Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:38:03 -0700 From: eskrima-request@martialartsresource.net Subject: Eskrima digest, Vol 11 #389 - 7 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: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on behemoth2.host4u.net X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Level: 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. the "combat", thang (jason couture) 2. Re: Combat smell test (Marc Macyoung) 3. Re: Re: Combat smell test (WoodyTX) 4. Re: Combat smell test (Marc Macyoung) 5. Re: Combat smell test (Ray Terry) 6. Combat smell test (Marc Denny) 7. Two of Marc MacYoung's recent threads (Todd Ellner) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:33:09 -0700 (PDT) From: jason couture To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Subject: [Eskrima] the "combat", thang Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Just read the last news letter and was VERY happy to read the intelligent input from Guro Dave Gould about the use of the word "combat" in school names. I hope y'all got a chance to look it over 'cause it was quite good. I don't know Guro Gould but, I do respect what he wrote. I may have opened a can of worms with my bitch about using the "combat" word in school names but, I've enjoyed reading all the feedback! I still have my own opinion of how the word should be used but, this is a FREE country and I will continue to put myself in harms way to keep it that way!! The important thing is that we continue to keep the FMA alive, so...........go bang some sticks! Take care, all. ===== **JASON COUTURE** _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com --__--__-- Message: 2 From: "Marc Macyoung" To: Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:56:23 -0600 Subject: [Eskrima] Re: Combat smell test Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net > Mostly true... If you don't shoot'em or blow them up you've screwed up badly. > However if you search for it you'll find those in Nam (and elsewhere I suspect) > that depended their dagger as a primary weapon. But then that worked better > in the special ops to which they were assigned. > Ray Terry Ummmm I know a number of current and former special ops guys. And while knife work was indeed a part of the equation in certain cases, last time I check things that went "boom" were preferred for combat. So the research I have done indicates that except for VERY specialized circumstances (i.e. sentry removal, assissination and other things where you didn't want to attract the attention of people who had guns) guns were preferred tools of the trade of people who won. In fact, most of the guys I know who did wet work used guns to get the job done. As such I would love to hear some of your research that supports your contention. M --__--__-- Message: 3 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 23:29:29 -0500 From: WoodyTX To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Re: Combat smell test Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net I must be misinterpreting this: He attacked them with a butter knife? *boggle* Seriously, I could care less about which SpecOps unit trains what art. For most of us, the biggest determinant is the individual's skills, not the style. An unmotivated individual, poorly trained in the Secret Arts of Ninjism (endorsed by all military branches!) would get his butt kicked by an untrained but athletic and aggressive high-school football player. WoodyTX > In the same > vein I have a Ranger friend whose patrol in Vietnam was charged by a > butterknife sword wielding villager.They entered the vil and the guy was > practicing. The squad watched the guy get more and more savage in his > swings until he charged them. As he did so seven guys opened up on him in > full auto. Expecting an attack they withdrew from the vil, made the LZ and > flew back in silence. Sitting in their hooch later the first words spoken > about the incident were when the squad leader, sitting there refelctively > looking over his beer, in a mystified voice asked "What the fuck was that?" > The entire squad burst out in laughter. > > Marc MacYoung --__--__-- Message: 4 From: "Marc Macyoung" To: Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 23:19:24 -0600 Subject: [Eskrima] Re: Combat smell test Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Snip > I hope that we don`t turn this into one of those redundant arguments over a > word(s) like other topics of conversations have recently such as the > definition of Arnis, Eskrima, and Kali... To summarize: Combat Is just a word, no more > and no less if some choose to use it so be it, the only thing that matters > anyway is your training and how well you move in combat, nothing could speak > higer for you as a warrior than your abilities and the way that you move in > combat. Words are for communicating, actions come into play when words have no more > value and diologue ceases to exist. There you have it Marc, go well. > Guro Dave Gould Whoa, where do I start? Okay, how about this, I am often accused of making things too complicated...usually by people who want to make things too simple. With this in mind let me give you an example about the importance of making differentiations. In combat situations, it is wise to train your people to walk past a downed opponent and fire a couple rounds into him in order to make sure