Bobbe
White Belt
I was going over this popular idea prevalent in many martial systems: “Think of the weapon as an extension of your body”. I have a healthy respect for empty hand Martial Arts, plenty enough not to scoff at them when I see something alien to my training. But there is an inherent flaw in the design of many empty hand arts, one that has been cultivated to present, as Microsoft would say, “A feature, not a bug”.
I understand the "sticky" element in trapping and the structural needs in a classical, empty handed art. By that I mean, the reason stances, hip twisting, forward lunging and other things are set up in a way to deliver a single shot with maximum power. So there is a need for proper body structure, stancework and the like in empty hand arts. And yes, you should look at a weapon as an extension of your bodyÂ…
HOWEVER
Classical blocks and stances in arts that aren't weapon-based don't consider the weapon in forms and drills. A good example of this is Wing Chun, you don't bend at the waist, bob or weave, and the blocks & parries are designed to "stick" to an opponent's arm. Furthermore, the blocks allow punches to get within a certain distance that, given the idea of a few extra inches of steel at the end of the fist, are dangerous. Add the element of the body structure, and the result will likely kill you.
This point is so often ignored, it’s usually forgotten about during “weapons” training in empty hand arts. But you must understand: Weapons use conforms to a different set of rules, and you can’t simply drag your weapon of choice through whatever empty hand regime you know and get the same results. Different systems approach weapons training with different things in mind, and I don’t want to make a sweeping generalization here, but I rarely see another practitioner or teacher from the harder styles like Karate or Kung Fu say something like “Let’s step away from Goju Ryu for a moment and see how people who have a casual familiarity with violence and blade work train it.”
Not to offend, but those I am particularly speaking of with such familiarity are the ones trained in Southeast Asian Martial Arts, often (annoyingly) referred to as “the Eclectic Arts”. (Like we’re somehow less legit because the Indonesians didn’t have Samurai, or the Filipinos don’t use Black Belts. Well, they do now, but I still remember the days…)
There are key stress points a “classically” trained martial artist presents that, to them, appear as strong defenses. And that’s not untrue, as long as we are speaking of UNARMED combat. However, a good knife fighter looks for these things. See, unlike the hands and arms, you CANNOT allow the knife to get close to your body, or play along your forearm as if it were a punch. Many classical systems give this rule up by default, using a classical block to deal with a knife. As an example, I tried to teach some basic Filipino knifework to one of my Wing Chun instructors about 8 years ago. He kept using Bong Sau (wing deflection block) to try to enter unarmed on a knife. It was a LONG time, with a lot of repeated drills to get him to actually HIT the attacking weapon arm & not block it or try to "stick" to it. Also, you cannot bring your torso/lower abdomen into the fight along with your attacking hands/weapon, because if you miss the parry or get faked out somehow, then you've just offered a good target to your opponent that didn't have a need to be there.
This is where many practitioners of classical martial arts tend to lose sight of the difference between a STYLE and a METHOD. Most styles have rules that cannot be bent for any reason, whereas a method simply says "here's the general idea...Make it work for you". Most bladed weapons don't need the "classical" body structure and alignment to kill, particularly knives. All you need is some sort of delivery system to get the blade into the target, that's it. You don't need to generate power like you would with a punch or palm strike, a sharp weapon doesn't need such. All a knife has to do is get close, the only power it needs is running along the edge. Keeping this at the forefront of your training can open up a different world for you in terms of understanding the nebulous nature of knife fighting, and when playing by the rulebook of a system vs. object practicality should be viewed with a critical eye. Again, a style will argue that you must adhere to the playbook. A method will say “I’m flexible, try out some different options with this. Let me know how it goes”.
I think that Filipino or Indonesian weapon training can help anyone in other arts as an individual grow and evolve with realization in your art. However, I recommend you keep them separate for several years, and don't try to blend them until you have a good understanding of BOTH under your belt. Otherwise, the search for "cohesive technique" will impede the learning process, and you'll constantly be looking for "Technique" instead of "Principle" which is way more important in my opinion. DonÂ’t get hung up on stylistic differences, or loyalty issues to your school or dojo. You can train a different art for no other reason than to better understand your own.
