true?
- Thread starter maressa
- Start date
There is a logic to it. There is no reason to learn two different arts. One will do.
Makes sense actually. You should always use a force multiplier in a fight and hand to hand should be your last resort. I can't think of a time/place/situation where I can't find something around me that I can use as a weapon. If you're fighting fair, you're doing it wrong.
Well the shower is a bad place to be attacked (think Psycho). But even in the shower, there's the shampoo bottle, the bar of soap and maybe a long handled brush or loofah. Or maybe you could even rip loose the towel rack. I think one of the worst scenarios was in the movie Eastern Promises where the character played by Viggo Mortensen was attacked by two knife wielding thugs when alone in a Turkish bath. Good thing life is usually not like a movie!
Not 100%, but according to a friend of mine when I asked, he said that they learn both together, from the beginning. From his skillset, I would guess more time is spent on weapons though.
Yes, unless you are already there. I'm thinking shanks, shivs, clubs, heck, a rock or bar of soap in a towel, or whatever else you can think up. Plenty of time to scheme, right.
Seriously, your brain is the weapon, your body and anything you can get your hands on are just extensions of that weapon. From a self defense perspective, I'm all about awareness, avoidance, de-escalation and escape. If it comes to physical violence, you've already screwed up in my book. If weapons are necessary, you've screwed up bad. ...And then again, once in a rare while $hit happens.
Last edited:
oaktree
Master of Arts
It really depends on the teacher, most either start off with weapon and may explain principles with open hand. When you can do weapon routine fast doing things with hands is much easier plus a punch doesn't look as threatening when you see sticks or knife coming at you
there's also the saying that in japanese arts, barehanded techniques have their origin in weapons techniques, for example the outside "swing" with the tonfa is the same movement than a backfist strike.
so it doesn't have to be irrational didactics.
but other arts like hapkido do it late after weaponless training.
so it doesn't have to be irrational didactics.
but other arts like hapkido do it late after weaponless training.
Depends on the FMA. Most do weapons first but not all
Juany118
Senior Master
- Joined
- May 22, 2016
- Messages
- 3,107
- Reaction score
- 1,053
I would only say that the use of a force multiplier is all about articulation. I am a skinny dude (5'10" 165). If a bigger guy comes at me I can justify using my expandable baton because, well he is bigger and stronger (yes I am a LEO). In the shower scene noted you can justify it under the Castle Doctrine even if you are the same size or bigger.
This is why I wish, when it came to armed Martial Arts Training, the Teachers were also well versed in the use of force statutes of their States and taught them as well. This way someone doesn't default to a weapon technique and get themselves in trouble.
MI_martialist
Brown Belt
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 401
- Reaction score
- 44
Real classical martial systems will start with weapons first because there are consequences to training...life and death. The real question is...why do the Karate, Tae Kwon-Do, and other "Traditional" martial arts start empty handed? Completely backwards.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,943
- Reaction score
- 8,690
Pretty sure wrestling boxing and sumo were always unarmed. Some were designed to give you skills with a weapon and some were designed to give you skill without one.
Juany118
Senior Master
- Joined
- May 22, 2016
- Messages
- 3,107
- Reaction score
- 1,053
Indeed true. What makes the order is based on evolution. Many, but not all, Asian Martial Arts had an origin of people forbidden to carry weapons by law, so you teach them unarmed first. Wing Chun and Okinawan Karate are in this boat. Even then eventually the weapons taught are ones not seen as weapons, but tools. The Butter Fly knife in Wing Chun is basically a refined cleaver, their staff is LONG because it is the staff a boat man would use. Farm implements were popular in Okinawa.
The FMA have their origins in Tribal Warfare. When you are training openly for war you train first with weapons. Kenjutsu, the resurrected European long sword fencing all start with weapons due to the blessing of authority.
Inside Martial Arts I see a subset that I have decided to call "Warrior/Soldier Arts." These are arts designed for open warfare under the umbrella of the legal authority, vs many other martial arts (starting unarmed) that were designed to fight against that authority which prohibited them being armed. Since my school's patron, Lapu-Lapu, was the Chieftain who killed Magellan, I would say FMA was created by the authority... even if later the Spanish tried to crush it.
