Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 03:01:48 -0700 From: eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: Eskrima digest, Vol 11 #250 - 6 msgs X-Mailer: Mailman v2.0.13.cisto1 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Errors-To: eskrima-admin@martialartsresource.net X-BeenThere: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13.cisto1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net X-Subscribed-Address: fma@martialartsresource.com List-Id: Eskrima-FMA discussion forum, the premier FMA forum on the Internet. List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: Send Eskrima mailing list submissions to eskrima@martialartsresource.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net You can reach the person managing the list at eskrima-admin@martialartsresource.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Eskrima digest..." <<---- The Sudlud-Inayan Eskrima/Kali/Arnis/FMA mailing list ---->> Serving the Internet since June 1994. Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry and Martial Arts Resource The Internet's premier discussion forum devoted to Filipino Martial Arts. 1900 members. Provided in memory of Mangisursuro Michael G. Inay (1944-2000). See the Filipino Martial Arts (FMA) FAQ and the online search engine for back issues of the Eskrima/FMA digest at http://MartialArtsResource.com Mabuhay ang eskrima! Today's Topics: 1. Re:Gladiator vs. Troy (Afern27@aol.com) 2. Re: Wannabees (Ray Terry) 3. RE: Gladiator vs. Troy (WoodyTX) 4. Re: Knife Fights at the DB Gathering (gints@att.net) 5. Kino Mutai (Filipino dirty fighting) in action (gints@att.net) 6. Heavy Hitters (finally) (Marc Macyoung) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: Afern27@aol.com Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 19:41:41 EDT To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Subject: [Eskrima] Re:Gladiator vs. Troy Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net In a message dated 6/23/04 5:30:26 PM Mountain Daylight Time, eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net writes: we don't admire the athlete who is childish and who wears his egocentrism on his sleeve (or hers, but the examples I'm thinking of are men). I think this is a very good point. While both were skilled warriors, Maximus was more worthy of admiration (and just plain more likeable) than Achilles. One behaves as a man, the other as a spoiled brat. --__--__-- Message: 2 From: Ray Terry Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Wannabees To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 16:41:25 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net > I am Michael and I am a Wannabee. Actually it sounds like you aren't. A wannabe usually thinks of himself as hardcore, not as a wannabe. That is what makes him/her a wannabe. :) An example of someone I consider hardcore... Cacoy Canete. He has been doing eskrima for just short of 78 years now. He has accomplished more in eskrima than most can even dream of... Yet he still trains his 85 year old body in eskrima three times a week, because he wants to get better. And I suspect he feels badly that he isn't training more often and with greater intensity, but age has a way of slowing one down. Ray Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "WoodyTX" To: Subject: RE: [Eskrima] Gladiator vs. Troy Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:50:03 -0500 Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net > -- Bill McGrath wrote: > > If you saw both Troy and Gladiator and feel Gladiator > was the superior movie, please tell me why. > > Regards, > Bill McGrath Although I'm a fan of Brad Pitt (Kalifornia, Fight Club, True Romance, Legends of the Fall, etc), and I thought the fight scenes were incredible (Inosanto 7 to 6 with a sword!!), I really didn't care about the characters in "Troy". At the risk of threadjacking, I'm finding that to be a common theme in modern movies: I just don't care about the protagonists. "Gladiator" connected on a gut level, even though the characters were two-dimensional and the fighting was hard to follow (Scott's jerky camera and quick edits). I suspect this is also why "Lord of the Rings" did so well, and the "Star Wars" prequels are a joke. Kurt --__--__-- Message: 4 From: gints@att.net To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 00:07:09 +0000 Subject: [Eskrima] Re: Knife Fights at the DB Gathering Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net > Marc Denny wrote: >At the previous Gathering all the knife fights were 2x2. To call the >results sloppy and behaviors unrealistic would be an understatement. >Indeed, as best as I could tell, EVERY SINGLE FIGHTER got killed. > >So I put it to the guys on the DBMA Ass'n Forum for their thoughts as to how >to do it better this coming Sunday. In search of additional thoughts and >with their permission, I post the most of the thread here. (Also posted on the public Dog Brother forum, but there are more knife experts on this group. ) Here are some suggestions for multiple man knife fights that I've tested in my GFC sparring nights. The additional distractions give the knife fight a purpose other than a simple duel. 1) Four players on two teams. Only one player on each team has a knife. Short knives work better here. The armed man assumes the job of protecting his unarmed buddy. 