No offense meant toward anyone, hope this post was informative.
I understand the "sticky" element in trapping and the structural needs in a classical, empty handed art. By that I mean, the reason stances, hip twisting, forward lunging and other things are set up in a way to deliver a single shot with maximum power. So there is a need for proper body structure, stancework and the like in empty hand arts. And yes, you should look at a weapon as an extension of your bodyÂ…
HOWEVER
Classical blocks and stances in arts that aren't weapon-based don't consider the weapon in forms and drills. A good example of this is Wing Chun, you don't bend at the waist, bob or weave, and the blocks & parries are designed to "stick" to an opponent's arm. Furthermore, the blocks allow punches to get within a certain distance that, given the idea of a few extra inches of steel at the end of the fist, are dangerous. Add the element of the body structure, and the result will likely kill you.
This point is so often ignored, it’s usually forgotten about during “weapons” training in empty hand arts. But you must understand: Weapons use conforms to a different set of rules, and you can’t simply drag your weapon of choice through whatever empty hand regime you know and get the same results. Different systems approach weapons training with different things in mind, and I don’t want to make a sweeping generalization here, but I rarely see another practitioner or teacher from the harder styles like Karate or Kung Fu say something like “Let’s step away from Goju Ryu for a moment and see how people who have a casual familiarity with violence and blade work train it.”
Not to offend, but those I am particularly speaking of with such familiarity are the ones trained in Southeast Asian Martial Arts, often (annoyingly) referred to as “the Eclectic Arts”. (Like we’re somehow less legit because the Indonesians didn’t have Samurai, or the Filipinos don’t use Black Belts. Well, they do now, but I still remember the days…)
There are key stress points a “classically” trained martial artist presents that, to them, appear as strong defenses. And that’s not untrue, as long as we are speaking of UNARMED combat. However, a good knife fighter looks for these things. See, unlike the hands and arms, you CANNOT allow the knife to get close to your body, or play along your forearm as if it were a punch. Many classical systems give this rule up by default, using a classical block to deal with a knife. As an example, I tried to teach some basic Filipino knifework to one of my Wing Chun instructors about 8 years ago. He kept using Bong Sau (wing deflection block) to try to enter unarmed on a knife. It was a LONG time, with a lot of repeated drills to get him to actually HIT the attacking weapon arm & not block it or try to "stick" to it. Also, you cannot bring your torso/lower abdomen into the fight along with your attacking hands/weapon, because if you miss the parry or get faked out somehow, then you've just offered a good target to your opponent that didn't have a need to be there.
This is where many practitioners of classical martial arts tend to lose sight of the difference between a STYLE and a METHOD. Most styles have rules that cannot be bent for any reason, whereas a method simply says "here's the general idea...Make it work for you". Most bladed weapons don't need the "classical" body structure and alignment to kill, particularly knives. All you need is some sort of delivery system to get the blade into the target, that's it. You don't need to generate power like you would with a punch or palm strike, a sharp weapon doesn't need such. All a knife has to do is get close, the only power it needs is running along the edge. Keeping this at the forefront of your training can open up a different world for you in terms of understanding the nebulous nature of knife fighting, and when playing by the rulebook of a system vs. object practicality should be viewed with a critical eye. Again, a style will argue that you must adhere to the playbook. A method will say “I’m flexible, try out some different options with this. Let me know how it goes”.
I think that Filipino or Indonesian weapon training can help anyone in other arts as an individual grow and evolve with realization in your art. However, I recommend you keep them separate for several years, and don't try to blend them until you have a good understanding of BOTH under your belt. Otherwise, the search for "cohesive technique" will impede the learning process, and you'll constantly be looking for "Technique" instead of "Principle" which is way more important in my opinion. DonÂ’t get hung up on stylistic differences, or loyalty issues to your school or dojo. You can train a different art for no other reason than to better understand your own.
No offense meant toward anyone, hope this post was informative.
