# Full Contact No Armor Event!



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Everyone,

Many people talk about it, some may try it but here is your opportunity to do it!

Sayoc Fighting Systems Presents a Full Contact Stick Fighting No Armor Event!

Weekend of October 16th, in upstate Pennsylvania.

This is an open invitation to fight, all styles are welcome, no spectators participants only! Challenge yourself, to a No rules, full contact Stick fight. Matches will end when either you or your opponent is knocked out, or submits. 

NO ARMOR is allowed only a mouthpiece, and protective cup.

Rattan sticks between 1"-2" in diameter 30" long 

If there is enough interest a similar event can be held at your location!!

For more information go to www.Sayoc.com, and reply to the similar post on the forum.

Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.


----------



## Seigi

WOW!!!
 :whip: 

GOOD-LUCK & safety to all.


Peace

PS. The Insurance has to be a HUGE cost.


----------



## KyleShort

:shrug:


----------



## tshadowchaser

I want photos and a full report on this one.
For those that have a chance to attend and/or enter let us know how it goes.
Best of luck and good health to those that get to play


----------



## Marvin

Is it going to be set up like The Dog Brothers, with light head gear?
or no head gear at all? 
or no head shots?


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Everyone,

Yes, this is a great and very challenging event! 

Most people do not know any of the history behind the early Sayoc Fighting Systems matches that went on in the 70's and 80's, full contact no armor, all out. But this is definitely a chance for those who talk and train in Filipino arts to experience another level to their stick fighting.

Marvin - This is not a "Dog Brothers" style match up. There is no armor and head shots are allowed.


Gumagalang 

Guro Steve L.

www.Bujinkandojo.net


----------



## f.m.a.c.student

sounds like fun, I would think that some one would get hurt


----------



## Marvin

Airyu@hotmail.com said:
			
		

> Marvin - This is not a "Dog Brothers" style match up. There is no armor and head shots are allowed.
> 
> 
> Gumagalang
> 
> Guro Steve L.
> 
> www.Bujinkandojo.net


WOW!!
Be careful folks!!


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

I hope you have an EMT there.

Good luck.


----------



## Feisty Mouse

Holy cow.  

Not for me, thanks - I hope everyone who attends takes care of themselves as best they can. 

And what is the insurance for hosting something like that?!?!?


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

Seigi said:
			
		

> PS. The Insurance has to be a HUGE cost.



Do you really think that an insurance company would authorize this kind of event? You should see the hoops that I had to hop threw for my home owners insurance to cover my dogs! For those who participate, make sure your health insurance is up to date!!

 :asian:


----------



## f.m.a.c.student

where at in up state pa is this going to be held at I went to your web and did not see where it was or when the 16th is comeing up really fast.


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Everyone,

For those of you who are coming to the event, you need to post at the Sayoc.com forum. Tuhon Kier(I believe) will be contacting those who are serious about attending.

Train Hard it is the Way!

Guro Steve L.

www.Bujinkandojo.net


----------



## loki09789

Airyu@hotmail.com said:
			
		

> Hello Everyone,
> 
> For those of you who are coming to the event, you need to post at the Sayoc.com forum. Tuhon Kier(I believe) will be contacting those who are serious about attending.
> 
> Train Hard it is the Way!
> 
> Guro Steve L.
> 
> www.Bujinkandojo.net


I'd like more information on some of the issues presented (insurance, liability, location...) before I start contacting anyone directly about the event.  The contact/'fighting' aspect isn't an issue for me so much as the 'sanctioning' and administrative issues (EMT's on site, insurance...) and this idea that there are 'no rules' IMO will always be a load of BS in a commerical event because there is no way on God's green earth that an event with no rules would get 'sanctioned' or insured.

Besides, if there are no rules (and more importantly, no consequences), then i win because I'll bring my car instead of a stick .


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Loki....,

If you are worried about liability, EMT, etc. then you have every right not to accept the open invitation to fight. No one stated this was a commercial/sanctioned type of event, only that it is open to everyone who is willing to put it on the line and fight.

Also, I do believe I wrote "Stick fighting", if you choose to drive a car then you could, theoretically stick fight within the car.(LOL)

Gumagalang

Guro Steve L.

ps: There is a video clip at www.Sayoc.com, that shows Tuhon cortes and Guro Mendez fighting no armor, just a brief view but it can give you an idea of what it can be like.


----------



## loki09789

Airyu@hotmail.com said:
			
		

> Hello Loki....,
> 
> If you are worried about liability, EMT, etc. then you have every right not to accept the open invitation to fight. No one stated this was a commercial/sanctioned type of event, only that it is open to everyone who is willing to put it on the line and fight.
> 
> Also, I do believe I wrote "Stick fighting", if you choose to drive a car then you could, theoretically stick fight within the car.(LOL)
> 
> Gumagalang
> 
> Guro Steve L.
> 
> ps: There is a video clip at www.Sayoc.com, that shows Tuhon cortes and Guro Mendez fighting no armor, just a brief view but it can give you an idea of what it can be like.


Thanks for the prompt reply.  Yes I am declining to participate because there is 'putting on the line' and being 'reckless' IMO.

As far as calling it a 'stick fight' one of the very core ideas of a 'no rules' fight is that there are 'no rules' so by 'breaking the rules' of bringing my car I am technically within the 'rules'.....I have a head ache now.


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello again,

Asprin or Ibuprofen will help the headache!!(LOL)

All the best

Guro Steve L.


----------



## loki09789

Airyu@hotmail.com said:
			
		

> Hello again,
> 
> Asprin or Ibuprofen will help the headache!!(LOL)
> 
> All the best
> 
> Guro Steve L.


Won't do much for the concussions (or liability) of the headaches post event.  Have fun, hope everybody coming out the other end can still recite the alphabet.


----------



## Tgace

Theres no laws regarding unsanctioned fighting events in Pennsylvania?


----------



## loki09789

Tgace said:
			
		

> Theres no laws regarding unsanctioned fighting events in Pennsylvania?


Understood, using the term not in the legal/literal application so much as the 'up and up' responsible application. Tim H made a good point about EMT's on site and insurance and such...having a flash back to those risk assessment charts they made us do in NCO school to evaluate the danger level of missions/operations and such....

Risk/reward - is it worth it to you for, essentially, a hobby? Not me. Hell, we still used ropes, carried first aid kits and double checked each others knots when we were rock climbing. Take risks, sure. But control the range of and the impact of the risk with some judgement/precautions/safety considerations.


----------



## Tgace

No offense, but "full contact" head shots with sticks?...that qualifies as deadly force in my state. Why not have "no-rules" knife fighting or gunfighting while your at it?


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Again Everyone,

Again, this event is not for everyone, but it is an option if one chooses to try it out and fight in the matches. Matches of this type do happen in other countries, as other societies lack the litagenous nature being further developed and pushed here in the USA. 

If you are hesitant to fight, don't do it.

Train Hard it is the Way!
Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.


----------



## Rich Parsons

Airyu@hotmail.com said:
			
		

> Hello Everyone,
> 
> Many people talk about it, some may try it but here is your opportunity to do it!
> 
> Sayoc Fighting Systems Presents a Full Contact Stick Fighting No Armor Event!
> 
> Weekend of October 16th, in upstate Pennsylvania.
> 
> This is an open invitation to fight, all styles are welcome, no spectators participants only! Challenge yourself, to a No rules, full contact Stick fight. Matches will end when either you or your opponent is knocked out, or submits.
> 
> NO ARMOR is allowed only a mouthpiece, and protective cup.
> 
> Rattan sticks between 1"-2" in diameter 30" long
> 
> If there is enough interest a similar event can be held at your location!!
> 
> For more information go to www.Sayoc.com, and reply to the similar post on the forum.
> 
> Gumagalang
> Guro Steve L.




Personally, I like the idea. I also think it is good to train for real occasionally. I also believe in control. 

I would have loved to made it to this event or even competed, I have been working all week to clear my work schedule to try to get out of town to go to this. One week's notice was a little short for me. Yet, I do appreciate the offer. I also was previously invited to another event, which makes it hard to back out on that as well.

I agree that it is not for everyone. 

I agree that people could get hurt.

I agree that it happens in other countries and cultures much more often.

I respect that an offer was made and they were and are willing to allow unknowns walk in and play with others.

I do have a few questions though:

1) May I also wear eye protection - aka Smith and Wesson Clear Eye Shields.

2) How are the match ups done?

2 a ) Is it done by age?

2 b ) Is it done by weight?

2 c ) Is it done by rank?

2 d ) Is it done by years of training?

Thank you for your future Reply.
:asian:


----------



## Flatlander

Tgace said:
			
		

> No offense, but "full contact" head shots with sticks?...that qualifies as deadly force in my state. Why not have "no-rules" knife fighting or gunfighting while your at it?


You know, this type of event is far beyond the level that I personally would feel comfortable exposing myself to willingly, at this point in my training.  I do believe, however, that there is a place for this.  For some, this is the next logical progression in the furtherance of their training.  There will be the few who have attained a point in their training where they need to see what actually works, and what does not.  What their *actual* response will be after getting smoked in the head - whether they really can defang that snake when it's trying to bite them.

As I said, I'm not there yet.  I will be one day, though.

I do have some other questions.....

Are they refereed?  At what point is there a stoppage in action?

You know what I do like about this event?  That it is not open to spectators, only participants.  I really like that.  It makes it all about the training, not about the show.  That's a real positive point.


----------



## Tgace

What happens when somebody winds up in the hospital? Im not judging the "rightness or wrongness" of the event, just that in this country you should be ready to accept either death or imprisonment before entering an event like this. Is it a win by knockout or unable to continue type thing??

never mind I went back to post #1 and see that it is.....lawsuit waiting to happen IMHO.


----------



## Gulo

i myseft am very interested to see a list of the participants who won!


----------



## loki09789

Flatlander said:
			
		

> You know, this type of event is far beyond the level that I personally would feel comfortable exposing myself to willingly, at this point in my training. I do believe, however, that there is a place for this. For some, this is the next logical progression in the furtherance of their training. There will be the few who have attained a point in their training where they need to see what actually works, and what does not. What their *actual* response will be after getting smoked in the head - whether they really can defang that snake when it's trying to bite them.
> 
> As I said, I'm not there yet. I will be one day, though.
> 
> I do have some other questions.....
> 
> Are they refereed? At what point is there a stoppage in action?
> 
> You know what I do like about this event? That it is not open to spectators, only participants. I really like that. It makes it all about the training, not about the show. That's a real positive point.


Like I said, risk and reward. Is it worth it to you? Go for it.

Tom brings up a good point about the social/legal ramifications of entering an event like this and it's appropriateness within the culture you live in. Say you get into a street altercation, and end up breaking up the guy really bad - righteously, but he/she/they are really damaged now.

If you have a history of ever entering such events with the obvious disregard for the legallity around it, you are setting yourself up for failure in the legal arena of battle if you have to justify your use of force with this in your history.  I can just picture what an attorney would do with this information while you are trying to defend your use of force.  You willingly entered a 'pit fight' that put you in a position that you would be using a 'club' to 'beat' another person, possibly on the head (deadly force in most states)...and so on.  Just not something I want to have to add to the other things that can be spun against me if I have to defend use of force ever.

This idea of 'testing yourself' is one of the reasons that I joined the service. If the purpose and goal of your martial arts training is to 'do it for real' then military service, LEO work, even private security/executive protection/bouncing are legitimate, accepted venues to use sanctioned violence. These venues (as opposed to the real world equivalent of a "Fight Club" setting) also incorporate the issues of justification, procedure and tactical judgement - so martial arts is 'put to the test' within a real world context and you have to make tactical 'street' decisions along with the application of physical techniques.

This stuff is not that.  This is dueling plain and simple.  Test of physical skill, but not self defense skill.


----------



## loki09789

Gulo said:
			
		

> i myseft am very interested to see a list of the participants who won!


Seeing as in pictures of what a 'winner' looks like  or the actual names....come on with the 'fight club' rule of not talking about 'fight club' feel of this, do you think you will be told?


----------



## Bob Hubbard

I think every one of us who studies the arts asks the obvious 'Can I do it for real?".

This is of course 1 way to find out.  One can only go so far with padded or flexible sticks, or the 'flail-fests' that most 'full contact stick fights' (the ones with the armour) seem to become.

Personally, it's not my cup of tea, and more risk than I feel comfortable taking myself, but as long as the full risks are openly known, to each their own.

I doubt there is any insurance available, and do hope they do have qualified medics on hand for the probable injuries that will occur.

I think the concerns that have been brought up are justified, and have been well presented.  For now however I believe it's up to the events presenters and any participants to keep up updated on the event.


----------



## KyleShort

Steve,

Doesn't a weapon fight with NO RULES seem to violate some of the premises of Ninpo?  I mean, if you are really talking no rules then you are going into that expecting to really hurt someone...if you want to test your true self defense techniques, truly, then you are going to do your damndest to take out an eye, bust in some teath, crush knuckles, blow out the knee bursa etc.  That is nothing that I would ever do unless my life were in danger, and I were unwillingly put in that place.  Hell I have a little crisis of conscience every time I am sparring and I see pink through kinks in the gear..."I like this guy, should I really kiss his exposed ulna with my rattan?"

jihi no kokoro...I don't think that you need to really hurt people (possibly permanently) in order to love them...the "benevolent heart".


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Everyone,

Thanks for everyones opinions and thoughts on this event! Great points have been brought up by everyone. 

Mr. Parson, to answer your questions contact Tuhon Kier at TomKier@Sayoc.com, he can give you the details that you are looking for. 

Kyleshort  jihi no kokoro or benevolent heart: The kanji utilized in the translation of this phrase means gentle or tender shelter or receiving assistance form, it is sometimes translated as place of mercy or in the shadow of kindness there is nothing in this type of training that violates this precept. If I offer myself to my opponent willingly and expect the same from him willingly, knowing that the outcome of such a match can be dangerous, then I am offering him (and myself) the opportunity to increase the knowledge in a combative way. A violation would be to not stop when my opponent has submitted or given up, or has decided to back away from such a match. When doing a competitive BJJ, MMA or any combative event match, there does not have to be anger or hate towards my opponent, that is the ego stepping forth to fill a lack of something I may have in my personality. To allow an opponent to bait you into anger is one of the warnings that is often passed down from many great masters but too few of us really grasp the philosophy. 

Loki09789  The idea of sanctioned violence within the realms of LEO, Executive protection, Military, Bouncing work is highly limited to what the legality of the type of work being performed is. A random Military person cannot go off and just indiscriminately begin shooting people, a law enforcement officer cannot randomly practice his takedown or baton skills on a civilian, bouncing is quasi legal at best as look at how many lawsuits arise from being manhandled in a bar, professional Executive protection work seriously frowns upon an individual who injures a perpetrator the key is to maintain a profile and protect the individual from being in a dangerous situation, or to remove them from such a situation if the need arises, doing it for real can also include MMA type bouts, BJJ events, full contact karate matches, whatever challenges oneself to push their own envelope. This type of event or any that is similar in fashion to this is not designed to make an individual a real world combative expert, but to help challenge ones physical, mental and emotional limitations. 

Kaith Rustaz  great comments, the flail-tests are still great fun though, and save my body from some serious beatings!!

Gumagalang

Guro Steve L.

www.Bujinkandojo.net


----------



## loki09789

Airyu@hotmail.com said:
			
		

> Hello Everyone,
> 
> Thanks for everyones opinions and thoughts on this event! Great points have been brought up by everyone.
> 
> 
> Loki09789  The idea of sanctioned violence within the realms of LEO, Executive protection, Military, Bouncing work is highly limited to what the legality of the type of work being performed is. A random Military person cannot go off and just indiscriminately begin shooting people, a law enforcement officer cannot randomly practice his takedown or baton skills on a civilian, bouncing is quasi legal at best as look at how many lawsuits arise from being manhandled in a bar, professional Executive protection work seriously frowns upon an individual who injures a perpetrator the key is to maintain a profile and protect the individual from being in a dangerous situation, or to remove them from such a situation if the need arises, doing it for real can also include MMA type bouts, BJJ events, full contact karate matches, whatever challenges oneself to push their own envelope. This type of event or any that is similar in fashion to this is not designed to make an individual a real world combative expert, but to help challenge ones physical, mental and emotional limitations.
> 
> Gumagalang
> 
> Guro Steve L.
> 
> www.Bujinkandojo.net


Steve,

You are correct about the 'random actions' for military/LEO and others being frowned upon...as it is frowned up for any member of a culture to 'randomly act' in a violent way.  

My point was that participation in one of these venues (and being a bouncer - at least in NYS - requires, by law, a guard card course and licensing, along with Exec Protection so it is more than "quasi-legal" regardless of how poorly run/done or litigated workers/businesses may be) put the physical skill of martial arts training into a real world context where things like judgement, decision making, situational/environmental awareness, verbal/negotiation skills (to talk down the other guy or when dealing with LEO after the fact), FIRST AID (other end of the 'self defense skill' spectrum IMO - if you know how to break it, knowing how to heal it to a degree makes sense) and other realistic skills are combined and can be directly tranferred/translated to civilian use with a minor adjustment.

Your statement about Exec protection goals and tactics is an easy translation to civilian life because the general goal if you are protecting your child/family/friend Ex.PR. training (or at least an understanding of the tactics) can help you make better real world choices that don't land you in jail.

You make the point that these types of events aren't intended to train 'real world experts' but to test the individual.  I would say that you can get that 'test the individual' experience from the type of activities/jobs I listed with a more practical application to your realistic use of martial arts AND stay within the law.

I would go further to say that sometimes these types of events encourage and reinforce physical applications that will hurt the martial artists 'real world application' because of the lack of contextual judgement because of the 'to the submission/knock out' set up.  Is there a fitness/doctor's release requirement?  What if someone who enters has an existing medical condition (heart problem or something) and drops during the event?  Insurance comes up again.

You can sign all the waivers you want, and so can the guy who breaks your head/hand and kills you or leaves you a veggie pattie that has to have his wife change his diapers - it is still illegal if you are using/collaborating to use deadly force against another person (with consentual participation or not) AND those voluntary release forms will not mean dooky when the surviving relatives or the maimed individual sues you/Sayoc because they can't earn a living anymore.  The reputation damage will be done even if the case isn't.

This is VERY different from MMA events that can be ensured or any other 'sanctioned' event/tournament.  Is it ensured, if not is it because the coordinator of the event didn't bother or was it because he/they were turned down?


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

How did the event go?


----------



## Tgace

The cane stuck in his braincase probably dosent allow him to get close enough to the computer to post....


----------



## loki09789

Tgace said:
			
		

> The cane stuck in his braincase probably dosent allow him to get close enough to the computer to post....


The catatonic drooling shorted out the computer...not to mention he couldn't remember which key was "a"......

I know I was pretty critical of the event from a personal stand point, but I am curious about the outcome and sincerely hope there wasn't any serious damage done...by cars or other 'no rules' tools that were snuck into this stick fight.


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Everyone,

This weekends event went off well and no serious injuries have been reported! You will be able to see some of the fights on various segments of the upcoming Sayoc Kali DVD's. Here is a quote from one of the Senior Sayoc Kali Instructors.

"Sayoc Kali focuses on "All Blade , All the Time!". A constantly evolving real 
world approach on the blade. 

Sayoc Kali is part of the larger organization called the Sayoc Fighting 
System, which encompasses many other aspects of the FMA. 

The 2004 Sayoc Stick Fights were conducted during a chilly autumn afternoon. As magenta leaves drifted lazily upon a mountain stream, all that was once tranquil were balanced by the maharlika's tune of a rattan stick whistling through the air, and its impact upon living skin and bone. The raw siena ofmoist soil invaded by crimson. Calloused hands and masks of exertion replace civilized armor. Myths are torn asunder and posturing trolls remain hidden in their warm electric havens. 

The old saying that fiction can never equal REALITY is proven to be true. 

Many who shall witness this footage will call it primal, perhaps even 
brutal... we call it training. 

Sayoc Kali 
"Not the Past but the Future""

Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.


----------



## Feisty Mouse

> Myths are torn asunder and posturing trolls remain hidden in their warm electric havens.


Perhaps for some... I think most of us remaining in our warm electric havens are simply not seeking out unneccesary injury.

Glad ot know it went well and there were no serious injuries.  Sounds like it was a lovely day.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

How many people fought?


----------



## Sun_Helmet

The Sayoc Stick Fights had a better showing of individuals, than many expected. We thank all those here who posted their concerns, but we didn't do this because it was a whim. It is not the first time we have done this training. So we had all the concerns listed here covered. We also had other precautions that were not listed here covered.

The purpose was not to hold this as a sporting event, but a documentation of a space and time for others to gain VALUABLE insight into their personal training whether they participated or not. If you are not doing it and discourage others from doing it, then how do you get the real world information? From word of mouth? 

Here's a chance to SHOW a student of yours that:

1. A disarm can work. If you have trained it appropriately.
2. The fights don't end when a stick is lost
3. Other arts can do well in this type of situation. Sound TACTICS always work better than Theories.
4. Hand hits might NOT work and sometimes they do.
5. Projectiles can be used in a real time situation to your advantage
6. The environment can assist or handicap you, depending on your mindset.
7. Some Hubad drills can come in handy.
8. Size can or cannot matter in a stick fight. But skill ALWAYS matters.
9. Conditioning for this type of scenario is more intense than one would think.
10. It's difficult to get a knockout but it can happen.
11. A stick can equalize a grappler AND vice versa, a grappler can use a stick to THEIR advantage.
12. A submission can happen with a pressure point when a stick is involved.
13. A standup submission can happen with a stick.
14. Fancy twirling when done by someone who knows WHY they are doing it can definitely hurt.
15. Stick grip changes can be done in real time and effectively.
16. Some who do not train in the blade have a huge misconception between what a blade can do and a stick. The gap is HUGE.
17. No headgear alters the way you fight. Many people think that the face is easy to strike until they realise that if you can get to the face, so can your opponent.

Just an inkling of material that was addressed this weekend.
So now you will have an opportunity to point out things to those who question your art, whether you are Sayoc or not. Perhaps it will support your training or maybe direct you in a path that will improve your training.
Regardless, the footage will soon be here and it will not be the end all but a point of reference for many of you.

We knew we would take some flak but that's human nature. We also know that many people who may dismiss this type of training will also be VIEWING the clips when they come up online or available via dvd. 

Btw, a car is armor unless a person can swing one from the outside of their vehicle... and no one ever called a car a 'stick'.

There was a question about military, LEO and other types of individuals. Well, we train all these types of individuals so we have to be able to tell them with a clear conscience that what we teach DOES work and they can then access whether it is something they will include in their arsenal. It also SHOWS what they can watch out for in terms of surviving a specific technique or tactic. It was for OUR benefit that we did this for OURSELVES. That is how we learn how to evolve SAYOC KALI. No one who entered the event was there primarily for personal glory, but a greater purpose...  documentation.

The real winners were the FMA community.

We don't care if you train Sayoc or not, the footage will be available with instruction for your own reflection. We are not judging you. We know all of you are probably tough hombres- you don't need to tell us. We TEACH about de-escalation and other methods of survival. We KNOW about the legal ramifications of force. That's a whole different subject. We wanted to document real world reactions and test moves in an ugly uncooperative environment. 

The very existence of this footage extends our respects to those who came before, and those who wish to represent the FMA in the future. 

--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali
'Not the PAST but the FUTURE'
----------
----------
----------
---------


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> The Sayoc Stick Fights had a better showing of individuals, than many expected.




How Many?


----------



## Flatlander

> The real winners were the FMA community.


 :asian:


----------



## Cruentus

Quick reply and opinion:

Sounds like the event went off well, and I was glad to hear that there were no injuries.

Now, I will say that I train live with "no rules" all the time. I do this with my training group, I do this in Balintawak, and I also get the chance to do this at FMAC flint. What makes this a positive learning experience is that we aren't competing in as much as we are trying to discover ourselves, and it is all in the spirit of love and respect for ourselves, our training partners, and the arts that we train. It is hard training and realistic training, but although we don't have a glass ceiling as to what we can or cannot do,  we end up setting our own parameters so that we do not walk away with an injury, and so we can train another day.

When you are not competing in as much as you are training hard with love and respect, then this kind of "no rules no gear" training can be done without injury.

However, if I am concerned only with beating the guy in front of me, as would be in a competition with "winners" and "losers," without rules or some sort of parameters set, I am going to hurt that guy. I will injure him or kill him, or he will injure or kill me. One of us will not train another day, at least not for awhile. 

The only reason I would fight to hurt ir kill someone is if I or my family or the innocents are in danger of being hurt or killed. If someone wants to injure or kill me they will have to deal with my 9mm or my blade before they even get to play sticks with me. Hopefully for both our sakes they will only have to deal with watching the back of my car as I drive away, and the police that will be talking to them afterwards. I would never want to enter a tournement or situation knowing that I would be faced with risking injury or death, which would require me to bring injury or death upon my opponent first. I value my health, and I value whatever is in my bank account too much to really want to put myself in a situation where one of these would be jeaprodized by irresponsable training or lawsuits.

So, as far as this tournament goes, if it was done as I explained above with love and respect for each other and the art, then I can see why this was successful and I can see why this went off without any injuries because this is the way myself and others prefer to train. It sounds like this was the case, which is why I congratulated those involved.

If, however, you mean to tell me that this was a brutal competition with no rules where all were out for blood, yet no injuries occured, then I will guess one of three options. #1. your lying or exagerating, and it wasn't the brutal competition that you illustrate; #2. The competitors were not good fighters or were not fighting hard enough, hence no injuries; or #3. You've traded one reality for another (gear for intent), which will leave a silly, unrealistic display of ego's rather then a realistic stick dueling display. Now, based on the posts here, I am guessing that it's more of what I described and do frequently myself, rather then a brutal, no ruled competition where all competitiors are out for victory and blood. What do you think?

Well, regardless, it will be interesting to see the video clips. Keep us posted...

With respect,

PJMOD


----------



## GAB

Loki, 

Did you say after the bout they won't know the alphabet?
I think they did not know it, to start with. 

Tgace you are hilarious, I am laughing as I do this...

Cheap attempt at selling DVD's and other nonsense...

Was it with Rattan sticks or foam rubber or copper tubing, emt or ????

Where was the cockfighting and dog fights held, was it before or after the event???

I prefer Bows and arrows at 100 yards rather then full contact rattan sticks.

Ouch...

I have been hit accidently with them and we are talking pain, my son got hit this weekend in the top of the head, we are talking egg size lump...I have to give it to him, did not phase him...

As Datu said, How many???

Regards, Gary


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Okay Gary, I'm your huckleberry... 



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> Loki,
> 
> Did you say after the bout they won't know the alphabet?
> I think they did not know it, to start with.



How ironic Gary, considering how your own post mutilates the english language. Is this forum now the Martial Arts Grammar forum? 



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> Tgace you are hilarious, I am laughing as I do this...
> Cheap attempt at selling DVD's and other nonsense...



Non sequiturs anyone? Gary you'll need to qualify that, because our SAYOC DVDs are VERY successful sans this footage. 
Gary, are you trying to slander Sayoc Kali on a public forum?



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> Was it with Rattan sticks or foam rubber or copper tubing, emt or ????



Is this a sentence? What's a 'COPPER' tube, a Freudian slip?



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> Where was the cockfighting and dog fights held, was it before or after the event???



Gary, for someone who practices the FILIPINO Martial Arts, you certainly do not respect the people or culture who taught you their art. Even worse if you are Filipino, it displays a huge dose of self hate. 

Study the Filipino addage, "Utang na Loob".

Btw, you meant "Where WERE the cockfights and dog fights held." 



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> I prefer Bows and arrows at 100 yards rather then full contact rattan sticks.



Gary, it looks like you prefer 'words' as your best weapon, since you obviously have a problem with 'sticks and stones'. A rattan stick isn't 'full contact', the event was. 
If we aren't good with the alphabet, what's your excuse?
Perhaps you will provide footage of your expertise with a bow and arrow. You know, sell some cheap DVDs? You better hurry though, because we have experts in the field of projectile weaponry who might produce a DVD on the use of the bow and arrow. 

Some people do and others... troll on those who do.



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> Ouch...
> 
> I have been hit accidently with them and we are talking pain, my son got hit this weekend in the top of the head, we are talking egg size lump...I have to give it to him, did not phase him...



How does someone get hit "IN the TOP of their head"? 



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> As Datu said, How many???
> Regards, Gary



Due to the nature of Gary's post, you'll all just have to buy the Sayoc Stick Grappling DVD to get a sampling of the fight / fighters. 
Cheap shots do not come without a price.


--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali
---------
----------
--------
--------


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Tulisan said:
			
		

> Well, regardless, it will be interesting to see the video clips. Keep us posted...
> 
> With respect,
> 
> PJMOD



Thank you. The footage will be self evident. Perhaps you will be able to share with us some of your footage in the future as well. I would purchase it. I've met a few Balintawak instructors in my time and have referred people seeking out Balintawak to them.

Gumagalang,
--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Tulisan said:
			
		

> When you are not competing in as much as you are training hard with love and respect, then this kind of "no rules no gear" training can be done without injury.
> 
> However, if I am concerned only with beating the guy in front of me, as would be in a competition with "winners" and "losers," without rules or some sort of parameters set, I am going to hurt that guy. I will injure him or kill him, or he will injure or kill me. One of us will not train another day, at least not for awhile.


If you are training 'no rules' from a position of 'love and respect' then you are imposing moral 'rules/goals' other than maintaining a 'no rules' environment. Now you are simply in a 'friendly sparring match' with someone who is going to 'simulate' attacking you in 'street legal' ways and target parts of you that might not be legal in a sanctioned tournament.

Reality training has to be contextual in order to be 'real.' If you are simply training to hit hard and 'fight' but are not learning to apply it in the reality of the world you live in (legal/social/geographical/personal makeup) then you are training for 'fantasy.'

I don't know how much injury reduction can be done based on love and respect when the operative phrases used to communicate this event were 'no rules' and 'full contact/no armor.'

I don't care what state it is or whether you want to contradict the 'no rules' issue by imposing a 'rule' of sticks only (btw a car is an impact weapon AND armor - that is why it was upgraded to TANK by improving the armor and adding a gun for further range) if you are going to have a no rules fight/competition then 'full contact' head strikes are going to be allowed and that is considered intentional deadly force - put it in a nice dress and make it look sexy but it is still illegal.


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> There was a question about military, LEO and other types of individuals. Well, we train all these types of individuals so we have to be able to tell them with a clear conscience that what we teach DOES work and they can then access whether it is something they will include in their arsenal. It also SHOWS what they can watch out for in terms of surviving a specific technique or tactic. It was for OUR benefit that we did this for OURSELVES. That is how we learn how to evolve SAYOC KALI. No one who entered the event was there primarily for personal glory, but a greater purpose... documentation.
> 
> ---------


Well ASSESSMENT (not access for one who wants to criticize grammar) by LEO/Miltary types means that they are taking your realistically functional training finding it useful within their contextual usage.

There is a big difference between training hard and training realistically.

I have seen and have HUGE respect of the SAYOC system.  It is similar to the Balitawak/FMA/Kenpo stuff that I know and love and is real world focused.  I don't agree with these 'fight club' events that say that they are no rules/full contact with real rattan sticks (only btw it is a stick fight even if it is no rules ), because they are not accomplishing the objective of 'real world' application so much as 'real fight' application.  In this day and age of civil cases, legal use of force and such do you really think that this type of thing should be the core of martial arts/self defense training?  How do you address the issue of legal use of force in SAYOC?  If you address that, how can you justify promoting an event that condones/promotes lethal force use outside of justified/legal context?


