Rich
I am well thanks and you.
Thanks for the info. In fact after I wrote the post I read some good information on the history of Balintawak on another thread here on MT and it kind of answered my question about who made them.
Initially what got me wondering about this, was I was watching some videos on you tube on Balintawak single stick sparring type drills, and I had previously heard of "grouped" and "un-grouped drills" and I was wondering what I was seeing. Which then lead me to ponder the Tapi Tapi drills of Modern Arnis and I was wondering if there was a connection somewhere? Which led me to ask for some more information about them. I knew that you, Tim, Paul, and some others studied Balintawak and also Modern Arnis so I hoped you might fill some info in.
The answer to my first question, of is there a connection between the two I think is answered to a degree. Simply there is no direct correlation, from what I read on the history of Balintawak on that other thread that GM Remy had already left the school prior to the drills being grouped (created) as a teaching tool.
Since you were taught by the un-grouped method how did GM Buot teach it if you don't mind me asking. I mean in your lessons was he showing a principle (say baiting) and then build the sparring drill around the concept, then next time maybe it would be passing, checking with the empty hand etc. etc. I know the order of techniques that I have here is probably out of order but I'm trying ask questions to give me a clearer understanding of how the drills were taught, because all I can see is the finished product so to speak.
Ultimately I would like to discuss how/if people think that the TT drills are linked in some format, teaching methodology/format to the Balintawak drills but that thread I figured I would start over in the Modern Arnis forum. However first I wanted to in a sense understand or gain insight into the Balintawak side first.
Thanks for you input.
Mark,
I am fine. Thank you.
As to a connection, between Remy and Grouping, I would no direct connection in the creation of it. One might argue that there was influence going the other way. GM Presas and GM Taboada were friends. Remy was a sponge. So one might say there might have been an influence from Grouping to Tapi Tapi.
Tapi Tapi also called Semi Sparring had been rolled out in the 70's and early 80's. It did not do well most of the students. This could be a maturity or training level of the students or it could have been some teaching aspects. I believe Remy kept it in his back pocket and rolled it out again in the 90's when more people could comprehend it and also he had modified his teaching approach.
That is my opinion. Some will most likely disagree with that.
So if we assume there was no influence in either direction, then Remy who would insert techniques into a flow drill and allow them to be out of order. As he would say, " ... and he can strike me here, and we do this, and if he would have striked over here I would do this, ..."
Students and teachers like to have consistency to know what they need to do and learn. (* Advantage to Grouping methodology *) and so a pattern came about. This pattern could be said to have been a grouping, only I believe that Remy did not intend it to be a pattern, but a serious of possible patterns. Now once there was a pattern, did he get upset? NO. Did he say "Very Good!". I bet you he did.
Where as the Balintawak Side of Grouping starts out with an intended series of attacks and prescribed blocks for the student to learn.
As to the Original / Un-grouped, Ted taught a technique (* Single *) and then we would go back to the mixing bowl. The Mixing Bowl is Corraidas where the isntructor will guide (Some say Agok) the student through a random series of attacks. The instructor can select any attack, and the student is expected to do the appropraite block for his timing and skill set. Usually the back up is taught first which gives the student more time to execute his block to be safe. It also usually requires the student to move lean / step to be at a safe distance, yet still in the conflict. So when the instructor feeds the attack for the new technique the student is expected to try and do his block and counter technique.
Now based upon this, the Instructor is the driver. So in Tapi-Tapi there is a driver and I believe that this is required so people know who is doing what while they practice. So in the end there is a small influence from the Un Grouped Balintawak teaching methodology into the Tapi-Tapi as well as what I stated above where I believe there might have been some influence back from Grouped Balintawak to Tapi-Tapi.
Does what I wrote make sense?