drills that I have acquired from different sources I have to rewrite them into Modern Arnis format as not to make myself nuts. Do you guys who train both systems find this confusing, or do you just get used to it? *



I like the answers that you have received from thus far and they are all quite interesting, informative.  Regarding to the Balintawak numerado  as taught by GM Bobby Taboada, Mike, is correct.  Now to answer your question, Bloodwood, the striking system **was not** changed in the early years of the Modern Arnis system being taught, it was augemented by teaching what Professor called the "basic" and the "traditional" strikes.

Professor, would teach the basic strikes - the Modern Arnis numerado - to beginners because it flowed better, particularly at strikes 3, 4, and 5.  The problem for most beginners is that they could not generate enough power with the retraction and strike combination from 2 to 3 and 4 to 5 in the "traditional" - Balintawak pattern.  By using the full follow through from 2 to 3 to 4 to 5, there is a smooth transition and power curve.

I learned both striking pattern from Professor and Sifu Don Zanghi between 1981 and 1986.  I know that Tim Hartman, was using both numerados in the late 1980's.  Rocky Paswik, taught both right through the 80's into the 90's.  Tom Bolden, Richard Roy and Bram Frank have taught both numerados, as did a number of other instructors that I have met and trained with in Modern Arnis.  

The full follow through strokes of Mdern Arnis, crossing the body from right to left, returned and repeated until you get to the #5 thrust is so much easier to teach to beginners.  It is a common and smooth mechanical motion, it does not start and stop, then re-start.  It also allows one to "flow" without a time and motion wasting retraction that telegraphs the #3 and #5 strikes.  That delay could be very costly to a beginning stick fighter.

The Balintawak first 5 have a very clear and functional purpose, but is more difficult for beginners to use in a smooth, powerful manner.  It is neither inferior or superior, it simply meets a different set of needs that a beginner in training does not have to be concerned with for some time to come.

I still teach a third numerado that I develped in 1986.  It meets the smooth flow transitions from strike to strike better in my opinion.  When I showed to Professor in 1989, during the review of my college curriculum, that he approved, he was pleased and congratulated me on the innovation; however, he did stress that he wanted me to continue to teach the Modern Arnis numerado so that when my students went to seminars/camps, they would know the same standard (my word) striking system as all of the others in attendance.  He was right.  If everyone had and used a standard numerado pattern, then it would be safer and easier for people from different areas to work together.   But the key point for me is that he did not discourage my innovation and specificly endorsed me to continue using it for MY Own Students.

The strikes of my beginners program follow the Modern Arnis pattern 1 - 9, however I carry #9 through to the left side and use a reverse thrust to the eye for #10, then a straight thrust to the eye for #11, then circle the stick around my head for a forehand #12.  In short from 9 through 12 my numerado is a Balintawak pattern, although the #12 follows the Modern Arnis method of delivery.

So now you know the answer and the reasoning behind Professor using both numerado systems.

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by DoctorB _
> *I like the answers that you have received from thus far and they are all quite interesting, informative.  . . .
> 
> 
> 
> I still teach a third numerado that I developed in 1986.  It meets the smooth flow transitions from strike to strike better in my opinion.  When I showed to Professor in 1989, during the review of my college curriculum, that he approved, he was pleased and congratulated me on the innovation; however, he did stress that he wanted me to continue to teach the Modern Arnis numerado so that when my students went to seminars/camps, they would know the same standard (my word) striking system as all of the others in attendance.  He was right.  If everyone had and used a standard numerado pattern, then it would be safer and easier for people from different areas to work together.   But the key point for me is that he did not discourage my innovation and specifically endorsed me to continue using it for MY Own Students.
> 
> The strikes of my beginners program follow the Modern Arnis pattern 1 - 9, however I carry #9 through to the left side and use a reverse thrust to the eye for #10, then a straight thrust to the eye for #11, then circle the stick around my head for a forehand #12.  In short from 9 through 12 my numerado is a Balintawak pattern, although the #12 follows the Modern Arnis method of delivery.
> 
> So now you know the answer and the reasoning behind Professor using both numerado systems.
> 
> Jerome Barber, Ed.D. *




DoctorB,

No Disrespect meant by this post, only another data point.