----------



## Sun_Helmet

ALL Training IS fantasy. 
Why? Because it is NEVER Real.

There's no reality based training that in my eyes equal REALITY. Therefore, any time we have something organized or something everyone agrees to do (like show up to class, warm up, have an instructor present, no alcohol, no external danger) then it is NOT Reality. 

However, within the context of this, one can get as close as possible to seeking out tactics that work with an uncooperative person. You can see real time reactions and responses and EVOLVE methods from this. The footage can be studied and allay certain concerns or induce new ones. For example, the mere removal of padded gloves altered the whole dynamics of the fights.

Btw, no one from Sayoc Kali stated this event was anything, but TRAINING. It's just training some do not care to venture into, which we don't lay judgement on.

In Sayoc Kali we say that the methods evolved from the blood and sweat of those before us, perhaps so others won't have to. In addition, it is to make sure when we say something like, "Training the non dominant hand is crucial to your survival" we have evidence that support it. 

From there we can take it and apply this method to REAL world scenarios. 

--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> ALL Training IS fantasy.
> Why? Because it is NEVER Real.
> 
> However, within the context of this, one can get as close as possible to seeking out tactics that work with an uncooperative person. You can see real time reactions and responses and EVOLVE methods from this. The footage can be studied and allay certain concerns or induce new ones. For example, the mere removal of padded gloves altered the whole dynamics of the fights.
> 
> Btw, no one from Sayoc Kali stated this event was anything, but TRAINING. It's just training some do not care to venture into, which we don't lay judgement on.
> 
> From there we can take it and apply this method to REAL world scenarios.
> 
> --Rafael--
> Sayoc Kali


But, since it is a vacuum exercise it encourages and evolves tactics that are not going to address anything other than a single attacker with a stick outside the tactical considerations of escape routes, terrain, light conditions, legal context, environmental weapons, duty to retreat...and the list goes on.  The stretch to 'real world scenarios' is much farther than if you put the hard impact (but for the sake of training safety regulated to a degree) responses INTO the contextual scenario to see how it works early on or even right away.  In educational circles this is basically known as thematic training.  You can create 'themes/scenarios' that validate your art by demonstrating quite clearly how it will or won't work in context.

Besides wouldn't this type of event/practice be considered the promotion of violence/unjustified lethal force use instead of an artistic way to respond to it responsibly?

Look, I recognize that this is essentially a 'gut check' session. Big fan of 'gut check' training. It does make you aware of how you honestly react under stress and fear/danger. I just don't see how this type of event is within the objectives/mission of a self defense focused training package. There are other ways that the same types of results and outcomes could be created without the contradiction of legallity/morallity practice vs. mission.

Again, simply asked questions: How many participants? Was the event Insured? You mentioned concerns were addressed, HOW specifically?

If this is more than just a 'legend building' promotional activity, then those details will help to bring more people to Sayoc events and further spread the benefits of the training.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Well ASSESSMENT (not access for one who wants to criticize grammar) by LEO/Miltary types means that they are taking your realistically functional training finding it useful within their contextual usage.



That misspelling was BEFORE I realized the goofy grammar factor here.
You do know that the point of my post was that strict grammar shouldn't be a prequisite in this forum, didn't you Paul?

Your usage of 'realistically functional training' ain't reely Shakenspear ya know. Btw, if you haven't edited your spelling yet -  it's 'milItary'. 
Let's move on, shall we?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> There is a big difference between training hard and training realistically.
> 
> I have seen and have HUGE respect of the SAYOC system.  It is similar to the Balitawak/FMA/Kenpo stuff that I know and love and is real world focused.  I don't agree with these 'fight club' events that say that they are no rules/full contact with real rattan sticks (only btw it is a stick fight even if it is no rules ), because they are not accomplishing the objective of 'real world' application so much as 'real fight' application.  In this day and age of civil cases, legal use of force and such do you really think that this type of thing should be the core of martial arts/self defense training?  How do you address the issue of legal use of force in SAYOC?  If you address that, how can you justify promoting an event that condones/promotes lethal force use outside of justified/legal context?




Guess WHY you have HUGE respect for Sayoc and your own FMA instructors?  Because they teach what they KNOW to be TRUE.

It's in the context of TRAINING. In any TRAINING, one can be susceptible to serious bodily injury. Especially REAL world simulated training. This wasn't a contest... no prize money, no audience.

Btw, who said this was for 'martial arts/self defense' training? Our students go beyond those descriptions. Some have to face people coming at them with bludgeoning weapons. Well, we can SHOW them the possibilities to look for to counter that.They don't have to engage in a stick fight, but they will know from the footage where to move for future reference. They will know where to keep their weapons in check. They will know where the targets are most likely to be. There's tons of info that can be culled from the footage.

How can one justify teaching a method if they don't know for sure the possible glitches inherent therein if they haven't even seen it happen in real time? Not even seeing it in TRAINING time?

--Rafael--
--------
--------
-------
----


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> It's in the context of TRAINING. In any TRAINING, one can be susceptible to serious bodily injury. Especially REAL world simulated training. This wasn't a contest... no prize money, no audience.
> 
> Btw, who said this was for 'martial arts/self defense' training? Our students go beyond those descriptions. Some have to face people coming at them with bludgeoning weapons. --Rafael--
> --------
> --------
> -------
> ----


Training should be a context that prepares people for the reality of application so if you are training people for a training context, then you are more interested in self perpetuation than application.

I think you can 'discover if it works/you can make it work' in a variety of ways that do not require using unjustified lethal force - btw, Janulis' observations about the possibilities of what really happened vs what was promoted in relation to 'no injuries' is a good one to chew on.

I think the second statement says it all for me, along with the clear side step of my questions.

I am done with this.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> But, since it is a vacuum exercise it encourages and evolves tactics that are not going to address anything other than a single attacker with a stick outside the tactical considerations of escape routes, terrain, light conditions, legal context, environmental weapons, duty to retreat...and the list goes on.



And within those restrictions is a HUGE amount of practical data which are addressed, tested and studied. Just look at the list I made earlier. MANY of those things APPLY to real world scenarios.

We have numerous other training scenarios and methods to address these other factors you mention. We delve into them and isolate them just like this stick event did.

For example, how do you pick up a lost weapon? Well, here's several instances someone might go for their bludgeoning weapon.

One can NOT train reality in SINGLE scenario, in a SINGLE instance, in a SINGLE drill.
One can state a TON of excuses NOT to do this, no one is saying YOU have to do it. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> The stretch to 'real world scenarios' is much farther than if you put the hard impact (but for the sake of training safety regulated to a degree) responses INTO the contextual scenario to see how it works early on or even right away.  In educational circles this is basically known as thematic training.  You can create 'themes/scenarios' that validate your art by demonstrating quite clearly how it will or won't work in context.



Based on what data? Is it data you witnessed or were told would work? Someone sought and earned that data. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Besides wouldn't this type of event/practice be considered the promotion of violence/unjustified lethal force use instead of an artistic way to respond to it responsibly?



Is that how you look at it? Be honest with yourself. Having no prior Sayoc Kali training, you are pretty much stating what OUR purpose and methods are through your own eyes.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Look, I recognize that this is essentially a 'gut check' session. Big fan of 'gut check' training. It does make you aware of how you honestly react under stress and fear/danger. I just don't see how this type of event is within the objectives/mission of a self defense focused training package. There are other ways that the same types of results and outcomes could be created without the contradiction of legallity/morallity practice vs. mission.



There's no one stating that YOUR methods are wrong, or even disagree with ours in many ways. Btw, Sayoc Kali is not merely a 'self defense' focused training. We teach many other individuals who may have different concerns beyond that. We've heard from their first hand accounts that OUR methods work. We'll go by the results our students have shown. You can approach them with yours and they can make an educated judgement from there.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Again, simply asked questions: How many participants? Was the event Insured? You mentioned concerns were addressed, HOW specifically?



Now you want to know HOW, why do you want to know if it isn't something you care to endorse? Like I stated earlier, we do things based on things we know to be true.. we've researched it. You're asking the same questions a student would ask when they say "HOW specifically do you retrieve a lost weapon?"... well this is HOW.... we earned it.

The way the internet is structured, there really is no way you can accept my answers to be true unless you were there, correct? For example, the numbers of participants... what makes you think people will accept numbers I type here? Isn't it better to just view a sampling of numerous fights and see for yourself? It was more than one.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If this is more than just a 'legend building' promotional activity, then those details will help to bring more people to Sayoc events and further spread the benefits of the training.




I don't think Sayoc Kali needs any 'legend building'. Everyone in FMA who has been around awhile know who we are. First off, the world is much larger than this small subculture we run in called FMA. Within the FMA, Sayoc Kali really has nothing to build when those in the know already respect our abilities. It is about EVOLVING our teaching methods and doing that based on similar REAL world tests.

What's interesting is that depending on who is posting on these forums, opinions contrast one another all the time. In other forums, they will say this is tame stuff, that they did this years ago; in others they will say the blade material is too much like a drill, etc. etc. Now it is too real or not real enough.

Just look at the footage and consider it a segment of training that not many do anymore. Simple as that. If you don't think there's no practical purpose - fine, we get it. We disagree.

It's wonderful to have a differing opinion. In the meantime, we can only be responsible for our student's progress and their REAl world results. 

In Sayoc Kali, our students have done well on both accounts. Below are what they say about it. I think they know a little bit about the real world.

--Rafael--

Not only is Tuhon Chris the real deal but his teaching skills are of the highest order. I am happy that I have the opportunity to begin as a student of Sayoc Kali.

Marc "Crafty Dog" Denny
Guiding Force of the Dog Brothers
Guro Crafty
Dog Brothers Martial Arts

"I've trained with many experts over my 24 years as a Navy SEAL and the information I've found to be the most efficient and well-rounded is the Sayoc Kali knife fighting techniques. You will acquire an exceptional proficiency with a knife beyond anything you thought possible."

Michael Jaco
Originator / Head Instructor for the Navy SEALs Combat Fighting Course 

"Sayoc Kali is phenomenal!
Edge Weapons just scratch the surface of the techniques, teaching methodology and combat mindset of the Sayoc group. If you are looking for teachers who seriously research and address all areas of personal combat for the modern warrior; you owe it to yourself to seek out these gentlemen."

Mike Mello
20 plus year police officer. International military and law enforcement trainer for Heckler & Koch and Armor Holdings Inc.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Training should be a context that prepares people for the reality of application so if you are training people for a training context, then you are more interested in self perpetuation than application.



You forget that this training event involved the ability to ***SUBMIT*** your opponent. That someone can decide to QUIT and the fighting is over.

You appear to have taken the whole event in your mind and projected your own ***LETHAL*** connotations disregarding the whole premise of the TRAINING.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I think you can 'discover if it works/you can make it work' in a variety of ways that do not require using unjustified lethal force - btw, Janulis' observations about the possibilities of what really happened vs what was promoted in relation to 'no injuries' is a good one to chew on.



Yes, let's chew. You haven't SEEN any footage but you know for a fact that no one was injured. I think no one was permanently injured, but there were injuries.
See above. It isn't fighting WITHOUT the ability to stop on your own, the interjection of a medical person or other observers. I don't know what you meant by promotion, unless it was your obvious mis- interpretation of what was promoted. It was promoted that SUBMISSION was allowed. That takes care of a HUGE gap between lethal force and training.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I think the second statement says it all for me, along with the clear side step of my questions.
> I am done with this.



Not exactly sure what you're trying to imply.
As you can plainly see, I was still trying to type my reply to your OTHER post when you mentioned I 'CLEARLY' sidestepped your questions. 

--Rafael--


----------



## GAB

Hi Rafael,

OK we understand each other, I believe it was an irresponsible event.

My grammer and typos and misspelled words aside, it is still not responsible.

I have built, have owned bows, for a very long time.

Same with the other weapons of the FMA.

The more credentials, the more irresponsible it is. 

Unless of course you are like the military and will take care of your injured with a medical plan.

Regards, Gary


----------



## Sun_Helmet

GAB said:
			
		

> Hi Rafael,
> 
> OK we understand each other, I believe it was an irresponsible event.



And no one is saying I have to agree with you.



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> My grammer and typos and misspelled words aside, it is still not responsible.



Yes, I agree it wasn't very responsible for you to choose to cheap shot my grammar and those who participated just because it wasn't your cup of tea. 



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> I have built, have owned bows, for a very long time.



Great, good for you.




			
				GAB said:
			
		

> Same with the other weapons of the FMA.



Too bad you diss the whole Filipino culture with your careless comments about cockfighting and dog fighting.



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> The more credentials, the more irresponsible it is.



Look in the mirror. See above.



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> Unless of course you are like the military and will take care of your injured with a medical plan.
> 
> Regards, Gary



Likewise.

--Rafael--
--------
---------
----------
--------


----------



## bart

Hey Guys,

I hate to wear the "MOD" hat, but please let's keep this civil. Sarcasm is one thing. Bitterness and cheap shots are another. Please guys, take the personal references to private messages, phone calls, email, etcetera. The forum is for the points of your opinions that are rooted in the art and the events, not in your personality.


----------



## GAB

Bart, OK...

Rafael, 

Actually with that remark about the cockfighting etc. It came from someone else to me, then I relayed it.

I have been asked if I have done those very things because of my tie with FMA. Seems like it is something that happens on the Islands quite a bit, along with full contact. (and some head hunting, but we do that here also):ultracool 

It was a little bit Sarcastic, but the whole thing was like WTF... Must be kidding.

Unfortunatly, I guess we were both not taking the topic the right way...

Tulisan seems to have handled it the best.

I will post less and read more...

Regards, Gary
ps: I will read the site and get back to you, should have done that in the first place....


----------



## Flatlander

I'm having difficulty really understanding why this is such a big issue.

1) Where do we think these arts evolved from?
2) This event was volunteer by the participants, not mandatory.
3) Where do we think these arts evolved from?

Really, what's the problem here?  I don't get it.  As I said upthread, I personally am not prepared to experience this level of training yet, but I am certain that one day I will be.  I'm sure that there are folks out there who can benefit from this, so why should they not?  Why would anyone ever choose to put a limit on their training, if they take it that seriously?  

Why should I care what my neighbors eat for supper?  I prepare my own supper.  That's good enough for me - let them choose what to eat.


----------



## GAB

Hi Flatlander,

Yes, but the impact on someone who is going out there and then getting hurt,
impaired for life maybe, Young and dumb comes to mind. Victim is another word.

Lets bring in some outsiders and bust um up is another way to look at it.

But, you are very correct...

Like I said, should have read more and posted less...

Regards, Gary


----------



## loki09789

Flatlander said:
			
		

> I'm having difficulty really understanding why this is such a big issue.
> 
> 1) Where do we think these arts evolved from?
> 2) This event was volunteer by the participants, not mandatory.
> 3) Where do we think these arts evolved from?
> 
> Really, what's the problem here? I don't get it. As I said upthread, I personally am not prepared to experience this level of training yet, but I am certain that one day I will be. I'm sure that there are folks out there who can benefit from this, so why should they not? Why would anyone ever choose to put a limit on their training, if they take it that seriously?
> 
> Why should I care what my neighbors eat for supper? I prepare my own supper. That's good enough for me - let them choose what to eat.


Here is my problem with it:

1. The arts evolved from necessity. In the current day (at least in first world nations like US/Canada and the like) the 'way it use to be done' is not acceptable because - for good or bad - there seems to be more support networks to create civil peace than were there before. Events like this are flat out ILLEGAL because of the 'full contact' and the 'no rules' issues around an event that is using lethal force (stick in this case). If people voluntarily submit or not, it is illegal. It is just as illegal to voluntarily buy drugs...so the voluntary involvement logic doesn't work for me. IF you are intending to hit someone with a blunt trauma weapon 'full contact' in order to get them to 'knock out or submit' then you are in simple terms using lethal force/deadly force to exert your will on someone - that is not training that is a life and death fight!

2. We use to have slavery around the time frame of the Civil war in the US, so that 'tradition' logic isn't going to hold up there either for me because we don't view Afro Americans/Blacks that way (or at least don't condone it legally) anymore.

3. Tradition is the weakest of all rationales IMO for the use of lethal force.

4. Events like this do not demonstrate a respect for the current culture, recognition for the context or the a responsible use of martial arts IMO. 

I would be interested in knowing what kind of credo or code of ethics are implied or expected of the members of this training group/system and how it can be justified/aligned to that philosophical stance. THEN, I would like to see how this can be defended as legal at all.

Wait...edit time. I found this from the Sayoc.com website in the disclaimer section.

Sayoc Kali(sm) strongly advises that all persons stay informed about the laws that apply to defense of self and others within their jurisdictions and their respective professions.

Considering that Tgace, as an LEO, and the NYS Trooper that works in the building are looking at the event details and saying that this sounds like lethal force (and is unjustified use therefore illegal/undefendable in court), I would question how much concern over self defense legallity there is here.

Still no answer on insurance and other questions.


----------



## arnisandyz

Coming in late, and from an outsiders point of view,  I think the original post started out like a very open invitation to those outside of Sayoc Kali. However no attempt is made to say or it is vary vague as to what type of event this will be (as Tulisan has stated), is it a coming together of the brotherhood to further FMA, or is it an invitation to bring fresh meat as someone else stated, is it an all out fight for your life?  There are many questions asked that havent been answered other than buy the DVD and see for yourself. 


all that was once tranquil were balanced by the maharlika's tune of a rattan stick whistling through the air, and its impact upon living skin and bone. The raw siena ofmoist soil invaded by crimson.  Many who shall witness this footage will call it primal, perhaps even brutal... we call it training.

The quoted passage above (although very good creative writing), further enhances the dramatization and Im sorry, almost seems WWF in its promotion of the event.  It seems to promote the idea of violence like a surreal movie trailer (you have to admit, it does sound cool) rather than the idea of advancing training.  The instances of sincere intentions are clouded by this overall theme. Perhaps a more editorial approach or documentation of the event would be better received?


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Here is my problem with it:
> 
> 1. The arts evolved from necessity. In the current day (at least in first world nations like US/Canada and the like) the 'way it use to be done' is not acceptable because - for good or bad - there seems to be more support networks to create civil peace than were there before. Events like this are flat out ILLEGAL because of the 'full contact' and the 'no rules' issues around an event that is using lethal force (stick in this case). If people voluntarily submit or not, it is illegal. It is just as illegal to voluntarily buy drugs...so the voluntary involvement logic doesn't work for me. IF you are intending to hit someone with a blunt trauma weapon 'full contact' in order to get them to 'knock out or submit' then you are in simple terms using lethal force/deadly force to exert your will on someone - that is not training that is a life and death fight!



Here's where the MYTH busting comes in and only through actual real world experience do we come up with the TRUE data. 
It takes several HARD, CLEAN shots to the head before one gets KOd by a rattan stick. Especially if the other guy doesn't want to get hit. That's a FACT. We knew this coming in because we've done this training before. The first shot can end the fight due to a cut or just unwillingness (tolerance) to take the pain, but there were no one shot KOs from a stick shot. Some fights went several shots before submission, no KOs. A stick has as much power as a kick or punch - the difference is that the stick doesn't break like a hand would from impact, but it does NOT hit the head/jaw at the angles a limb shot can induce a KO with. Anyone telling you otherwise is fooling you. 

Here's why:
What pushes the myth along is that people wearing headgear stay within the contact zone too long and get TOO MANY impact shots to their head than they would if it was real. So they stay in and get clocked. In a real fight between trained combatants, they will not engage the fight this way. All things change when you KNOW your own head can get hit. No one acts like a stick robot anymore. Once they get hit hard they submit or close. They do not trade shots at full power, because the body doesn't work that way. You need to pad up to get that type of reaction from BOTH parties.

Guess what happens? People stay at long range or they stay in grappling range. 

No one stays in the corto range. Corto is the mutual aggressive space and that is where your reflexive responses no longer can guarantee you will see a shot coming in time to counter it.

However, after several shots to the hands or close calls to the head, the long range fighters realize there's no advantage in staying out there. They won't get a KO, because it isn't a blade. They just get nicked here and there. Only when you get a fighter who can't stand the hand hits anymore do you ever get a submission at long range (BOTH fighters staying outside). So they close to grappling range.

You have to catch them disengaging as they back off to guess what? The corto range. even then, trained fighters trap the offending stick arm or weapon, they cover, they block with their own stick.

Fighters will know that even their striking arcs, etc. have to be smaller. Why? Because the opponent will get their shot in if you over commit, and probably harder because they timed your wide or overly committed attacks.

That's REALITY.

At extreme grappling range, you won't get a KO because of the power arc of the stick.

That is REALITY.

So this DVD will SHOW you how stick GRAPPLING LOCkS and Submission holds can fit into your arsenal and make you an efficient fighter. It will SHOW you that even if you don't have a weapon there are ways to close.

As far as we are concerned we are training out of necessity. We have to teach military personnel how to deal with people running at them with blunt and edged weapons. They have been taught incorrectly in some instances on how to deal with such threats.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3. Tradition is the weakest of all rationales IMO for the use of lethal force.



One has to first consider whether or not your premise that this is lethal force is false or not.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4. Events like this do not demonstrate a respect for the current culture, recognition for the context or the a responsible use of martial arts IMO.



Since you concluded with an IMO, that's okay with me.Although I disagree. In fact, since we posted this event we've had numerous replies from other systems that state they do this too.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I would be interested in knowing what kind of credo or code of ethics are implied or expected of the members of this training group/system and how it can be justified/aligned to that philosophical stance. THEN, I would like to see how this can be defended as legal at all.



Well in your first post you admitted in stating that this event interested you and you might pass the info around. Then you also stated that you agree to such 'training' or 'gutchecks' whatever that means. Now it seems the whole idea is foreign to you and you are above it all because you find it unethical.

So you're telling us that when you train with a stick, your students ALWAYS wear head gear even when they do drills aimed at the head? They ALWAYS wear street hockey gloves and mouthpieces or goggles? ACCIDENTS do happen and I bet that if your training has any inkling of reality, people get hit with a stick now and then on the HEAD. It is part of training.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Considering that Tgace, as an LEO, and the NYS Trooper that works in the building are looking at the event details and saying that this sounds like lethal force (and is unjustified use therefore illegal/undefendable in court), I would question how much concern over self defense legallity there is here.



Are you trying to establish that no one knew this was for training purposes and that they were getting ambushed in the middle of the woods that they CHOSE to drive two hours to get to? That after they were given numerous warnings and cautions, waivers and other opportunities to realize this is for training and in training one can get hurt that they were now in self defense mode?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Still no answer on insurance and other questions.



The answers are there but you don't wish to understand them. 

Look there's no malice directed at you Paul, but I think there's certain concepts that have to be SHOWN to work before one states that they are indeed true. IMO there's certain misconceptions of what a stick can or cannot do and it's right time that we address it. If we teach our students to stay in corto range in a stick fight like many do in their stick drills, then that's more unethical than telling them the truth.

Again, no one said YOu or ANYONE else had to do this for themselves... it was to document and study the TRUE reactions of a stick fight. How other methods or ranges of fighting can fit right into the fight. You can choose to learn from it or not.

--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali
"Not the PAST but the FUTURE"
---------
----------
----------
--------


----------



## Sun_Helmet

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> The quoted passage above (although very good creative writing), further enhances the dramatization and I1m sorry, almost seems WWF in its promotion of the event.  It seems to promote the idea of violence like a surreal movie trailer (you have to admit, it does sound cool) rather than the idea of advancing training.  The instances of sincere intentions are clouded by this overall theme. Perhaps a more editorial approach or documentation of the event would be better received?




Well, the words "WE CALL IT TRAINING" is right there at the end of it. You can apply the same perceptions any outsider will react to when they see two people even doing a  simple eight count sinawali drill. Barbarians!

The universal usage of the word, "WE" was also qualified by stating that it meant to encompass how people react to ALL of us FMAs.

The documentation will be in the DVD. if you check the Sayoc Public forum, this post was under one that was more straight forward. I can't help it if I sound cool...but the ground WAS siena, the blood WAS crimson, the place WAS chilly, it WAS autumn, Soil WAS moist, sticks DID whistle in the air, etc... as far as brutal or primal.. well you can read for yourself how others reacted to the footage sight unseen.... it isn't exaggeration.

--Rafael--
----------
----------
----------
----------


----------



## arnisandyz

Hi Rafael,

I have no problem with the choice of words (as I mentioned, excellent writing), only its intent. To me, the words are used to glamorize and setup" a backdrop for violence, not training.

And the words we call it training comes off as bravado posturing rather than a descriptor when used in context with the rest of the paragraph.

Im not saying this is your actual intent, only that others may view it this way (as you can see by some of the responses here).  I will be sure to check out this DVD however, as I am sure it it loaded with valuable information and will have a very high production quality as other Sayoc DVDs.  

Thanks

Andy


----------



## Sun_Helmet

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> I¹m not saying this is your actual intent, only that others may view it this way (as you can see by some of the responses here).  I will be sure to check out this DVD however, as I am sure it it loaded with valuable information and will have a very high production quality as other Sayoc DVDs.
> Thanks
> 
> Andy



Point taken Andy. The written word does present all sort of projections from the readers themselves. From what I've seen so far on the DVD, it equals the other Sayoc DVDs just due to the setting involved. 

I think the instructional portion will be an eye opener as well. Tuhon Tom Kier demoed some of it in our last Sama Sama and even some high ranked well known FMAs from other systems came away with a VERY positive reaction to it. In fact, Tuhon Tom's fight had a disarm, a gunting to the leg, and ended with a stand up stick lock submission against one of our other very tough instructors (who also had a grappling bg). Very quick and efficient once he had it locked in.

--Rafael--
---------
---------
--------
---------


----------



## arnisandyz

Thanks Rafael,

will this fight footage be part of the new SamaSama DVD or a stand alone?  What will be the title so I can look out for it?


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Andy,
The DVD will be called Stick Grappling. It will have training tips, Instructional, and a sampling of the fights. 
-----
The Sama Sama 2004 DVD will be a two disc set and will have special guests like Guros Krishna Godhania, Atienzas, Harley Elmore (doing some Maphilindo) and Ray Floro.

I'm not sure if the action flex melees that we did for fun will be included but it has around seventy people in various 'tribes' working group dynamics. This was done for fun and comraderie. 

We also had long range 'blade simulator' matches that also had a good amount of folks participating. Again. not sure if that is all in the Sama Sama dvd.

There were long range segments, tomahawk, projectiles, phase two knife tapping, silat, whip, stick templates, karambit template and less interviews... just a ton of material is covered.

--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali


----------



## Cruentus

I have two points real quick (I am at Rich Parson's after training and I need to get home):

#1. Rapheal said, "ALL Training IS fantasy. 
Why? Because it is NEVER Real.

There's no reality based training that in my eyes equal REALITY."

Now, please don't misconstrue me here. I am not entering an arguement with anyone or taking sides with anything...I am pleasently observing.

On that note, Raphael's quote here is worth reiterating, because it is probably the most true thing that has been said in this entire thread. Too often people fail to realize that "training" or even "competition" in a controlled environment is NOT "reality." That is why we call it _training_. That being said, it is important that we understand the differences between reality and whatever training we are doing so that we can make the adjustments when it is crucial to our survival (reality). That being said as well, we need to train hard and as realistically as we can, but we also need to survive those training sessions so that we can train another day. It is not prudent self-defense to tear your body to pieces and live a cripple in your old age or die an early death, just as it is not prudent for skill developement to injure yourself and put yourself out of the game for months. 

Just some things we should all think about.

#2. I just wanted to say that YOU WILL SHATTER BONE if you are using a heavy log of a stick (the kind that I use, as well as many others) and executing a full power strike using your whole bodies force and making contact with bone, with all that force focused where only a few milimeters of space on the stick touches a few milimeters of surface area (on bone). Period. The above is what Modern Arnis or Balintawak could consider a PROPER STRIKE. If you strike your opponent properly, you will end the match with one solid blow as described. This could mean a shattered wrist, a shattered temple, a shattered jaw, or what have you for whoever is on the recieving end of that cane. If you do not "KO" your opponent with a "proper strike," then you are not using heavy enough sticks, or you are executing a level of control (as I and my collegues do when we train). If you are trying to KO your partner and you fail to do so, then I think you need to figure out what is technically inferior in your strike (was it poorly focused, were your body mechanics off, were you hitting with the belly rather then the end, etc., etc., etc.)

Also something to think about.

Again, not argueing, just adding my thoughts. Thank you for listening...

PJMOD  

p.s. my grammer sucks here, so please excuse me... :ultracool


----------



## Bester

So, let me see if I understand this whole thread.

Some guys want to get together in the woods, no insurance, no safeguards and flail away at each other and call it "Real".

Ok, to each their own.  

Me, I am not certain I understand the "desire" to risk maiming, concussions, broken bones, etc. needlessly.  I've worked knife defenses, but never with live steel.  I must certainly be missing something in my training.

Personally, since I believe several of these groups also train heavily in the blade I would like to see them all go "For Real" with live steel.

When is that gathering scheduled for?


----------



## KyleShort

Hi Paul,

For the first time I took a moment to read through your Gild page.  Very impressive and I really like your approach to rank.

That's all I had to say =)

Kyle Short


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Bester said:
			
		

> So, let me see if I understand this whole thread.



Okay.



			
				Bester said:
			
		

> Some guys want to get together in the woods, no insurance, no safeguards and flail away at each other and call it "Real".



Well you missed the whole theme of it being part of training. You also make a few assumptions.



			
				Bester said:
			
		

> Ok, to each their own.



Obviously it is NOT  -  see the rest of your post below.



			
				Bester said:
			
		

> Me, I am not certain I understand the "desire" to risk maiming, concussions, broken bones, etc. needlessly.  I've worked knife defenses, but never with live steel.  I must certainly be missing something in my training.



No need to get defensive about your training. No one is judging your training. People get broken bones ice skating and die sky diving or skiing- I find that needless.



			
				Bester said:
			
		

> Personally, since I believe several of these groups also train heavily in the blade I would like to see them all go "For Real" with live steel.
> 
> When is that gathering scheduled for?



When we first announced this event someone else on another forum remarked, "Why not just fight with bolos?"

That validated our Sayoc Kali training even more, because we understand the VAST difference between a stick and blade.
Remember this was training that focused on a stick as an impact weapon. A blade is not an impact weapon.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Tulisan said:
			
		

> #2. I just wanted to say that YOU WILL SHATTER BONE if you are using a heavy log of a stick (the kind that I use, as well as many others) and executing a full power strike using your whole bodies force and making contact with bone, with all that force focused where only a few milimeters of space on the stick touches a few milimeters of surface area (on bone). Period. The above is what Modern Arnis or Balintawak could consider a PROPER STRIKE. If you strike your opponent properly, you will end the match with one solid blow as described. This could mean a shattered wrist, a shattered temple, a shattered jaw, or what have you for whoever is on the recieving end of that cane. If you do not "KO" your opponent with a "proper strike," then you are not using heavy enough sticks, or you are executing a level of control (as I and my collegues do when we train). If you are trying to KO your partner and you fail to do so, then I think you need to figure out what is technically inferior in your strike (was it poorly focused, were your body mechanics off, were you hitting with the belly rather then the end, etc., etc., etc.)



