Relationship between Modern Arnis and Balintawak

[Cruentus]

Well, thanks for all the replies...

Darn it, of course you Kuntaw guys are all the way up in Traverse City... I am way down in the Detroit area.

Waiting on Tim, Rich or Paul... j/k


see ya
Rob

Hi Rob,

Well, I don't post in areas other then the ones I moderate much, but because I like ya Rob, I'll respond. WTF, why not...

Rob, a lot of what I will say, you already know, but I am saying it for the benefit of everyone else.

First off, we need to look at the nature of both systems to understand the differences. Balintawak is a stick dueling system. Created by Anciong, it evolved during a time when scores were settled through dueling with the stick. Modern Arnis, on the other hand, is NOT a stick dueling system. It is a system of self-defense. When one understands the purpose of each system, then one can understand the differences and the reasons why they evolved that way.

So, when we look at Balintawak, we find that there really isn't an "empty hand" system per say. Not in the classical sense, anyway. Most of our Balintawak Training is geared towards dueling with someone else, stick vs. stick. If Anciong or one of his students were going to fight, they brought 1 stick. If two players wanted to test each other out, they did so with a stick. So, the focus on knifework, empty-hand work, etc., didn't exist in Balintawak. Now, does this mean that Balintawak players couldn't fight without a stick? No...in fact Manong Ted's students here on this board will recall the tale of a fight Anciong had where his empty hand skills came into play. Each instructor had certain skills in their personal repertoire for fighting empty handed or with other weapons; many of these built off the attributes developed from Balintawak. However, as a system, there is no "Balintawak Empty Hand" per say.

So, to ask about "Balintawak empty hand" is almost a loaded question (you slick SOB... ). The real question would be "How does what Manong Ted teaches for Empty hand compare to Modern Arnis?" We'll get to that answer shortly.

Modern Arnis is a self-defense system rather then a dueling system. Part of the way the Professor Presas taught self-defense was to show how things were "all the same." So, most of Modern Arnis stick work is intended to work the same empty handed (1-12 disarms are a great example). Also, unlike Balintawak, there is a highly developed empty hand system within Modern Arnis. The reason is obvious, and Professor used to say so in his seminars: you aren't going to be walking around the street with a stick. The assumption by Professor was also that you weren't going to be carrying a knife or gun either, as he saw these as tools of death rather then tools of self-defense. So, great value was put into the development of the Modern Arnis empty-hand system, because it was assumed that one would need this the most in a self-defense situation. Had Modern Arnis been a stick dueling system, we probably would not have as developed of a system for empty hand as we do today.

So, what is similar to what Manong Ted teaches for empty hand and Modern Arnis? The "It is all the same" concept is very similar. Manong Ted shows how the empty hand applications are the same as our stick work, and how the skills we have developed with the stick will work if applied to empty hand. This is very much like Modern Arnis. So in concept there are similarities.

Technically, however, they can be very different because we utilize different stick techniques in Balintawak then in Modern Arnis. However, Manong Ted's empty hand trapping and striking is very similar to Modern Arnis. The biggest difference is that Manong Ted doesn't leave as much room for interpretation, where as Modern Arnis is very loose comparatively as to what would be considered an effective bait, trap, or strike. The biggest difference between the two arts, though, would be the use of joint locks in Modern Arnis. Manong Ted has joint locks and throws for sure, but Modern Arnis is very extensive with the joint locking and throwing applications due to Small Circle Jujitsu and Japanese Judo/jujitsu influence. Also, I would say that Modern Arnis all around has much more of an extensive empty hand system considering that the focus of Balintawak is not empty hand.

Finally, I would like to mention something about what I call a "results based" approach. Classic Balintawak is completely results based in that it is based off what will work in a fight (generally, a stick duel), and that is about it. You learn the basics in Abecedario's and Seguida's; then by the time you are in Corridas you are sparring. The sparring isn't constrained by rules even though it is controlled; therefore it is not geared towards winning within a set of rules, but it is geared towards winning in a fight. If a technique doesn't work in real time in a controlled Balintawak sparring session, then we KNOW it is not working in a real fight. Therefore, we work with Manong Ted or each other if we are together and training to correct the mistake so that it will work in real time against a resisting and unpredictable opponent. This results based approach in Balintawak carries over when Manong Ted teaches empty hand applications.