2) Three players: two unarmed vs. one armed. A long knife works better here. 3) Serial attacker: one knifer gets a new opponent every ten seconds. 4) Armed+unarmed vs. 2 armed/unarmed In this case, you are defending yourself and an unengaging buddy. I haven't actually tried this combo yet. 5) Fighting around an obstacle, any type of fight. Any knife combination. In the past, I've dragged the 150 lb Green man dummy heavy bag into the middle of the floor. 6) Home intruder: single or team fighting to gain ground I tried this in a one car garage with the home access being a single door. Defender(s) prevent the offender(s) from gaining ground. At the Gathering, add cones or heavy bags to mark the path. Gints Klimanis --__--__-- Message: 5 From: gints@att.net To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 00:11:08 +0000 Subject: [Eskrima] Kino Mutai (Filipino dirty fighting) in action Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Here some Filipino Knio Muai in action, although I grabbed this post from a digital photography post. Be sure to check out the photo of the bite from an 18 month-old. Funny. ---------------------- Gregory wrote: So I'm doing the dishes and the kids are playing in the next room where I can keep an eye on them, and everything is good. All the sudden my oldest, Ximina, starts crying (2.5 years old). She almost never cries. So I go over and see what's up. On the way over, I pass sissy (her younger sister, 15months old) playing as normal in the playroom. Ximina is standing in the hallway holding her arm next to my fish tank (100 gallon). There's nothing else but a tree and a display cabinet in the hall, and the glass doors are intact (I think I would have heard them if they broke). So I'm thinking did the fish bite her? But they are just fancy goldfish and the tank is too tall for her to reach in. Then I think she slamed her fingers in the access panels below the tank. So I walk up to comfort her then I see why she's crying and holding her arm... So I pick her up comfort her and bring her over to the playroom and sooth her. Camera's sitting there and I fire off a single shot. Ok, its a pretty crappy snapshot, but hey, I had other things on my mind. http://www.pbase.com/image/30473233/original Okay, I'm a bad daddy, should have been watching them closer. But anyways, I then take her over to the kitchen and run her arm under some cold water and she settles down. I then kiss her boo boo and in no time, she back to her normal self, playing nicely with Sissy. I'm curious as to how this happened. It's the first time anything like this has happened. --__--__-- Message: 6 From: "Marc Macyoung" To: Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 12:15:24 -0600 Subject: [Eskrima] Heavy Hitters (finally) Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Ollie said > And, as you quite rightly presume, I never did that. Which, as you correctly > point out again, makes me a "civilian", and quite clearly not a member of > 'your club'. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you give the distinct impression > that you see civilians as being somehow beneath you. Second-class citizens. No. It's not a "club." It is not an elite group. It's not something that makes us better, nor however,-- it very much needs to be pointed out -- does it make those who have chosen to "stand the wall" worse. It just makes us very human... and, as is often forgotten, if not intentionally ignored... part of society. And what that means quite frankly is that there are people in this society who see those who "serve" as second class citizens, not the other way around. Before I answer your post, let me ask you a question. Did you see the movie "A Few Good Men?" If so, let me ask you something else, who were you rooting for? I mean who was the "Good Guy" and who was the "Bad Guy?" Did you think that Jack Nicolson's character was a vicious, self-deluded fruitcake while Tom Cruise was the noble lawyer crusading to reveal the corruption and brutality of a maddog? Did you like Kevin Pollack's character believe that two "bullies beat up a weaker" person? Did the speech that Jack Nicholson made before admitting his involvement make you think "This psycho needs to be keep on a leash?" I ask you these questions, not because I assume they are your opinions, but because by and large, these are the impressions that many people have about the movie. They really enjoy seeing someone they consider to be a bully, getting nailed ...and by clever words alone. HA! Didn't that smart yuppee lawyer show that big bad uppity servant who's the boss? I, on the other hand, am greatly saddened by that movie. In fact, I feel it points out a rather