that he is truely dead. Most military people I know were trained this way. But, using a scenario from a recent Arizona Concealed Carry class. A shotgun wielding maniac breaks a window of your house, you hear your children screaming. Grabbing your gun you rush towards the door. Before you reach it the maniac kicks the door open and charges you. You shoot him and he collapses, dropping the shotgun out of reach. As you rush past to check your children he gasps from the floor that he is going to kill you. You put two more rounds into him to keep him from doing so as you rush to check on your children. Problem is that you have just committed manslaughter in Arizona. In some states, second or third degree murder. He was not offering you an immediate threat (down and without a weapon any more) and you killed him anyway. I recently read an article about a Buffalo store clerk who disarmed a robber, chased him and then shot him. He's being prosecuted, for the same reason, the robber wasn't an immediate threat. The drug dealer who was robbed, then chased and attacked his robbers with a katana in England was prosecuted for the same reason. The threat was past, yet he still attacked. Now with this in mind kiddies, I want you to seriously stop and think about any training that you are receiving that involves you disarming and then stabbing an attacker with his own (now your) knife. You call it self-defense, the courts call it something else. Guess whose opinion carries more clout? In the same vein, while genocide of a civilian populace may be an acceptable strategy in third world countries for so-called military, rebel, and tribal paramilitary (or places where the fighting if for Ethnic/Religious supremecy) ...it doesn't exactly go over well among the Geneva Convention bound armies. Among Westernized armies you end up getting court martialed for it. In fact, if you remember a little incident called My Lai, the fact that it may have been "ordered" didn't keep the LT from going to trial. And while we are on the subject, killing enemy soliders in combat is okay, shooting them after they surrendered is again a no-no. So there are rules, standards and conditons even in combat. Combat is NOT a wild free for all. Now I will be the first to admit that the rules of engagement may not be particularly conducive to the survivial of the individual. But when we are talking about war, the individual's survival takes secondary importance to the bigger picture. In this case, keeping genocide from happening. Yes, they create all kinds of problems, and they are often violated, but there is a reason that combat is strictly defined and strictly controlled by accountable military bodies. Because quite honestly, it is a horrible blood bath when military/para-military decide to go on the rampage. Remember the fun and frivolity of Nanking, Manila, Khemer Rogue, Sierra Leone, Ruwanda, Congo, Kosovo, Armenian Genocide and countless other examples? So I would have to say that depending on circumstances you find yourself in knowing these little definitions is kind of important. What is more important however, is that the definitions that you come up with -- and base your behavior on -- be in line with the more generally accepted standards where you find yourself. Your actions must be appropriate to the circumstances you are in, not what you think is justified....that's why having a realistic definition of terms is important, especially if you aren't in standing in the middle of the malestroms that you described. Hell, I live in Castle Rock Colorado now. I'm ass deep in yuppies these days. Not gang bangers. The most dangerous thing I have to face these days is an asshole on the cell phone driving a SUV. I haven't been shot at in nine years...a new record for someone with a mouth as big as mine. Do I have the same "mindset" I had when I was in professions where a bad day at work meant someone died? No. I am far more mellow and less on the edge. Because I don't have to be. It is not necessary for the environment I now exist in. The trick is to recognize where you are and what is appropriate for those circumstances. If you are in it, you are in it. Where I have problems is with people who want the perceived bennies of being a "warrior" without the attendant responsibilities, duties, controls and consequences. I had a major argument with an ex teacher on the purpose of being "elite" I objected to his perception of elitism because someone knew his particular fighting art. In my definition the purpose of the warrior is to serve. It is not self-glorification, status, fantasy or a sense of elitism. A person who doesn't have those responsibilities and obligations to others has no right to call himself a warrior, much less consider himself elite for being a member of a small clique. It has been my experience that people who are enamoured of the word "combat" tend to fall down on this point. So, yeah I do think it is kind of important to consider what the word means and how it is used, or over used as the case may be. M --__--__-- Message: 5 From: Ray Terry Subject: Re: [Eskrima] Combat smell test To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:39:38 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net > Even here in L.A. there are areas that could be considered war zones... Sorry. Not even close. Ray Terry rterry@idiom.com --__--__-- Message: 6 From: "Marc