I carry the idea of a results based approach into my Modern Arnis training, as I was blessed to have pretty much always trained this way when I first started Martial Arts in 1985. However, many Modern Arnis people do not train in a results based fashion. By the nature of how Professor Presas taught, he was very dynamic and often did demonstration friendly techniques on cooperative Uke's, often relying on pain compliance for effect. Remy Presas could fight and taught a lot of things that would work in a fight. However, he also was a dynamic presenter and would often demo things that looked sweet or got a laugh, but wouldn't be something that even he would attempt to pull off if he were attacked. A lot of Modern Arnis is done through drills and demonstrations, where you get a lot of theory rather then an actual understanding of what will work in a fight, under stress, against a resisting and unpredictable opponent. So, in Balintawak, empty hand or otherwise, there isn't as much theory as much as there is, "This is what gets the best results." Modern Arnis on the other hand you will get a great diversity, depending on who you talk too, in theory and claims (and arguments even) as to how it is or how it is supposed to be. Some Modern Arnis people train their Modern Arnis in a results based fashion, but many don't. So, depending on whom you train with in Modern Arnis, you could run into a great variety of differences in theory and approaches. This diversity in theory doesn't exist so much in Manong Ted's Balintawak due to the very specific way in which he teaches, and due to the results based approach.

Well, I hope I answered some of your questions.

Take care,

Paul Janulis

 

[Dan Anderson]

Paul,

Good post, especially on the differences between Modern Arnis and Balintawak eskrima.

Yours,
Dan

PS - Been "bombed" lately?

 

[Cruentus]

Paul,

Good post, especially on the differences between Modern Arnis and Balintawak eskrima.

Yours,
Dan

Thanks Dan.

PS - Been "bombed" lately?

lol...no....but I am sure that is only a matter of time...

Paul

 

[Toasty]

Paul,

Excellent response... especially the point that M.A. has a rather well developed empty hand syllabus vs Balintawak's being more a response off what one does with the stick.

I am interested to see if Rich & Tim feel the same way...



p.s. one of these days I'm gonna have to try this Modern Arnis stuff out - see how it fits in my " mixing bowl"...


see ya

Rob

 

[Mao]

I gotta say, it does sound like there are some "issues" with modern arnis and you , paul.
It may because of the way you understood or were taught because you were so young.
Having fought point system and full contact and been involved in non sport oriented styles as well, and being years older, my understanding, as well as the way Prof. and I would work at my house or in hotels was probably much different than the way he would work with a youngster, or teenager.
Modern arnis is very results oriented. I was his whipping post more than once. I know others were as well. Tapping out never helped.
Of course there are theories and drills. How else does one train the various attributes. That is the same in any style. Professoinal athletes train daily whether it's batting, pitching, kicking field goals, slap shots, bag drills, pick your arena. One must train attributes, footwork, striking, power generation, timing, ballance, distance etc..
As for the MT hand of modern arnis, it is very alive and dynamic and worth the effort to explore and pull out of it everything you can, same with the anyos.
xo,
Dan McConnell

 

[Dan Anderson]

Yikes! I have been mentioned as possibly agreeing with Kelly! :erg: Maybe the world is flat, after all. Since I have trained with Remy Presas and Ted Buot, I'll add in my two cents worth into the mixing bowl.

First, I don't think Paul has an underlying disdain for Modern Arnis people. He has more of a preference for balintawak. There are lots of drills and actions in Modern Arnis that ARE NOT directly results based, i.e. what will get you through the fight. That being said, I think the very same drills DO teach cane and body manipulation WHICH DO add to one's skills which WILL get you through the fight. As to whether Modern Arnis players have "game" or not, as usual, it lies within the practitioner and not the art.