Not arguing here, since I think you raised very good points. It even supports the range I was talking about- small surface - small impact surface ... mostly happening in corto range where your full power strike can do the MOST damage in terms of body mechanics. At long range (extended sticks tip to tip), you still have to enter corto (extended stick tip touches opponent's limb) to make HARD contact. A big difference with the long blade where you can literally puncture away at your opponent from afar.

The lack of armor makes people consider this right away. 

How will I make the hard contact without my own self getting clocked on the way in or on the way out (double kill)? When we used action flex we see people rush in with wild abandon - no matter what stick system. It is the ego taking hold, there's no self awareness check. When we use light gear and padded hard sticks simulating blades and we only allow kill shots to matter, we noticed they stayed at long range longer, but would not close because the padded sticks were supposedly long blades. Then we let them play with armor and sticks and there's too many double kills for the beginners.

What this specific training event focused on was how to get past that range and get a submission, Many are all still thinking like typical stick swingers. It isn't a bad thing if you can keep range  and we had some of our instructors do this successfully in their fights. Yet, the reason they stayed in that range was because they knew how to get out of the grappling stick range.

If it comes to someone with a heavy stick here is the equalizer: You have ONE shot with that heavy stick. Your opponent and you both know it. You HAVE to maintain PROPER RANGE to make the next shot count. The other guy KNOWs how to cover and CLOSE ... FAST. They will come in swinging as well or at least make you respond to their attack... perhaps make you block before you counter. Enough time for them to enter your half beat timing and close. In Sayoc Kali it is called, "Keeping your opponent honest".

Which also figures into the equation that if you use a heavy stick you also allow the opponent to pick up a lighter stick to make faster and more repetitive contact on your unarmored person. Btw, we had several guys who studied modern arnis in the fights. I've worked out with BOTH Balintawak and Modern Arnis individuals. We have MA instructors in Sayoc Kali. Tuhon Chris Sayoc's family hosted the great Remy Presas when he first arrived in the NY area in the early days. We've seen what's out there.

Back to corto:
What I stated about corto range is true- you won't be able to break anything if the other guy is uncooperative and they have access to your unarmored person as well. You have to be able to catch them coming into that range to make the desired impact ONE time.

Yes, a heavy stick can shatter bone but you lose some of that advantage when you use the heavy stick, especially a long stick. One is that the other person closes in on you fast... covered. Now you have a heavy long stick that is harder to use in a grappling situation.

We had some fights end at long range but that was from repetitive hand strikes... not ONE.  If you are training properly, it is difficult to get hit dead on at the wrist and hand... you are usually keeping your limbs mobile.

I know that many here may think all this is useless info and that they knew this already. Well, that's great for you. However, when there's now evidence of these concepts it is much easier to make your case. It isn't for everyone but we knew that comin in. There's room for all.

Now, when you state that you can KO an opponent in one strike.. how do you KNOW? Someone in your school must have done so correct? They must have been in the middle of an actual sparring match to make this an uncooperative opponent right? What makes that training different? Isn't that according to others here a lethal weapon being used improperly, even if it is part of TRAINING? 

Again. no malice intended - thanks for keeping this a proper discussion. 
Here's a montage clip from the INSTRUCTIONAL section of the DVD:
http://sayoc.com/vidclips/Internet1.mov
--Rafael--
---------
--------
----------
-------


----------



## pakua

loki09789 said:
			
		

> hope everybody coming out the other end can still recite the alphabet.



Anyone who enters this is too thick to recite the alphabet _before_ IMO.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

pakua said:
			
		

> Anyone who enters this is too thick to recite the alphabet _before_ IMO.



Brutal! Worse one yet... INCREDIBLE! A little late but always good to dust these zingers off.

I see an odd alphabet fixation on this thread. 
In contrast, I value this opinion much better:

"On a scale of 1 to 10, I rate Sayoc Kali a 10.
I personally, highly recommend Tuhon Chris Sayoc to anyone interested in learning the strategies and tactics of edged weapons awareness and self-defense."

Dan Inosanto
Founder / Head Instructor
Inosanto Academy of Martial Arts

--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1.Here's where the MYTH busting comes in and only through actual real world experience do we come up with the TRUE data.
> It takes several HARD, CLEAN shots to the head before one gets KOd by a rattan stick.
> 
> Anyone telling you otherwise is fooling you.
> 
> 
> That's REALITY.
> 
> 
> 2. So this DVD will SHOW you how stick GRAPPLING LOCkS and Submission holds can fit into your arsenal and make you an efficient fighter. It will SHOW you that even if you don't have a weapon there are ways to close.
> 
> 3. As far as we are concerned we are training out of necessity. We have to teach military personnel how to deal with people running at them with blunt and edged weapons. They have been taught incorrectly in some instances on how to deal with such threats.
> 
> 4. One has to first consider whether or not your premise that this is lethal force is false or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 5. Since you concluded with an IMO, that's okay with me.Although I disagree. In fact, since we posted this event we've had numerous replies from other systems that state they do this too.
> 
> 
> 
> 6. Well in your first post you admitted in stating that this event interested you and you might pass the info around. Then you also stated that you agree to such 'training' or 'gutchecks' whatever that means. Now it seems the whole idea is foreign to you and you are above it all because you find it unethical.
> 
> 7. So you're telling us that when you train with a stick, your students ALWAYS wear head gear even when they do drills aimed at the head? They ALWAYS wear street hockey gloves and mouthpieces or goggles? ACCIDENTS do happen and I bet that if your training has any inkling of reality, people get hit with a stick now and then on the HEAD. It is part of training.
> 
> 8. Are you trying to establish that no one knew this was for training purposes and that they were getting ambushed in the middle of the woods that they CHOSE to drive two hours to get to? That after they were given numerous warnings and cautions, waivers and other opportunities to realize this is for training and in training one can get hurt that they were now in self defense mode?
> 
> 9. The answers are there but you don't wish to understand them.
> 
> 10.Again, no one said YOu or ANYONE else had to do this for themselves... it was to document and study the TRUE reactions of a stick fight. How other methods or ranges of fighting can fit right into the fight. You can choose to learn from it or not.
> 
> --Rafael--
> Sayoc Kali
> "Not the PAST but the FUTURE"
> ---------
> ----------
> ----------
> --------


I know...I said that I was done, but my impulse control is showing again (that's a joke btw  I wouldn't expose myself to any of you )Here we go:

1. IN REALITY I don't think I will be doing head shots with a rattan stick - and neither will the majority of people who are not training for system/self perpetuation. For me, and most self defense oriented martial artists with FMA background, the rattan stick is a METAPHOR for other weapons and the goal is to train for adaptability and translation NOT to master a rattan stick. So, your idea that you are training for reality has holes in it for me.

2. Marketing, hmmm.....

3. You don't 'have to', you choose to, just like you choose to organize/participate in these 'fight club' events. There is a big difference in responsibility, remember that when you are being arrested for negligent homocide because someone wasn't willing to submit after one of your powerful head shots and took those other 2/3....

oh yeah, it only takes ONE head shot to cause concussive damage that will have symptoms that take hours/days/weeks sometimes before the person goes into a coma, knows something serious could be wrong.

4. Well, two current LEO's and my MP/LEO/Self Defense oriented training all scream that it is lethal force AND that it is an unjustified/defensible use.

5. I don't care how many people responded "If all your friends were jumping over Niagara Falls...." as my mother would say.

6. Yes the event interested me, but since no one was willing to openly discuss insurance/locations/schedules/safety guidelines/emts..... I exercised judgment.

7. No they don't ALWAYS wear that level of protective gear...but then again, I know the difference between tactical and technical training goals/needs and environmental/material needs. I know how to set up responsible training environments that are ALIGNED to my goals/intent as an instructor of self defense and keep me WITHIN the Social/cultural/contextual/legal realm of acceptability...but still teach students HOW and WHEN to bang hard, that is 'leading by example.' If I want my students to be 'versed in the laws of defending yourself' to paraphrase the Sayoc.com disclaimer, then I need to be modeling that behavior myself in EVERY PART OF MY PROGRAM. It is bad enough that as flawed humans, we set ourselves up with 'do as I say, not as I do' moments - they can be reduced/eliminated at the curriculum/system level with some simple consideration and thought.

8. Again, voluntary does not eliminate that it is lethal force, especially when you are talking about it taking multiple power shots to the head with rattan in order to knock out a person.....WOW if that isn't demonstration of intent I don't know what is.

9. The answers are not there because you won't give them. Constant dodging leaves me with the impression that either you don't know or it is not all covered/on the up and up OR you are 'legend building.' I think Janulis' post references some possible interpretations to consider.

10. Ah, the 'stick fight' idea again.... I thought it was a 'no rules' event and I also thought it was a way to test the 'reality' of what you can make work... I don't see the reality of 'dueling skills training' in todays world. I DO see how those skills can be reorganized/refocused in a self defense curriculum to meet the real world needs of today's civilian existence...even LEO/MILITARY don't/can NOT operate the way 'it use to be done' in all cases and they DON"T DUEL! - Peacekeeping missions and such require more judgement than lethal force skills for instance.


----------



## GAB

Yes Loki, The way it was done 35 years ago and within Dept. policy, will probably land you off the job for awhile, or permanently, or in jail..

The 'old hickory' was not supposed to be placed on the head when I was there and yet it sometimes can/could not be avoided, but you had better have had a good reason even in the bad/good old days...

The hands usually were a good target and other locations are much preferred.

After a seminar this weekend we were talking after class, my son was the only one who was there who has/had any knowledge about my background...

After that and being together I said remember the time I told you this and this he laughed and said right on...

Unfortunantly or??? I have had to, in my past hurt quite a few in my position and when the stick was taken out it was to be used, no threat, no yelling, just blunt force trauma and bones were broke..Not all the time but quite a few
times, the collar bone was a place when you really wanted to takeum out.

The wrist, elbow and knee were other locations of preference. Similar to empty hand, the strike across the side of the face incompassing the ear is very effective.

I have an understanding of the use of sticks, but then I was paid to do it and was putting my life in such a position. I think it is fair to say I could do it, I was trusted by my employer and others to use the force necessary. 

This particular event is/boards on criminal behavior. IMO.

But, the school has a pretty good following at least by the way they advertise, etc..  Rogue, comes into my mind, but we will have to follow it up and watch how it plays. (dvd)

I am sorry if you are going to have to dip into your pockets, because of me, but I was, and am on a plain to see the real picture...IMO

Regards, Gary


----------



## Guro Harold

This thread is bearing light on several training, legal and LEO perspectives.
Good info.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1. IN REALITY I don't think I will be doing head shots with a rattan stick - and neither will the majority of people who are not training for system/self perpetuation. For me, and most self defense oriented martial artists with FMA background, the rattan stick is a METAPHOR for other weapons and the goal is to train for adaptability and translation NOT to master a rattan stick. So, your idea that you are training for reality has holes in it for me.



Perhaps you are not being asked certain questions by operators who have to go into the field and do their job effectively. A stick isn't a metaphor in our training except as a stick or blunt weapon. It can not replace a metaphor for a blade. Like a machete. In time the tactics become watered down and the effectiveness follows. Pretty soon you have people saying, "Why not use blades instead". Pretty soon they think blades and sticks are similar. Once you start saying that a stick is a METAPHOR for a  large blade then you start thinking that head shots are no good, when in contrast a Blade head shot is VERY effective. We do other training that focuses on that aspect.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2. Marketing, hmmm.....



That coyness won't work here. Someone asked a specific question. In any case marketing is part of your agenda as well. We can go over details in your comments and links to your site if you'd like.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3. You don't 'have to', you choose to, just like you choose to organize/participate in these 'fight club' events. There is a big difference in responsibility, remember that when you are being arrested for negligent homocide because someone wasn't willing to submit after one of your powerful head shots and took those other 2/3....



You call it fight club since that is your defensive marketing kicking in. You weren't involved but you showed interest. Now you abhor the behavior.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> oh yeah, it only takes ONE head shot to cause concussive damage that will have symptoms that take hours/days/weeks sometimes before the person goes into a coma, knows something serious could be wrong.



See above. That can happen while you are doing ANY physical contact activity. We get it. It is NOT for you. Well it was but not now.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4. Well, two current LEO's and my MP/LEO/Self Defense oriented training all scream that it is lethal force AND that it is an unjustified/defensible use.



I can find you my own LEOs and lawyers who disagree. Especially when the actual use of sticks and full contact was NEVER your concern in the beginning of this thread. Your first post was concerned with insurance and other matters that had no focus on the actual ACT of using a stick to make contact. You already read that it was no armor,therfore risk of serious injury could happen at any exposed body part, yet you were interested.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5. I don't care how many people responded "If all your friends were jumping over Niagara Falls...." as my mother would say.



You don't care therefore, you kept asking HOW MANY? Btw, they stated they did this training too AFTER the fact. We were not doing this because others did.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 6. Yes the event interested me, but since no one was willing to openly discuss insurance/locations/schedules/safety guidelines/emts..... I exercised judgment.



Actually Steve L. posted a DIRECT email link for questions to Tuhon Tom Kier who was the person holding the event. Let's be honest and tell everyone if you followed up that info. Why not get the info STRAIGHT from the person holding the event? You never posted on the sayoc site either. why would we post the location on a public forum when we wanted no strange gawkers or other elements. 

For someone who states they do tactical instruction, it isn;t very sound security precautions. We wanted the fighters to not have a cheering section of non participants thinking this was something else. We didn't want people showing up betting on fighters. I ignored that part of the question because it is obvious to anyone who purports teaching tactical methods.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 7. No they don't ALWAYS wear that level of protective gear...



Tell that to the jury when they take the portions of your statements here and turn it around on you. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> but then again, I know the difference between tactical and technical training goals/needs and environmental/material needs. I know how to set up responsible training environments that are ALIGNED to my goals/intent as an instructor of self defense and keep me WITHIN the Social/cultural/contextual/legal realm of acceptability...but still teach students HOW and WHEN to bang hard, that is 'leading by example.'



Which is a nice MARKETING statement.
Sayoc Kali is one of the leading systems in Tactical Edged Weaponry Instruction in the country. Many of our instructors are either in the security, military and LEO fields. 
They come to us for training. 
We don't need to defensively market our system on the backs of others.

You do know that's what you are doing right?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If I want my students to be 'versed in the laws of defending yourself' to paraphrase the Sayoc.com disclaimer, then I need to be modeling that behavior myself in EVERY PART OF MY PROGRAM. It is bad enough that as flawed humans, we set ourselves up with 'do as I say, not as I do' moments - they can be reduced/eliminated at the curriculum/system level with some simple consideration and thought.



Let's get this straight. Tell me about ALL the precautions and safety regulations you need to have a full contact no armor event. Make sure you take the same premise as you took in your initial post.
At what point would you say this is a good idea, because you thought it WAS a good idea in your initial post.

Answer your own questions here publicly to satisfy your own inquiries.

Let's see if your "do as I say... not as I do" maxim still fits.

I do warn you that I will be a good defensive marketing armchair critic, so make it good.

SHOW ME.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 8. Again, voluntary does not eliminate that it is lethal force, especially when you are talking about it taking multiple power shots to the head with rattan in order to knock out a person.....WOW if that isn't demonstration of intent I don't know what is.



Wow, if that doesn't say selective reading. You did miss the FACT that people submitted prior to getting multiple shots to the head that KOs them correct? That it kept people HONEST?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 9. The answers are not there because you won't give them. Constant dodging leaves me with the impression that either you don't know or it is not all covered/on the up and up OR you are 'legend building.' I think Janulis' post references some possible interpretations to consider.



Or you failed to contact the person holding the event when a direct link was posted for you. Not very good on the after action report.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 10. Ah, the 'stick fight' idea again.... I thought it was a 'no rules' event and I also thought it was a way to test the 'reality' of what you can make work... I don't see the reality of 'dueling skills training' in todays world.



Perhaps you haven't broken it down to the elements that focuses on the skill sets required to be practical.

I gave you some examples, but selective reading tends to blur that distinction.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I DO see how those skills can be reorganized/refocused in a self defense curriculum to meet the real world needs of today's civilian existence...even LEO/MILITARY don't/can NOT operate the way 'it use to be done' in all cases and they DON"T DUEL! - Peacekeeping missions and such require more judgement than lethal force skills for instance.



So you're telling us in Sayoc Kali what the military wants and can do. 
Which branch do you currently have a contract with?


--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali


----------



## Sun_Helmet

GAB said:
			
		

> The 'old hickory' was not supposed to be placed on the head when I was there and yet it sometimes can/could not be avoided, but you had better have had a good reason even in the bad/good old days...



You are looking at it from the perspective that only YOU have the stick. Instead, the stick grappling we focused on allowed someone to close on a person armed with an impact weapon and either disarm, or stay away from impact points. It allowed them to understand that sometimes the below the neck shots don't work and perhaps they need to find FASTER more EFFICIENT tactics to restrain someone. 

It also allowed them ways to get to a lost stick. To make sure a lost stick isn't near the other person.

In terms of having a stick, it shows them HOW they can close and use the stick to put a lock on someone that also has an impact weapon. Without hitting them repetitively. Not only does it promotes unwarranted exchange, but  it may not be as effective as another option.

--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> That coyness won't work here. Someone asked a specific question. In any case marketing is part of your agenda as well. We can go over details in your comments and links to your site if you'd like.
> 
> You call it fight club since that is your defensive marketing kicking in. You weren't involved but you showed interest. Now you abhor the behavior.
> 
> I can find you my own LEOs and lawyers who disagree. .
> 
> Actually Steve L. posted a DIRECT email link for questions to Tuhon Tom Kier who was the person holding the event. Let's be honest and tell everyone if you followed up that info. Why not get the info STRAIGHT from the person holding the event?
> 
> For someone who states they do tactical instruction, it isn;t very sound security precautions.
> 
> We don't need to defensively market our system on the backs of others.
> 
> You do know that's what you are doing right?
> 
> I do warn you that I will be a good defensive marketing armchair critic, so make it good.
> 
> Wow, if that doesn't say selective reading. You did miss the FACT that people submitted prior to getting multiple shots to the head that KOs them correct? That it kept people HONEST?
> 
> Perhaps you haven't broken it down to the elements that focuses on the skill sets required to be practical.
> 
> So you're telling us in Sayoc Kali what the military wants and can do.
> Which branch do you currently have a contract with?
> 
> 
> --Rafael--
> Sayoc Kali


Oh, good grief...

1. I haven't listed my program name (btw, don't have a website to refer to since you didn't bother checking), haven't offered my program as superior (especially since I haven't even mentioned any training details what so ever - only concepts). How can I be defensively or even offensively marketing anything?

2. No the full contact wasn't a concern nor was the injury risk - I have accepted the level of risk for actions in the past and will do so in the future ...the lack of clear information, openly given (don't give me this 'security' reason because it is a simple issue of only letting in the registered list of players and all others are not allowed in the door - all this secrecy stuff is 'mysterious' more than 'tactical'), reasonable protective gear or mention of insurance/liability/legitimacy/EMT... was what concerned me. I have YET to get a straight answer from you about any of these issues since you were the one I was asking most recently - if you feel that the information is accessable and easy to find - get it and answer those questions posted/directed at you.

3. As far as the head shots...what's the point. Much like my military time, the idea that you need to train being 'wet, cold and miserable' is BS, so is the idea that you have to get hit in the head, full contact in order to know what it will do. I know what it will do from safer and just as 'real' variations that reduce the risk of concussions and death/brain damage.

4. You might be a good armchair critic, but you aren't doing so well at explaining how this was a legal, insured, resonsible or philosophically aligned event based on the Sayoc disclaimer. You talk to your lawyer/leo consultants, give us quoted testamonials ABOUT THIS EVENT in reference to use of force and then we will see. I have read the testamonials from the people on the website, they all praise the art and its 'fightness' but show me in the curriculum/system that issues of state laws and use of force continuums are being taught/applied. Show me where this type of event fits into the systematic approach of tactical development.

5. "Skill sets to be practical...." practical for WHAT? That is what tactical training is about: Context. I can train someone to do a backflip and it might be the greatest backflip in the world but, outside of a tournament competition, it is going to have a very small justified application in training.

You are talking about building validity and training models based on a duel between two willing fighters carrying rattan fighting to 'knock out/submission'... how does that help the soldier/leo/civilian contextually and directly? Especially when each of those contextual applications are LOADED with considerations that the dueling environment won't even touch.

Basically it doesn't. How long do I have before his back up/friends/cops/... can jump in? How far is my nearest support/safe place to get to? Which way is good for me to escape? How do I take this guy out and not give away my position or comprimise my team/squad/unit? Which way do I have to push this guy/guys to keep them away from my wife/child/intended victim/injured buddy?

All questions/problems that won't even be addressed so how is your stick fight model 'practical' for these types of needs?

I was in the military, participated in the training and was trained as an NCO (as all NCO's are leader and teacher) to be a military instructor, so I think I understand what the military mission prep/needs fairly well.  I also know that this type of 'technical expert' contracting has its place but will have to be modified to fit the context...modification from stick dueling to combat is going to be a BIG stretch IMO.

Until you can reasonably prove to me that it was a legal event and can reasonably explain how this type of event is aligned philosophically within that disclaimer about knowing and working within the use of force laws, I don't need to read the 'flip the script' technique of trying to undermine my comments. Doesn't prove the event legallity/validity or back up your claims when you seem to be acting in an "unofficial Wendy's spokesman" capacity.


----------



## bart

Hey There,

I must say the only thing that I find a little "off" is that we can't see any footage without paying. I don't mind "paying" per se, but if the footage is going to be on a DVD that is supposed to teach lessons rather than document, then we're only going to be able to see "the cream of the crop" so to speak. That is, we will only see what has been deemed by the Sayoc people as good enough to be "good press". To me, that's not documentation but propaganda/marketing. 

Proponents of this event here have been pushing from the beginning that this was an "event to see". But now rather than an open exchange of information, there has been an invitation to give money to Christopher Sayoc so that we can see snippets of the action between excerpts of "The Hunted". It smells like marketing because it surrounds information that initially seemed open, but is now available only at a "market value." 

Honestly, people can gather out in the woods and slug it out like crazy for all I care. That's between them, God, and the Government. Personally, I wouldn't want to put someone's eye out unless it was for something noble beyond the scope of training. I believe in going hard but I believe in doing it wisely and with moderate protection at the least. I like the "Be Friends At The End Of The Day" model. It's hard to do that, going full tilt without gear. If you did it, more power to you. But people of like mind will remain suspicious without objective confirmation. Selections hand picked by the Sayoc Clan with the intention of placing them in a DVD is not objective, especially since one of the points of the DVD will be to say how great Sayoc is and that it is the best FMA.  

Also it might be that Sayoc has contracts with LEO's/Military/Etc. But working in the public sector myself, that does nothing but make me believe that the Sayoc Marketing Department is very well organized and aggressive. It reminds me of CPC (http://www.cpcmartialarts.com) except for Cops instead of Kids. Securing contracts with those "not in the know" says nothing for the quality of the product. For those who have office jobs, how often have the execs gone away on a retreat and come back with products and ideas that are at best counterproductive or irrelevant? The answer is "a lot", especially in government. The quality of Sayoc is irrelevant in the acquisition of those contracts. It is however very relevant in whether they keep those contracts. Let's see in 10 years what is still in place. Only then can we truly see how quality effects such contracts. 

By the way, my criticism here is not of the Sayoc Fighting System or Kali System. I base my personal judgements in that regard on individuals and not systems. My only exposure to Sayoc is a single seminar at the Inosanto Academy and what I've seen on some video. My criticism here is on the constant protestation surrounding the term "marketing". There is nothing wrong with marketing, especially if it is honestly put forward as such.


----------



## Cruentus

A couple of other things to share.

#1. Rapheal, you did raise some good points on the limitations of fighting with gear that I agree with. That is why I myself prefer to train without gear (except maybe groin, eye, and teeth protection depending on what we are doing). However, I do prefer to excersise a level of control so we can train the next day.

#2. I have my opinions, some good and some doubtful, about this event. But, as they say, opinions are like A-holes anyways. So I just mostly am trying listen, observe, and learn. I don't get my nut in a twist tie over what you or anyone else does, I just try to learn from it and move on. I am confident with what I do where I don't feel the need to try to "me too, me too" the Sayoc group, and where I am not upset because someone might be doing something that I am not. I already know that how I train is effective enough, yet I already understand that I can learn from how others train. In terms of other things like liability, well, if something happends and someone else gets injured or sued due to negligent behavior, then that isn't my problem (hopefully). Again, I'll just learn from someone elses mistake and move on. Now, if this is an attempt to justify ones style (my style is better), or an attempt to take other players from other styles out of the game, then that kind of challange crap will backfire horribly. Again, not my problem (hopefully), and I will just learn from someone elses mistakes and move on.

I am not saying this to slam on others who are being critical of this event, because there may be very justifiable reasons for others to be critical. I am not saying this to justify myself either, or to slam on the Sayoc group. I am only saying this so that you will understand where I am comming from, and so that you will understand that some of the things I say are merely things to think about rather then attacks on this event or on any particular group. 

#3. On striking and stylistic differences. Rapheal, you said that you had Modern Arnis represented at the event, and that you have seen Balintawak people play and fight. This is fine. I need to point out something here. You haven't seen the Balintawak that I represent and am a part of (Manong Ted Buot/ GM Anciong Bacon Lineage). Furthermore, you have not seen me personally or my personal group (Tulisan Eskrima Gild which is not art specific), or the FMAC Flint Group (A private club that I am affiliated with, headed by Senior Master Jim Power, Master Mike Power, and Master Rich Parsons). I don't think you have seen the larger Modern Arnis organization that I am affiliated with (WMAA headed by Datu Tim Hartman), but I cannot be sure about that because the WMAA is very large in comparison to the others (and there are many differences among players within the WMAA, meaning that even if it says WMAA that doesn't necessarly mean it represents me).

I mention this because my Modern Arnis and my Balintawak is different then the others out there. I am not going to say better or worse, but I will say different. You may have experienced other Modern Arnis or Balintawak people, but it is not the same as the Balintawak I do, or the Modern Arnis that I do. These differences can make or break the outcome of a fight. I do not claim to know exactly what Tuhon Chris does or (Tuhon?) Keir does, as I have not felt them in action, even though I have seen/felt Sayoc Kali before. Similarly, Feeling Modern Arnis or Balintawak does not mean that you have felt me or my collegues.

I did not take offense to anything you have said, and I mention this hoping that you do not take offense to me. I say this because there are stylistic differences between what I and my collegues do and what you and your people have seen, so technical discussions are sort of a apples to oranges discussions until we have the chance to get together and FEEL the differences. The language of Movement explains things much better then the spoken or written word, as I am sure that you guys have found out in your live training.

#4. One positive thing I'll say here is that I am glad that you guys are training "live," and not just doing dead patterns or drills. Although I question the safety of your event (which I'll have to see some footage to really make a judgement), I am impressed that you guys do include live training against resisting and unpredictable partners. This is something that I am a big advocate of.

#5. On hitting: You have made some good points regarding hitting, Rapheal. The internet is a poor medium for expressing technical detail, but I'll give a few clue's that will help express some aspects of striking from my perspective. And since perceptions (false or true) play a role on what people read, please recognize that these are only clues, and the only true way to explain is through movement and feeling.

I will only express my personal style, but please recognize that this is derived mostly from Balintawak (since we are talking about stick dueling).

- Heavy sticks: I don't try to beat my opponent with speed, I try to beat them with timing. So, I want to wield as heavy of a stick as I can control to get my proper timing. At a personal weight of 233 lbs (from my doctors apt. Monday) and with an ability to do 111 pushups in 60 seconds at a weight of 233 lbs (according to my prep for my Michigan Law enforcement physical exam) I can wield a pretty heavy stick without sacrificing my timing. As long as I don't sacrifice my timing, how fast some else is with their baby stick is not an issue for me.

- Power with heavy sticks: My strategy is not to "whip" my opponent with a witic, leaving a nasty surface wound as I would if I was using a light stick. My strategy is to use my whole bodies force through the heavy stick to impact behind the surface of your skin and shatter bone behind the surface. This is akin to the difference between a belly slap and a punch to the gut. This can mean the difference between ending the fight in one or two strikes, and having the fight last through many strikes into a grappling match.

- Range to pull off the strikes: I prefer a corto range. I am not a largo Mano fighter, but we train to close the gap to the corto range. As you know, it is difficult to prevent someone from closing the gap. Now, at the corto range, my intent is to manage distance to pull off full power strikes. I do this through the utilization of three things: 1. footwork, 2. wieght distribution from one leg to another, 3. body bending at the hip joint (like a boxer with slipping, weaving, etc.). The utlilization of the last 2 is what we call "the lean" or "undayang"(sp?), and is a trademark of the version of Balintawak that I represent. By utilization of these body mechanics, I am able to manage distance in the corto and grappling ranges so that I can execute a full power strike with my heavy stick. 

Add timing to this and I can execute a lot more then one full powered strikes with my heavy stick.

- "Anti" grappling - I hate the word anti-grappling because it is often associtated with non-grapplers who want to build false confidence so they can fool themselves into thinking that they don't need to learn to grapple. So I use to word for lack of a better term. However, even though I wouldn't consider grappling my strong suit, I am a grappler just the same, and a stick grappler as well. (side note, I liked some of the takedowns on the Sayoc website, btw.)

Having said that, from the perspective of a grappler, I know that it is difficult to stop someone from closing the gap from the largo to medio to corto to grappling range; you have to knock them out. However, I also know that it is difficult to stay in the grappling range when your opponent is using anti-grappling techniques, such as eyes gouges and fishhooks. Just because you can do the same thing to your opponent, in either case you cannot stay in the grappling range for very long when these techniqes are thrown into the mix, just as the point fighter can't stay in the kicking range for long when grappling is thrown into the mix.

When you add a weapon into the mix, like a stick, your stick becomes your anti-grappler. You can knock out your opponent, or shatter their wrist, knee, collarbone, jaw, hand, etc., etc., through some of the methods I described above. This makes grappling easier to prevent then when you have only your hands to do the job. Furthermore, utilization of the puno, anti-grappling methods, and stick locking/breaking makes your prolonged grappling a less likely occurance.

With all this to consider, if I stick duel, it is less likely going to end with someone tapping out, and it is more likely to end with something shattered.

Ironically, in my lesson with Manong Ted today, we discussed grappling. Although I don't like to quote him on internet forums, this is far too appropriate for the conversation. He said, "Well, if it is catch-as-catch-can, we utilize everying from the top of our heads to the tip of our toes. Even our teeth. We are fighting not just to win...but to survive." I think that sums things up pretty well here.

Conclusion: Rapheal, again I am not argueing, but I am only offereing some things to think about. I wish you guys well on your journey and I wish you all good training. Send my regards to your people.

Be safe.

 :supcool: 
Paul Janulis
Master of Defense


----------



## Sun_Helmet

bart said:
			
		

> I must say the only thing that I find a little "off" is that we can't see any footage without paying.



There will be a quick montage of the fights free on the site. 



			
				bart said:
			
		

> I don't mind "paying" per se, but if the footage is going to be on a DVD that is supposed to teach lessons rather than document, then we're only going to be able to see "the cream of the crop" so to speak. That is, we will only see what has been deemed by the Sayoc people as good enough to be "good press". To me, that's not documentation but propaganda/marketing.



