"Standard Strikes" Remy Presas taught?

[Mark Lynn]

Thanks for the reply Palusut. I hope my posted questioning isn't coming off as veiled RP bashing because that is far from my intention. 1) Based on my own research and study, RP seemed to focus more on creating conceptual understanding and the techniques were simply vehicles to illustrate them.

2) For the most part, RP was dealing with previously trained artists with at least a fundamental base of stance, striking and blocking skills. Even the people who trained privately with him during those 'between seminar' times were already versed in many of the basics.

3) That said, IMO, RP pushed MA as a conceptual art and was not nearly as caught up on the details as the rest of us seem to be.

4) Beyond the fundamental strikes, blocks, 12 angles and all the ways that the structure of the 12 angles are combined and drilled to introduce the concepts that he based MA on, there really aren't any nailed down 'techniques' on the empty hand side. They were examples of how these concepts can be applied, but there doesn't seem to be any nailed down specifics that RP required for the empty hand side. If you could make it work for you, the strikes didn't seem to matter as much as the conceptual mastery and the fact that you made it work.

So far, everything that people are posting reinforces that idea. I am interested in any different views and experiences though.

Paul
I added numbers to your post to address them.

1) I would agree here, at least in the USA but I wonder about the Philippines training.

2) I agree with you here too.

3) I still agree with you

4) I pretty much agree with you here.
However it depends upon the way you look at it. Take the drill (I think is called) Opening and closing the X (gunting) the drill is a flow drill, and yet the mechanics behind the drill involve hitting the arm (as in a arm destruction) now granted you wouldn't stand and punch in mid air simulating striking the arm, however you would drill the technique sololy in the air first at his command and then with a partner. So you got the mechanics (or motion) down and then you applied it. But you were taught the strike in a sense.

Same with the backfist, jab, cross or the bolo punch. In the Sinawali Boxing drills you used these techniques, as well as the clearing or parrying motions. Again Remy would stand in front of the class and go through the hand signals to have the student practice the technique and then go into partner drills to apply them.

This is why I have questioned so much in my postings about the relationship between what Remy taught his older students in the Philippines, and how his art relates to Ernesto's and such. Because like Dieter said in one post (in a sense) what I see from Ernesto looks closer to what Remy taught/was like in the Philippines. Well Ernesto teaches a multitude of different hand strikes and kicks (I think there are 20 techniques) and the majority of them I've seen Remy do (the hand techniques at least) but not taught as in a class setting. Rather it was covered in a drill or an application of some sort.

If Remy were teaching a class from scratch today would he teach the same way as he did to his seminar students. Or would he change the method of instruction to cover more of the basic mechanics of how to do something?

I think he taught in the most effective way he could, that is teaching to a large segment of the audience (those with prior training and knowledge of the martial arts) and using them to help the beginners who need help. So he didn't cover the nuts and blots basics that an instructor would have to cover with a new person.

Oh well this is my rambling post for the night.

Mark

 

[Dan Anderson]

THere is a distinction between 'teaching' any of these empty hand strikes/kicks and such and just demonstrating these techniques to people with the assumption that they already know them from previous martial arts training in other arts. So, for the sake of clarification here:

By 'teaching' do you mean that RP demonstrated the technique, explained the mechanics of it, and then had you do multiple repetitions to develop proficiency AND THEN put it into a drill or movement pattern like Redonda, Siniwali...?

OR

Did he simply demonstrate 'you can do this' and one of the things that he points out is a backfist, punch.... and lets you try it out as part of a possible application of a conceptual movement?

Which one did RP really do?

In a sense, neither. RP never explained the mechanics of striking. He was in the same situation as the founder of bagua, Tung Hai Chuan - he taught established martial artists (in this case established means if you had any training whatsoever). He would demonstrate the strike within the context of the move and tell you to do it. It was not in the context of part of a possible application of a conceptual movement.

Locking was different. Here he went into a bit more detail.

Based on my own research and study, RP seemed to focus more on creating conceptual understanding and the techniques were simply vehicles to illustrate them.

Paul, I think that you and many "conceptualizers" are reading far more into why and how RP taught than what was there. Conceptual thinkers think in conceptual terms. He spoke in general terms regarding concepts. He would stress the flow and other aspects but he never got into it that far like you and Bram. He would make simple comments like, "If he goes like this, you are there already." He would be speaking simply and we would make them into cryptic statements to be delved into and pondered over laborously.

I think RP was a lot like Morihei Uyeshiba in that he did far more demonstrating and doing than explaining. He left the explaining for us to figure out.

Mark, from my sources RP's Modern Arnis back in the earlier days in the PI was closer to EP's Kombatan. I have a film of RP in 1975 that demonstrates "pink book" material which is more Kombatan-ish in execution than US Remy Presas movement. Interesting stuff.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

 

[clockexit]

Maybe this doesn't fit here...there is a cane strike that I have learned that comes off out of the striking side armpit, using the body as a 'counter force' point to allow the strike to whip right out. What is that called? (if you can understand my lame description)

As taught by Master Sunny Umpad it is called Interior Sinawali.In Modern Arnis we call it Whip Striking.We teach it coming out from the armpit either horizontal or vertical...Gray Wolf