From seeing Prof. Presas' first written materials and how they were pretty much how he taught them in the early seminars, I think he developed a lot of his empty hands back in the PI and they are not so much an American add on.

Why an empty hand post has come down to stick fighting came out of the question regarding balintawak empty hands and the clarification between Balintawak and Modern Arnis.

From what I have seen and experienced, the balintawak "controlled sparring" is based on the "left turn at Albuquerque," the cockeyed move that comes out of nowhere and dealing with that. Here I may be way off base as I am a novice in balintawak.

This next one physically hurts. :ultracool

Dan Anderson might actually agree with me on this subject, “Some people approach martial arts in an effort to try and learn to become a fighter, others are natural instinctual fighters from day one!”

Yes, true. In my own family, my older brother, Don, was the natural fighter. I had to learn how to be one.

More pain. :uhoh:

Again Dan Anderson might actually agree with me here as well,,, “you missed some serious energy apparently when you were not old enough to feel his wrath, I did not miss it, I got it very directly”

Actually, I think Paul did train directly under Remy and yes, if you did not feel him personally, you really missed something. Same with Prof. Wally Jay.

“I was never a go along with it kind of guy, still do not (what do ya think Dan?)[/i] Kelly, you're actually a pusssycat. Once you get over innate shyness and your unwillingness to commit your views publically, people will get to know and love you. :rofl:

Kelly - back to serious discussion for me. Question: do you have any direct Balintawak experience and if so, which "clan?" I'm curious.

Good thread but gotta go right now. I'll be back.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

 

[Brian Johns]

A lot of Modern Arnis is done through drills and demonstrations, where you get a lot of theory rather then an actual understanding of what will work in a fight, under stress, against a resisting and unpredictable opponent. So, in Balintawak, empty hand or otherwise, there isn't as much theory as much as there is, "This is what gets the best results." Modern Arnis on the other hand you will get a great diversity, depending on who you talk too, in theory and claims (and arguments even) as to how it is or how it is supposed to be. Some Modern Arnis people train their Modern Arnis in a results based fashion, but many don't. So, depending on whom you train with in Modern Arnis, you could run into a great variety of differences in theory and approaches. This diversity in theory doesn't exist so much in Manong Ted's Balintawak due to the very specific way in which he teaches, and due to the results based approach.

I would have to disagree with the "best results" argument here. This appears to be positing, implicitly, that Balintawak is superior to Modern Arnis with respect to "what gets best results." It's dangerous to generalize and say that one style is superior to another. Didn't Bruce Lee emphasize the importance of the individual over styles or systems ? I believe that Professor Presas meant the same thing when he encouraged people to find "the art within the art." Whether you train in a "results oriented" system depends on who you train with. I think that, properly trained, Modern Arnis is a "results oriented" style......think of the empty hand work, joint locks, stick work, ground work, trapping hands, tapi tapi etc etc. If you train with a Master of Tapi Tapi, a Datu or any other high ranking Modern Arnis player, you will find that the art of Modern Arnis "is very much alive" and progressive. Let me tell ya, you could not get more results oriented than the tapi tapi that Professor was teaching in the last few years of his life. It did not matter if you "cooperated" or tried to counter what he did, he beat the crap out of you.......his art was "very much alive" and results oriented.

When Mao and I visited Professor in Victoria in February of 2001, he told me directly that he considered Balintawak to be the most deadly martial art that he had encountered in his life and that he developed tapi tapi to counter Balintawak. However, to me, it's much more than countering Balintawak......it's a way to counter anything out there and QUICKLY. It ain't no game of patty cakes and it ain't a DRILL !!

Some folks think of "tapi tapi" in terms of "stick vs. stick." That is a gross misunderstanding of the Professor's philosophy of the art. Professor emphasized the concept of tapi tapi in the ENTIRE art of Modern Arnis. That, to me, is very much alive and very results oriented.