There's going to be a mixture of footage. The point of the footage is to SHOW mistakes get made, it won't be pretty. There is a sampling of various skill levels. So that's a false assumption. We'll probably edit out repetitive moments that illustrate the same thing.



			
				bart said:
			
		

> Proponents of this event here have been pushing from the beginning that this was an "event to see". But now rather than an open exchange of information, there has been an invitation to give money to Christopher Sayoc so that we can see snippets of the action between excerpts of "The Hunted". It smells like marketing because it surrounds information that initially seemed open, but is now available only at a "market value."



Well, we're not going to freely put out footage without adding something beneficial, like instruction to the DVD. That would just open up a whole other issue, and nothing would be gained for it. It would be more like what these folks are stating as a fight club thing where people are just there banging heads for no value. There IS value and the instructional portion will show a variety of options that fights could have ended more efficiently.As with any instruction that is hard earned, those who wish to get it should pay for the lesson.



			
				bart said:
			
		

> I like the "Be Friends At The End Of The Day" model. It's hard to do that, going full tilt without gear. If you did it, more power to you. But people of like mind will remain suspicious without objective confirmation. Selections hand picked by the Sayoc Clan with the intention of placing them in a DVD is not objective, especially since one of the points of the DVD will be to say how great Sayoc is and that it is the best FMA.



No bad blood was exchanged from the fights. I think everyone there respected the other and even MORE in the end. The whole difference WAS no negativity was evident PRIOR to the fights. Everyone knew WHY we were documenting it because they were briefed several times before they even got there and AFTER they arrived on site.

I found the last comment unfortunate, because it just shows the very problem with the FMAs as we know it. Systems fight over the dumbest perceived things and it is still such a SMALL subculture that it will remain such. No one here ever insunuated that the DVD was to show that Sayoc is the best FMA. That's rather illogical because the inidvidual doing their training represents themselves first. In fact, I reinforced that this was for the benefit of all FMAs.



			
				bart said:
			
		

> Also it might be that Sayoc has contracts with LEO's/Military/Etc. But working in the public sector myself, that does nothing but make me believe that the Sayoc Marketing Department is very well organized and aggressive.



One reason the Sayoc System is well organized and united is because we have a bigger picture beyond intertribal squabbles and downplaying other systems. It is an unfortunate trait that we've all seen negatively affect so many martial arts, even beyond the FMA. We realize that Unity is much stronger than trying to do this all by yourself. We've seen other instructors from several systems plead to join our system and we've turned them down. Why?  Because they exhibited that they didn't respect where they came from. Not even their old instructors. They didn't respect the culture or the gifts left to them. They were bringing baggage in that we didn't need. That's on an individual basis not a style or system one.

One can see it here. People are more than happy to throw insults sight unseen. Pick at this or that. It doesn't harm the Sayoc system one bit, but it does exhibit why others wonder how such unity and trust between Sayoc Instructors have been maintained for nearly thirty years. You won't see a Sayoc Kali student bad mouth ANY FMA system, nor ridicule them. I think deeds are more important and proof can be seen online and elsewhere.

People end up making assumptions and then run with it.



			
				bart said:
			
		

> Securing contracts with those "not in the know" says nothing for the quality of the product. For those who have office jobs, how often have the execs gone away on a retreat and come back with products and ideas that are at best counterproductive or irrelevant? The answer is "a lot", especially in government. The quality of Sayoc is irrelevant in the acquisition of those contracts. It is however very relevant in whether they keep those contracts. Let's see in 10 years what is still in place. Only then can we truly see how quality effects such contracts.



I think it is VERY relevant because we didn't come in from the outside in. The military folks were students prior to joining the military. They excelled and gained trust of their comrades. Nothing was earned that wasn't sweated over and proven. From there we've had students excel in various on  field missions and received recognition. Their buddies then asked where they got this training from. We then prove to those guys that we knew what we were doing. To imply otherwise attempts to invalidate the likes of those I've listed here. If you ask the people in the know they are the REAL deal.

As per time, it's only getting better. We've done this for several years now and there's MORE interest than ever. They have SEEN value in our approach and want MORE.



			
				bart said:
			
		

> My criticism here is on the constant protestation surrounding the term "marketing". There is nothing wrong with marketing, especially if it is honestly put forward as such.



The only people that needed to know that the fights would be included in the DVD were the individuals involved. Once they were okay with that they went about their business. Anyone who wasn't cool with it, knew so before ever stepping out of their home.

I don't think there's anything wrong with marketing either. When someone asked about the DVD I answered, it isn't like that person was a plant (a Sayoc rep). I was pointing out that Paul here was doing a bit of it himself and implying that my answers (to THEIR questions) were some form of devious plot to promote DVDs. Don't worry... we're VERY open about blatant marketing.LOL

--Rafael--


----------



## Cruentus

KyleShort said:
			
		

> Hi Paul,
> 
> For the first time I took a moment to read through your Gild page.  Very impressive and I really like your approach to rank.
> 
> That's all I had to say =)
> 
> Kyle Short



Thank you sir!

artyon: 

Paul Janulis


----------



## Tgace

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> One can see it here. People are more than happy to throw insults sight unseen. Pick at this or that. It doesn't harm the Sayoc system one bit, but it does exhibit why others wonder how such unity and trust between Sayoc Instructors have been maintained for nearly thirty years. You won't see a Sayoc Kali student bad mouth ANY FMA system, nor ridicule them. I think deeds are more important and proof can be seen online and elsewhere.


I dont believe anybody is being "insulting" maybe poking a little fun at something that is at best illegal and at worst inviting needless maiming or death. If Im risking my life, its going to be for something of value. I dont want my obituary to read "Killed while trying to prove how good a stick fighter he was...."

As to the risk of getting injured or killed skydiving/driving/ et. al. yeah...but thats not part of the package unless something goes wrong. This is akin to diving out of the plane, having somebody toss the chute out after you and having to put it on before hitting the ground. The metaphor doesn't work.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Tulisan said:
			
		

> So I just mostly am trying listen, observe, and learn. I don't get my nut in a twist tie over what you or anyone else does, I just try to learn from it and move on. I am confident with what I do where I don't feel the need to try to "me too, me too" the Sayoc group, and where I am not upset because someone might be doing something that I am not. I already know that how I train is effective enough, yet I already understand that I can learn from how others train.



That's says a LOT about your skills and confidence in your abilities and training. I agree and respect that. I feel the same way.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> #3. On striking and stylistic differences. Rapheal, you said that you had Modern Arnis represented at the event, and that you have seen Balintawak people play and fight. This is fine. I need to point out something here. You haven't seen the Balintawak that I represent and am a part of (Manong Ted Buot/ GM Anciong Bacon Lineage). Furthermore, you have not seen me personally or my personal group (Tulisan Eskrima Gild which is not art specific), or the FMAC Flint Group (A private club that I am affiliated with, headed by Senior Master Jim Power, Master Mike Power, and Master Rich Parsons). I don't think you have seen the larger Modern Arnis organization that I am affiliated with (WMAA headed by Datu Tim Hartman), but I cannot be sure about that because the WMAA is very large in comparison to the others (and there are many differences among players within the WMAA, meaning that even if it says WMAA that doesn't necessarly mean it represents me).



I've met guys like Zack from Balintawak and Rick Mitchell, so perhaps I haven't met you guys yet. I'd like to someday. From Modern Arnis, I've met so many that I can't keep count... there's a LOT of you.LOL

Let me see... I've met Max Pallen, Jeff Delaney, Doug Pierre and Sayoc Kali's Tuhon Ray Dionaldo toured with Master Presas for awhile. I know Master Presas visited our school in Florida to pay respects to Tuhon Chris Sayoc's father once many years ago.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> I do not claim to know exactly what Tuhon Chris does or (Tuhon?) Keir does, as I have not felt them in action, even though I have seen/felt Sayoc Kali before. Similarly, Feeling Modern Arnis or Balintawak does not mean that you have felt me or my collegues.



We'd be more than happy to meet you all someday. Perhaps, that may happen someday. I think the better we know one another the stronger the FMA becomes.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> I did not take offense to anything you have said, and I mention this hoping that you do not take offense to me. I say this because there are stylistic differences between what I and my collegues do and what you and your people have seen, so technical discussions are sort of a apples to oranges discussions until we have the chance to get together and FEEL the differences. The language of Movement explains things much better then the spoken or written word, as I am sure that you guys have found out in your live training.



I agree 100 percent. I know many people finally understand Sayoc Kali after they have actually met us in person.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> #4. One positive thing I'll say here is that I am glad that you guys are training "live," and not just doing dead patterns or drills. Although I question the safety of your event (which I'll have to see some footage to really make a judgement), I am impressed that you guys do include live training against resisting and unpredictable partners. This is something that I am a big advocate of.



Thanks.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> #5. On hitting: You have made some good points regarding hitting, Rapheal. The internet is a poor medium for expressing technical detail, but I'll give a few clue's that will help express some aspects of striking from my perspective. And since perceptions (false or true) play a role on what people read, please recognize that these are only clues, and the only true way to explain is through movement and feeling.
> 
> I will only express my personal style, but please recognize that this is derived mostly from Balintawak (since we are talking about stick dueling).
> 
> - Heavy sticks: I don't try to beat my opponent with speed, I try to beat them with timing. So, I want to wield as heavy of a stick as I can control to get my proper timing. At a personal weight of 233 lbs (from my doctors apt. Monday) and with an ability to do 111 pushups in 60 seconds at a weight of 233 lbs (according to my prep for my Michigan Law enforcement physical exam) I can wield a pretty heavy stick without sacrificing my timing. As long as I don't sacrifice my timing, how fast some else is with their baby stick is not an issue for me.



You'll like the way we do our stick push ups then! Remember I stated a lighter stick not a baby stick. 233 is LIGHT in some of our circles... LOL



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> - Power with heavy sticks: My strategy is not to "whip" my opponent with a witic, leaving a nasty surface wound as I would if I was using a light stick. My strategy is to use my whole bodies force through the heavy stick to impact behind the surface of your skin and shatter bone behind the surface. This is akin to the difference between a belly slap and a punch to the gut. This can mean the difference between ending the fight in one or two strikes, and having the fight last through many strikes into a grappling match.



We don't use many witiks either. However, you have to make sure that timed strike is 100 percent effective. At a high level, after that the stick has to be in position to counter their submission locks with their stick.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> Range to pull off the strikes: I prefer a corto range. I am not a largo Mano fighter, but we train to close the gap to the corto range. As you know, it is difficult to prevent someone from closing the gap. Now, at the corto range, my intent is to manage distance to pull off full power strikes. I do this through the utilization of three things: 1. footwork, 2. wieght distribution from one leg to another, 3. body bending at the hip joint (like a boxer with slipping, weaving, etc.). The utlilization of the last 2 is what we call "the lean" or "undayang"(sp?), and is a trademark of the version of Balintawak that I represent. By utilization of these body mechanics, I am able to manage distance in the corto and grappling ranges so that I can execute a full power strike with my heavy stick.



Yes, that's what we call body shifting in Sayoc Kali.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> Add timing to this and I can execute a lot more then one full powered strikes with my heavy stick.



We've found that it has to be clean and that the opponent is not doing the same or covering up intentionally to close the gap. Staying in corto range leaves one open in the reactionary gap.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> Having said that, from the perspective of a grappler, I know that it is difficult to stop someone from closing the gap from the largo to medio to corto to grappling range; you have to knock them out. However, I also know that it is difficult to stay in the grappling range when your opponent is using anti-grappling techniques, such as eyes gouges and fishhooks. Just because you can do the same thing to your opponent, in either case you cannot stay in the grappling range for very long when these techniqes are thrown into the mix, just as the point fighter can't stay in the kicking range for long when grappling is thrown into the mix.



Well as the DVD shows the grappling range is SAFER than the corto range that you work on which is probably why you work on it the most, because it is the most dangerous space. That was the point of my post. We have just that type of stuff in the fights going on. BOTH opponents have to CHOOSE to maintain corto to duke it out. Usually one will either submit or close/back away.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> Furthermore, utilization of the puno, anti-grappling methods, and stick locking/breaking makes your prolonged grappling a less likely occurance.



We count the use of punyo as part of stick grappling. Anything that happens in the ground position we count as stick grappling. Note that my earlier post stated the fact that the STICK was an EQUALIZER. So I agree with you there. However, the fights didn't end itrike of a stick on the grpound... it ended when the guy began to push away from the smaller hits and got caught in again the corto range which includes the range when leg is already standing up. (like a stack)



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> With all this to consider, if I stick duel, it is less likely going to end with someone tapping out, and it is more likely to end with something shattered.



Albeit in CORTO RANGE.



			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> "Well, if it is catch-as-catch-can, we utilize everying from the top of our heads to the tip of our toes. Even our teeth. We are fighting not just to win...but to survive." I think that sums things up pretty well here.



That's a similar quote I often use when people ask about the FMA and why the ancient art was never transcribed. "It's because they were too busy trying to survive."

Thanks for the discussion Paul. I don't see many parts where I disagree.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Tgace said:
			
		

> I dont believe anybody is being "insulting" maybe poking a little fun at something that is at best illegal and at worst inviting needless maiming or death. If Im risking my life, its going to be for something of value. I dont want my obituary to read "Killed while trying to prove how good a stick fighter he was...."



Well you have a false premise on why people werethere.



			
				Tgace said:
			
		

> As to the risk of getting injured or killed skydiving/driving/ et. al. yeah...but thats not part of the package unless something goes wrong. This is akin to diving out of the plane, having somebody toss the chute out after you and having to put it on before hitting the ground. The metaphor doesn't work.



The metaphor fits. Before you had people jump out of planes with chutes, the instructor themselves have done it. They didn't do it on a simulator. You bring them along and train them til they are ready. Sooner or later they have to actually jump out of the plane. Sooner or later you have to drive without the safety instructor and their emergency brakes... especially if you will be a driving instructor yourself.

Jumping out without a chute and someone tossing it out for you isn't even part of any sky diving protocol.

Certainly one can go through, and not do this type of training but in Sayoc Kali we are about gathering useful information for others. If one of us haven't made something work for real, then we won't teach it. As stated earlier, YOU do not have to do it, but the footage supports certain things that maybe some of us wished we had with us way back. It is imperfect and raw in many ways. There's some techniques that aren't done correctly there's some done beautifully. At least it is there to study and IMPROVE on. We know we have already improved on some things.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> How can I be defensively or even offensively marketing anything?.



Read your posts. Figure it out.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2. No the full contact wasn't a concern nor was the injury risk - I have accepted the level of risk for actions in the past and will do so in the future ...the lack of clear information, openly given (don't give me this 'security' reason because it is a simple issue of only letting in the registered list of players and all others are not allowed in the door - all this secrecy stuff is 'mysterious' more than 'tactical'), reasonable protective gear or mention of insurance/liability/legitimacy/EMT... was what concerned me. I have YET to get a straight answer from you about any of these issues since you were the one I was asking most recently - if you feel that the information is accessable and easy to find - get it and answer those questions posted/directed at you.




What's this "get it and answer those questions" stuff? 
Does that really work in your world?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3. As far as the head shots...what's the point. Much like my military time, the idea that you need to train being 'wet, cold and miserable' is BS, so is the idea that you have to get hit in the head, full contact in order to know what it will do. I know what it will do from safer and just as 'real' variations that reduce the risk of concussions and death/brain damage.



So why ask where the fights will be?
Why act like you were going to go?
You never had any intention of going did you, or did you think head shots wouldn't happen at all?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4. You might be a good armchair critic, but you aren't doing so well at explaining how this was a legal, insured, resonsible or philosophically aligned event based on the Sayoc disclaimer. You talk to your lawyer/leo consultants, give us quoted testamonials ABOUT THIS EVENT in reference to use of force and then we will see. I have read the testamonials from the people on the website, they all praise the art and its 'fightness' but show me in the curriculum/system that issues of state laws and use of force continuums are being taught/applied. Show me where this type of event fits into the systematic approach of tactical development.



Pretty amusing for someone who hasn't participated in anything BUT armchair criticism on this thread.

Why do I need to satisfy your need for this info?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5. "Skill sets to be practical...." practical for WHAT? That is what tactical training is about: Context. I can train someone to do a backflip and it might be the greatest backflip in the world but, outside of a tournament competition, it is going to have a very small justified application in training.



That's because your tactical approach may be totally different from ours. Perhaps that is what irks you so much. Something seems 'mysterious' to you when it is plain as day for us. Hey, if what you do works for you - more power to you. I KNOW what we do WORKS. 
Let it go.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> You are talking about building validity and training models based on a duel between two willing fighters carrying rattan fighting to 'knock out/submission'... how does that help the soldier/leo/civilian contextually and directly? Especially when each of those contextual applications are LOADED with considerations that the dueling environment won't even touch.



That's because you weren't asked DIRECTLY by our clients about certain issues and concepts. There's certain principles in the fights that become readily apparent to them. That they wouldn't FULLY grasp or have faith in until they see it for themselves. You've somehow boxed yourself in thinking that the duel has no purpose. Fine. We have found tons of info that applies. Minute details. The stick duel reveals these to those who are looking for them. You seem to have your own agenda - we disagree.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Basically it doesn't. How long do I have before his back up/friends/cops/... can jump in? How far is my nearest support/safe place to get to? Which way is good for me to escape? How do I take this guy out and not give away my position or comprimise my team/squad/unit? Which way do I have to push this guy/guys to keep them away from my wife/child/intended victim/injured buddy?



That's a broad picture. 
Perhaps that's the problem here. 
You're thinking so broadly on the uselessness of a 'duel' aspect that you miss the fine print.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> All questions/problems that won't even be addressed so how is your stick fight model 'practical' for these types of needs?



That's because those are issues have already been addressed. Those are not the details the clients inquire about. They already have that.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I was in the military, participated in the training and was trained as an NCO (as all NCO's are leader and teacher) to be a military instructor, so I think I understand what the military mission prep/needs fairly well.  I also know that this type of 'technical expert' contracting has its place but will have to be modified to fit the context...modification from stick dueling to combat is going to be a BIG stretch IMO.



Don't worry, WE do the modifications. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Until you can reasonably prove to me that it was a legal event and can reasonably explain how this type of event is aligned philosophically within that disclaimer about knowing and working within the use of force laws, I don't need to read the 'flip the script' technique of trying to undermine my comments. Doesn't prove the event legallity/validity or back up your claims when you seem to be acting in an "unofficial Wendy's spokesman" capacity.



See that's where we differ. I don't NEED to do anything for you. We're doing our thing and that's that. You're some internet forum expert. That's great. 

Several of our guys just returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. 
MANY have gone back. 
I just returned from Beirut last year.

We didn't see any Wendys there. 
Although there's actually a HARD ROCK in Beirut...LOL.

--Rafael--
----------
---------
---------
--------


----------



## GAB

Yes Rafael,

I was usually the one yielding the stick and the other were either combative with hands or other items that were not considered so dangerous as to the use of deadly force.

It was standard practice in my years if the stick was taken away from you, it was time for deadly force. In the hands of a criminal who does not want to submit, them getting your stick was a bad scene.

After reading all the various posts, I do see your side from what you are saying.

But to go back to my post about selling DVDs I think there is more to that then you want to admit..

Simple request's go unanswered, others are just redirected, meet might with might, and then change your angle, you are doing good in the verbal combat, how about some answers.

Sounds like quite a few military, I figure Uncle Sam (tax payer)is picking up the bill for injuries.

How many in the various structured and unstructured combat scenerios were involved?

I really like Tommy Lee Jones, so I will have to follow it up some more, I think it is interesting the way you put me, as the bad guy so you can justify your Marketing angle. 

Good Gamesmanship quick wits. The problem with it, is it, smacks of rougue conduct as I have said before.

Regards, Gary

ps: When I was working Metro it was not uncommon/most likley to have...

1 shotgun per man in veh. 12G 00 buck 2 man cars... 
2 guns on each person
1 baton per man
1 or 2 saps per man
sap gloves
1 or 2 flashlights in veh per man
1 knife on you, 
Some even carried a 3rd gun on there ankle also, this was in the days of the 6 shot rev 38.  And an xtra 50 rounds per man, 38 and a box of 00.

But then we were not your run of the mill, we were a strike force and deployed in the highest crime areas on a daily bases.

Now the average officer with the high capacity mags, has more on his person
then we did with all the extras..  Good for them...

Hope this helps when I talk about experience..

Regards, Gary


----------



## Tgace

Why not "no rules" knife fighting events??


----------



## Tgace

Oh...BTW. Skydiving isnt the intentional use of deadly force against another person. Ive skydived, nobody tried to whack me across the head with a stick. Apples + oranges.


----------



## Bester

Because it is hard to look like a "Tough Guy" while trying to hold in ones insides.

Careful there Mr. Gerace, you might just give these "Highly Skilled Combaticons" another marketble idea for their next DVD series.

Seriously, I happen to agree in a small way with their accessment of various training methods.  The padded / flexi crap does really turn into slap and flail fests that bear little in common with true combat. But, it does serve its main purpose, which is safety.

Hell, I work gun disarms with rubber guns.  I've done stuff with loaded paintball guns as well.  Immediate feedback, close to realistic response.  No big gapping holes.  Oh yeah, I do wear eye protection when doing so.  That whole I'd be an real moron not to.

I'm sorry, but just heading into the woods to beat each other up is stupid. I used to know people who did dumb things and called it "Training".  Watching that clip way back I only had 2 thoughts.
1- So the big guy can toss the little guy around and choke him out.  Wow.
2- Standard "Tough Guy" stuff.

But hey, you have got all this free publicity here, and elsewhere to help sell move DVDs. More power to you as this extended infomercial continues.  You'l please excuse me, I have to go back to pissing off the Ninjas now. :/


----------



## KyleShort

This is going to be interesting, because I am actually going to come to the defense of Sun.  But first I will state that I do not agree with an event of this type.  Primarily because it violates my first rule of self defense, which is to avoid activities that have a very high potential for harm.  I don't eat McDonald's, I don't drive a motorcycle, and I only come to rolling stops in neighborhoods with high potential for car jackings.  In this event, with the rules expressed as they have been in this thread, in seems evident that the threat of grievous, life lasting (or taking) injury was very real.  I lost a knee once to martial arts training and I would never again walk into a situation where it is very likely that I would lose any eye, teeth or whatever else. When I spar stick to stick, I wear armor.  Not because I can't take pain, or even a broken bone (still a very real possibility with armor).  I wear armor so that I do not needlessly expose myself to more lasting injuries such as busted trachea c-rings, popped eyes, split knee caps and shattered joints.

To me an event like this violates at least my concept of what self defense is.  However it seems to hold true to everything that I know about comeptitive sport.  My buddy is a soccer player and by the time he reaches his mid thirties, he will be reduced to a mere hobble,  a grotesque image of what he once was.  He has traded his knees to be at the top of his game.  Those who enter events such as these decide to gamble.  They willingly accept the risk in exchange for the potential of becoming a greater fighter.  But self defense is not about accepting risk of life threatening danger.  It is about avoiding it at all cost, and getting out of it as fast as possible when your back is to the wall.

That having been said, I do see value in this type of training.  Of course there is value in getting your stomach stappled to lose weight, but I would not condone it.  Now what are the benefits to this type of training event?

1. You may in fact discover more truths about your skills and right now the best person to substantiate the claim is Sun, because he was there.  You might even discover that there is no such thing as a friendly no rules weapons match, because the participant's own moral/ethical limiters act as the rules of the match.  Good learnings would come from this no matter what.

2. I firmly believe that 90% of self defense is attitude.  This level of training would introduce the participant to a heightened sense of danger and give them exposure to making their attitude what it needs to be in order to survive.  It also gives you exposure to a new realm of adrenal dump.

3.Regarding the comment of the big guy manhandling the smaller guy.  Bester, I think that you are looking at this one sided.  It might not be shocking that the big guy was capable of doing what he did, but what did the little guy learn from the experience?

To each his own.  I would never compete in such an event willingly, but I hope those that did were able to achieve their goals and walk away better because of it.


----------



## f.m.a.c.student

I cant belive I read the whole thing all seven pages 
I have know dought that you should be able to knock someone out with one hit to the head. 


Mike


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Everyone,

Sorry to be away from all the action as I sit here in Schipol Airport reading through the many posts!!

So this event ruffled a few feathers!! Who cares? I think too many people are thinking of this opportunity as one similar to the many Stick tournaments out there in the FMA world. I do not believe that was the intent, but as a learning tool it can be an experience that many will eventually try in their training. 

Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Bester said:
			
		

> Because it is hard to look like a "Tough Guy" while trying to hold in ones insides.



I agree. There's a HUGE difference between stick and blade and those that keep asking the same question should check their own training standards.



			
				Bester said:
			
		

> Careful there Mr. Gerace, you might just give these "Highly Skilled Combaticons" another marketble idea for their next DVD series.



Can we use that "quote?"



			
				Bester said:
			
		

> Watching that clip way back I only had 2 thoughts.
> 1- So the big guy can toss the little guy around and choke him out.  Wow.
> 2- Standard "Tough Guy" stuff.:



1. The clip was NOT a match that was part of the instructional section. That 'little guy' is probably one of the toughest guys you'll ever meet. If you ever met him, you would know. He was assisting in the instructional section.

2. So Standard that NO ONE has ANY footage of this kind of instruction in the whole history of martial arts instructional tapes.

Btw, the 'big guy'  has fought some of the best stick guys out there. His last non Sayoc match was against Eric Knaus, the uncontested best fighter from the Dog Brothers. Knaus didn't weigh as much but towers over most mortals in skill, power and height.

On this 'veiled marketing innuendo'. If you check around, we are not very shy in promoting product. We have ads in magazines, and place info in forums when our dvds or seminars come around. We probably have some of that in this forum on another thread somewhere. I think some folks are looking WAYYY too hard into something that doesn't even matter. 

I don't know about anyone else's marketing campaigns, but wading through several pages of back and forth is not my idea of streamlined marketing. 

I only entered this thread due to some of the silly comments and misinformation being passed on. The only positive is getting to 'meet' some of folks that have lineage to other systems I respect.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

f.m.a.c.student said:
			
		

> I have know dought that you should be able to knock someone out with one hit to the head.
> Mike



You need a clean shot, and someone who stays in corto for that clean shot. It is possible and can definitely happen... however, Sayoc Kali excels in corto range and everyone in the event knew the dangers of that range especially against one another. So they knew that the KO shot would be in that danger zone.

I know you probably know this already. If you didn't, ask yourself why.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

KyleShort said:
			
		

> I wear armor so that I do not needlessly expose myself to more lasting injuries such as busted trachea c-rings, popped eyes, split knee caps and shattered joints.



Very astute observation Kyle. As stated earlier, we tried to dissuade people from entering the event and what people misinterpret as 'mysterious'  evasion of info was a way to filter out the lookeeloos, wannabees, glory hounds, fight club types. If one had previous major injuries they were also out. Human nature allows people to be foolish and take unnecessary risks when they think their pride is on the line if friends, students or family are watching. When you make them WORK for the info and they SHOW their true intent, and AGREE personally to the grounds we lay out, only then do they get the necessary information. Those guys showed up and were given extensive preparation on what this was all about. They become accountable for themselves. They knew what the documentation was for. It wasn't for 'legend building' especially in such a small community - that really means nothing. We've seen and worked with REAL living legends and 90 percent of them are not known by the FMA community or the general populace. To us in Sayoc, they are the true legends.

So for those who want info for free, can demand all they want. You can read in their posts that they weren't showing up anyway. Okay maybe one guy might try his 'escape and evasion' tactics which will only leave us with stuff we already knew. We do that with paint ball and world class trackers... at night, that's a whole different exercise. In daylight, we'd find him in no time. gee, wonderful... thanks for wasting our time.

Now what do you do if you run out of ammo and are set up on a one on one scenario. Never happens? Interesting, because that's not what we've heard. It doesn't take too much imagination to know your primary weapon can be lost, and that you might need time to gain your secondary. Or that you might get stuck in a dark cave. You don't have a blade but managed to pick up an impact weapon. Perhaps because your hand got shot or injured. "But some guy on the internet told us that this stuff NEVER happens... I mean we trained HARD not to get into this situation. No one EVER isolated certain problems or studied them in this much detail, they said it wasn't necessary. I read it in MARTIALTALK for pete's sake!!!"

Well, what if you CAN still fight with that impact weapon to gain access to a firearm. Or learned ways to disarm an impact weapon effectively. You drilled to learn corto range well, you learned the other ranges, perhaps you yourself didn't go one on one with someone but you SAW proof of what COULD happen no matter what skill level. You KNOW this can work.

Well then turn the switch on and go brother.



			
				KyleShort said:
			
		

> To each his own.  I would never compete in such an event willingly, but I hope those that did were able to achieve their goals and walk away better because of it.



Excellent points Kyle. As we stated earlier, it just isn't for the participant's benefits, but PRIMARILY for those who observe the DVD that can point out what they lack in their own training, even see something that VALIDATES their training. They will understand that mistakes and missed opportunities do happen, that's what all this is about... getting better.

They are the target audience. 

They are the ones who will get the most out of the DVD. They will add to the moves, they will refine or improve the moves. That's for the betterment of the FMA. That's for true evolution of the arts. Those who will look at the fights to boost up their self important ego or their 'style' will do so because they are mainly doing their own 'legend building'. Those who look for 'fight club' footage won't get anything but a thrill. We have more important things to do.

You can see from the posts that many here think that this event was considered merely a fight club stick event with perhaps a ref, maybe no ref. That it was haphazard or that it was uncontrolled by outside forces. That's how we wanted it to look. Because when there's control or perceived control- people ACT braver or foolish. 

Not once in their negativity did anyone bother to think that several unnamed individuals may have also been in attendance to observe the fights (but no outside lookeeloos), as well as other precautions were setup. 

--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali
"Not the PAST but the FUTURE"


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> So why ask where the fights will be?
> Why act like you were going to go?
> You never had any intention of going did you, or did you think head shots wouldn't happen at all?
> 
> Pretty amusing for someone who hasn't participated in anything BUT armchair criticism on this thread.
> 
> Why do I need to satisfy your need for this info?
> 
> That's because your tactical approach may be totally different from ours. Perhaps that is what irks you so much. Something seems 'mysterious' to you when it is plain as day for us. Hey, if what you do works for you - more power to you. I KNOW what we do WORKS.
> Let it go.
> 
> That's because you weren't asked DIRECTLY by our clients about certain issues and concepts. There's certain principles in the fights that become readily apparent to them. That they wouldn't FULLY grasp or have faith in until they see it for themselves. You've somehow boxed yourself in thinking that the duel has no purpose. Fine. We have found tons of info that applies. Minute details. The stick duel reveals these to those who are looking for them. You seem to have your own agenda - we disagree.
> 
> That's a broad picture.
> Perhaps that's the problem here.
> You're thinking so broadly on the uselessness of a 'duel' aspect that you miss the fine print.
> 
> That's because those are issues have already been addressed. Those are not the details the clients inquire about. They already have that.
> 
> Don't worry, WE do the modifications.
> 
> See that's where we differ. I don't NEED to do anything for you. We're doing our thing and that's that. You're some internet forum expert. That's great.
> 
> Several of our guys just returned from Iraq and Afghanistan.
> MANY have gone back.
> I just returned from Beirut last year.
> 
> We didn't see any Wendys there.
> Although there's actually a HARD ROCK in Beirut...LOL.
> 
> --Rafael--
> ----------
> ---------
> ---------
> --------


No, I didn't intend to go when I couldn't get ANY direct answers in an open announcment...if it is legit, it can be discussed openly.  

