Originally posted by Kirk
Thanks for the correction. I can never remember how to spell it!
But it does bring up the question .. why is it called "FMA"???
As I understand it, the islands are called the Philippines, the people and cultural elements are Filipino/Filipina. And the language is Pilipino.
This difference arises from several factors. When the Spanish took over the north and central islands, they named the islands after their king, Philip. Which, I believe, they spelled as "Filip." The "Philippines" is an english version of the name (I think).
The ancient native tongue of the region didn't have an "F" sound and it got pronounced as "P."
If memory serves, this is the root of these different spellings.
But I'm intrigued by your comment about being
taught relatively quickly. What's a common time frame to be
considered effective in Kali?
In my experience, someone can gain basic profiency within a few months. But this will vary from person to person and system to system because not all systems are taught the same way -- which leads to your next question.
Is it an art where a lot of technique
is taught early, and you spend all the time thereafter (as much as
one would like I suppose) improving your skills that have been
taught early?
Depends on the system. Some systems do a "flood" of elements and then go back and clean up the details. Others bring out one element at a time and get it relatively polished before bringing out the next element.
But, either way, the FMAs tend to be very "concept" oriented, instead of "technique" oriented. In my experience, they're taught like this (I'm sure there are exceptions among the thousands of FMA systems that I've never seen):
You learn drills to develop flow and coordination. You learn techniques and the principles that make the techniques work. Then you try to perform the techniques within the flow of the drills. This gives you a semi-resisting opponent and helps you develop your material under conditions that approach "live fire." Then you spar and pressure test your material.
The instructors in my school tell me that they feel
that first .. the kenpo weapons "suck" and that Kali is one of
the best weapons systems out there. So incorporating Kenpo's
empty handed combat and multiple attacker's "dominance" with
Kali's weapons dominance works for them. Not trying to start
anything here, that's what they tell me. They're entitled to thier
opinion, right? (I haven't studied long enough to form an opinion)
If I understand correctly, then what you've been told kind of boils down to, "We use Kali weapon training because it's better than Kenpo weapon training, but the Kenpo empty hands are 'better' than Kali empty hands -- or that there are no Kali empty hands?"
If that's what you're being told then I would guess that there are a few possible reasons for this sentiment being put forth.
(a) they may have never delved deep enough into the Kali to have gained any understanding of the empty hand aspect of the Kali.
(b) they may have never seen Kali empty hands at all and may think it doesn't exist
(c) being Kenpoists, they may have had blinders on when it came to the Kali empty hands
(d) they may know better, but not want their students to know better
In my experience, the empty hands of Kali are very similar to those of Kali. They are both very fluid and rapid with striking. They both are very concerned with multiple opponents (though I haven't personally seen this in my very limited exposure to Kenpo, I'll take your word for it). They both tend to "smother" the opponent with strikes, traps, and locks.
Hope that was helpful.
Mike