The thing that I admired about Professor is that he was not an exclusivist. He was a democrat (with small case "d"). In other words, Professor did not hold notions of superiority with respect to other martial arts. He was always learning and investigating new fighting concepts...."making the connections" in other words. He was democratic when it came to investigating other arts and working with other elite level martial artists. He never stopped learning. He would proclaim more times than I can remember "I will never stop learning !!"

Professor gave us more than just the art of Modern Arnis. He gave us a way of looking at other arts and making the connections. He also taught us to be "alive", progressive and dynamic in ALL aspects and not just in stick work. Because of that, Modern Arnis is a results oriented art. How well that is taught by an individual is another matter entirely.

Take care,
Brian Johns
Columbus, Ohio

 

[Dan Anderson]

I would have to disagree with the "best results" argument here. This appears to be positing, implicitly, that Balintawak is superior to Modern Arnis with respect to "what gets best results." It's dangerous to generalize and say that one style is superior to another.

Yes. It is the practitioner who makes or breaks the game.

I think that, properly trained, Modern Arnis is a "results oriented" style...

Yes, properly trained. If you get a fighter who trains Modern Arnis, you will get a fighting style. If you get a dancer...

When Mao and I visited Professor in Victoria in February of 2001, he told me directly that he considered Balintawak to be the most deadly martial art that he had encountered in his life and that he developed tapi tapi to counter Balintawak.

Thank you! I have heard talk of that but never have found out who he said that to.

The thing that I admired about Professor is that he was not an exclusivist. He was a democrat (with small case "d"). In other words, Professor did not hold notions of superiority with respect to other martial arts. He was always learning and investigating new fighting concepts...."making the connections" in other words. He was democratic when it came to investigating other arts and working with other elite level martial artists. He never stopped learning. He would proclaim more times than I can remember "I will never stop learning !!"

To me, that's an element that makes it modern.

Professor gave us more than just the art of Modern Arnis. He gave us a way of looking at other arts and making the connections. He also taught us to be "alive", progressive and dynamic in ALL aspects and not just in stick work. Because of that, Modern Arnis is a results oriented art. How well that is taught by an individual is another matter entirely.

Take care,
Brian Johns
Columbus, Ohio

Great post, Brian!

Yours,
Dan

 

[Guro Harold]

I think that, properly trained, Modern Arnis is a "results oriented" style.

True, but it depends on the focus of the individual and teacher.

Some people don't have to train anything and they are natural born killers, while others could know every martial art imaginable and couldn't defend themselves against a wet paper bag.

We have to also remember that there were some techniques that the Professor did not teach to the general audience but to his most trusted students and family. No one knows all information that the Professor knew.

[The Professor] considered Balintawak to be the most deadly martial art that he had encountered in his life and that he developed tapi tapi to counter Balintawak.

- I have heard this before and the same on left vs. right tapi-tapi.

We have to also remember the he developed it first for himself, he also developed it through bouts, he pulled it off because he put in the time and energy, and he had the skill to do it.

If anyone out there thinks that by studying any martial art for a few years and think that they can go against a seasoned martial artist who has lived, trained, loved, and bleed the art from birth, might be in for a surpise unless the are truly quite naturally gifted.

The closest analogy that I can give is that if you went to summer training camps with Michael Jordan for years. You get his shoes. You buy his clothes. You have meals with him learning his insights into the game of basketball and how he with innovation, countered his competion. Now, does that make you able within itself to win a game of basketball against a division one or pro player?

Finally, tapi-tapi is a great concept but we have to remember its still based on the abcedarios of Modern Arnis, give and take, then counter for counter! Tapi-Tapi opens the portal of dynamic arnis but it is not the final destination.

Best regards,

Harold Evans

 

[Rich Parsons]

My Apologies Rob,

I worked on some issues for work over the weekend, and also I am busy with it today. I hope to be done in the next day or so with the latest crisis.

Note: ** Not a real crisis, just takes time to resolve, and work through, no matter what other people think.

Then I will disassemble both techniques.