Yeah, I'm armchairing here.  Wasn't at the event personally, but I am also not selling the proof that what I am doing is valid.  I AM concerned as a 'member of the FMA community' that you have posted would benefit from such events because I don't think it benefits the community of martial arts as a whole when the students you are trying to train will not be able to benefit from the real world lessons if they are seriously injured/killed in the name of training.  There is a legal term of collateral liability for who will be held accountable for anything.

Bart  has a good angle on the marketting tactics of this event.

Let me be clear on this stuff that has expanded beyond the event and the information delivery/availability around it:

Sayoc system is fine.  I don't have a problem with the system or people in it - as far as I know .

My main concern and criticism is that this type of event is counter productive to real world training because it is not reality, nor does it enhance/simulate/support reality beyond the stick on stick duel.

If this idea that you have to do it 'no rules', 'full contact' and to 'knock out/submission' it the center piece to real training, why don't military units give opfor real bullets during training exercises?  Why were there developments like Shinai/Bokken/blunted weapons for non ballistic/lethal force for bladed weapons training?  Because it is hard for a student to use what they learned in that 'real' training when they are dieing/dead or permanently maimed...but hey, the system seniors can use that experience to improve the system based on those lab rat actions.

As far as the tactical/application appropriate modifications...who is better suited to do that, the user or the techincal expert who is vastly knowledgeable on that one thing but not nearly as knowledgeable as the 'topic expert' who is going to be applying it (Military/LEO)?  Please explain to me how you have modified stick dueling appropriately into the average police force continuum or a military person's rules of engagement (which can change from theater to theater/mission to mission) or a civlians use of force/state penal code.  

Remember my above comment:  Not a bash on the whole package, but a criticism on this no armor/full contact/no rules/closed door practice because it doesn't elevate the martial arts/FMA community in my opinion, it perpetuates the myth that ALL martial artists/FMAers practice with no regard for responsible use of force within the current society but are trying to test their mettle based on some misguided interpretation of 'manliness/warriorship' dug up and manipulated from the past.  Leaving that impression by actions/events like this only adds to the negative perception and the resistance from the uninitiated to see the benefits/practicallity and personal empowerment of martial arts training.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Tgace said:
			
		

> Oh...BTW. Skydiving isnt the intentional use of deadly force against another person. Ive skydived, nobody tried to whack me across the head with a stick. Apples + oranges.



So that's why you tried to make the metaphor work for YOU previously riiiigggghtttt?

--Rafael--


----------



## pakua

I can't accept this _they became accountable for themselves_ notion.

Just because I know the dangers of people coming at me with sticks and accept that it's up to me to fend them off, doesn't make it right for the other guy to kill me. I hope that the law would still see my death as manslaughter at minimum, and perhaps as murder even, since it could be argued that you were actually doing your best to kill me.


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> So that's why you tried to make the metaphor work for YOU previously riiiigggghtttt?
> 
> --Rafael--


Not a metaphor, simple comparison of how/when you accept risks.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> No, I didn't intend to go when I couldn't get ANY direct answers in an open announcment...if it is legit, it can be discussed openly.



I think I discussed why it is still legit and still not post ALL the details on an open forum above.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I AM concerned as a 'member of the FMA community' that you have posted would benefit from such events because I don't think it benefits the community of martial arts as a whole when the students you are trying to train will not be able to benefit from the real world lessons if they are seriously injured/killed in the name of training.  There is a legal term of collateral liability for who will be held accountable for anything.



That's because YOU set up a perceived threat in your own mind and ran with it.This isn't something new.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Bart  has a good angle on the marketting tactics of this event.



See other post.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Sayoc system is fine.  I don't have a problem with the system or people in it - as far as I know .



From our perspective, it matters little.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> My main concern and criticism is that this type of event is counter productive to real world training because it is not reality, nor does it enhance/simulate/support reality beyond the stick on stick duel.



See above. Set limitations for yourself not for others.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If this idea that you have to do it 'no rules', 'full contact' and to 'knock out/submission' it the center piece to real training, why don't military units give opfor real bullets during training exercises?



Don't know where you get centerpiece from when I capitalized the word (s) MINUTE DETAILS earlier. Btw, You think Simmunitions don't hurt as much as a stick shot at close range? Anyone ever fire a round at your temple or trachea  point blank?




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Why were there developments like Shinai/Bokken/blunted weapons for non ballistic/lethal force for bladed weapons training?  Because it is hard for a student to use what they learned in that 'real' training when they are dieing/dead or permanently maimed...but hey, the system seniors can use that experience to improve the system based on those lab rat actions.



And in turn, some focused so much on the blunt weapons that they lost the effectiveness of their blade arts. You can see right here in this forum people equating blades to wooden weapons. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> As far as the tactical/application appropriate modifications...who is better suited to do that, the user or the techincal expert who is vastly knowledgeable on that one thing but not nearly as knowledgeable as the 'topic expert' who is going to be applying it (Military/LEO)?



Here's where you make an assumption that some of our guys are NOT users. I just gave you one of our students/Apprentice Instructors names and comments in my previous posts. I just mentioned that many of our students just came back from the Middle East. They weren't/aren't there as technical advisors. MOST of our full instructors are in security or actively an LEO. The father of our system's current head retired as a Correctional's Officer. They were ALL users. Again place your limits upon yourself not on others.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Please explain to me how you have modified stick dueling appropriately into the average police force continuum or a military person's rules of engagement (which can change from theater to theater/mission to mission) or a civlians use of force/state penal code.



See above. You're still stuck on the fight club duel not on the MINUTE details that arise within the context. More limits.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Remember my above comment:  Not a bash on the whole package, but a criticism on this no armor/full contact/no rules/closed door practice because it doesn't elevate the martial arts/FMA community in my opinion, it perpetuates the myth that ALL martial artists/FMAers practice with no regard for responsible use of force within the current society but are trying to test their mettle based on some misguided interpretation of 'manliness/warriorship' dug up and manipulated from the past.  Leaving that impression by actions/events like this only adds to the negative perception and the resistance from the uninitiated to see the benefits/practicallity and personal empowerment of martial arts training.



Well, you can alleviate that by SIMPLY stating that this isn't the FMAs that you teach and it isn't your cup of tea. No one thinks less of you.

Coming in here trying to imply this and that, making negative assumptions without just basically stating you do NOT do this type of thing outright, and just leave and be done with it.... that is called Defensive Marketing. 

Politicians do it all the time. They cast negative aspersions upon their opponents. They attempt to demonize another by running with 'out of context' info.

At no time did we in Sayoc Kali state anything negative about any other system or come to threads that do not include us to try and push our own 'concepts'  on another's efforts.

Perhaps next time you will know when to be 'done with it'.

--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

pakua said:
			
		

> I can't accept this _they became accountable for themselves_ notion.
> 
> Just because I know the dangers of people coming at me with sticks and accept that it's up to me to fend them off, doesn't make it right for the other guy to kill me. I hope that the law would still see my death as manslaughter at minimum, and perhaps as murder even, since it could be argued that you were actually doing your best to kill me.


You don't have to accept that BS...well they are accountable for themselves for volunteering for the event, but the guy who is hitting him in the head with the stick is accountable for his intent (which in this case is to apply full contact force to cause knock out/submission).

I mentioned colateral liability... that means the anyone who was involved in organizing, coordinating, encouraging....the environment that set up the head shot/injury/death will also share some culpability.

I do believe that in the hands of a well trained attorney a case could even be made for a murder charge instead of just manslaughter because of the knowing and willful intent to use LETHAL FORCE in the form of a stick to the head.

I am still waiting for SHelmet's answers to my questions since he has taken on the 'spokesman' hat and has yet to do more than throw the ball back in my end of the this court.

SH,  If you are going to step up and be the voice that defends this get your ducks in a row instead of deflecting.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

pakua said:
			
		

> I can't accept this _they became accountable for themselves_ notion.
> 
> Just because I know the dangers of people coming at me with sticks and accept that it's up to me to fend them off, doesn't make it right for the other guy to kill me. I hope that the law would still see my death as manslaughter at minimum, and perhaps as murder even, since it could be argued that you were actually doing your best to kill me.



That's a false premise. Do you train in FMA at all?

--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1.  I think I discussed why it is still legit and still not post ALL the details on an open forum above.
> 
> 2.  That's because YOU set up a perceived threat in your own mind and ran with it.This isn't something new.
> 
> 3.  Set limitations for yourself not for others.
> 
> 4.  Don't know where you get centerpiece from when I capitalized the word (s) MINUTE DETAILS earlier. Btw, You think Simmunitions don't hurt as much as a stick shot at close range? Anyone ever fire a round at your temple or trachea point blank?
> 
> 5.  Here's where you make an assumption that some of our guys are NOT users. I just gave you one of our students/Apprentice Instructors names and comments in my previous posts. I just mentioned that many of our students just came back from the Middle East. They weren't/aren't there as technical advisors. MOST of our full instructors are in security or actively an LEO. The father of our system's current head retired as a Correctional's Officer. They were ALL users. Again place your limits upon yourself not on others.
> 
> 6.  Well, you can alleviate that by SIMPLY stating that this isn't the FMAs that you teach and it isn't your cup of tea. No one thinks less of you.
> 
> 7.  Coming in here trying to imply this and that, making negative assumptions ...that is called Defensive Marketing.
> Politicians do it all the time.
> 
> 8.  At no time did we in Sayoc Kali state anything negative about any other system or come to threads that do not include us to try and push our own 'concepts' on another's efforts.
> 
> Perhaps next time you will know when to be 'done with it'.
> 
> --Rafael--


1.  I don't really think you did.  I think you tried to but I don't see any details in your statements or anything that would convince me that this is 'legit' as in legal.

2.  Dude, what threat?  Market?  I don't care about your market success relative to mine - because I don't care about market success.  I care about training.  Again, I am speaking as ME, not as the XYZ guy of some group.  I am not promoting myself as instructor.  I am talking about what I think are good and bad practices in training.  This is bad.

3.  I'm not trying to tell you what to do.  Just putting up my case because I can see where what you are doing is legally/morally/physically dangerous disproportionate the MINUTE rewards...except for 'legend building' because people talk about it.

4.  Well if it is MINUTE, why is the risk justified even for training?  If it is such an insignificant component but the inherent risk is so large, why bother?
Yes Simunition hurts/has the potential for causing injury - THAT'S WHY THEY WEAR PROTECIVE GEAR AND ESTABLISH 'RULES' DURING THE SIMULATION/SCENARIO TRAINING!  I am not talking about not training hard or with hard contact - just doing it with some sense of social/legal/educational responsibility.

5.  How many of them participated in this event?  Relative to what reality was revealed from it, what will they do differently as appliers/instructors of self defense/tactical skill based on the results?

6.  I can do that, but the general public that is casting those opinions will not be so selective or segregative in their judgement/perception and will, therefore form negative opinions about all martial arts/fma'ers if they hear/learn about stuff like this.

7.  Back to the 'threat' comment.  I am not a politician nor do I see myself in competition with Sayoc or you, so quit imposing the assumption that my comments are based on fear or a percieved threat to my martial arts reputation...they is motivated by moral conviction.

8.  It is not "We" as in sayoc anything, it is you as in SHelmet talking.  Unless you have been recognized as the PR contact you are assuming powers you don't have.

9.  Your right, maybe I will stop beating my head against the rock of ignorance....


----------



## arnisandyz

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> As we stated earlier, it just isn't for the participant's benefits, but PRIMARILY for those who observe the DVD that can point out what they lack in their own training, even see something that VALIDATES their training. They will understand that mistakes and missed opportunities do happen, that's what all this is about... getting better.
> 
> They are the target audience.
> 
> They are the ones who will get the most out of the DVD.
> 
> 
> This sounds like creating a DVD was the driving force behind this gathering. You already mentioned Sayoc Kali's agressive marketing.  Maybe the "open invitation" title should be changed to "casting call".  I'm sure the fights were live and not scripted...but the DVD doesn't sound like a documentation of the event, but the reason FOR the event. You said yourself the event is PRIMARILY for those who will watch the DVD. If this is true, then the underlying marketing tones throughout this thread make more sense.
> 
> The problem with combining a documentary with marketing entertainment is that its not always clear were the lines are drawn. Look at Moore's 911.  I myself work in the evil business of Advertising and Marketing and we do play with smoke and mirrors at times.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> You don't have to accept that BS...well they are accountable for themselves for volunteering for the event, but the guy who is hitting him in the head with the stick is accountable for his intent (which in this case is to apply full contact force to cause knock out/submission).
> 
> I mentioned colateral liability... that means the anyone who was involved in organizing, coordinating, encouraging....the environment that set up the head shot/injury/death will also share some culpability.
> 
> I do believe that in the hands of a well trained attorney a case could even be made for a murder charge instead of just manslaughter because of the knowing and willful intent to use LETHAL FORCE in the form of a stick to the head.
> 
> I am still waiting for SHelmet's answers to my questions since he has taken on the 'spokesman' hat and has yet to do more than throw the ball back in my end of the this court.
> 
> SH,  If you are going to step up and be the voice that defends this get your ducks in a row instead of deflecting.




You sure make a lot of false assumptions Paul.

1. No one was injured seriously
2. We had precautions set up
3. Therefore, there isn't this PHANTOM murder case you keep trying as a pseudo internet prosecutor.

Why should anyone need to 'step up' to your own pile of BS?

Btw, I still haven't heard any constructive ideas from your end of the armchair court.

--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Why should anyone need to 'step up' to your own pile of BS?
> 
> Btw, I still haven't heard any constructive ideas from your end of the armchair court.
> 
> --Rafael--


Well, the thread started as an announcement, became an inquiriers venue and now has become a debate topic, not a place for me to 'tell you what to do.'

But, if you are asking for constructive advice/criticism:

1. Be straight and open when you post an event announcement. If someone asks for more info and you have it, DON'T refer them to private email (especially about the rules or safety precautions around a 'full contact' event) but answer it right there. By virtue of the up front/open communication it leaves the impression of confidence and legitimacy in the event.

If you leave it at "talk to me in private for more details" or "Here's this cool thing, but I can't tell you what it is" then you may turn away people who are interested but need more info to feel that it is credible.

2. DON'T make claims that it is for proof/validation and then say to see the proof people have to by the DVD and btw we editted it for highlights....it could be construed as 'we editted it/skewed the results to create the validation'.

3. DON"T DO IT AT ALL! Full contact, yes. No 'armor', Yes. No Rules, NEVER (because the minute you stipulate weapon specifications you have instituted a 'rule') make that claim. Rattan, yes...but not all together like this.

I am sure that even though you don't get the pointed impact of rattan on skull that having your helmet rocked by a rattan stick will induce a reasonbly safe range of reactions (both physiological AND emotional) that the student can experience AND still reflect on after the fact with a much lower risk of head trauma.

4. Don't NOT answer questions about insurance, liability, support/legal administrative/event structure if it is really there. Dodging only feeds suspicion.

That enough our you want more?


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1.  I don't really think you did.  I think you tried to but I don't see any details in your statements or anything that would convince me that this is 'legit' as in legal.



I think you do not WANT to see.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2.  Dude, what threat?  Market?  I don't care about your market success relative to mine - because I don't care about market success.  I care about training.  Again, I am speaking as ME, not as the XYZ guy of some group.  I am not promoting myself as instructor.  I am talking about what I think are good and bad practices in training.  This is bad.



It is 'perceived' because nothing of the sort that you mentioned as a given has happened for several decades now. This wasn't a fight club thing that you ran with in your own mind. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3.  I'm not trying to tell you what to do.



Sure you are. You're also telling EVERYONE else here what to do. Do it YOUR way... it is the MORAL way...This stuff is FIGHT CLUB stuff.. THIS IS BAD. All based on your false assumptions. The less info you have the more you run with your assumptions, which is also self- evident.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Just putting up my case because I can see where what you are doing is legally/morally/physically dangerous disproportionate the MINUTE rewards...except for 'legend building' because people talk about it.



Yet you stated you were WILLING to join right in IF there was insurance and medical personnel etc.  You were even going to pass on the info! So it was not the ACT of NO ARMOR, FULL CONTACT but the liability/medical  issues. It was never about physical SAFETY because the FIRST post stated the NO ARMOR, FULL CONTACT criteria. Therefore, you do not have a case of MORAL superiority. 

So when no one POSTED details and GAVE you a DIRECT link to follow up on details that we didn't want exposed on an OPEN forum. You did the 'responsible and MORAL obligation' of NOT following up and basically ran with false assumptions.

In terms of 'legend building', you've talked about it more than we have so thanks!



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4.  Well if it is MINUTE, why is the risk justified even for training?  If it is such an insignificant component but the inherent risk is so large, why bother?



I didn't say INSIGNIFICANT, that's your own limitations popping up once more. MINUTE, meaning deconstructing moves and other tactics universal to certain real life situations.... why bother? Because it may SAVE a life one day. That is why we bother. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Yes Simunition hurts/has the potential for causing injury - THAT'S WHY THEY WEAR PROTECIVE GEAR AND ESTABLISH 'RULES' DURING THE SIMULATION/SCENARIO TRAINING!  I am not talking about not training hard or with hard contact - just doing it with some sense of social/legal/educational responsibility.



There were protective gear allowed, just not what you would use. We had mouthpieces and cups. There was an established rule.. submission/ a third party call/ voluntary signal to stop even if one was NOT injured (which falls under submission)  

YOU just don't train this way, but try to leave out the melodrama of 'this is FIGHT CLUB' BS, because the above rules haltthe fight before serious injury can occur which is usually when one man is unable to continue (mentally, change of heart or physically) and another is allowed to continue.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5.  How many of them participated in this event?  Relative to what reality was revealed from it, what will they do differently as appliers/instructors of self defense/tactical skill based on the results?



Okay, now we're getting somewhere. 
You might even realize why we never state the number of participants because the DVD will not show individuals who do not wish their identities revealed. If I told you 'fifty' guys showed up and we show 'two' guys on the dvd then you can see where stating the number openly is rather moot.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 6.  I can do that, but the general public that is casting those opinions will not be so selective or segregative in their judgement/perception and will, therefore form negative opinions about all martial arts/fma'ers if they hear/learn about stuff like this.



You're not going to change their minds by implying that what we do is NOT meant to cause bodily injury or even death to their REAL WORLD attacker if they have to. I think THAT is half of what makes people think the other way.. that martial arts is BS, mystery mumbo jumbo and only for the movies.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 7.  Back to the 'threat' comment.  I am not a politician nor do I see myself in competition with Sayoc or you, so quit imposing the assumption that my comments are based on fear or a percieved threat to my martial arts reputation...they is motivated by moral conviction.



Didn't say you were a politician, I said you doing your own 'legend building' by trying to come off as some moralist who has his own 'concepts' that are better than what you think the Sayoc material is. You can say otherwise, but people here can read your own words.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 8.  It is not "We" as in sayoc anything, it is you as in SHelmet talking.  Unless you have been recognized as the PR contact you are assuming powers you don't have.



Sounds like you're limiting yourself again Paul. Yes, it IS 'WE".
Sayoc Kali works as a group. Especially so when we instruct. Our methods are consolidated from a diversity of expertise. No ONE person has ALL the answers in our group. You are again imposing some sort of label on us that doesn't apply.

In Sayoc Kali, we don't judge our system by how good the higher ranks are, but how good our students become. When our students can APPLY themselves in real time then that means our INSTRUCTION and METHODS work.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 9.  Your right, maybe I will stop beating my head against the rock of ignorance....



Hey at least you don't stoop to 'demonizing' like a politician Paul.

You can tell when someone resorts to name calling... they have found their limits. 

--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1.  Yet you stated you were WILLING to join right in IF there was insurance and medical personnel etc. You were even going to pass on the info! So it was not the ACT of NO ARMOR, FULL CONTACT but the liability/medical issues. It was never about physical SAFETY because the FIRST post stated the NO ARMOR, FULL CONTACT criteria. Therefore, you do not have a case of MORAL superiority.
> 
> 2.  I didn't say INSIGNIFICANT, that's your own limitations popping up once more. MINUTE, meaning deconstructing moves and other tactics universal to certain real life situations.... why bother? Because it may SAVE a life one day. That is why we bother.
> 
> 3.  There were protective gear allowed, just not what you would use. We had mouthpieces and cups. There was an established rule.. submission/ a third party call/ voluntary signal to stop even if one was NOT injured (which falls under submission)
> 
> 4.  YOU just don't train this way, but try to leave out the melodrama of 'this is FIGHT CLUB' BS, because the above rules haltthe fight before serious injury can occur which is usually when one man is unable to continue (mentally, change of heart or physically) and another is allowed to continue.
> 
> 5.  Sounds like you're limiting yourself again Paul. Yes, it IS 'WE".
> Sayoc Kali works as a group. Especially so when we instruct. Our methods are consolidated from a diversity of expertise. No ONE person has ALL the answers in our group. You are again imposing some sort of label on us that doesn't apply.
> 
> 6.  In Sayoc Kali, we don't judge our system by how good the higher ranks are, but how good our students become. When our students can APPLY themselves in real time then that means our INSTRUCTION and METHODS work.
> 
> 7.  Hey at least you don't stoop to 'demonizing' like a politician Paul.
> 
> 8.  You can tell when someone resorts to name calling... they have found their limits.
> 
> --Rafael--
> Sayoc Kali


1.  Those insurance question were the beginning of the inquiries for me.  When I was told that I had to contact off the original source announcement like it was going to be a 'secret society meeting'....I chose to see if you (as in your stated WE) were willing to talk about the event openly, you were not.  I had no interest in participation because it was not an openly discussed event.

If you had a teen age daughter and her date came to the door and wouldn't answer straight questions like "what are you going to do? Where is it taking place? Are there going to be adults there?" why would you bother asking anything else, the interpretation is that secrets are trying to be maintained...not worth risking my 'daughter' or, in this case, my brain pan.

2.  ONe of the first things I learned about self defense/crisis response type of biological reactions is that the MINUTE details matter far less than the will and the gross motor memory because the MINUTE and fine motor operations fall apart once the HR gets over 145 and keeps climbing from the fight or flight response.  So your results still remain to me insignificant.

3.  Ah...now the 'no rules' issue is changed to 'rules of protective gear' and the aforeNOTmentioned third party call.... If you need a third party call then the player is incapacitated and the head shots are even MORE unjustified because he no longer is posing a reasonable threat to the other player....  I have yet to see any validation from your legal consultants.

4.  IF you have to have a third party caller and IF you are taking a stick fight that includes head shots to knock out/submission it only takes ONE shot to concuss the brain that could lead to coma/death if untreated - and even lower grade possibly permanent damage.  What do the players say when they go to the emergency room for treatment?  I know that GSW have to be reported by law, I wonder how this type of thing would be handled.

5.  If it is 'we' then why are 'you' talking as if you know all about SAYOC?

6.  THEY as a whole work to develop effective physical artists, no doubt about that - again not talking about the system, talking about this type of training/event as part of that package.

7.  How is my statement 'demonizing' I didn't say you dressed up in your mommies nightie or called you an idiot (not that there's anything wrong with that), I said I should know better than beat my head on the rock of igorance...ignorance isn't terminal...just get educated about the legallity and educational alignment/validity of this type of event.

8.  You can also tell that the person has run out of proof and valid topical discussion when they start focusing on discrediting the other person's points instead of supporting their own.....


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1. Be straight and open when you post an event announcement. If someone asks for more info and you have it, DON'T refer them to private email (especially about the rules or safety precautions around a 'full contact' event) but answer it right there. By virtue of the up front/open communication it leaves the impression of confidence and legitimacy in the event.
> 
> If you leave it at "talk to me in private for more details" or "Here's this cool thing, but I can't tell you what it is" then you may turn away people who are interested but need more info to feel that it is credible.



We disagree, I think people who SERIOUSLY want to know will make the personal contactif they are given it. It is the next progression. Sooner or later you have to make that direct coontact and what better way than to contact the organizer directly. People who are too timid to ask are not going. We wanted people who WANT to go. That makes them more accountable for their actions.

Otherwise,  they will just say... "well, I READ on the internet that this was happening and this was written and then someone else posted (who may not even be part of the event)" Then a third party will cut and paste the info posted here and put it elsewhere or to private email. 

You end up with a mess. Our event went off without a hitch.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2. DON'T make claims that it is for proof/validation and then say to see the proof people have to by the DVD and btw we editted it for highlights....it could be construed as 'we editted it/skewed the results to create the validation'.



Since you haven't seen the footage that's rather an amusing take. I think what I stated in that list I made earlier on this thread of proof will be self - evident oncethe footage is out. I don't know how it could skew anything because fights ended in different ranges. One can make an educated judegment though on which tactic suits him best. No ONE tactic dominates.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> . DON"T DO IT AT ALL! Full contact, yes. No 'armor', Yes. No Rules, NEVER (because the minute you stipulate weapon specifications you have instituted a 'rule') make that claim. Rattan, yes...but not all together like this.



Well, if you followed up the website link and emailed the contact, the fighters would have better information. That's the only people that really matter at that point. Lookeeloos will say what they want anyway.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I am sure that even though you don't get the pointed impact of rattan on skull that having your helmet rocked by a rattan stick will induce a reasonbly safe range of reactions (both physiological AND emotional) that the student can experience AND still reflect on after the fact with a much lower risk of head trauma.



Nope, that only works if there's EVIDENCE that there's a sharp difference between helmet and non helmet. I've been in hundreds of helmet matches... it is totally different. You can ask any FMA who has been there and done that and they will tell youthat students and novices will ALWAYS use the false security of a helmet to stay within striking range. It builds a fasle muscle memory. So many FMAs will not compete in helemt stick fighting matches because of this. The Dog Brothers were created in response to this. They fell under the same scrutiny then and still.

Now you can have a footage and SHOW them that the striking range is only available on the halfbeat. That's it. Unless you're fighting a total untrained person, it very difficult to get clean shots longer than the halfbeat.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4. Don't NOT answer questions about insurance, liability, support/legal administrative/event structure if it is really there. Dodging only feeds suspicion.



It fed a few people's suspicion and you were the one running with it most. Anyone who followed up got the answers they needed. Again it isn't going to come in an open forum like this. No matter how 'mysterious' you may falsely label it. We got the individuals we wanted. No hassles. No complications. It was a smooth operation.

Next.
--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1. We disagree, I think people who SERIOUSLY want to know will make the personal contactif they are given it. It is the next progression. Sooner or later you have to make that direct coontact and what better way than to contact the organizer directly. People who are too timid to ask are not going. We wanted people who WANT to go. That makes them more accountable for their actions.
> 
> 2. Since you haven't seen the footage that's rather an amusing take.
> 
> 3. I've been in hundreds of helmet matches... it is totally different. You can ask any FMA who has been there and done that and they will tell youthat students and novices will ALWAYS use the false security of a helmet to stay within striking range.
> 
> 4. Now you can have a footage and SHOW them that the striking range is only available on the halfbeat. That's it. Unless you're fighting a total untrained person, it very difficult to get clean shots longer than the halfbeat.
> 
> 5. It fed a few people's suspicion and you were the one running with it most. Anyone who followed up got the answers they needed. Again it isn't going to come in an open forum like this. No matter how 'mysterious' you may falsely label it. We got the individuals we wanted. No hassles. No complications. It was a smooth operation.
> 
> Next.
> --Rafael--


1. So now I and others who wanted answers are being labelle as 'timid'...who's name calling? What if I had contacted the private mail address, got the information and it only solidified my opinion that this was a dangerous, illegal and irresponsible event and called the local/state PD about it to get their perspective...and then told the private email contact that the cops even said it was no good...what then? If there were arrests involved because they broke up this 'Kock fight' type event, would I be 'demonized' as destroying your training practice only to put mine ahead by elimination or would I be viewed as a responsible citizen that was coordinating with my community support network?

2. Read more carefully, the footage doesn't skew, your editting will skew it...that's just plain science. How can I get the 'evident' conclusions unless I see all the same footage that you did in the editing process?

3. Well then, take your already stated 'proven' observations and set up a helmeted contest that has rules that will simulate that type of reaction and encourage training that will engrain what you think is proper application w/o the further risk of brain damage instead of setting up events that are being marketted as proving it again and again...what is the point if it has already been proven?

4. PLUGGGGGGGG.

5. It is mysterious because of the intentional withholding of information openly and clearly. Smooth operation or not, it is still illegal IMO. A drug deal that goes down smooth isn't legit either.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1.  Those insurance question were the beginning of the inquiries for me.  When I was told that I had to contact off the original source announcement like it was going to be a 'secret society meeting'....I chose to see if you (as in your stated WE) were willing to talk about the event openly, you were not.  I had no interest in participation because it was not an openly discussed event.



Let me get this straight, Paul. 
I was NOT on this forum thread til AFTER the event happened. 
How can I answer any of your inquiries?

You were given a DIRECT link to the person (still not ME) who was ORGANIZING the event. 

Yet somehow you feel that I somehow evaded your first question. My appearance on this forum AFTER the event could not possibly be the reason you didn't attend.

If you even posted on the sayoc forum, I would have at least seen it myself PRIOR to the event. You didn't even do that.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If you had a teen age daughter and her date came to the door and wouldn't answer straight questions like "what are you going to do? Where is it taking place? Are there going to be adults there?" why would you bother asking anything else, the interpretation is that secrets are trying to be maintained...not worth risking my 'daughter' or, in this case, my brain pan.



Wrong analogy.

It's more like your teenage daughter had a friend who told you your daughter was going on a date (on the internet) with a guy and GAVE you his number/email to call to verify the date and time, and all the necessary info to contact the actual event organizers (adult supervision, etc.) themselves.

Instead you chose to ignore it and thought it was TOO mysterious.

Then AFTER the fact you asked me who was there, a person who didn't directly organize the event, to supply you with all the papers and stuff AFTER the DATE. I may be a teacher in the school, but was not the person who had that delegated responsibility from the principal.

Make sense?




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2.  ONe of the first things I learned about self defense/crisis response type of biological reactions is that the MINUTE details matter far less than the will and the gross motor memory because the MINUTE and fine motor operations fall apart once the HR gets over 145 and keeps climbing from the fight or flight response.  So your results still remain to me insignificant.



Because you're still making assumptions. You do NOT develop the required CORRECT gross muscle memory UNLESS you first place under the microscope valid data that supports appropriate training and tactics. Untrained that gross muscle memory can be standing there frozen as someone attacks you.

For example:
No one validated the Tueller drill until someone took footage of it and timed it.
From THAT point people created CORRECT responses based on that data. They studied the MINUTE details down to milliseconds. They understood offlining, obstacles, lateral /circular, when to deploy, etc.. All this was tried and documented. 
Now people have CORRECT gross muscle memory responses.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3.  Ah...now the 'no rules' issue is changed to 'rules of protective gear' and the aforeNOTmentioned third party call....



It was never changed if you followed up the DIRECT Links. There's even mention of cups and mouthpieces on our website. You're only listening to your daughter's date again.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If you need a third party call then the player is incapacitated and the head shots are even MORE unjustified because he no longer is posing a reasonable threat to the other player....  I have yet to see any validation from your legal consultants.