When I started my formal Training in 85-86 I was being taught in Modern Arnis the following

1 -12 With Control


Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone Retract to the left shoulder
Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone Retract to the right Shoulder
Horizontal forehand to left floating rib retract to the left Shoulder
Horizontal backhand to right floating rib retract to the right side
Forehand (curving thrust) to abdomen Retract back to the right side 
Forehand to upper left chest retract to the left side
Backhand to upper right chest retract to the right side
Diagonal down backhand to right knee retract to the right side
Diagonal down forehand to left knee retract to the right side
Forehand thrust to face / left eye retract to the left side
Backhand thrust to face / right eye retract to the right side
Vertical down to crown of head
[/list=1]

1 - 12 with follow through or Flow
Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone flow / cut through to the left side
Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone flow / cut through to the ride side
Horizontal forehand to left floating rib flow / cut through to the left side
Horizontal backhand to right floating rib flow / cut through to the ride side
Forehand (curving thrust) to abdomen Retract to the right side
Forehand to upper left chest flow / hook cut through to the left side.
Backhand to upper left chest flow / cut half way through, then retract back to the left side.
Diagonal down backhand to right knee flow / cut through to the right side
Diagonal down backhand to left knee flow / cut through to the left side
Backhand thrust to face right eye flow or hook cut through to the right ride
Forehand thrust to face to the left eye flow or hook cut back to the left side
Vertical down to crown of head
[/list=2]


The Following Question I was asked on my Yellow Belt Test:
Q: What is the difference between 1-12 Control and 1-12 Follow Through?

A: 1-12 with control uses strikes and 1-12 with follow through uses a cutting motion. Also the eyes are reversed in 1-12 with follow through.

My Local Instructors had been taught this since the first time they saw GM Remy Presas in the mid-late 70's 

:asian:


----------



## Dan Anderson

The basic numerado I was taught is thr same as in any of Prof. Presas' books or videos.  He would, however, shift numbers 6&7 and 10&11 when doing the tapi-tapi drill, which from my information, comes from Balintawak's abecedario (I could be wrong on that - Rich correct me if so.).  This is the only place he would shift the strikes when I was at any of his seminars or private lessons.  The shifting certainly kept one on one's toes when beginning.  He would also teach it in three aspects: control, follow through and recoil.

Yours,
Dan Anderson


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *DoctorB,
> 
> No Disrespect meant by this post, only another data point.
> 
> When I started my formal Training in 85-86 I was being taught in Modern Arnis the following
> 
> 1 -12 With Control
> 
> 
> Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone Retract to the left shoulder
> Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone Retract to the right Shoulder
> Horizontal forehand to left floating rib retract to the left Shoulder
> Horizontal backhand to right floating rib retract to the right side
> Forehand (curving thrust) to abdomen Retract back to the right side
> Forehand to upper left chest retract to the left side
> Backhand to upper right chest retract to the right side
> Diagonal down backhand to right knee retract to the right side
> Diagonal down forehand to left knee retract to the right side
> Forehand thrust to face / left eye retract to the left side
> Backhand thrust to face / right eye retract to the right side
> Vertical down to crown of head
> [/list=1]
> 
> 1 - 12 with follow through or Flow
> Diagonal down forehand to left temple/collar bone flow / cut through to the left side
> Diagonal down backhand to right temple/collar bone flow / cut through to the ride side
> Horizontal forehand to left floating rib flow / cut through to the left side
> Horizontal backhand to right floating rib flow / cut through to the ride side
> Forehand (curving thrust) to abdomen Retract to the right side
> Forehand to upper left chest flow / hook cut through to the left side.
> Backhand to upper left chest flow / cut half way through, then retract back to the left side.
> Diagonal down backhand to right knee flow / cut through to the right side
> Diagonal down backhand to left knee flow / cut through to the left side
> Backhand thrust to face right eye flow or hook cut through to the right ride
> Forehand thrust to face to the left eye flow or hook cut back to the left side
> Vertical down to crown of head
> [/list=2]
> 
> 
> The Following Question I was asked on my Yellow Belt Test:
> Q: What is the difference between 1-12 Control and 1-12 Follow Through?
> 
> A: 1-12 with control uses strikes and 1-12 with follow through uses a cutting motion. Also the eyes are reversed in 1-12 with follow through.
> 
> My Local Instructors had been taught this since the first time they saw GM Remy Presas in the mid-late 70's
> 
> :asian:
> 
> *




 

No disrespect seen or felt, Rich.  I was taught directly from Professor's 1974 Modern Arnis publication and the first two strikes were horizontals to the left and right temple respectively.
That is what Sifu Zanghi taught and that was reinforced by professor at the first couple of seminars that I attended in 1981 and 82.  John Bryant, a former Zanghi student and the second person to open a school teaching Modern Arnis in the Buffalo area taught the strikes as you have described them and I saw Professor reinforce that version.  Thereore I have concluded that there are several versions of how and where the first two strikes go, so let's put tht puppy to bed and move on!