Rob et al,

My Delayed response:

The Original question:

Modern Arnis empty hand seems to be heavily influenced by Wally Jay's Small circle ju jitsu (scjj). MA locks and take downs seem (to me) to have a more ju jitsu flavour than other FMAs. What was MA empty hand like before Prof. met Wally Jay?

Vince
Black Grass

If you look at the Practical Art of Escrima, (* My apologies, the first edition copy I had is gone, I did pick up a second edition, and the date was Copy Right 1994, but it obviously, is based from the first book *) I find that the empty hand portion is as stated previously, that the motions were larger and were used to control the body and lock the elbow and the shoulder or the head, while the small joint lock motions that are seen later in time, attack more of the wrist and fingers. This by no means, there were no wrist locks in the early portion of the system for they are there as you review the self defense and other techniques.

It is all the same
If you look at the “It is all the same”, then you see the same techniques and strategy applied to the larger joint can also be applied to the smaller joints for desired effect.

As to the “pink book” aka Modern Arnis “Stick Fighting”, you also see the larger motions and attacks to the larger joints, although more often with a stick in your hand then just plain empty hands. Just another example of the “it is the same”, in application.

As to who created the approach or concept of it is all the same, I will leave that for the historians to argue about, and my expectation is that it will be found back in a much further time then in recent history or recent century or two.

Results Based
As to Paul’s post, I think that it was fine and represented a good point of view. I liked it. When Paul has stated things inane or insane, I have told him before and in person or over the phone. No problems disagreeing with him. Also as I know Paul, I do not see his age as an issue, nor do I see hidden agendas by him to degrade Modern Arnis. I am not defending Paul, only explaining how I read his post.

What I saw in his post was that Balintawak does not have a developed Empty Hands system, which I have also stated before. It is there, and it is taught and or shown in the “it is the same” manner, even if you have to adjust to location on the body since it is now empty hands versus stick to stick or …,. So, the empty hands are there, for the intuitive and experienced students who can take the applications and translate them.

As to Modern Arnis and results based, I did not see this as a slam on Modern Arnis. Some people at some seminars or camps were just after techniques, others thought the drill was the end of it all. Yet, if you talk to those who have a title or name recognition in Modern Arnis, they should from my experience, know and instruct that the drill is the drill, and there is more, and it can be covered, or addressed as time goes by, and when the student is ready to learn. The integration of drill to drill and the understanding of the concepts of that allow for this to step the student through the phases of learning and progress into some form of semi sparring and then free sparring.

As Datu Kelly and SM Dan, both mentioned, no art has a complete rule on the best, and it comes down to the practitioner, who executes it.

So, the idea of Results Based and Modern Arnis is that as it was and is taught in seminars and camps and classes, the control over the student being able to see the results was not there. In traditional Balintawak where one person worked with another and the rest watched, the control could be more easily executed. Does it mean that it was 100%, of course not? Now, to qualify the above, obviously if you have trained with GM Remy Presas for any time one on one and also trained with those who have titles or known names, you would get the control to see to the Results Based. Hence, Why I can see where some would take Paul’s post differently then I, as most of those here, are either of the Title and Name Known, of have trained with those for a while.


Modern Arnis versus Balintawak
I do not think any one art is superior to the other on its merits alone. I do think that certain arts do come easier to some people, because of the way they are taught, or philosophy behind the system.

I have a second hand story without names for this discussion. A Modern Arnis practitioner was looking to study Balintawak and could not train with the instructor and instead trained with a student (* term used loosely, as this person had many years of good training in Balintawak. It is not meant derogatory in any manner. *) of the Balintawak instructor. After a few classes the Modern Arnis practitioner asked, why not try “this” or try “that”, and the answer is, because this is the counter for “that”, or you have less options for “this”. The Modern Arnis person asked why then do you not do these options you mentioned? Because your "timing" in Modern Arnis is better than my timing in Balintawak on that move.