That's a false assumption. 
I have yet to see why there's a need to satisfy you who has no significant positive contribution to us.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4.  IF you have to have a third party caller and IF you are taking a stick fight that includes head shots to knock out/submission it only takes ONE shot to concuss the brain that could lead to coma/death if untreated - and even lower grade possibly permanent damage.  What do the players say when they go to the emergency room for treatment?  I know that GSW have to be reported by law, I wonder how this type of thing would be handled.



Lots of IFs. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5.  If it is 'we' then why are 'you' talking as if you know all about SAYOC?



I read about them on the internet.LOL

Who do you need to talk to?

Let me guess, perhaps the DIRECT link that was supplied to you that you didn't care to follow up on.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 6.  THEY as a whole work to develop effective physical artists, no doubt about that - again not talking about the system, talking about this type of training/event as part of that package.



And we continue to talk.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 7.  How is my statement 'demonizing' I didn't say you dressed up in your mommies nightie or called you an idiot (not that there's anything wrong with that), I said I should know better than beat my head on the rock of igorance...ignorance isn't terminal...just get educated about the legallity and educational alignment/validity of this type of event.



Cute.
Let me know when you think this material has any positive purpose beyond cheap shots on a keyboard. 
People like to toss out personal insults and then 'disguise' it by using it as something they don't really want to own up to. They can get it out there, and then retreat from it.

It's a common trait.

I thought you fashioned yourself a SERIOUS MORAL representative. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 8.  You can also tell that the person has run out of proof and valid topical discussion when they start focusing on discrediting the other person's points instead of supporting their own.....



I think you're doing just fine discrediting yourself. See the first question.

Let me return to my time machine so I can answer your questions PRIOR to the event.

--Rafael--


----------



## MJS

WOW!!  I've been reading this thread for the past 8 pages.  Definately some interesting posts.  I'd like to add my 2 cents.

First off, if we go back to the very first post, it was simply an invite to anyone who wanted to attend.  It appears to me that this was strictly voluntary.  I'll say it again...VOLUNTARY.  That being said, I really don't see what the other 7 pages have to do with the event?  If you don't want to attend because of the contact, no gear, risk factor, etc. then its very simple...DON"T GO!!!!!  If people have the stones, and obviously there are those that do, that want to attend, then its strictly THEIR responsibility for ANYTHING that happens.  

Mike


----------



## Rich Parsons

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Very astute observation Kyle. As stated earlier, we tried to dissuade people from entering the event and what people misinterpret as 'mysterious'  evasion of info was a way to filter out the lookeeloos, wannabees, glory hounds, fight club types. If one had previous major injuries they were also out. Human nature allows people to be foolish and take unnecessary risks when they think their pride is on the line if friends, students or family are watching. When you make them WORK for the info and they SHOW their true intent, and AGREE personally to the grounds we lay out, only then do they get the necessary information. Those guys showed up and were given extensive preparation on what this was all about. They become accountable for themselves. They knew what the documentation was for. It wasn't for 'legend building' especially in such a small community - that really means nothing. We've seen and worked with REAL living legends and 90 percent of them are not known by the FMA community or the general populace. To us in Sayoc, they are the true legends.



Rafael,

I would have to agree that you did try to disuade people. And that is fine. I agree with most of your comments on why, yet I repeat that I would have liked a few more days notice to try to clear my schedule to get there.

Yet, as it turned out it is better this way. If I had driven all the way gotten a hotel, to have my techniques and skill be used in a DVD for the profit of others, I would have been upset. Now this does not mean there are ways around this. I have driven when asked to an event, to help out, and was treated with respect, for the asking. I have donated my time for teh benefit of others and took only a tank of gas and a meal in payment, for an event that I was the co instructor at. The other instructor did the same. I just wantd to help. I have also helped a friend to make a DVD for training of his studnets and some friends over seas. If he made money on this in the future I would not be upset. Why because he asked me upfront, and I knew what I was getting into, before the travel and rearrangement of schedules. 

As to taking responsibility for yourself, I Agree. :asian:

As to working with those who are not known, I would have to agree, that there are good players out there who no one knows about. Hence in my second post I think, I stated that it was good of you to open this up, not know who would show up.



			
				Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> So for those who want info for free, can demand all they want. You can read in their posts that they weren't showing up anyway. Okay maybe one guy might try his 'escape and evasion' tactics which will only leave us with stuff we already knew. We do that with paint ball and world class trackers... at night, that's a whole different exercise. In daylight, we'd find him in no time. gee, wonderful... thanks for wasting our time.
> 
> Now what do you do if you run out of ammo and are set up on a one on one scenario. Never happens? Interesting, because that's not what we've heard. It doesn't take too much imagination to know your primary weapon can be lost, and that you might need time to gain your secondary. Or that you might get stuck in a dark cave. You don't have a blade but managed to pick up an impact weapon. Perhaps because your hand got shot or injured. "But some guy on the internet told us that this stuff NEVER happens... I mean we trained HARD not to get into this situation. No one EVER isolated certain problems or studied them in this much detail, they said it wasn't necessary. I read it in MARTIALTALK for pete's sake!!!"


Paintball, yes you never run out of ammo there or in real life. :rollseyes:

I was playing once in a nice warehouse where the shooting outside cause us to stop from time to time. Well, I was out of ammo and was headed back for more, and was caught by the other team. I surrendered, to avoid the point blank shot. This guy said he did nto care and shot me. I disarmed and then shot him repeated at point blank range with his own weapon then took his weapon with me, and went after his team. So the skills worked. Oh yeah the judge was so busy rolling on the ground laughing at the guy crying foul on me, that he did not call me out. He just waved me on. 

I agree that there will be times when you will need it.




			
				Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Well, what if you CAN still fight with that impact weapon to gain access to a firearm. Or learned ways to disarm an impact weapon effectively. You drilled to learn corto range well, you learned the other ranges, perhaps you yourself didn't go one on one with someone but you SAW proof of what COULD happen no matter what skill level. You KNOW this can work.
> 
> Well then turn the switch on and go brother.



Yes



			
				Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Excellent points Kyle. As we stated earlier, it just isn't for the participant's benefits, but PRIMARILY for those who observe the DVD that can point out what they lack in their own training, even see something that VALIDATES their training. They will understand that mistakes and missed opportunities do happen, that's what all this is about... getting better.





			
				Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> They are the target audience.
> 
> They are the ones who will get the most out of the DVD. They will add to the moves, they will refine or improve the moves. That's for the betterment of the FMA. That's for true evolution of the arts. Those who will look at the fights to boost up their self important ego or their 'style' will do so because they are mainly doing their own 'legend building'. Those who look for 'fight club' footage won't get anything but a thrill. We have more important things to do.



I agree



			
				Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> You can see from the posts that many here think that this event was considered merely a fight club stick event with perhaps a ref, maybe no ref. That it was haphazard or that it was uncontrolled by outside forces. That's how we wanted it to look. Because when there's control or perceived control- people ACT braver or foolish.



I can see your points.



			
				Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Not once in their negativity did anyone bother to think that several unnamed individuals may have also been in attendance to observe the fights (but no outside lookeeloos), as well as other precautions were setup.
> 
> --Rafael--
> Sayoc Kali
> "Not the PAST but the FUTURE"



Not sure of the above. It was ok for some to watch if they were invited? If so, then ok, I can see this. This goes back to the thrill seekers, and wanna be fight clubers.  I meet a friend of a friend. Not know how serious this guy was, it was the second time I had meet him and says, hey lets go get into a fight tonight. I did not know if he was serious, joking or a thrill seeker, and looking to just watch one he started. So, I had a training knife on me, (* I forgot to take it from the pocket. *)  I pulled it and stabbed him in the gut with it, He freaked, no real reaction, other than to yell and cringe in fear. I said no fights for you, for a long time, and do not get me in any either. He was still checking to see if the blade had cut him, and I showed him it was a trainer. Yes, many woudl say this is reckless, and I could have made a mistake and had a real knife on me. Yet, this stopped the thrill talking and BS of people looking to get into "Some Action" and watch others operate. Been there, not doing it again, unless I have too. 

Peace Brother.
 :asian:


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Thanks for the comments Rich and Mike.

Btw, as I stated Rich, we told people BEFORE they ever left their house what the purpose of the training was for. So you wouldn't have to make any reservations for hotels etc. if that was a conflict.

Those unseen on the DVD and such may or may not have participated. They just don't want to be on camera for their own personal reasons. Others were there as extra personnel for certain precautions on safety and conduct. Others were invited observers who shall remain nameless, but were not there for the thrill seeking stuff- definitely had their own legitimate purpose.

Yes, people do run out of ammo in paintball but as you stated later... when folks are in paintball mode we're back in armored protective shells. We wouldn't get to the business of focusing on ONE project.

We've done scenarios of action flex versus paintball in the dark. That changes everything as well.

best,
--Rafael--


----------



## arnisandyz

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> Rafael,
> If I had driven all the way gotten a hotel, to have my techniques and skill be used in a DVD for the profit of others, I would have been upset.
> 
> Here is the double edged sword.  If you tell people you are holding an event to be used on a DVD it totally wipes out the reasoning for not having onlookers, as the audience for DVD viewers would outnumber the audience in attendance.  If you don't tell people your likely to get the response that Mr Parsons gave.  This of course is dependent on IF the event was held PRIMARILY for a DVD viewing audience as I mentioned in my last post.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1. So now I and others who wanted answers are being labelle as 'timid'...who's name calling? What if I had contacted the private mail address, got the information and it only solidified my opinion that this was a dangerous, illegal and irresponsible event and called the local/state PD about it to get their perspective...and then told the private email contact that the cops even said it was no good...what then? If there were arrests involved because they broke up this 'Kock fight' type event, would I be 'demonized' as destroying your training practice only to put mine ahead by elimination or would I be viewed as a responsible citizen that was coordinating with my community support network?




Lots of IFs again. 
Sorry if calling you 'timid' and hurt your feelings. 
When I demonize people I usually go for the jugular and call them timid.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2. Read more carefully, the footage doesn't skew, your editting will skew it...that's just plain science. How can I get the 'evident' conclusions unless I see all the same footage that you did in the editing process?



Well, if you SAW the footage you would actually give many of us here a break and understand that editing long pauses between fights, setting up time and all other very boring nonessential details is a waste of dvd. We have more than material to waste on our dvd...heh.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3. Well then, take your already stated 'proven' observations and set up a helmeted contest that has rules that will simulate that type of reaction and encourage training that will engrain what you think is proper application w/o the further risk of brain damage instead of setting up events that are being marketted as proving it again and again...what is the point if it has already been proven?



Now we're talking. It wasn't proven until we proved it.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4. PLUGGGGGGGG.



Anyone who wanted to buy the DVD made up their minds long ago.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5. It is mysterious because of the intentional withholding of information openly and clearly. Smooth operation or not, it is still illegal IMO. A drug deal that goes down smooth isn't legit either.



Info was available.
People have the wrong opinion all the time.

I don't know too much about drug dealing, we're on the good guys side.

--Rafael--


----------



## Bob Hubbard

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> We've done scenarios of action flex versus paintball in the dark. That changes everything as well.



Hmm...glow in the dark paintballs, black lights and 'glowing' action flex.  Low budget star wars anyone? 

(Sorry, needed to add a little lightness to the thread.)

Seriously, sounds like fun.


----------



## Cruentus

To lighten up the mood...

I hacked into the Sayoc site and I found the footage from this weekend. You'll want to click on the clips after you go into this link:

http://members.tripod.com/mickfl/wbw/id4.htm

Needless to say...I laughed, I cried, and I cried again. I would have to say that some of those fighters in the video are definatily bigger then me. My personal favorite was "kendo stick shots" and "Phantom slams Big Shot on trash can."

  :ultracool


----------



## JPR

I have a question that is not related to if you should have done this, nor how legal it to do this.  

You stated: 



			
				Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1. No one was injured seriously ...



Which confuses me and I hope you can clear it up.  From what I have read I understand that you did full contact, no armor, no limitations, stick on stick duels.  This leads to my question, if you were going all out, why wasnt anyone seriously injured?  I thought the whole idea of me hitting you with a stick was to injure you, whether it is a strike across your knuckles in an attempt to break your hand and do an impact disarm, or pop you in the head as you charge in to make you not want to charge in.  

So I am left wondering the following things:

1.	Are sticks an effective weapon?  Trained fighters with no armor and full contact didnt do serious damage to anyone.  If, for some strange reason, I am involved in a conflict should I abandoned using a stick(s) because they dont do damage? 
2.	A corollary question from #1, does a trained fighter negate your ability (even if you are trained) to do damage with sticks?    
3.	Did I miss understand the nature of what you were doing?   Were these no limits duels, or were they training scenarios?
4.	Were you mostly looking at grappling?  In other words, did you start at largo, blitz through to corto and enter into grappling, or did you have people staying out and striking?
5.	What do you consider serious injury?  My definition includes; broken bones (while not life threatening they do require trained medical intervention), concussions, loss of consciousness due to head trauma, amoung others. 

I probably have other questions, but these will do for now.  Again, just to make sure everyone understands, I am not passing judgment on what happened, I am just trying to understand and learn from the experience.

JPR


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Tulisan said:
			
		

> To lighten up the mood...
> 
> I hacked into the Sayoc site and I found the footage from this weekend. You'll want to click on the clips after you go into this link:
> 
> http://members.tripod.com/mickfl/wbw/id4.htm
> 
> Needless to say...I laughed, I cried, and I cried again. I would have to say that some of those fighters in the video are definatily bigger then me. My personal favorite was "kendo stick shots" and "Phantom slams Big Shot on trash can."
> 
> :ultracool




LOL.. we said we were good but not THAT good!

--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1. You were given a DIRECT link to the person (still not ME) who was ORGANIZING the event.
> 2. Yet somehow you feel that I somehow evaded your first question. My appearance on this forum AFTER the event could not possibly be the reason you didn't attend.
> 3. Because you're still making assumptions. You do NOT develop the required CORRECT gross muscle memory UNLESS you first place under the microscope valid data that supports appropriate training and tactics. Untrained that gross muscle memory can be standing there frozen as someone attacks you.
> 4. No one validated the Tueller drill until someone took footage of it and timed it.
> 5. From THAT point people created CORRECT responses based on that data. They studied the MINUTE details down to milliseconds. They understood offlining, obstacles, lateral /circular, when to deploy, etc.. All this was tried and documented.
> Now people have CORRECT gross muscle memory responses.
> 6. It was never changed if you followed up the DIRECT Links. There's even mention of cups and mouthpieces on our website. You're only listening to your daughter's date again.
> 7. Lots of IFs.
> 8. Let me know when you think this material has any positive purpose beyond cheap shots on a keyboard.
> 9. People like to toss out personal insults and then 'disguise' it by using it as something they don't really want to own up to. They can get it out there, and then retreat from it.
> 10. I think you're doing just fine discrediting yourself. See the first question.
> 11. Let me return to my time machine so I can answer your questions PRIOR to the event.
> 
> --Rafael--


1. Explained my process on this, 'nuf said.
2. Yup, you have not answered any of the questions I asked you directly.
3. You are confusing 'assumptions' with researched based curriculum learning. Based on your 'from the video footage and the 'proof'' comment, you have already established and built the Sayoc program on these sound premises - why do I need to get hit in the head? I don't have to get shot to know that it hurts and understand what impact it will have on the body....
4. Actually Tueller only established the 21 foot distance as the minimum reactionary gap. Before that others had done reactionary training and such, Fairbaern (sp?) for one from what I remember. Tueller drill is the most recent trend of commonly used researched data.
5. And again, the miniscule is going to become insignificant because of loss of fine motor skills...I can't explain it any clearer - it is based on clinical research.
6. No, it wasn't 'changed' but yours was the first mention by anyone of it in a public setting. Now, I can't say for sure that it would tip the scales, but knowing that the event would be refereed so to speak might make the difference for some (even if they ignore the lethal force issue).
7. All the IF's are ways of linking the information that has been provided by you...still no answers to some of the questions.
8. My hope is that this discussion will get people to examination what type of 'training' they are involved in and whether it is worth risking your brain and body over when there are reasonable and more contextual ways of doing it that are within the law. That is my positive goal.

As a civilian OR an LEO or a military operator participant let's assume that you don't get hurt BUT your participation in this type of training in the past is documented/used when you are under the microscope to decide if you were reasonable and justified in your use of force for a 'good shoot' (for LEO), 'justified use of force' (Civilian)or a 'conduct unbecoming' or such case under the UCMJ (for the military types), then you have a documented behavior/participation that could be interpretted as a clear disregard of responsible use of force....making it harder to defend yourself in a legal scrutiny.

9. "People like this..." huh? I said what I said and haven't wavered from it. If you percieve insult what of it? That is your interp, not my implic.
10. I lack credibility? Thanks, I wanted to lose wt. ... at least I consulted legal topic experts about this and can reference training pedagogy and understand 'lead by example' as a trait of educational philosophy.
11.Just go back to where I asked you direct questions and haven't yet to get direct answers.

Now I could go one step farther and contact the Central Police Services instructor (now retired) or the County prosecutor/former student of my instructor that also acted as consultants on the use of force guidelines within the self defense curriculum, start writing up notes for a piece on 'full contact martial arts training - is it practical or even legal?', site this thread and the event as a source document/example to get a more in depth take on the legallity/consequences of causing injury or paricipation in this type of event.
To avoid that 'assumption' thing, you could do the same by consulting your own local prosecutors and we could share the results in counterpoint.

If you did the same, then you might be applying your training philosophy to something more than a stick.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

JPR said:
			
		

> From what I have read I understand that you did full contact, no armor, no limitations, stick on stick duels.  This leads to my question, if you were going all out, why wasn1t anyone seriously injured?  I thought the whole idea of me hitting you with a stick was to injure you, whether it is a strike across your knuckles in an attempt to break your hand and do an impact disarm, or pop you in the head as you charge in to make you not want to charge in.



hello,
There were limitations, since there's the ability to call the action off at any time (by yourself, the other fighter or a third party) and submit. Others chimed in and force teamed the no limitations rule on here, and did more to add to the confusion. The option of submitting or quitting at any time takes away the unnecessary shots that induce the real damage. We found there was more strategy, caution and footwork than padded events.



			
				JPR said:
			
		

> 1.	Are sticks an effective weapon?  Trained fighters with no armor and full contact didn1t do serious damage to anyone.  If, for some strange reason, I am involved in a conflict should I abandoned using a stick(s) because they don1t do damage?



If one trains in how to use a stick, then it will be very effective to someone who is untrained. Look at how an untrained person handles a stick for the first time and see how awkward and open their gross motor skills are.

It's much harder to hurt a trained fighter who knows what you are doing and has trained to avoid, or counter it. I've found that people deliver their shots much more frequently and more in the danger zones when they are armored. It is human nature. That doesn't exclude training armored because you can  focus on other tactics with that as well.

A regular untrained person won't see half of what you are doing before it is too late. Especially if one trains honestly and know the danger zones.



			
				JPR said:
			
		

> 2.	A corollary question from #1, does a trained fighter negate your ability (even if you are trained) to do damage with sticks?



Yes. If one has never seen a HARD combination of shots in their life they will most likely think they can stay in there and take it or exchange until they get hit. They might think they can close and grapple to attempt to smother the stick But a stick is a great equalizer to some grappling moves.



			
				JPR said:
			
		

> 3.	Did I miss understand the nature of what you were doing?   Were these no limits duels, or were they training scenarios?



There's limits, and it was controlled in terms of there's intervention before any damage happens. We broke fights up into several 'stick' scenarios as well. However, it is VERY close to how tactics with a stick work. Certain things we train in; like picking up a dropped stick or switching hands in flow make more sense. Because no matter how great we think our grip and striking is, stuff happens and one has to train to answer these before they happen for real.

For example, people told us that projectiles don't work. We in the FMA know that they do work, in the proper context. One of the fights illustrated this plainly.



			
				JPR said:
			
		

> 4.	Were you mostly looking at grappling?  In other words, did you start at largo, blitz through to corto and enter into grappling, or did you have people staying out and striking?



We asked various fighters to agree on different ranges to start. We even started one with both fighters laying on their backs about twenty five feet apart and then standing up and engaging.

We had some fights that stayed largo (outside) the whole time and ended in largo but it didn't end with a KO - the repetitive strikes to the limbs worked along with exhaustion. However, full power of these strikes was nullified because the other guy was aware of the corto dabger zone. The largo guy knew he was striking at a real good grappler, so he avoided the corto range where the grappler would close. Proving that in a stick to stick fight, the corto range is the MOST dangerous IMPACT space.

The most dangerous striking zone is CORTO in a STICK fight. No one wants to stay in that zone if all things are equal.



			
				JPR said:
			
		

> 5.	What do you consider serious injury?  My definition includes; broken bones (while not life threatening they do require trained medical intervention), concussions, loss of consciousness due to head trauma, amoung others.



Yes those count as serious. With the ability to submit or quit and allowing oneself to leave the padded safety net and egos behind.. people were responsible and avoided that from happening. We all fall into the safety net of padded fights, if we are all honest with ourselves. We will take that extra risk if we KNOW we are armored. We might try to avoid it but it still happens. Again this was not a fight club style event. People who entered had training and were responsible about keeping this less about winning than about testing their material and seeing if it worked in real time.



			
				JPR said:
			
		

> I probably have other questions, but these will do for now.  Again, just to make sure everyone understands, I am not passing judgment on what happened, I am just trying to understand and learn from the experience.
> JPR



No sweat. Glad to help.

--Rafael--


----------



## KyleShort

That submission bridge was awesome  All the clips needed was a little dueling banjos in the background!


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1. Explained my process on this, 'nuf said.



We all read what you said initially. Then you tried to imply I was here to answer them. You never followed up on a DIRECT contact.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2. Yup, you have not answered any of the questions I asked you directly.



Yes I have, you don't like the answers.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3. You are confusing 'assumptions' with researched based curriculum learning. Based on your 'from the video footage and the 'proof'' comment, you have already established and built the Sayoc program on these sound premises - why do I need to get hit in the head? I don't have to get shot to know that it hurts and understand what impact it will have on the body....



No one ever said YOU have to get hit in the head.
We don't have to prove our training methods to you if they are already being used in REAL time on the field. nuff said.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4. Actually Tueller only established the 21 foot distance as the minimum reactionary gap. Before that others had done reactionary training and such, Fairbaern (sp?) for one from what I remember. Tueller drill is the most recent trend of commonly used researched data.



Fairbairn. Which supports making CURRENT up to date research important.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5. And again, the miniscule is going to become insignificant because of loss of fine motor skills...I can't explain it any clearer - it is based on clinical research.



You can't explain it further, because again you refuse to grasp what I wrote. You can NOT TRAIN people to become efficient with INCORRECT reflexive responses. One can have TRAINED gross motor skills or UNTRAINED gross motor skills. The TRAINED gross motor skills are incorporated by using CORRECT responses culled from REAL data. You can only TEACH a proper response if you KNOW that someone CAN pull it off in a high stress environment, in REAL time. That they can take a NEWLY TRAINED, CORRECT gross motor response and replace their INCORRECT gross reflexive motor response. It can be done because trained individuals do it all the time. They have the TRAINED muscle memory to react CORRECTLY.

When trained operators shoot they move the way they are trained. That is their NEW CORRECT RESPONSES working their gross motor skills. They no longer react the way they did before they got any training.

And unlike you, we work with individuals who ARE routinely tested on the FINE points of their TRAINED gross motor skills.

I'm not talking about trying to pull off a fancy move that makes no sense. I'm talking about finding the move that seems to work BEST at the time even against trained individuals.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 6. No, it wasn't 'changed' but yours was the first mention by anyone of it in a public setting. Now, I can't say for sure that it would tip the scales, but knowing that the event would be refereed so to speak might make the difference for some (even if they ignore the lethal force issue).



There was no lethal force issue in our training environment. You put that false premise there and ran with it. I'm just watching how you run it to the ground.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 7. All the IF's are ways of linking the information that has been provided by you...still no answers to some of the questions.



Yes and I'm saying your links don't work, they are based on a false premise.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 8. My hope is that this discussion will get people to examination what type of 'training' they are involved in and whether it is worth risking your brain and body over when there are reasonable and more contextual ways of doing it that are within the law. That is my positive goal.




My hope is that people actually go and research something before coming on here and piling on misconceptions based on a false premise.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> As a civilian OR an LEO or a military operator participant let's assume that you don't get hurt BUT your participation in this type of training in the past is documented/used when you are under the microscope to decide if you were reasonable and justified in your use of force for a 'good shoot' (for LEO), 'justified use of force' (Civilian)or a 'conduct unbecoming' or such case under the UCMJ (for the military types), then you have a documented behavior/participation that could be interpretted as a clear disregard of responsible use of force....making it harder to defend yourself in a legal scrutiny.



Again that is YOUR limited instructional curriculum showing through. 
Why? because you haven't the data we have. You pushed valuable info into the 'dueling' box and can't get out of it.

Just the the FACT that this will be included in a TRAINING and INSTRUCTIONAL DVD supports someone's case that they used the CORRECT method to subdue or restrain someone. Instead of wailing away at Rodney King, you saw ON the DVD that said individual LEARNED to use less violent means to apprehend someone. It's happened to our guys on the field and they were NOT placed on trial they had a great writeup on the local papers as using the proper force to stop a knife wielding attacker in a dark New Jersey ally.

That's the difference. You are going by what you think, we are going by what we KNOW to be true.

Here's some stuff to consider:
1. This training teaches someone weapon retention in REAL time. Actual tactics that may work, when modified to the client's requirements.
2. Switching dominant hand to gain access to one's secondary weapon, or radio.
3. Misdirection using unorthodox projectiles that will allow one to close. 
4. Restrain WITHOUT the use of sharp force trauma even against someone who is armed with an impact weapon.
5. Losing head gear doesn't mean you are without options. You can still smother and take down a person.
6. Posting techniques that counter grappling entries,so that you aren't trying to strike at their knees as they come in.

I can go on and on but then again you probably got nothing out of the above.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 9. "People like this..." huh? I said what I said and haven't wavered from it. If you percieve insult what of it? That is your interp, not my implic.



Perhaps people call you 'ignorant' all the time and therefore you don't get any negative interp out of it.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 0. I lack credibility? Thanks, I wanted to lose wt. ... at least I consulted legal topic experts about this and can reference training pedagogy and understand 'lead by example' as a trait of educational philosophy.



That's the point of it. You are in back obtaining research. We are in the forefront GATHERING the necessary data that EVOLVES the training. That's why Sayoc Kali has been recognized as such by many as a highly evolved curriculum by those in the know.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 11.Just go back to where I asked you direct questions and haven't yet to get direct answers.



Just go back to where you were given a DIRECT contact from the person holding the event and you didn't follow it up and are now trying to get it from me AFTER the fact.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Now I could go one step farther and contact the Central Police Services instructor (now retired) or the County prosecutor/former student of my instructor that also acted as consultants on the use of force guidelines within the self defense curriculum, start writing up notes for a piece on 'full contact martial arts training - is it practical or even legal?', site this thread and the event as a source document/example to get a more in depth take on the legallity/consequences of causing injury or paricipation in this type of event.



I like this quote:
"Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety."

You have started on a FALSE premise and you might as well go all the way and run with it. So many here have already understood the purpose and practicality of the training.Perhaps you should go all out and ban ALL stick training that involves UNARMORED participatints. Sticks are blunt 'lethal weapons' according to your false premise so any training should be under licensed governmental criterions.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If you did the same, then you might be applying your training philosophy to something more than a stick.



Yeah, that's what Sayoc Kali does...  only teach stick.
Limits continue.

--Rafael--


----------



## Tgace

Legally, its the application of the weapon that counts. Sticks arent "classified" as anything. When used against another person they become "weapons", legally, as would a chair, shovel, steel toe boot...Hitting somebody in the head with any of these could "readily cause death or serious physical injury". Becoming deadly force.

If some guy came swinging a rattan cane at my head on the street...Im shooting him down.


----------



## DoxN4cer

Tgace said:
			
		

> Legally, its the application of the weapon that counts. Sticks arent "classified" as anything. When used against another person they become "weapons", legally, as would a chair, shovel, steel toe boot...Hitting somebody in the head with any of these could "readily cause death or serious physical injury". Becoming deadly force.
> 
> If some guy came swinging a rattan cane at my head on the street...Im shooting him down.



Nicely articulated, Tom.


----------



## hardheadjarhead

I'm a little unclear on the hypotheses of the things tested in these bouts.  Ergo some questions...fired in a staccato manner reminiscent of a three year old:

Isn't much of this stuff merely reinventing the wheel?  How is this any different than what the Dog Brothers do?  Granted, they wear fencing masks, but little else.  Is the difference that significant?

Fighting like this serves to test the theories and techniques taught in the FMA, but fighting with protection will often do that as well.  The "data" acquired, stating that hand shots and head shots do not always work on the first hit _with rattan canes_ is valid...but didn't we allready know that?  How does the data change if we switch to kamagong or hickory?  We know that these sticks are harder to wield with speed (for some) and change certain dynamics...but how do solid hits with those heavier weapons effect the outcome of a fight?  What if the sticks were flat and edged, or carved into a square cross sectional shape?  When do you plan on doing this?

In our culture people generally don't "stickfight".  How is any of this information applicable to everyday scenarios that civilians and LEO's face?  For the latter, would it be more appropriate to conduct these fights with those high impact plastic batons they carry?  I suppose this would test the damage potential of said baton (which is allready done nightly across the country) and also test what would happen if two LEO's who were highly trained in FMA got into it over, say, rights to a donut.

Are we trying to validate FMA stickfighting concepts or relate what we do to American street conflict?  If the latter, when will we see fights like this with copper cable and pipe?  Is that on your schedule?

Why is it bad for "wannabees", "lookalees" and their ilk to show up to events like this?  Ought not a "wannabee" be thrown into the mix to see how their skills fare as driven by this ego?  What is it exactly they "wannabee?"  How is this any different than what the other fighters "wannabee?"  

I failed to see this anywhere...maybe it was posted and I missed it.  _How many people showed and fought?  _ 

On that note, who was represented?  What styles fought?  How did they do?  Did any person/style have a distinct edge because of their training?   Did any little guys fight?  I suspect there weren't weight classes...how did the littles do against the bigs?  Did anybody record weight and height in the matches as a part of the acquired data?  How long did the average match last?  For that matter, how many matches were fought?

Why is the sky blue?   Can I have ice cream for supper?


Regards,


Steve


----------



## GAB

Hi Sunny oh reflective dude,

I would just like to say that the conventional fighter, like's the conventional fighter, ever notice how hard it is for the conventional to fight the unconventional, was anyone on pcp, coke or meth???

Regards, Gary


----------



## Sun_Helmet

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> I'm a little unclear on the hypotheses of the things tested in these bouts.  Ergo some questions...fired in a staccato manner reminiscent of a three year old:



No problem. You have some good questions.



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> Isn't much of this stuff merely reinventing the wheel?  How is this any different than what the Dog Brothers do?



No one claimed the wheel being reinvented in terms of how the event was what 'WE' in the FMA call training. 'We" was used to cover that this isn't something new, but some techniques and moves might need closer scrutiny to see if they may be effective for other usage. It isn't THAT different. Some of our students ARE Dog Brothers,most importantly one of the founders. We've done Sayoc Kali seminars at the Dog Brothers previous weekend gathering events. The MAIN difference is that in these matches we were focusing on training some Sayoc principles that will be introduced to the public.

We feel that the Dog Brothers are very important contributors to the FMA community.