The "with control" and "follow through" methods were taught in the 70's through 1994, which is when I stopped attending camps with Professor.  I went to a couple of seminars and several of my students attended both camps and seminars right through 2000, so I was aware what was being taught relative to this particular thread. 

My major point was and still is that the answer to Bloodwood's question is that Professor has taught BOTH the basic and traditional striking numerado striking patterns.  

The basic or Modern Arnis method was for beginners and it was developed to make the "flow" from strike to strike smoother and easier.  The traditional or Balintawak striking method was taught to intermediate and advanced underbelts.  That system is more difficult to used effectively because of the tendancy for people not to make strong #3, #4 and #5 strikes because of the retractions necessitated by that numerado pattern.  As people beecame stronger, more comfortable and used the proper body mechanics, the weakness in striking with the Balintawak System disappeared.

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by Dan Anderson _
> *The basic numerado I was taught is thr same as in any of Prof. Presas' books or videos.  He would, however, shift numbers 6&7 and 10&11 when doing the tapi-tapi drill, which from my information, comes from Balintawak's abecedario (I could be wrong on that - Rich correct me if so.).  This is the only place he would shift the strikes when I was at any of his seminars or private lessons.  The shifting certainly kept one on one's toes when beginning.  He would also teach it in three aspects: control, follow through and recoil.
> 
> Yours,
> Dan Anderson *




Well From the mid 80's when the professor taught 1-12 at a seminar or camp I only saw the 'Control' method being taught. Other students and Black belts would make sure that the flow of follow through would be taught to new students. 

This would have to be the basic 1-12. As for the Tapi-Tapi, yes the 6& 7 and 10 & 11 were switched and yes this is very very similar to the Balintawak Abecedario, not quite the same but real close.


----------



## DoctorB

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *Well From the mid 80's when the professor taught 1-12 at a seminar or camp I only saw the 'Control' method being taught. Other students and Black belts would make sure that the flow of follow through would be taught to new students.
> 
> This would have to be the basic 1-12. As for the Tapi-Tapi, yes the 6& 7 and 10 & 11 were switched and yes this is very very similar to the Balintawak Abecedario, not quite the same but real close.  *



That is another example of how we get slightly different versions of how Modern Arnis is done and taught.  Professor was not totally consistant in his approach to the art, but the root elements remain the same.  Things get switched to fit a particular need or situation - that is part of the meaning behind Professor's comment that "You make it for yourself."

On the other hand, Rich, what has been discussed here between you and Dan, does not in any way change the value of what I wrote in response to Bloodwood's question.  Professor taught both a basic and a traditional striking system as part of the Modern Arnis program.

Jerome Barber, Ed.D.


----------



## Mickey

> _Originally posted by DoctorB _
> *That is another example of how we get slightly different versions of how Modern Arnis is done and taught.  Professor was not totally consistant in his approach to the art, but the root elements remain the same.  Things get switched to fit a particular need or situation - that is part of the meaning behind Professor's comment that "You make it for yourself."
> 
> On the other hand, Rich, what has been discussed here between you and Dan, does not in any way change the value of what I wrote in response to Bloodwood's question.  Professor taught both a basic and a traditional striking system as part of the Modern Arnis program.
> 
> Jerome Barber, Ed.D. *



Dr. Barber,

I have read this thread and I seen other the many posts, no one came out and said you were wrong, only what they had experienced themselves. 

Good Posts and different opinions are what this site is about.


----------



## Rich Parsons

Doctor B,

My Apolgoies if you thought I was trying to invalidate your post. I said no disrepesct, only trying to offer more data points.

I think the Professor, (* To some *), GM Presas (* To others *) and Remy (* (No Disrepect meant at all he told me to call him this.) To me and others also *) had unique relationships with everyone. I know I do not have the exact same relationship with all my friends. So, it could be that this another point of difference.

I think if you were to ask anyone, to tell you how they were taught, no two people would be exactly the same, method or style. Yet, if you ask a group of people who saw an accident , not one will see what the others saw completely. They will all remember sometign sltighly different. This does not mean that any of them are wrong.

Best Regards
:asian:


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *This would have to be the basic 1-12. As for the Tapi-Tapi, yes the 6& 7 and 10 & 11 were switched and yes this is very very similar to the Balintawak Abecedario, not quite the same but real close.  *



Rich,
I hope to connect up with Manong Ted when I come out in April and then I will learn correctly the Balintawak Abedecario.  Coolness ahead in the future.