Once again it is not the art but the practitioner. ** The Modern Arnis practitioner did end up training with the Balintawak instructor. **

Modern Arnis Tapi-Tapi versus Balintawak
“Tapi-Tapi was created to counter Balintawak” I have no doubt that was something that the late GM Presas said. One would ask, why he would say in a proud voice that Balintawak is one of the deadliest arts he has known and then create a counter for it.

Forgive me for this may not translate well from my brain to the computer. I will do my best.

Balintawak has a set series of techniques, and the back up (* this is the one that is easiest to learn, or execute with no or late timing is learned first. *) and as the skill level goes up the person learns better timings and what is called some short cuts. This is taught one on one and the instructor can help the student learn the basics and then the timing, and then later how to put it into the mixing bowl of sparring.

In this, one of the major concepts is the left hand (off hand or non stick hand), and how it monitors, manages, and delays the opponents stick. The left hand does not grab the opponents stick, as this limits you options in techniques and also delays your own reaction to move to the next technique yourself. After sufficient timing has been established, then counters to grabs are learned.

In Tapi-Tapi, and I will reference it from the Semi Sparring point of view from the 80’s and what I know of the lock flow drills with the stick, (* Which has been pointed out can be translated to empty hands as well *). In Tapi-Tapi you either bait your opponent to grab your hand or you grab their stick and manipulate them into a lock, of a strike if they refuse to block. (* These are the traditional entries *) The following is not a slam. It is easier to teach someone how to grab a stick and then to move from there, as the opponents stick is under your control. This does drive results when executed at speed or at the proper timing, as you now are able to control and or strike your opponent. Yes with the grab you have lost some options and there are counters that can tie you up. But, as I pointed out above, “After sufficient timing has been established, then counters to grabs are learned”. Many Senior and those whose names are known today of the Balintawak players, could execute these moves, yet, the average student would use the grab as it is effective. Even some of those who have their own systems today including GM R. Presas used the grab because they were able to make it work. So is the grabbing bad? Not really if you realize that any technique can be countered and are prepared to react. Once again it gets down to timing and execution and who is the better of the two who are swinging sticks or empty hands or …, at each other.


My apologies for the stick inclusion into this empty hand discussion, I was just replying to those already in this thread.

I must apologize, for I have spent a couple of hours on this post and have to get back to finish up some of my work before tomorrow.

Best regards

 

[Cruentus]

I just had the chance to read Rich's post after I posted my reply. Rich has a good way of explaining things, and I agree with his post.

:asian:

 

[Tgace]

Man..I could smell the smoke from the study. What goes here?

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Paul, Rich, Rob,

I have a question regarding Manong Ted and Balintawak!
I have consistently heard of Balintawak's controlled sparring
and not being a Balintawak student myself I am interested in
how this is performed! I am assuming that it is a no contact
bait and strike type of sparring but I would very much
appreciate knowing more! My second question, is that from
your posts it seems as if Balintawak is more simple and direct
with possibly less variation and inclined to get the job done
quickly and effectively! My questions are just inquisitive and
in no way represent a dig in this heated discussion!

Brian R. VanCise

 

[Datu Tim Hartman]

Hi Dan,

How would you compare the M.A. empty hands to the Balintawak empty hands? - similarities/differences...

{actually - Tim, Paul or Rich - you guys can answer this too... LOL}

Rob

Rob-

Based on what Manong Ted has taught me, I would say that the original system of Balintawak is not an open hand system. Ted has shown me some open hand translations to some of the moves, but during my classes with he has always emphasized that we are doing a stick-fighting system.

 

[Mao]

Rich:
"It is all the same
If you look at the “It is all the same”, then you see the same techniques and strategy applied to the larger joint can also be applied to the smaller joints for desired effect."

Agreed. This holds true in many aspects as well, not just joint locks.

Results Based
As to Paul’s post, I think that it was fine and represented a good point of view. I liked it. When Paul has stated things inane or insane, I have told him before and in person or over the phone. No problems disagreeing with him. Also as I know Paul, I do not see his age as an issue, nor do I see hidden agendas by him to degrade Modern Arnis. I am not defending Paul, only explaining how I read his post.