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> Granted, they wear fencing masks, but little else.  Is the difference that significant?



I think we shouldn't make this an either /or issue. BOTH have their advantages. Just like using armor might. 

In the Sayoc event, the fighters focused on staying OUT of impact range more. Now that might be PSYCHOLOGICAL... not having the fencing mask on. The fencing masks in terms of impact do NOT really give that much more protection as one is led to believe. Psychologically, perhaps some folks would believe that it does, so would attempt to stay in corto longer.  You might even see some DBs choose a heavier thicker rattan, why is this? Because the thinner rattan do not do as much damage. So they get a heavier weapon. 

We found less hard thrusts to the head because the counter thrust/strike to the head is also open. So you don't want to risk it against someone who is aware of it.

The second factor are the gloves.
Most DBs use street hockey gloves and it gives a lot of protection, so you see less stick switching while in midst of movements than if you had no gloves. You find less disarms, lost grips, stick grabbing, chambering and trapping are less apparent with padded gloves. In some fights the stick lead switch factor was CRUCIAL to the outcome. Especially in grappling and long range.



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> Fighting like this serves to test the theories and techniques taught in the FMA, but fighting with protection will often do that as well.



Yes and no. You've seen fighters who do this with armor and they fight totally different than they should if unarmored.

Now we in the FMA KNOW that RATTAN sticks were our TRAINING equipment. Rattan sticks were NOT the FMAs lethal weapons. 
Rattan was what our Filipino ancestors used to make sure no one died in TRAINING, using the alternatives of bahi or real edged weapons.
They lived on to do battle for real.

If we are confused by this historical fact, then we have to wonder where in our training did this concept get lost?
As many here (even those who didn't agree with me) have said, rattan is NEVER our ideal weapon of choice in a REAL life encounter. 

If we REALLY look at the history of FMA, RATTAN is our weapon for TRAINING.

Some add the buzzword, 'lethal' carelessly.  You read a lot of 'IF' scenarios. ALL these 'IFS' can be applied to ANY training situation. However, the Footage is proof that rattan may be painful, but in the correct TRAINING environment and guidance, it is NOT lethal.



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> The "data" acquired, stating that hand shots and head shots do not always work on the first hit _with rattan canes_ is valid...but didn't we allready know that?



We want to go beyond that. That fact is evident right away in this scenario (at least to FMAers), however we are focused on what ELSE can we learn to counter getting hit in the head and hands MORE. Are there flows that work better than most in certain circumstances. We did discover there were certain   tactics that minimized getting hit in the hands and head less. It occured in all three ranges. Watching the DVD, I'm SURE that the FMA's innovative minds will come up with their own revelations.

Our whole point is to push the evolution of FMA. We can all sit back and say everything has been done. Well, perhaps.. but has everything been remembered? How much have we lost?

Tuhon Chris Sayoc once stated, "Imagine how our ancestors LIVED the FMA, becuase it was about self preservation that was CONSTANTLY tested. So think if ALL the athletes and soldiers of today who don't train FMA were suddenly in a culture where the FMA was ALL they did. How much better do you think those OLD warriors of old were to today compared to us?"




			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> How does the data change if we switch to kamagong or hickory?  We know that these sticks are harder to wield with speed (for some) and change certain dynamics...but how do solid hits with those heavier weapons effect the outcome of a fight?  What if the sticks were flat and edged, or carved into a square cross sectional shape?  When do you plan on doing this?



Rattan is a training implement that minimizes the lethality of hard wood like kamagong. Pain from rattan hits are the best motivators for HONESTLY respecting the damage that the kamagong would induce.

I think you answered your last question by your indication that there IS a difference. Similar to those who said doing this with blades is the same.
They should ask themselves WHY they think there's similarity at all?



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> In our culture people generally don't "stickfight".  How is any of this information applicable to everyday scenarios that civilians and LEO's face?



Here's one :
One of our instructors, a New Jersey LEO was able to restrain and disarm a knife wielding attacker in a dark alley with his impact weapon. He was commended not placed on trial. It was in the papers. VERY positive article.

How many times have we seen the opposite happen? 
What was in those officer's training that told them to use the wrong use of force? Perhaps they had limited training that also had gaping hole in it.
If the officers had training in our LEO stick restraint course, they would find out that impact blows are not always lethal, they just compound the problems in the long run. 
Are there other ways to restrain someone with a stick that works on a TRAINED uncooperative person?
The DVD will show that there IS an alternative. It will show a fight that ends with a submission standing up with a stick. No hits to the head necessary.

That one clip in itself is invaluable to someone who is seeking another option.




			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> For the latter, would it be more appropriate to conduct these fights with those high impact plastic batons they carry?  I suppose this would test the damage potential of said baton (which is allready done nightly across the country) and also test what would happen if two LEO's who were highly trained in FMA got into it over, say, rights to a donut.



The one who has trained and found other options in the use of the stick will get the donut. 



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> Are we trying to validate FMA stickfighting concepts or relate what we do to American street conflict?  If the latter, when will we see fights like this with copper cable and pipe?  Is that on your schedule?



See above. 



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> Why is it bad for "wannabees", "lookalees" and their ilk to show up to events like this?  Ought not a "wannabee" be thrown into the mix to see how their skills fare as driven by this ego?  What is it exactly they "wannabee?"  How is this any different than what the other fighters "wannabee?"



In SAYOC we will throw a wannabe in on less intense workouts and testings if they want. It will be quickly apparent to themselves, that they will need to get more training. It saves everyone a waste of time.

Ego gets a LOT of people killed.

As for  'lookeeloos" ...  this was not fight club.



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> I failed to see this anywhere...maybe it was posted and I missed it.  _How many people showed and fought?  _



Covered earlier.



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> On that note, who was represented?  What styles fought?  How did they do?  Did any person/style have a distinct edge because of their training?   Did any little guys fight?  I suspect there weren't weight classes...how did the littles do against the bigs?  Did anybody record weight and height in the matches as a part of the acquired data?  How long did the average match last?



Since Sayoc Kali has individuals that encompass just about every other style or system out there, several were represented. Sayoc Kali isn't about excluding any style of FMA or otherwise.... we've gone beyond that and found that our system enhances those who seek it... regardless of style/system. We care not for where a student came from, so you can see a DB, a BJJ, a boxer, a wrestler, kung fu, another FMA system, etc. represented in Sayoc. We do care that they do NOT bring their personal baggae from elsewhere into the system.

Also, in this day and age of cross training- I'm sure many of those involved would say I missed something that they trained in if I try and cover it here.

Little guys did well. Big guys did well. It all depends on which one uses their training and physical attribute the best. Yes, size and other factors were noted.

In my initial sequence of posts I stated that each individual did well. They used several styles and it came down to the individual executing the appropriate move in the correct time. So many styles were validated.



			
				hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> For that matter, how many matches were fought?



There's at least four or more matches on the DVD. Not all matches will be on the DVD. Since the DVD is INSTRUCTIONAL , we chose to omit repetitive fights in terms of outcome and dynamics (one long range fight, one close, one both, etc.) So if there's two fights that ended with the same range and move, we'll choose the one that we can see better and study closer for the DVD. 

Any other number I say will just be heresay. 

--Rafael--
------
-------
-------


----------



## loki09789

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> I'm a little unclear on the hypotheses of the things tested in these bouts. Ergo some questions...fired in a staccato manner reminiscent of a three year old:
> 
> Isn't much of this stuff merely reinventing the wheel?
> 
> The "data" acquired, stating that hand shots and head shots do not always work on the first hit _with rattan canes_ is valid...but didn't we allready know that?
> 
> In our culture people generally don't "stickfight". How is any of this information applicable to everyday scenarios that civilians and LEO's face?
> 
> Are we trying to validate FMA stickfighting concepts or relate what we do to American street conflict?
> 
> Why is it bad for "wannabees", "lookalees" and their ilk to show up to events like this? Ought not a "wannabee" be thrown into the mix to see how their skills fare as driven by this ego? What is it exactly they "wannabee?" How is this any different than what the other fighters "wannabee?"
> 
> I failed to see this anywhere...maybe it was posted and I missed it. _How many people showed and fought? _
> 
> On that note, who was represented? What styles fought? How did they do? Did any person/style have a distinct edge because of their training? Did any little guys fight? I suspect there weren't weight classes...how did the littles do against the bigs? Did anybody record weight and height in the matches as a part of the acquired data? How long did the average match last? For that matter, how many matches were fought?
> 
> Why is the sky blue? Can I have ice cream for supper?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Steve


LOL...

SHelmet,

You have not answered questions directed at you. I know..."Yes, I have. You just choose not to read them." Well, I have yet to read your explanation/justification for the level of force used that would make this legal. What I have gotten from you is comments on my comments, not answers.

I think GAB/Tgace have made the legal position on force/deadly force pretty understandable from a legal interpretation so it isn't just my assumptions talking (which is never really was so much as research and background being used).

I don't think events like this elevate FMA or martial arts. They degrade it because they demonstrate a disregard for the social values of the time we live in. As responsible martial artists, we will always be 'diplomats of our arts' to those who are uninitiated. If we do things that are flat out outside the legal/social culture of the day, it isn't a good impression to leave. And for training application/validity...it isn't a strong enough case to justify the potential injury caused by the lethal force levels used. Remember it isn't the end result but the force you are applying and what INTENT it demonstrates because of the use. I don't see any other interpretation of intent for a full contact head strike with a stick other than deadly force. You might not 'mean for it to happen' but actions speak louder than words and if your action is head strikes with a stick - it is deadly force.

At the least, there will be some mutual combat/endangerment issues. Given the skill, intent and information that a lawyer can get about the incident, a case could be made for 1st Degree Murder if you hurt some guy under these circumstances because you pre-meditated the act by contacting the coordinator and possibly finding out who was going to be there, demonstrated intent with the travel and stepping into the match/participation as well as the head shots themselves - which you were not obligated to 'back off' of in intensity or frequency unless the other person was knocked out/submitted or heard the third party signal.

Why would I want to comment on what others in MA are doing along these lines? Well, if some are seeing this as 'elevating' FMA/MA I don't and have explained why. I am in essence being 'my brother's keeper' so to speak (philosophically, not trying to impose my Christian Dogma on folks  )concerning this issue as others have done on other topics time and time again - what keeps things 'lively' here.

There have been many a thread about professions, situations, politics that people have dived into freely with no thought about the 'live and let live' logic at all. Why is it any different for me to comment on something that will affect the way martial arts could be viewed - as a martial artist? I have a conviction and a belief and am exercising some 'moral courage' in presenting it - something I thought was suppose to be part of the development of a 'martial artist as a person'....

This event type is dangerous disproportionately to the 'rewards' of it. It is illegal and participants could be charged just for playing, let alone for causing injury/death. It also demonstrates a serious lack of respect or understanding of penal law in relation to force/deadly force.

Show me where I am wrong in the above summary of my position with more than just the 'your assuming' BS or your training rationale - what about the social/legal context?


----------



## Sun_Helmet

GAB said:
			
		

> Hi Sunny oh reflective dude,
> 
> I would just like to say that the conventional fighter, like's the conventional fighter, ever notice how hard it is for the conventional to fight the unconventional, was anyone on pcp, coke or meth???
> 
> Regards, Gary



I give you the benefit of the doubt and treat this as a serious inquiry to keep the thread productive.

The focus of the event was not focused on that. 
However, in the field the Sayoc tactics have been HIGHLY effective against the unconventional, because OUR tactics are sound and researched.

Remember that the majority of the higher ranks in Sayoc have lived, live and worked in the world of making sure the unconventional are kept in check. 

Some may even say our Sayoc training is unconventional... instead of drugs, we use methods that we KNOW to be true.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Show me where I am wrong in the above summary of my position with more than just the 'your assuming' BS or your training rationale - what about the social/legal context?




Social /legal context ALL depend on whether or not your premise is TRUE.

Anyone can argue social/legal context. However, one of the main elements of making a VALID social/legal argument is if the basis of your contention was based on something that is TRUE.

What would be a FALSE premise?

How about focusing on your 'intent of force'?

If the intent was NOT to KILL someone with a strike and instead focus on maintaining safe range while keeping the other fighter HONEST (as stated numerous times on this thread) in the corto range. In YOUR training you MIGHT not have the capacity to understand what I am talking about, but that does not make your premise correct.

If you incorrectly ASSUME that the intent was LETHAL,  then you can go on and on based on a FALSE premise. You can build a FALSE social/legal argument based on YOUR inconsistencies in your personal history of training. That is possible.

Some things to ponder:

FACT:

You ASSUME we are there to kill one another and that is a FALSE premise, YOU continue to run with. 

There is NO indication to anyone who was personally involved that the main intent was anything BUT training, and that safety of all involved was covered. For example, no one was there to 'wait' for a fight to end from a third party once another fighter was hit hard. All fighters were instructed to acknowledge a hard hit and keep their training HONEST. Therefore, you ASSUME otherwise.

The RESULTS of the event BACK this. 
That is TRUE.

ALL PARTICIPANTS (not Paul R. Martin) WERE INFORMED PRIOR TO ATTENDING THE EVENT WHAT THE EVENT WAS DESIGNED TO DO. That is TRUE.

YOU were NOT given this info and will NOT be given this info, because you didn't ASK the direct contact, even when given their contact info. That is TRUE.

YOU can NOT/REFUSE to make the distinction that I was NOT the EVENT organizer, but a Sayoc Kali rep. You keep asking the same question that someone MORE qualified to answer (and YOU chose not to contact) could make. That is TRUE.

As a Sayoc Kali representative, if I were on this forum PRIOR to the event I would have directed you to the identical DIRECT contact info that Steve L. did. That is the most responsible thing to do... go to the source. That is TRUE.

ALL initial info and the lack of info was designed to weed out people who would not understand that this type of event was designed for our instructional purposes. It is called a probe to see if anyone would follow up. In the followup they were informed of the FACTS. You never went BEYOND the first probe which CLEARLY indicated BLATANT inconsistencies in the content of the original post. That is TRUE.

NON Sayoc FMAs practioners on this thread, have gradually figured out that the 'We call this training" phrase also relates to their OWN training. With minor changes here and there, it is what FMAers do. They check and rechekc if their training is valid and practical, and sometimes it comes with hard contact. By their own questions and my answers- I have reinforced this. They made the logical leap long ago.

You build arguments based upon YOUR continuous barrage of false premises. That is ... um... what IS that?

There's a difference in opinion, I don't begrudge you for having a difference of opinion. However, by allowing that, it doesn't make you right. That is TRUE.

Posting the EXACT same content over and over again here on this thread does NOT change anything. 
That is TRUE.


--Rafael--


----------



## GAB

Hi Rafael,

Yes, it is/was a good question and I got a good answer. Thanks.

The thing I was trying to bring forth, I should have been clearer. 

I am sure you would have the skills to take care of someone who was under the influence of a drug that would help them to overcome pain and still be able to fight. (Rational or not)

The Cabalas system talks about, when in close and the stick is not that productive resort to the other (empty hands) techs.

The way you are calmly discribing this incident and what you are/were looking for is much more informative than the original publication... 

If there were spectators and they wanted to see blood and gore, they probably would have been unsatisfied in their quest. 

It is getting tiresome to read the rhetoric, but the thread is still informative:
Re: on how to duel with words in a good debate...

Thanks, regards, Gary


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Social /legal context ALL depend on whether or not your premise is TRUE.
> 
> Anyone can argue social/legal context. However, one of the main elements of making a VALID social/legal argument is if the basis of your contention was based on something that is TRUE.
> 
> What would be a FALSE premise?
> 
> How about focusing on your 'intent of force'?
> 
> If the intent was NOT to KILL someone with a strike and instead focus on maintaining safe range while keeping the other fighter HONEST (as stated numerous times on this thread) in the corto range. In YOUR training you MIGHT not have the capacity to understand what I am talking about, but that does not make your premise correct.
> 
> If you incorrectly ASSUME that the intent was LETHAL, then you can go on and on based on a FALSE premise. You can build a FALSE social/legal argument based on YOUR inconsistencies in your personal history of training. That is possible.
> 
> Some things to ponder:
> 
> FACT:
> 
> You ASSUME we are there to kill one another and that is a FALSE premise, YOU continue to run with.
> 
> There is NO indication to anyone who was personally involved that the main intent was anything BUT training, and that safety of all involved was covered. For example, no one was there to 'wait' for a fight to end from a third party once another fighter was hit hard. All fighters were instructed to acknowledge a hard hit and keep their training HONEST. Therefore, you ASSUME otherwise.
> 
> The RESULTS of the event BACK this.
> That is TRUE.
> 
> ALL PARTICIPANTS (not Paul R. Martin) WERE INFORMED PRIOR TO ATTENDING THE EVENT WHAT THE EVENT WAS DESIGNED TO DO. That is TRUE.
> 
> YOU were NOT given this info and will NOT be given this info, because you didn't ASK the direct contact, even when given their contact info. That is TRUE.
> 
> YOU can NOT/REFUSE to make the distinction that I was NOT the EVENT organizer, but a Sayoc Kali rep. You keep asking the same question that someone MORE qualified to answer (and YOU chose not to contact) could make. That is TRUE.
> 
> As a Sayoc Kali representative, if I were on this forum PRIOR to the event I would have directed you to the identical DIRECT contact info that Steve L. did. That is the most responsible thing to do... go to the source. That is TRUE.
> 
> ALL initial info and the lack of info was designed to weed out people who would not understand that this type of event was designed for our instructional purposes. It is called a probe to see if anyone would follow up. In the followup they were informed of the FACTS. You never went BEYOND the first probe which CLEARLY indicated BLATANT inconsistencies in the content of the original post. That is TRUE.
> 
> NON Sayoc FMAs practioners on this thread, have gradually figured out that the 'We call this training" phrase also relates to their OWN training. With minor changes here and there, it is what FMAers do. They check and rechekc if their training is valid and practical, and sometimes it comes with hard contact. By their own questions and my answers- I have reinforced this. They made the logical leap long ago.
> 
> You build arguments based upon YOUR continuous barrage of false premises. That is ... um... what IS that?
> 
> There's a difference in opinion, I don't begrudge you for having a difference of opinion. However, by allowing that, it doesn't make you right. That is TRUE.
> 
> Posting the EXACT same content over and over again here on this thread does NOT change anything.
> That is TRUE.
> 
> 
> --Rafael--


Check out this link to http://www.rantpipe.com/Articles/Includes/NassauPistolPermit/DeadlyForce/DeadlyForce.asp

It isn't NY or PA but I doubt that there is much difference in the foundation of the definitions.

Key in on the "readily able to cause death or other...." for the definition of physical force/deadly force - which full contact head strikes even with Rattan are capable of (remember my Concussion comments).

AND 

The FACT that you are NOT legally justified in the use of deadly force if "he can avoid doing so..." (in reference to using deadly force)...which you can do in a full contact/'no rules' competition because participation is voluntary.

AND

I have cited two current legal professionals who are backing up the 'lethal force/intent' interpretation that I have posted.

Where is the false premise?

Again, you can organize it under your own set of philosophical ideas and set up your own 'rules' (call them goals if you don't want to get caught in the loop) for a no rules fighting match (which negates ANY philosophy or intent that you verbalized/wrote to the participants because even those implied 'rules' don't matter in a no rules match - correct?) but it don't make it legal or ethical.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

GAB said:
			
		

> The Cabalas system talks about, when in close and the stick is not that productive resort to the other (empty hands) techs.



Yes, that is the norm of most research on close quarter stick. We are developing ways (or maybe 'uncovering') to make the stick useful in a close quarter environment that doesn't involve trying to get an impact strike at such a range. A punyo may be effective but to an LEO is it counter productive? Is there another way to restrain someone so that your partners can close with :
1. Not getting hit themselves by their or your stick strikes.
2. Offers partners access to isolate limbs to cuff/hold while still holding the perp down.
3. Keep the perp focused on the stick applied to them as others can get in and offer assistance.



			
				GAB said:
			
		

> The way you are calmly discribing this incident and what you are/were looking for is much more informative than the original publication...
> 
> If there were spectators and they wanted to see blood and gore, they probably would have been unsatisfied in their quest.



I agree. The only blood we got was when someone hit their nose on an forearm trying to get out of a triangle choke. NOT stick impact related.


--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Where is the false premise?



It all goes back to your initial posts when you linked a car to a rattan stick as an impact weapon.

If you can NOT distinguish the difference between a historically verified TRAINING tool for the MAJORITY of FMAs ie: rattan stick, and equate said rattan stick (that WE used in the event) to having the same 'deadly force' as the impact of a metal firearm, billy club or car then that is a false premise.

You also keep stating 'repetitive' rattan strikes (now backing off of the one hit rattan kill shot) with disregard of safety from everyone involved, that is a false premise.

You also refer to 'No rules'... it has been quite OBVIOUS from the ORIGINAL post that the probe was meant to instigate query from those serious about participating that there was BLATANT inconsistencies with the wording. How can there be 'No rules' if the followup sentence says you can 'submit'? We placed red flags in there to help us weed out those who wished to seriously participate in our project.

Also your false premise indicates you do not want to take in the info I readily gave that the training had the purpose of focusing the advantages of staying in long range and close grappling range... NEGATING the more powerful corto range striking. That the event was under CLOSE scrutiny to test out certain moves and tactics.

The fact that one can HEAR Sayoc instructors call out danger zones, instruction and safety warnings throughout the matches support that this was all meant for instruction, study and training. It wasn't the picture you created in your mind of a 'fight club'. 

That false visual context still blurs much of your judgement. Many here have begun to understand the bigger picture.

Only instructors were allowed to yell out to the participants and non compliance to the commands meant stoppage of action.

YOUR limited access to OUR information about the event made you go several directions. The way YOU demand info after not following up on the direct source, allowed me the opportunity to feed some FMA and Sayoc principles to this forum. Perhaps it made it more productive, I tried to steer clear of the emotional danger zones as much as possible.

'Concussions' during training would be supported by MA/FMA training concussions and other impact related activities that may cause concussion. However, no one got a concussion after our event. 

In the context of Training, a concussion might occur, but many would argue the point that to NEGATE any possibility of someone getting a concussion during ANY MA training is not only impossible it is also no longer training the FMAs.

As per 'readily able..." In the context of the event, that was NOT readily available. Neither is their legal precedent of rattan sticks as readily available lethal implements. 

If it were so, no one would be allowed to use them in FMA training and it would not have been the UNIVERSAL TRAINING TOOL of our FMA ancestors.

Why do the FMA use rattan?... to make the training HONEST, to keep the impact HONEST but NOT deadly.

Why did the Filipinos CONTINUE to use rattan as a training tool even AFTER the Spanish were ousted? The manongs understood from HONEST training that it was the closest thing and the safest thing to reality.

If one were to research all the recorded unpadded stick 'death' matches...if you can actually find any; you will note that they did NOT use rattan. They used bahi or kamagong. 

--Rafael--


----------



## GAB

Hi Sun_Helmet,

The more information you are giving the more I can relate to the very things you are saying. 
I have been in lots of controlled contests and sure we got damaged a little. With the idea of instructors yelling out instructions and others being quiet leads one to believe, this was what you are saying it was. (training exercise)

Yes, you have clairified many times, hooked, line, and sinker is not something I think was happening. The time outs were probably there and other ways of saving someone from permanent damage( like for like )not a black belt against a white new be dude (belt)..

I will have to follow up on your school more, based on your techs. regarding debate...

Regards, Gary

ps: were you using the twigs, as I have heard them called 3/4" or so in Dia.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

GAB said:
			
		

> Hi Sun_Helmet,
> 
> The more information you are giving the more I can relate to the very things you are saying.
> I have been in lots of controlled contests and sure we got damaged a little. With the idea of instructors yelling out instructions and others being quiet leads one to believe, this was what you are saying it was. (training exercise)
> 
> Yes, you have clairified many times, hooked, line, and sinker is not something I think was happening. The time outs were probably there and other ways of saving someone from permanent damage( like for like )not a black belt against a white new be dude (belt)..
> 
> I will have to follow up on your school more, based on your techs. regarding debate...
> 
> Regards, Gary



Thanks Gary. I respect the fact that you kept your mind open and kept the discussion from the spiraling from a negative to something productive.

I will be gone without email access on a special project, and hopefully if anyone else wants to discuss anything about Sayoc they ask Guro Steve L. when he returns from Sweden. We also have folks who can help on sayoc.com 

Regards,
--Rafael--


----------



## arnisandyz

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Yes, that is the norm of most research on close quarter stick. We are developing ways (or maybe 'uncovering') to make the stick useful in a close quarter environment that doesn't involve trying to get an impact strike at such a range--Rafael--



Hi Rafael,

Has Tuhon Ray shared with the Sayoc group his method of "Punyo Mano"? He has done a good job of incorporating different systems (including Sayoc Kali and Modern Arnis) to address this range. 

Thanks

Andy


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> If it were so, no one would be allowed to use them in FMA training and it would not have been the UNIVERSAL TRAINING TOOL of our FMA ancestors.
> 
> Why do the FMA use rattan?... to make the training HONEST, to keep the impact HONEST but NOT deadly.
> 
> Why did the Filipinos CONTINUE to use rattan as a training tool even AFTER the Spanish were ousted? The manongs understood from HONEST training that it was the closest thing and the safest thing to reality.
> 
> If one were to research all the recorded unpadded stick 'death' matches...if you can actually find any; you will note that they did NOT use rattan. They used bahi or kamagong.
> 
> --Rafael--


Again, it isn't the tool but the usage that makes it a deadly force weapon. TGace has already made reference to that explanation. I would hesitate to use tradition as a rationale for swinging rattan at someone's head.  I am not disagreeing with the wood/grass - but how you are applying it.

If you can't distinguish that much, the idea that you know the local self defense/use of force laws as a 'lead by example' instructor/leader way to go is lacking - even though you ask that practitioners be versed in your website disclaimer.

As far as the rest...what can I say, you continue to avoid answering direct questions, make clear explanations....I guess it is just more advertising.  In the end it was awefully structured for a 'no rules' event.  What if someone didn't comply with the third party calls:  remember it was no rules so they really don't have to comply - and may not be able to hear under the stress of fight or flight (there have been personal accounts of tunnel vision and loss of hearing in some cases) so even if they wanted to play fair (which implies rules) they might not be able to based on the physiological nature of stress.

Also, some of the things you are tagging on me, weren't from me.  But one I will address is the 'car' issue.  If you HIT someone with a car (as any deer) I would think that counts as an Impact tool.  If you hit someone they call it vehicular homicide/manslaughter....again it isn't the 'thing' that makes it an impact tool but the function in the moment/usage...

Nice side step of the legal reference btw.


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Again, it isn't the tool but the usage that makes it a deadly force weapon. TGace has already made reference to that explanation. I would hesitate to use tradition as a rationale for swinging rattan at someone's head.  I am not disagreeing with the wood/grass - but how you are applying it.



And I am stating is that you are limited in understanding the USAGE of rattan in FMA training we incorporate and continue to retread the same issue that MOST of the readers and FMAs UNIVERSALLY understand. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If you can't distinguish that much, the idea that you know the local self defense/use of force laws as a 'lead by example' instructor/leader way to go is lacking - even though you ask that practitioners be versed in your website disclaimer.



Well that's another 'IF' that is incorrect.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> As far as the rest...what can I say, you continue to avoid answering direct questions, make clear explanations....I guess it is just more advertising.



Others here have UNDERSTOOD my plain answers and stated so in this very page, perhaps you need to reassess your own comprehension skills. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> As far as the rest...what can I say, you continue to avoid In the end it was awefully structured for a 'no rules' event.  What if someone didn't comply with the third party calls:  remember it was no rules so they really don't have to comply - and may not be able to hear under the stress of fight or flight (there have been personal accounts of tunnel vision and loss of hearing in some cases) so even if they wanted to play fair (which implies rules) they might not be able to based on the physiological nature of stress.



Covered the 'NO Rules' post probe already.

There was no unnecessary 'stress', I was there.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Also, some of the things you are tagging on me, weren't from me.  But one I will address is the 'car' issue.  If you HIT someone with a car (as any deer) I would think that counts as an Impact tool.  If you hit someone they call it vehicular homicide/manslaughter....again it isn't the 'thing' that makes it an impact tool but the function in the moment/usage...



Have you ever done any training with rattan? Does it feel like the same impact as a car?

Again you state a false premise, your function/usage analogy is incorrect.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Nice side step of the legal reference btw.



Addressed it... MOST people here understand it... you're a special case. 

Here's your first post on the thread:



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> ...and this idea that there are 'no rules' IMO will always be a load of BS in a commerical event because there is no way on God's green earth that an event with no rules would get 'sanctioned' or insured.
> 
> Besides, if there are no rules (and more importantly, no consequences), then i win because I'll bring my car instead of a stick .
> __________________
> Paul R. Martin




I think you answered yourself.. there WERE rules, but it wasn't commercial in the terms that there were spectators who paid or money was exchanged.

Looks like there's some slippage on your 'deadly force' morality issue as well, since you wanted to use a car and the ONLY thing holding you back was consequences.


--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> Hi Rafael,
> 
> Has Tuhon Ray shared with the Sayoc group his method of "Punyo Mano"? He has done a good job of incorporating different systems (including Sayoc Kali and Modern Arnis) to address this range.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Andy



Yes. Tuhon Ray is one of the best stick and blade instructors in the world. Anyone who has a chance to train with him is a lucky person.


In the late 80's and early 90's we used to travel up and down the East coast trying to promote the FMAs. We used to enter as many MA tournaments to compete in THEIR rules or give a chance to demo FMA. During that era, it was a VERY difficult arena. So I'm used to people using their limited understanding of FMAs in general. 

Decades later, we have seen the FMA grow and feel that this growth made all the barriers we and others have torn down and the hard looonng weekends of travel worth it.

As per folks who want to play 'brother's keeper' to the FMA... we were doing this before everyone ever thought the FMA was a legitimate family.

--Rafael--


----------



## arnisandyz

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Yes. Tuhon Ray is one of the best stick and blade instructors in the world. Anyone who has a chance to train with him is a lucky person.
> 
> 
> In the late 80's and early 90's we used to travel up and down the East coast trying to promote the FMAs. We used to enter as many MA tournaments to compete in THEIR rules or give a chance to demo FMA. During that era, it was a VERY difficult arena. So I'm used to people using their limited understanding of FMAs to build division amongst MAs in general. Some places wouldn't let us if we were not wearing Karate gis..lol... so we found ways to get around that.
> 
> Decades later, we have seen the FMA grow and feel that this growth made all the barriers we tore down and the hard looonng weekends of travel worth it.
> 
> As per folks who want to play 'brother's keeper' to the FMA... we were doing this before everyone ever thought the FMA was a legitimate family.
> 
> --Rafael--



Rafael,

Yeah,  Tuhon Ray has shared with us some stories of the "older days" and has used those experiences (mainly fighting) to explain some of his methodology of Punyo Mano.  He has some old fight footage on his website if anyone is interested. 

Do you know if there is any chance of Sayoc Kali bringing their SamaSama back down to Florida?


----------



## Sun_Helmet

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> Do you know if there is any chance of Sayoc Kali bringing their SamaSama back down to Florida?



Andy, there are no plans to bring Sama Sama down south - the majority of instructors are up north and the logistics these days would be tougher for them to make the trip.

Btw, I saw Travis this weekend at Instructor camp, and he showed us the panther teeth holes in his shirt. (no that is NOT part of Sayoc training...yet... 