Yours,
Dan


----------



## Dan Anderson

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *
> I think if you were to ask anyone, to tell you how they were taught, no two people would be exactly the same, method or style. Yet, if you ask a group of people who saw an accident , not one will see what the others saw completely. They will all remember something slightly different. This does not mean that any of them are wrong.
> 
> Best Regards
> :asian: *



Rikki,
You win a *free beer* for that observation!  Is that ever the truth!  You may collect from me the next time we see each other.  The big trick is to ensure one gets the root concepts of what was taught and the variations are frosting on the cake.

Yours,
Dan


----------



## Rich Parsons

> _Originally posted by Dan Anderson _
> *Rikki,
> You win a free beer for that observation!  Is that ever the truth!  You may collect from me the next time we see each other.  The big trick is to ensure one gets the root concepts of what was taught and the variations are frosting on the cake.
> 
> Yours,
> Dan
> 
> *




Danny BOY!

I tried to double click on the 'Free Beer' Link but could not get it to work!  


Seriously, the next time we see each other :drinkbeer :cheers:


----------



## bloodwood

Thanks
Some good information has been put out there during your posts. I am a little wiser from your efforts.
I think comparing Modern Arnis and Balintawak is excellent. It draws out the differences and similarities in the two systems and bridges the gap, thus allowing for integration of the two while training. Both are flexible arts which makes them fun to explore the endless possibilities.

Always the student
Bloodwood      :asian:


----------



## norshadow1

> _Originally posted by Mickey _
> *Dr. Barber,
> 
> I have read this thread and I seen other the many posts, no one came out and said you were wrong, only what they had experienced themselves.
> 
> Good Posts and different opinions are what this site is about. *



Nice idea, Mick, but I believe what Doc was refering to was to the point that Bloodwood asked a specific question which he answered.  All of the other posts talked around the specific  question.  It is very clear to me from what has been posted by all of the others, that Doc's statement that professor often taught differently from time to time and place to place is correct.  But even that goes beyond Bloodwood's question of why did professor teach both the Balintawak and Modern Arnis striking systems.  

Lamont


----------



## pesilat

> _Originally posted by DoctorB _
> *That is another example of how we get slightly different versions of how Modern Arnis is done and taught.  Professor was not totally consistant in his approach to the art, but the root elements remain the same.  Things get switched to fit a particular need or situation - that is part of the meaning behind Professor's comment that "You make it for yourself."
> 
> On the other hand, Rich, what has been discussed here between you and Dan, does not in any way change the value of what I wrote in response to Bloodwood's question.  Professor taught both a basic and a traditional striking system as part of the Modern Arnis program.
> 
> Jerome Barber, Ed.D. *



I think this is illustrative of the fact that Modern Arnis was (and, I would assume, still is) a "living" system. That it continues to evolve.

All the systems that I train in are like this, and, I would venture, that most systems are like this.

The only time it becomes a problem is when someone from one "evolutionary cycle" tries to "correct" someone from another cycle. In most instances, both are "correct."

An illustration of this principle happened last year with one of my friends. He and I have both trained in Balintawak under the same instructor. Our instructor earned his "Completion of Art" in Balintawak under GM Bobby many years ago. He's been training and teaching what he learned since then, but hasn't sought to go for his "Master" rank.

Several years back, one of Bobby's newer instructors saw me and some friends training and he told us that what we were doing was "wrong." We paid attention to what he said, but once he was gone, we just kind of shrugged it off because we trust our instructor and know that when we saw Bobby in '95, he was teaching the same stuff we had learned from our instructor.

Last year, one of my peers, Steve, attended a seminar with GM Bobby. Steve asked GM Bobby about the differences we'd seen from this other instructor. Bobby's response was, "No. What you have is valid and it's Balintawak. I teach some stuff differently now, but that doesn't invalidate what you've got."

I think a lot of people (especially fresh instructors) don't understand this and it becomes the root of a fair amount of misunderstanding and tension.

Mike


----------



## lightninghands

I do the Taboada 12 strikes, but I'm into Tabimina style of balintawak, I think both of them came from the Villasin Lineage


----------



## Rich Parsons

lightninghands said:
			
		

> I do the Taboada 12 strikes, but I'm into Tabimina style of balintawak, I think both of them came from the Villasin Lineage



GM Toboada did train with GM Villasin.  I also think he had the chance while he was younger to meet and work out at least once with GM Anciong Bacon. (* I saw one picture *)

Sir Bobby Tabimina (* as his students call him out of respect *)  did start out with the GM Villasin School but he also did train with GM Bacon. Being from the GM Buot Family, I can see the subtle differences in preferences (* that exist between people to people and family to family *) in some moves that have GM Bacon's. He also leans forward like many of the GM Villasin family. So Tabimina is from both.


----------