I agree that it represented his point of view. His age at the time would be one of the reasons that his understanding and experience is different than those who were older, more experienced then. Remy and others would work differently, as you know, with youth or inexperienced people than with someone who had 'been around' so to speak. No slam, just fact.
I will e-mail Paul privately as soon as I can.

As to Modern Arnis and results based, I did not see this as a slam on Modern Arnis. Some people at some seminars or camps were just after techniques, others thought the drill was the end of it all. Yet, if you talk to those who have a title or name recognition in Modern Arnis, they should from my experience, know and instruct that the drill is the drill, and there is more, and it can be covered, or addressed as time goes by, and when the student is ready to learn. The integration of drill to drill and the understanding of the concepts of that allow for this to step the student through the phases of learning and progress into some form of semi sparring and then free sparring.

I see this as the aforementioned understanding. Yes, there were people after different things, and people who had a way different concept of martial arts in general i.e. posers, inexperienced, those who didn't really want to put in the sweat/pain/time to really learn the system. The drilling etc that can be addresed as time goes by is, apparently, much like the way sparring is approached with Manong Ted, slow at first, then faster, eh?

As Datu Kelly and SM Dan, both mentioned, no art has a complete rule on the best, and it comes down to the practitioner, who executes it

Agreed. Further, we could include "and their experience, mindset, psychological makeup an other elements".

So, the idea of Results Based and Modern Arnis is that as it was and is taught in seminars and camps and classes, the control over the student being able to see the results was not there.

I don't agree completely. This was and is not my experience, especially today. Not the way I approached it, then or now, and not the way I teach.

Modern Arnis versus Balintawak
I do not think any one art is superior to the other on its merits alone

I agree with this completely.

In terms of the original intent of this thread, we're not comparing oranges to oranges because, as has been mentioned several times already by more than one person, balintawak is not an MT hand art.
That should have been a very direct and simple answer. Now look where it's gone. Too bad really.

Dan McConnell

 

[Toasty]

First things first...

How in the hell did my question & corresponding answers get turned ito a Damned pissing match on who knows Modern Arnis and/or Prof. Presas better??!!

Jeez, you guys are as bad as the JKD guys & Kenpo guys... lighten up ALL.


Secondly, Mr. Worden, its not a question of "Balintawak not having empty hands and now it does..." its a question of difference. Perhaps Paul miswrote or you misread - either/or, it doesn't matter.
While Modern Arnis (from the explanations i have read anyway) appears to have a distinct "set" of empty hand techiniques taken from Karate & JuJutsu - Balintawak simply does the same thing (with obvious minor modifications) empty handed as we would with the stick in our hand - which may, however, resemble JuJutsu or Karate in as much as locks are locks & strikes are strikes.

And thirdly - 40 years ago was when Nong Ted was teaching at the Balintawak club with Anciong - and according to him the story of "30 or 40 guys show up & getting badly beaten..." is just that, a story... and a highly exagerrated one at that.



Anyway, thanks for all the answers... I'll not be frequenting this board anymore as I am not really all that interested in Modern Arnis. The only reason I did was sometimes people bring up the Balintawak connection and that is what interests me...

so long fellas

Rob

 

[Toasty]

OK, after this I wont be frequenting this board... LOL


Brian,

I believe some of your questions are answered in Paul's second post as well as Rich's.
I will aks them to and (assume they will) answer your question more in depth...


my best to you

Rob

 

[Datu Tim Hartman]

My take on Modern Arnis vs. Balintawak

It’s very hard to compare these two systems. In the case of Modern Arnis it is an all encompassing art, where in Balintawak’s primary purpose is stick dueling. So will the following comments that will follow keep in mind that I will be specifically targeting the stick dueling aspect of both systems.

Both systems have there strengths and weaknesses. Modern Arnis is an easier system to practice. There is a much greater allowed margin error. In the case of Balintawak, it is much more precise with a very small allowed margin for error. One may say Modern Arnis is a basic math and Balintawak would be more like algebra. In both cases they are very effective.