dangerous and ugly trend in American society. I didn't see a "Good Guy" or a "Bad Guy." What I saw was two very different mindsets, both critical for the preservation and functioning of society, so entirely out of touch with each other that they had nothing but distain for each other. And that both had become so entrenched in their own way of functioning that they had no idea the needs, conditions or purposes of the other. Nor the fact that they needed each other. What saddened me the most however, is how the so-called "Good Guy" was willing to let another "stand" an extreme post (and generally ignore his very existence) until something came up that he condemned him for. Let someone else do the dirty work. Until it was time to condemn him for his actions/choices Nicholson's character, the rest down in Gitmo and the conditions they operated in didn't exist in Cruise's world view. I say this even though a) Cruise's character was himself supposed to be military, b) he would have known that there was a base down there c) Cruise's character was both obviously intelligent and held what could only be described as a "desk job." As such, the way that character was written is rather unrealistic from a military standpoint, and was instead far more "civilian" oriented. Yes, Nicholson's character was snotty and condescending during their intitial interview/trip, but so was Cruise's. Oddly enough, he was condescending to the ideas that Nicholson expressed about the danger he and his Marine faced, not specifically about the fact that Nicholson's character was covering up after a tragic result of a bad order. (Remember Cruise mocking Nicholson's "I eat breakfast" line?). Putting it bluntly, Cruise's character was quite willing to let someone else risk life and limb to deal with an extreme situation; but wanted it handled under the moral, emotional and ideological standards that he -- in his non-dangerous lifestyle -- operated by. And he did this with absolutely NO concept of the problems and challenges that occurred under those conditons. And then he got morally outraged when a servant didn't behave the way he wanted the world to be. My problem wasn't with who was the "Good Guy/Bad Guy" or who was "right or wrong," my problem with that movie was that it showed the total break down in communication and understanding of two very critical components of society. In as much as each had, not only become so isolated and separated from each other, but also that both had solidified into dogmatic, isolationist contempt for each other. Each was so locked in their own mindset that they failed to see that they really did need each other -- and *gasp* needed to work together as part of a larger whole, namely society. Now in answer to your question do I "see civilians as being somehow beneath you. Second-class citizens"? No. What I do see however, is that in order for society to function, certain "jobs" must be done, certain services performed, certain issues addressed. Quite often society ascibes the "value" to these services according to their needs, wants and conditions. I mention this because quite simply there is a tendency among people, especially of those who are in positions of, if not power, then at least outside of these services, to look down at those who perform them. Ever met anyone who felt that a job was beneath them? Or perhaps that their time was more valuable than performing a particular task? This stratification extends into socialization as well. How many upper managament/CEOs do you know who have janitors, cops and garbage men as friends? How many active duty soldiers do you know? There is a very distinct trend in the US towards what can only be called intellectual elitism. Rather than going into this in detail I highly recommend you read "Bobos in Paradise" by David Brooks. (http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/Econ_Articles/Reviews/bobos.html) The term Bobo stands for bourgeois bohemians, a weird blend of ideologies and motives. It is a social trend that anybody who has sat in a Starbuck's and listened to the conversations around them will recognize. This isn't just a Yuppee mindset, but a rather interesting and pernacious variant. One that is very concerned with being both PC and personal gain. I have replaced the term Bobo with Yuppee in my lexicon as I see a distinct difference in operating styles My wife however, still uses the term Yuppee to lump them all together. An interesting comment she made about both lifestyles is that they are " dependant on the existence of a servant class" But a servant class would be horribly un-PC as well an unegalitarian. The mental gynastics that Bobos go through to maintain both their "superior" position and their boheimian/enlightened world view is the topic of the book. I mention this because when it comes to looking at people as "Second class" Bobo's excell at it. Quite simply, people who provide services that are critical to the function of society are -- although they will never admit it -- looked upon as both