History Channel - The Human Weapon Eskrima Sneak Peak!

Saw It on Friday. It was pretty good. Made me want to go train escrima and kali. Wish there was a school in my area.
 
One thing that was erroneous in the show was them claiming that the sparring sticks were padded with steel rods in the middle. That part was for Hollywood.
icon6.gif
 
I just caught a re-broadcast.

I taped the first part and caught the second half live.

In the fight at the end, Mr. Chambers had his left hand out too much. (* Evidence of it getting hit and ending the fight *) He was not used to having a weapon be both his offense and defense.

As to the steel rods, I would be real surprised if it were. It may feel like steel when you get hit, but given the amount of feflection during the swings and impacts I would not expect it to be steel.

I think there was a good history aspect as well.

I also think that with the Pekiti Tersia and Doces Pares and Balintawak, as well as another system, I am still trying to track down, there was a decent representation of the arts.
 
Its great that each MA is getting its own show and overall I like the series (thank God for DirecTV and a 100 DVR) but I do have some issues about the opening 5 or so minutes when they pump up how violent, deadly, bloody that week's martial arts can be.

They did Maui Thai two weeks ago and you'd have thought fighters were dying on a weekly basis the way it start off.
 
Saw it, and once again liked everything EXCEPT the hosts.

Oh, and one of the dumbasses kept calling a ginunting a "bolo".

But other than that, good stuff.

A ginunting is a bolo, bolo is a pretty common generic term for long bladed weapons. Admittedly its alot like calling a rapier a sword, but the statement is true.

Lamont
 
Great show, look forward to all of them to add to my collection.
 
I've heard this both ways--some people insist a bolo is a specific machete-like weapon, while others say it's a generic term.

Could someone post a picture of what specificly they mean by a "bolo" if it refers to a particular type of blade.

I have a pretty good image in my head of a tenegre, binangon, talibon, pinuti, ginunting, kampilan, barong, etc. I do not have an image for "bolo."

Thanks,

Lamont
 
I have a question for those of you that study one of these systems and has at least dabbled in others. This concerns the "wow factor" where someone watching it says "Boy! I want to do this!". Those people (like me) also worry about not getting it all. So, If someone took up one way and trained diligently, would all the techniques be the same as the other styles? Would they be covered? Do they overlap or are the different styles truly unique?

I ask because from a novice view everything on the show looked so similar ultimately.
 
There's a lot of overlap. The individual techniques tend to look very similar from FMA to FMA; how they're put together in combos, what range is preferred, how much the second hand is used, what weapons are taught, what length of weapon is preferred, whether the assumption is of a bladed or impact weapon, how much emphasis on empty-hand...these will differ.
 
I have a question for those of you that study one of these systems and has at least dabbled in others. This concerns the "wow factor" where someone watching it says "Boy! I want to do this!". Those people (like me) also worry about not getting it all. So, If someone took up one way and trained diligently, would all the techniques be the same as the other styles? Would they be covered? Do they overlap or are the different styles truly unique?

I ask because from a novice view everything on the show looked so similar ultimately.


They are similar but different.

Assume that there is only so many ways the body can move.

Now look at the tecniques that are possible as a funnel that is upside down. (* Small side up *)

So if one starts at the 12 o clock location and then works to get better (* tightening the circle or precision *) Now assume as one gets better you move around the funnel to other techniques. In the end you might get a lot better, but you might not see a specific spot on the funnel. You can use your techniques and flow to adjust to new situations. You might not see or know a single sequence that another style of FMA might do or teach.

(* No assume the funnel is bigger and it contains all arts and styles. *)
 
I have a question for those of you that study one of these systems and has at least dabbled in others. This concerns the "wow factor" where someone watching it says "Boy! I want to do this!". Those people (like me) also worry about not getting it all. So, If someone took up one way and trained diligently, would all the techniques be the same as the other styles? Would they be covered? Do they overlap or are the different styles truly unique?

I ask because from a novice view everything on the show looked so similar ultimately.

There is of course alot of similarity and yet alot of differeances. One of the things I look for in FMA's is there footwork. I definately like the FMA's that emphasis movement and that use the angles well. Most do this to some degree or another but other ones do it considerably better. I am also partial to FMA's that are blade oriented over stick oriented as that is my major focus.
icon6.gif
 
Back
Top