In Modern Arnis it is common to teach techniques with the use of drills. Unfortunately it is easy to find oneself caught up in the drill and forget about the combat applications. Early in my carrier I had a rude awakening which I quickly corrected. The problem with drills is that it forms patterns. If one gets caught in a pattern it is easy to be countered.

In Balintawak we are taught by scenarios in an attempt to not form any predictable patterns. This method does have its own draw backs. One in particular that it takes longer to develop the concept of flowing from one technique to another. When I teach Balintawak I use a combination of both methods. This is not to say one is better than the other, this is just what works better for me.

Now Tapi – Tapi is a great program in Modern Arnis, but one should understand that it is watered down Balintawak. Remy came up with a program that was easier to teach the masses. Unfortunately by doing this many of the nuances weren’t taught. The benefit of this method is that Remy was able to teach a higher quantity of people.

Originally Posted by Palusut
We have to also remember the he developed it first for himself, he also developed it through bouts, he pulled it off because he put in the time and energy, and he had the skill to do it.

Excellent point Harold! Remy developed Tapi – Tapi for himself. He then shared it with his students. The problem with this is as follows:

His students didn’t have his skill sets.
They didn’t have his vision.
They didn’t have the hows and whys needed to counter act the moves.
You can’t counter Balintawak if you don’t know what it is!

I’m sick and tired of people quoting Remy saying “Tapi-Tapi was created to counter Balintawak” and then thinking that they can defeat Balintawak players. This is not the case. What I will say is this. At the earlier stages of training in both systems I would give the advantage to the Modern Arnis Players. As the training continues I would say that it then begins to favor the Balintawak player.

Now in my case my training with Nong Ted is to seek out the Balintawak roots in Modern Arnis. Remy was one of the people to sponsor me for acceptance with Nong Ted. The more I train with the Balintawak the more I see where Remy was getting some of his material. I feel that the two arts can compliment each other quite well if trained properly. I’ve just started my 6th year of training Balintawak and I feel that has taken my understanding and execution of Modern Arnis to new levels.

As I said before, I’m specifically addressing the stick fighting aspect of the arts. Although I must say that my open hand tactics have been affected by my Balintawak training also.

:asian:

 

[Datu Tim Hartman]

First things first...

How in the hell did my question & corresponding answers get turned ito a Damned pissing match on who knows Modern Arnis and/or Prof. Presas better??!!

Come on Rob, you know there is no contest on this one. It's ME! :boing2: Also I would like to point out you have very good posts and I would like you to encourage you to continue posting here. As far as people over reacting, it must be that time of the month!

See you later,
:cheers:

 

[Dan Anderson]

Paul, Rich, Rob,

I have a question regarding Manong Ted and Balintawak!
I have consistently heard of Balintawak's controlled sparring
and not being a Balintawak student myself I am interested in
how this is performed! I am assuming that it is a no contact
bait and strike type of sparring but I would very much
appreciate knowing more! My second question, is that from
your posts it seems as if Balintawak is more simple and direct
with possibly less variation and inclined to get the job done
quickly and effectively! My questions are just inquisitive and
in no way represent a dig in this heated discussion!

Brian R. VanCise

Hi Brian,
I am none of the above but I can give you some insight at your question. Manong Ted will present you with a "situation" for you to handle. You handle it and if it leaves you open for immediate counter. Then he shows you how to handle it which doesn't leave you open. This is an incredible simplification and it doesn't mean that there is only one way to do something but it is the best way I can describe it. You will have Rich there in October. Have him demonstrate some to you and my explanation will make sense.

Tim's first four paragraphs of his post before mine does a comparative description between the two systems justice. I totally agree with his statement,

"You can't counter balintawak if you don't know what it is!"

My personal nickname for balintawak is the "anti-eskrima."

Rob,
Don't desert us because things get toasty. It's the nature of this forum that things get toasty from time to time.

Yours,
Dan Anderson