--Rafael--


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1. And I am stating is that you are limited in understanding the USAGE of rattan in FMA training we incorporate and continue to retread the same issue that MOST of the readers and FMAs UNIVERSALLY understand.
> 
> 2. Others here have UNDERSTOOD my plain answers and stated so in this very page, perhaps you need to reassess your own comprehension skills.
> 
> 3. Covered the 'NO Rules' post probe already.
> 
> 4. There was no unnecessary 'stress', I was there.
> 
> 5. Have you ever done any training with rattan? Does it feel like the same impact as a car?
> 
> 6. Again you state a false premise, your function/usage analogy is incorrect.
> 
> 7. Addressed it... MOST people here understand it... you're a special case.
> 
> --Rafael--


1. Were head shots used? Yes. That is all I need to know.
2. I comprehend well enough. You are avoiding my 'legal/sanctioned/insurance' questions. Got it.
3. Do you mean the 'no rules' advertising probe (which would mean sensationalism) or your accusation (assumption) that I only inquired to set up this line of comments - which isn't true. IF I found out that there was no 'armor' but that there were going to be some kind of padding added to the stick that was provided to disperse/deaden the point impact of the head shots...well maybe not that date because of timing, but another one that fit better. I have seen that done - even in the Sayoc website pics.
4. I am sorry, but how valid is your experiment or your data for real time usage if the person is not going to be experiencing fight or flight stress? Besides which, since the reaction is indivdual - what you thought was not there might have been for someone else.
5. No it doesn't ( I would imagine  but I figure at this point you woudn't mind if I tested that theory), but then again, I didn't use the 'no rules' statement.
6. Funny, my local county prosecutor agreed with me when I did finally consult him today. He also said that the lack of up front/open information should be a warning signal that things aren't 'legit' and any such events should be avoided because of 'colateral liability/culpability.'
7. Yes, I seem to be a special case if I am the only one who recognizes the inherent danger of such a 'mysterious' event and the lack of legitimacy in practice and advertising....


I suppose that I will be accused of 'false assumptions' again even though I cited your comments and data along with my comments during the phone interview. Unlike the original advertisement and your posts, I was up front with the data when I talked to him. If I was wrong, I would have eaten crow and asked for ketchup, but based on what you yourself have said, this type of event can get every participant/coordinator in trouble in the criminal and civil sense.

Here's simple questions for you - again: What was the plan if someone was injured seriously? Were there EMT's ON SITE? Was the event covered by insurance?

You participated and are a Tuhon type in the organization, I would think that you could answer a simple 'yes' or 'no' to these questions without giving up any secrets.


----------



## arnisandyz

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> Andy, there are no plans to bring Sama Sama down south - the majority of instructors are up north and the logistics these days would be tougher for them to make the trip.
> 
> Btw, I saw Travis this weekend at Instructor camp, and he showed us the panther teeth holes in his shirt. (no that is NOT part of Sayoc training...yet...
> 
> --Rafael--



LOL...yeah, i've seen pictures of Travis doing "buno" with some of the big cats he works with, pretty nuts.   

I know Guro Mike Sayoc, who has helped host the previous SamaSamas, is still here in Kissimmee. Is he pretty much doing his own thing seperate of you guys? If its to "political" in nature to answer, I understand. 

Thanks

Andy


----------



## Cruentus

Rapheal,

I have a couple of questions. This may have been covered in the thread already, but my brain leaks out of my ears when I read more then 3 posts on this thread for some reason. Soon, I'll be a babbling idiot.....woe...wait a second here...   

#1. Could you explain in some detail the Sayoc Kali strategy for stick fighting. I am hearing a lot about avoidence of the Corto range because that is where the stick can be most damaging. The impression I am getting is that the strategy is to chip away at your opponent in the largo range and end it there, or to close the gap from the largo to the grappling range and out grapple your opponent, depending on how strong of a largo player or grappler you are compared to your opponent. But mainly, when all things are equal, you guys aim to avoid the corto range. Am I understanding this correctly? Please help me understand.

#2. A question that I keep seeing, but I see no answer to, is how many people were at the event and what styles were represented. If you don't want to say so, no problem, but could you please tell me why. I guess I am just missing the importance of this question, or why you wouldn't want to answer this one. You can PM me on this if you want to keep it out of the public thread if that would be best.

Thanks man, and thanks for your patience. Now...time to go work on my suplex into the flaming table maneuver...  

Yours,

PJMOD


----------



## Michael Billings

Tulisan, great post!   And the offer to take it to PM or email.  A couple of you bashing away at each other vis-a-vis keyboards instead of sticks, could learn from this example.  

 -Michael


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Tulisan said:
			
		

> Rapheal,
> #1. But mainly, when all things are equal, you guys aim to avoid the corto range. Am I understanding this correctly?



In Sayoc Kali, due to SK's CQ knife training the corto range is what many of our guys excel at. Therefore tendency is to engage in what one knows best. However, after one does enough padded/armored stick fighting, they realize that with longer weapons and almost equal skill sets, staying at that range TOO long outweighs the positives. So they begin to increase skill at largo range and then stick grappling range. Many of our students have done grappling so they are now adapting the stick to grappling range. Some have done a lot of largo as well if they also train in our stick curriculum. It is difficult to learn stick grappling with padded sticks, the way the techniques are designed the padded sticks do not offer the same 'honesty' as a hard stick. It is less about impact, but more about the manipulation and locks that require no give at certain points.

So when we take the training to the level of rattan, with minimum padding, we have them whittle away their tendency to stay at corto. They don't WANT to stay in corto, but their ego wants them to stay in and get the shot as they did when they were padded up. The best reason to evade corto range, you are open to all the other limb strikes, take downs, and stick strikes at power arcs as well. The students reassess their timing and conditioned responses. So when two people good at corto range fight, the fastest way to win is to close by baiting corto and taking them down. 

If the takedown fails you are BACK in corto range so do not try to stay in grappling mode and try again. Even if you think you are attempting another takedown... You cover/clear and escape to largo as FAST as possible. At any time you are in corto and you are NOT the one making the ONLY contact (before and after the strike) that means your tactic is flawed and you need to close or evade. 

Body shifting is excellent for ONE counter as you make impact. If you do not make impact and maintain corto, the highest probability is that a stick fighter with grappling skills will have you in their guard or swept in the air. When one is swinging with power it is tougher to evade a takedown. When you reset the range away from corto, and the grappler attempts to do a takedown then THEY are in corto range.

So the short answer is , avoid the corto range unless you make the only impact strike, with equal skills you should follow to grappling or largo depending on how much better you are in those ranges against the other person.

The Sayoc stick grappling DVD will show all kinds of scenarios, only one fight ended quickly and that was by the person who excelled in stick grappling, as well as largo and corto. It was a standup submission and he had BOTH sticks by then. He used guntings against a lowline kick, and used the extra stick to keep the opponent at bay and the used it to bait them into his submission stick lock.




			
				Tulisan said:
			
		

> #2. A question that I keep seeing, but I see no answer to, is how many people were at the event and what styles were represented. If you don't want to say so, no problem, but could you please tell me why. I guess I am just missing the importance of this question, or why you wouldn't want to answer this one. You can PM me on this if you want to keep it out of the public thread if that would be best.



Mainly because whatever number I say will give others more pages to waste about my 'evasion' of details if they do not pop up on the DVD. So whatever number of participants one sees in the DVD would be the best way to count who was there. I think there is four or more scenarios on the DVD. To us who were there, we know the number and some chose not to be included, other fights were redundant (as far as outcome and techniques/tactics) so were edited due to space. As far as styles, since Sayoc  does not involve itself in outside politics, we have students who crosstrain and encourage them to seek as much knowledge from every kind of FMA or MA out there. What we teach fits in no matter what they train so we escape that form of 'classical mess'. 

Hope this made sense Tulisan. Good name btw. There's a book on the Katipunan that covers the history of the Tulisanes.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1. Were head shots used? Yes. That is all I need to know.



We KNOW that's 'all you need to know'... that's what causes a false premise.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2. I comprehend well enough. You are avoiding my 'legal/sanctioned/insurance' questions. Got it.



We KNOW you 'Got it'. That's the problem.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3. Do you mean the 'no rules' advertising probe (which would mean sensationalism)



It's a probe. Sensationalism would not include blatant inconsistencies on the following sentence. We would have stated that submission was NOT allowed.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> or your accusation (assumption) that I only inquired to set up this line of comments - which isn't true. IF I found out that there was no 'armor' but that there were going to be some kind of padding added to the stick that was provided to disperse/deaden the point impact of the head shots...well maybe not that date because of timing, but another one that fit better. I have seen that done - even in the Sayoc website pics.



Which of course PROVES there were inconsistencies on our 'sensationalistic' probe. As stated red flags were placed, YOU just indicated that, and STILL make a false assumption.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 4. I am sorry, but how valid is your experiment or your data for real time usage if the person is not going to be experiencing fight or flight stress? Besides which, since the reaction is indivdual - what you thought was not there might have been for someone else.



Because fight or flight was not the purpose of the training as stated several pages back. The post above this to Tulisan and other details I have covered pages with indicate that, but you STILL go back to the same false premise. You are placing your own training limitations on our curriculum.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5. No it doesn't ( I would imagine  but I figure at this point you woudn't mind if I tested that theory), but then again, I didn't use the 'no rules' statement.



No, but I wished you HAD taken the extra step and contacted the direct event source when given the opportunity.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 6. Funny, my local county prosecutor agreed with me when I did finally consult him today. He also said that the lack of up front/open information should be a warning signal that things aren't 'legit' and any such events should be avoided because of 'colateral liability/culpability.



I suppose if I stated that a former  prosecutor and several  lawyers from the event state were consulted prior to the event.. it wouldn't change your mind. One man's expert can contest another's. The best PROOF are the results. FMA training has been this way for hundreds of years.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 7. Yes, I seem to be a special case if I am the only one who recognizes the inherent danger of such a 'mysterious' event and the lack of legitimacy in practice and advertising....




It is only 'mysterious' if you never followed up with the direct source.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I suppose that I will be accused of 'false assumptions' again even though I cited your comments and data along with my comments during the phone interview. Unlike the original advertisement and your posts, I was up front with the data when I talked to him. If I was wrong, I would have eaten crow and asked for ketchup, but based on what you yourself have said, this type of event can get every participant/coordinator in trouble in the criminal and civil sense.



False premise and lack of comprehension of what I REALLY wrote. The only way a participant/coordinator could get in trouble is if they did every thing we did NOT. As several metaphors wrongly indicated, we gave the fellow the parachute- we didn't throw it at him after he leapt. The accident would happen if the chute didn't open. The same accident can happen during ANY stick training with live rattan. A concussion can happen during ice skating. That does not mean deadly force was being encouraged or the purpose of the training. In fact, if the very event was to encourage STICK GRAPPLING as a safer/efficient alternative to corto range striking it supports the TRAINING purpose of the event.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Here's simple questions for you - again: What was the plan if someone was injured seriously? Were there EMT's ON SITE? Was the event covered by insurance?




A simple question in THREE parts...lol.
There is a Sayoc plan because injury has happened before in other training, some serious even from something that happened unrelated to training. However, within our ranks are EMT/Medics from the civilian and SF military sectors. Within our ranks are surgeons and orthopedic doctors. Within our ranks are just about every expertise one can think of. This is why Sayoc is a 'We' answer, not an 'I' answer. If YOU do not know medical management then I will not attempt to teach you here. Therefore, by deductive reasoning you would know we have several insurance people as students and consultants.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> You participated and are a Tuhon type in the organization, I would think that you could answer a simple 'yes' or 'no' to these questions without giving up any secrets.



Yes.

--Tuhon type--


----------



## Michael Billings

> Mainly because whatever number I say will give others more pages to waste about my 'evasion' of details if they do not pop up on the DVD. So whatever number of participants one sees in the DVD would be the best way to count who was there. I think there is four or more scenarios on the DVD.


 This seems like blatent advertisment and will not be tolerated.  I will not debate whether this is "selling" or not, but if you continue this, the thread will be locked and post deleted.  

 It is also a blatent evasion of a perfectly reasonable question regarding any event.  It is up to you whether to answer it, but your "rationale" is specious and appears mercenary and driven by a profit motive.

 -Michael Billings
 MT SModerator


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> This seems like blatent advertisment and will not be tolerated.  I will not debate whether this is "selling" or not, but if you continue this, the thread will be locked and post deleted.
> 
> It is also a blatent evasion of a perfectly reasonable question regarding any event.  It is up to you whether to answer it, but your "rationale" is specious and appears mercenary and driven by a profit motive.
> 
> -Michael Billings
> MT SModerator



Here's a reason:

In our system we have group pics after closed seminars and events. You often see eighty people, but that may be half of who were really there. Unlike what some folks are accustomed to, Sayoc events sometimes have individuals who have jobs that don't allow their identities to be exposed. You can all surmise why.

What if I said there were thirty? Fifty? Two?

Do we go on several pages trying to find out the names of said participants?

Hope that clears it up.  

If anyone wants to further continue this, take it to sayoc.com and we can avoid any marketing assumptions. 


--Rafael--


----------



## Bob Hubbard

I'm webmaster for about 20 different martial arts sites, including a few which deal with LEO and other 'identity-sensitive' individuals.  The solutions to the identity problem is easy.

1- Don't take their picture
2- If you do, don't put it online
3- If they are in a crown shot, blue the face.

Saying there were 30, 40, 10, whatever will not violate their privacy or safety.  A caption "Event participants and guests" on the pic would easily dispell any suggestion of artificially inflating the numbers. 

When asked who was there, you can easily state the ones you can, and a blanket "as well as other members of XXX who for safety and security reasons requested anonimity."


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> I'm webmaster for about 20 different martial arts sites, including a few which deal with LEO and other 'identity-sensitive' individuals.  The solutions to the identity problem is easy.
> 
> 1- Don't take their picture
> 2- If you do, don't put it online
> 3- If they are in a crown shot, blue the face.
> 
> Saying there were 30, 40, 10, whatever will not violate their privacy or safety.  A caption "Event participants and guests" on the pic would easily dispell any suggestion of artificially inflating the numbers.
> 
> When asked who was there, you can easily state the ones you can, and a blanket "as well as other members of XXX who for safety and security reasons requested anonimity."



What do you do if they are in the background of a moving picture or if they are the participants of said film? We don't have the tech to blur images. The best option is to edit them out.

What if the two individuals were edited merely for redundancy and dvd space?

By counting them, the followup question would be to VERIFY they were there at all, which would be counter productive and moot.

One of the reasons we have a close relationship with certain agencies is that we go above and beyond to shield their identity. Correction: In fact, we KNOW they don't want to be part of the pics... so it doesn't even go to the point of requesting removal of them on the pic. 

If some of you really have to have a number, say... fifty, as well as other members of XXX who for safety and security reasons requested anonymity.


--Rafael--


----------



## Bob Hubbard

A $400 PC, a copy of Linux, and a search of various free software sites will turnup several programs capable of doing that.  If you do a search on a program called "GIMP", it may be useful.  It is a free graphics editor with the power of Photoshop, but for free.  It does run on both Windows and Linux.

Some VCRs and Camcorders also have advanced editing features.  Ask the company who masters your DVD's to do the quick edit job for you.  If you're burning the DVDs on a home box, it also easily has the power to do the edit and rerender job.

Saying "We had 10 CIA Assassins at our party" and showing 10 blurred shadows, won't violate national security. 

Now, this is a shameless plug: If your video people can't do it, I might be able to.  I've done graphic and video work for several people, most recently Datu Hartman.  (I'm the video editor for his video projects). If you'd like my help, let me know off board and we can discuss it in more depth.


----------



## loki09789

Sun_Helmet said:
			
		

> 1. Because fight or flight was not the purpose of the training as stated several pages back. The post above this to Tulisan and other details I have covered pages with indicate that, but you STILL go back to the same false premise. You are placing your own training limitations on our curriculum.
> 
> 2. No, but I wished you HAD taken the extra step and contacted the direct event source when given the opportunity.
> 
> 3. I suppose if I stated that a former prosecutor and several lawyers from the event state were consulted prior to the event.. it wouldn't change your mind. One man's expert can contest another's. The best PROOF are the results. FMA training has been this way for hundreds of years.
> 
> 4. It is only 'mysterious' if you never followed up with the direct source.
> 
> 5. A simple question in THREE parts...lol.
> There is a Sayoc plan because injury has happened before in other training, some serious even from something that happened unrelated to training. However, within our ranks are EMT/Medics from the civilian and SF military sectors. Within our ranks are surgeons and orthopedic doctors. Within our ranks are just about every expertise one can think of. This is why Sayoc is a 'We' answer, not an 'I' answer. If YOU do not know medical management then I will not attempt to teach you here. Therefore, by deductive reasoning you would know we have several insurance people as students and consultants.
> 
> --Tuhon type--


1. No it wasn't the purpose but the purpose was suppose to show/prove what did work in real fight time...I think that word 'fight' would indicate half of the 'fight or flight' idea. So, not acknowledging or accounting for its affect in reality on a fighter's performance and only focusing on getting techniques off isn't very real to me.

2. As I said, as well as the Prosecutor, if an event is on the up and up, with no alterior motives (advertising, promotion, abuse, legitious/civil liability risks) then I shouldn't get dodges and have to go behind close doors for more info. Bob made a good point along the same lines with the picture/attendance issue. Either say it out right or don't say it at all.

3. It very well might, but since all you say to my questions is "We had it covered" and "your assuming"...how can I know anything. Again, either say it out right or don't even bring it up.

4. Covered in #2

5. Actually the wording was "Simple question*s* for you...." so I don't know what your referring to with the beginning of that comment. Great, you had people with medical training there because they were part of your organization, but if you had people hitting each other with sticks in the head and didn't have EMT (meaning on duty with an ambulance and response equiptment) there, that is pretty irresponsible to me. Again you 'answer' with information, but no real structure or details.

This is my last public post on this (for real this time). Ultimately, I think the marketing/Public Relations strategy of being secretive but 'open' leaves too many people with questions about motives (whether training or advertising) and responsibility of practice.

I know I am saying it again (but gee isn't that what having a consistent stance is all about?), if it was 'legit' and there was no reason to be 'closed door' other than to create this aura of mystery then simply answering questions about attendance and results with "20" or what ever would be a great way to avoid that impression.

I don't see Blauer/Wagner/MacYoung types who are of the tactical schools of martial arts doing the 'secret society' thing in their approach. It is all in the open and upfront. They are very well respected and 'contracted' by LEO/Military as well as civilian types - and I imagine because they don't create the mystery around themselves they seem a hell of a lot more accessable than the "Beeatches come to me" approach to advertising.

If you want to continue this in PM that would be fine with me. I have explained what my 'positive goals' were. If they were in contrast to promoting or stroking the Sayoc ego, oh well. I still haven't seen anything that convinces me that this was anything other than a 'fight club' event (btw, the philosophical justification for the fight club in the book/movie was to 'gain experience' through 'fighting' and discovering who you were in strife) designed to promote another DVD.

Tyler from FIGHT CLUB :"The first rule of fight club is, you do not talk about fight club. The second rule of fight club is, you do not talk about fight club. The third rule of fight club, someone yells stop, goes limp, taps out, the fight is over. The fourth rule: only two guys to a fight. The fifth rule, only one fight at a time fellas. The sixth rule: no shirts, no shoes. The seventh rule, fights will go on as long as they have to. And the eighth and final rule, if this is your first night at fight club, you have to fight.")


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> ...showing 10 blurred shadows, won't violate national security.
> 
> Now, this is a shameless plug: If your video people can't do it, I might be able to.  I've done graphic and video work for several people, most recently Datu Hartman.  (I'm the video editor for his video projects). If you'd like my help, let me know off board and we can discuss it in more depth.



Thanks for the offer. We try not to place the 'Invisibles' on any of our public  venues, even if we had the tech (which we can on still pics). On the motion stuff, we take your first option, by just taking them out entirely. This way we don't risk anything. Little minute surface skin details or body mannerism, as well as a whole slew of other ways to identify someone visibly are not risked. We just see no positive in it.

If we end up being vague on some questions on a public forum, so be it.

Heard good things about Datu Hartman this weekend from one of our MA guys. So I'm sure his commercial dvds do real well, and have excellent production.

--Rafael--


----------



## Sun_Helmet

loki09789 said:
			
		

> 1.  No it wasn't the purpose but the purpose was suppose to show/prove what did work in real fight time...I think that word 'fight' would indicate half of the 'fight or flight' idea.  So, not acknowledging or accounting for its affect in reality on a fighter's performance and only focusing on getting techniques off isn't very real to me.



Work modular... take what you learn from the 'fight' data and then add it to the other scenarios or training drills. If one doesn't have the correct responses in the fight section of their training, by lumping it in on the broader scenarios - it will dilute the necessary skills one has to learn.




			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 2.  As I said, as well as the Prosecutor, if an event is on the up and up, with no alterior motives (advertising, promotion, abuse, legitious/civil liability risks) then I shouldn't get dodges and have to go behind close doors for more info. Bob made a good point along the same lines with the picture/attendance issue.  Either say it out right or don't say it at all.



Ask your prosecutor friend if he would NOT call the direct contact if he was given/encouraged the opportunity to. 



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 3.  It very well might, but since all you say to my questions is "We had it covered" and "your assuming"...how can I know anything.  Again, either say it out right or don't even bring it up.


 
Because YOU do NOT have to KNOW anything. You weren't part of the training.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> 5.  ... Great, you had people with medical training there because they were part of your organization, but if you had people hitting each other with sticks in the head and didn't have EMT (meaning on duty with an ambulance and response equiptment) there, that is pretty irresponsible to me.  Again you 'answer' with information, but no real structure or details.




We had it MORE than covered. Next.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> This is my last public post on this (for real this time).  Ultimately, I think the marketing/Public Relations strategy of being secretive but 'open' leaves too many people with questions about motives (whether training or advertising) and responsibility of practice.



Outside people will have questions. Only the REAL participants matter. Our motives are not questioned by those in the know. That's all that matters.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I know I am saying it again (but gee isn't that what having a consistent stance is all about?), if it was 'legit' and there was no reason to be 'closed door' other than to create this aura of mystery then simply answering questions about attendance and results with "20" or what ever would be a great way to avoid that impression.



I know... false premise.

okay... we had 20. See how moot that question is?



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I don't see Blauer/Wagner/MacYoung types who are of the tactical schools of martial arts doing the 'secret society' thing in their approach.  It is all in the open and upfront.  They are very well respected and 'contracted' by LEO/Military as well as civilian types - and I imagine because they don't create the mystery around themselves they seem a hell of a lot more accessable than the "Beeatches come to me" approach to advertising.



Great for them. The more the merrier. I recommend anyone who wants to seek them out to train with them. Sayoc Kali does not try to market AGAINST any one/style/system. We don't consider anyone teaching FMA our competition. It's a huge world. 

We LIVE the FMA and to pit one against the other as you just did, is just divide and conquer mentality. That's a lose / lose situation. Force teaming your POV with others doesn't concern us. 

Sayoc Kali does VERY VERY well with our methods.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If you want to continue this in PM that would be fine with me.  I have explained what my 'positive goals' were.  If they were in contrast to promoting or stroking the Sayoc ego, oh well.  I still haven't seen anything that convinces me that this was anything other than a 'fight club' event (btw, the philosophical justification for the fight club in the book/movie was to 'gain experience' through 'fighting' and discovering who you were in strife - much like you are saying your stick fighting will validate technique through reality) designed to promote another DVD.



Since you have NOT seen the material, I suppose you would agree that this is YOUR assumption . I, who have seen the material would say for a FACT that it was a false premise.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Tyler from FIGHT CLUB :"The first rule of fight club is, you do not talk about fight club. The second rule of fight club is, you do not talk about fight club. The third rule of fight club, someone yells stop, goes limp, taps out, the fight is over. The fourth rule: only two guys to a fight. The fifth rule, only one fight at a time fellas. The sixth rule: no shirts, no shoes. The seventh rule, fights will go on as long as they have to. And the eighth and final rule, if this is your first night at fight club, you have to fight.")



Therefore by POSTING our event on a public forum (which now has OVER 2000 hits!) AUTOMATICALLY removes the 'Fight Club' connotation.

By giving a DIRECT contact on selfsame PUBLIC forum, REMOVES the 'Fight Club' connotation.

By FILMING and DISTRIBUTING some footage of said event, REMOVES the fight club connotaion.

Knock Knock... FALSE PREMISE!

--Rafael--


----------



## Cruentus

Before this thread gets locked with the key swallowed...

Mr. Billings, thanks for the positive comments. I do try (don't always succeed, but I try...  )

Rapheal, thanks for answering my questions again. I believe I understand. Also, it's always rare but good when someone knows what my handle means.  :ultracool 

Thanks,

Paul


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman

First off I would like to say that it great the members of the Sayoc Kali group are represented here on MT and are participating on the forum. I have noticed that Tuhon Tom has just signed up and Im looking forward to his input. Now on with the thread;

First of all I really dont have a problem with how you choose to train. When I was younger I would participate in many different types of contact weapon sparring with no safety equipment. We would use staves, nunchaku, sai & on the assorted weapons. I was young, inexperienced and crazy! I learned a couple of things quickly; 

	Be first!
	Be fast!
	Be accurate!
	DONT GET HIT!!!!!

There were a lot of good things that I learned, but some negative things did occur;

	I spent less time training so my injuries could heal.
	I lost some of my training partners do to the type of training.

What I decided was that I would train that way less and only with like minded individuals. This way I could attract more people to the art and have a hardcore program for the more serious. I was at the 88 Michigan Modern Arnis summer camp with Jeff Leader and we got bored waiting for the session to begin so we started to free start. During the match Jeff left a very interesting welt mark on my forearm. I thought to myself next time Ill block that one.  People around us thought that we were crazy. After which we decided not to do this in public view so people werent intimidated by what we were doing.

 If people want to train this way I think it should be done in closed door sessions. We as FMAers are ambassadors for our arts. We need to try to attract people to our systems and not scare them away. This is why Prof Remy A. Presas formed Modern Arnis. People in the P.I. were leaving the FMAs and going into Japanese karate. Why? Because people needed to be able to go to work the next day! Prof was responsible for rejuvenating the interest in their national art. He even received a commendation for the Filipino government for his achievements. 

What worries me with promoting an event link this is that it may do harm than good! If this was truly to benefit the FMA community it may have been best to keep it quite and collect the intel for future work. Instead it may be perceived as a chest beating, banner waiving self promotional gimmick. I think this may end up as a black eye for all of our people. Now Im not trying to trash talk you. What Im trying to say is that people may not perceive this the way it was meant. 

In the written form of communication I dont always get my point across well. Im mildly dyslexic and it hampers my communication. I prefer face to face conversations. If youre ever out my way I would be more than happy to go out for a cup of coffee or something stronger to discuss different ideas. Seeing that you live  out of my area feel free to call me (716-675-0899).

Respectfully yours,  :asian:


----------



## Tgace

Well Said... 
:asian:


----------



## Sun_Helmet

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> First off I would like to say that it great the members of the Sayoc Kali group are represented here on MT and are participating on the forum.



Thanks Mr. Hartman. I've been a member for awhile now but have only contributed on historical threads. If anyone thought this thread was heated, they should venture to the debates I've had with some Western Martial Arts experts who thought the Filipinos were conquered by the Toledo Blade.



			
				Datu Puti said:
			
		

> If people want to train this way I think it should be done in closed door sessions. We as FMAers are ambassadors for our arts. We need to try to attract people to our systems and not scare them away.



This was the first open invite in thirty years of doing such training in Sayoc. When we first designed the invite, we felt that only those like minded individuals would respond. In the one on one interviews, we could determine if the individuals had prior training and would understand how the event was designed.

In the past, we've done training that would isolate other aspects of stick work, we felt there was a large vacuum of stick grappling material available for FMA which was taught by FMAs. As you stated the Japanese arts have books on this material in bookstores, there's bits here and there from FMAs but not available to the general public. There's material by the great Gene Lebell as well. However, nothing focusing entirely on the stick grappling and why stick grappling is an often ignored subject in the context of FMA. As ambassadors to our arts, the Sayocs have been able to show FMA concepts on a large budget Hollywood film (with more in the works), developed curriculum for the military, expanded historical research of Filipino tribal warfare, and now want to spread the word that the stick can also be a great equalizer against grappling or used in grappling mode. 

How well the FMA community embraces this opens the doors to the HUGE untapped (pardon the pun) grappling student body that have not seriously studied FMAs.

If one were to surf the net, you can see grappling instructors, even former JKD students stating the 'dead' arts of FMA. As ambassadors of FMA, here is material that speaks their language and SHOWS them the validity of our close range techniques as well as their own grappling material adapted to FMA.

In the history of Filipino tribal warfare, there are documented instances where observers would indicate warriors not merely hacking away at one another, but tying up their opponent and pretty much restraining them to use their edged weapon, like a Kalinga head ax.




			
				Datu Puti said:
			
		

> What I1m trying to say is that people may not perceive this the way it was meant.



I believe people would choose to perceive anything we do based on their presumptions and background. Since this event is accompanied by instruction and not sold as a PRIDE or NHB entertainment type of material, we know that the positives outweigh the negatives. In fact, from all the forums we have posted only this one solicited so many INITIAL negative responses. We also knew that if we communicated and placed our POV constructively, that many here will see that the last statement that I wrote way back, "primal (snipped) brutal...WE call it training" would be universally understood. We trusted other FMAs such as you to recognize the training for what it was, no matter how much they were steered off by others in the beginning.




			
				Datu Puti said:
			
		

> If you1re ever out my way I would be more than happy to go out for a cup of coffee or something stronger to discuss different ideas.



Sounds great. You're also invited as a special guest to any Sayoc Kali event we have in the future (seminars, etc.). We've extended such to others in MA in the past and always had great times with them. 

Again, I extend my thanks to the board and its members. Further Sayoc related questions can be handled at our site.

Gumagalang,
--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello Everyone,

Sorry for my absence from this mess, I only returned last evening from Stockholm.

Man, has this thread become sensitive/flaming or what not! I think we may all need to take a step back and not take ourselves/yourselves so seriously. After all it was only an opportunity to train/fight, not all this political/legal/ego massaging that has been going on. 

Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.


----------



## GAB

Airyu@hotmail.com said:
			
		

> Hello Everyone,
> 
> Sorry for my absence from this mess, I only returned last evening from Stockholm.
> 
> Man, has this thread become sensitive/flaming or what not! I think we may all need to take a step back and not take ourselves/yourselves so seriously. After all it was only an opportunity to train/fight, not all this political/legal/ego massaging that has been going on.
> 
> Gumagalang
> Guro Steve L.


Guro Steve, I will say between your two personalities, you are one not so slick dude...

IMO

Regards, Gary


----------



## Airyu@hotmail.com

Hello GAB,

I hope that is a good thing???(LOL)


Gumagalang
Guro Steve L.

www.Bujinkandojo.net


----------



## ace

Im Johny come late to this topic.
How Many Fighters came to this Event????

If opponents lost there Stick did they continue to Fight.

How Many Bones were Broken & Did the Tooth Fary loose
alot of cash?????

Was Ground Fighting a factor in any of the Fights.

Sory if These Questions have alredy been asked 
But U can Save Me a Ton of Reading I will
be Grateful


----------