less important and "on call" for the needs, wants, comfort and benefit of the Bobos. And when those nasty, dirty, stupid people aren't busy doing this job, "well, just go away". And yet, despite this, they become extremely defensive if you point out this elitist attitude; because after all, they are intelligent, sensitive, egalitarian people who feel that they treat everyone equally -- despite their track record and displayed behaviors. Want an example of this kind of thinking? As a bodyguard it was my job to protect people in trouble. Trouble to the point that there was a pretty good chance that someone would try to kill them. Never mind the fact that despite the fact that I was risking my life to protect them (and possibly have to kill someone else) they wanted to haggle about price. What was most appalling was when I set boundaries about what was going to happen because of the danger levels to myself (i.e. that would get me killed) the common response was "Well that's your job." "Excuse me? No you moron, my job is to protect you and keep you out of trouble, not to get my head blown off because you don't want to be bothered or inconvienced by the situation you created here." But that was very much the attitude I regularly encountered while trying to provide protection services to both people and organizations. My life, because of what I did was not worth the same value as those I was supposed to protect. Now you ask me if I think civilians are second class citizens? By extension you ask if those who choose to serve think the same? No, Buckwheat, I think it goes the other way. I think there is very definately a segment of society that thinks those who serve are lesser beings. Quite frankly, it isn't for them that I chose to do the protection/services that I provided, nor is it for them that I train others to stand the wall these days. It's for the people out there, the "civilians" who are just trying their best to get by. People, do their own bit to help the whole by what they do, but who are unequipped to handle the monsters that haunt the night. Monsters who would prey on them or kill them for pleasure. It is the people who are struggling to live good lives in a complicated -- and sometimes dangerous world -- for whom I say Demi Moore's line from "A Few Good Men" "Ain't nothing going to hurt you tonight. Not on my watch" If need be I will die protecting people -- especially the innocents; that is a responsibility that I have taken on based on what I do rather well. But there is a cost to myself and to others who have chosen to perform this duty. A cost that is often not understood by those we stand between them and danger. And for most people, god bless them, I don't want them to know the types of monsters that are out there. Let them get on with their lives and raising their children never knowing what DIDN'T get through. I wouldn't want to inflict the horrors I have seen on anybody, much less the good people out there who are just trying to get by best they can. Having said this however, yes, I and many others who take that hit everyday for people, do get cranky when we encounter the Tom Cruise attitude in A Few Good Men. Not because we have distain for those we stand for, but because quite often those who dismiss us as stupid, violent and second class citizens don't want to communicate. They don't want to understand what is involved in the situation. In fact, they don't want to learn what is really going on outside their own little preview. They want the entire world to work according to what they believe, think and value. Instead of seeking to understand the complexities and conditions that we face, they are more interested in projecting their morals, standards and expectations on our actions and condemning us for actions that they do not understand (i.e. why such actions were necessary or what the long term cost are for those actions for those who had to make the hard choices). You asked what was one of the identifying marks of a heavy hitter, I'll tell you right now, one of the biggest marks is Pain. It's living with and still being able to function under the weight of seeing, doing and having done things that would destroy most people. It's living with the trauma of having seen and dealt pain, death and destruction. What's more though, it's knowing this hell, and while not wanting to go there again, a willingness to do so if the need arises. Or, putting in your terms, the willingness to deprive somebody of the chance to play with their grandchildren -- and the willingness to live with the costs of that decision because it needed to be done. M --__--__-- _______________________________________________ Eskrima mailing list Eskrima@martialartsresource.net http://martialartsresource.net/mailman/listinfo/eskrima http://eskrima-fma.net Old digest issues @ ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com/pub/eskrima Copyright 1994-2004: Ray Terry, MartialArtsResource.com, Sudlud.com Standard disclaimers apply. Remember September 11. End of Eskrima Digest