The thing I love most about Martial Arts, if you can't tell, is that my love of history fits right in
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Takenouchi Ryu starts unarmed. Hontai Yoshin Ryu (and it's Takagi bretheren) start unarmed. Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu starts unarmed. A number of lines of Araki Ryu start unarmed. Some Sosuishi Ryu lines start unarmed. Yagyu Shingan Ryu starts unarmed.
Do you want me to continue?
Danny T
Senior Master
Though not trained as such at this time the man who is concerned the sole heir to pekiti tersia has said he began with 3 years of training with no weapons under his grandfather. Weapons were always there and he witnessed the training but it wasn't until after 3 years that his formal weapon training began.
Charlemagne
Black Belt
This really depends on the system, the organization, and the instructor, but yes, that is true more often then not. When I did Modern Arnis, we learned empty hand right along with weapons, and the same thing was true for Lacoste-Inosanto Kali. In Pekiti Tirsia Kali, this is less true. However, what is more accurate in PTK than other systems I have trained, is that the empty hand movements really do mimic that of the knife system. Other systems claim this, but I have not seen that in my observations. Most older FMA systems have empty hand material that looks nothing like their weapons work and when you observe it, you can easily see that they have borrowed heavily from Western Boxing, Thai Boxing, Judo/Jujutsu, etc. I'm not suggesting that is a problem or anything, just trying to make things clear. Many groups are open about their having borrowed from other systems, while many others are not. Stealing material from others and then pretending your system had that stuff all along seems to be a bit of the FMA way of doing business.
If you are looking to gain high level empty hand skills, you will need to pick your FMA instructor and system carefully as classically, most did not focus there. Systems which have developed in more modern times have expanded their empty hand work by borrowing from other places, sometimes more effectively than others. Some modern FMA styles (Yaw Yan, NUDDA, etc.) are almost exclusively empty hand, which is interesting.
The other option you have is to study some empty hand on the side so that you have your own blend from a functional perspective. If your FMA system has good footwork and tactics, all your really need to round that out are some basic striking mechanics to blend in with the mano y mano material they already have there. There are a bunch of options, but I haven't seen an FMA style yet that basic Thai Boxing striking mechanics would not blend very well with. One does not have to create their own system or anything, just have a personal skill set that covers all your bases.
Depending on where you are at in Brazil, some FMA groups have started to teach down there. If you are interested, reply here and I will post a link.
Charlemagne
Black Belt
I don't disagree with that. One must be sure of the situation (is my life, or the life of another innocent, in danger?) before deciding to deploy a weapon in an actual fight. If the other guy has a weapon or if it is two/three-on-one, then I am going to draw my knife. If it is a simple bar scuffle over a stupid misunderstanding, then a weapon is probably overkill and could land you in serious trouble. That is one major reason I combine my FMA training with other things. I love FMA and consider it to be my primary focus, but I want to have options along the force continuum, not to mention skills on the ground, etc. in case I end up there against my will.
Charlemagne
Black Belt
I believe Mr. Gaje was talking about doing footwork primarily for the first three years. However, the system is not structured that way by any of the organizations/groups that teach it today. Gaje himself does not teach the system that way.
The head of my organization, Tim Waid, had been studying Pekiti Tirsia for a very long time under instructors here in the USA when he decided to move to the Philippines to train. Tim told Gaje that he wanted to learn the system the same way Gaje himself was taught it, and then lived with Gaje for 5 years training daily and re-learning the system from the ground up. What he put together for the Pekiti Tirsia Global Organization's curricular structure is based upon a re-examination of the curricular charts he took over to the Philippines and asked Gaje to critique, combined with his own observations on how Gaje was teaching the system to those who were training with him daily compared to the seminar structure often used in the USA. We do some empty hand in the beginning, but it is primarily a focus on footwork, basic strategy/tactics of self-protection, and striking mechanics with the long and short weapon.