Denny" To: Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:16:01 -0700 Subject: [Eskrima] Combat smell test Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Woof All: In response to what I understood to be a statement that the term "combat" applied to a mean street fight, I wrote: BEGIN > Concerning "combat", my sense of the word goes further. For me the term has a military conotation-- it is about killing people who are trying to kill you. Doggie smell test: Use the term only if you would feel comfortable using it in front of someone who has seen combat in Afghanistan or Iraq. Marc/Crafty END In a friendly way Dave Gould, who I see on his website uses the term, responded at length to "take me to task" on this. Dave, I confess to finding your response a bit non-responsive/defensive. It certainly sounds like you would feel comfortable using the term in front of people who have seen military combat and as such my doggie smell test presents no negative insinuations for your use of it. Woof, Marc/Crafty PS I find your criterion about being forced to fight when you don't want to fight anymore a very interesting one. --__--__-- Message: 7 Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:17:27 -0700 (Pacific Standard Time) From: "Todd Ellner" To: Cc: Subject: [Eskrima] Two of Marc MacYoung's recent threads Reply-To: eskrima@martialartsresource.net Marc, Your recent threads on classical martial arts and the "what if monkey" have gotten me thinking about a lot of things like teaching and basic human politeness. There's not enough space to go through a line-by-line point-by-point analysis of everything you've said, so I'll stick to the essentials of your lengthy pieces on these. Cutting through the verbiage your final message is that "classical martial arts" are useless for fighting and self defense. Before you start in, I'm fully aware of the difference between the two. You dance around the subject and spill a lot of ink, but that's what it comes down to. Many believe that whatever they do is the best stuff in the world. Every one of them is wrong. It is just as much of an error to believe that anything that came into existence more than five years ago is worthless. People have been pugging for about five million years. The basics haven't changed much. If someone's got them it doesn't matter if he calls them "combatives", "martial arts" or no nonsense self defense". If he can teach those skills then he can call himself guru, sensei, or coach for all I care. The intersecting circle diagrams on your site are not terribly helpful. All they say is that whatever other people do can only be very slightly about self defense or fighting and that what you do is better. The amount of venom you demonstrate towards martial arts is rather surprising. I say surprising because you claim to teach Pencak Silat. What makes this doubly mystifying is that you don't give credit to any of the people you learned it from. You haven't even completed the basic curriculum of any of the systems which you might claim to teach. To say that you teach the essence or analytic framework without having been through at least the fundamentals need not be dignified with comment. It also flies in the face of your personal statements about the skills and level of understanding of at least three men. I will not embarrass either of us by bringing up their names. All I need to say is that your recent words do not jibe with what you said about them some time ago. Were you under the impression that their egos needed stroking through flattery and false praise? Or do you believe that you can afford to be rude and dismissive now that you've gotten what you want from them? I can assure you that the first is not true. The second is not the mark of an honest man. This brings us to the "what if monkey" discussion. You can't learn from someone you don't fundamentally respect. And you can't have a shred of integrity if you sneer at or insult your students while wasting their time and taking their money. Reducing them to "what if monkeys is incredibly rude. If you called them that to their faces I'd hope that one or two would take a swing at you. Doing it behind their backs, even if it's in the privacy of your own mind, just makes it worse and compounds appallingly bad manners with moral cowardice. Unless you've got a real talent for dishonesty they'll figure it out and resent it and you pretty quickly. Some people think they know everything, so they ask leading questions. Others take this stuff seriously and think about it, maybe too much at times Others lack confidence in their skills and ask questions because of it. Others have real doubts about the teacher. There are different ways to deal with each. In all of these cases it's the teacher's responsibility to figure out what's going on and fix it or send the students on. If the same problem keeps showing up it's not a reason to put down the students. It's time to figure out where you're screwing up as an instructor. A certain amount of questioning is healthy. If all you hear in class is "Yes sensei. Whatever you just said, sensei," they aren't learning anything. If they're really thinking about how to apply what they've learned a fair number of these questions will be "what if" questions. Anyone who has been teaching for a while knows when and how to stop the speculation and get back on task. He will also leave plenty of time for questions and encourage the honest ones. One of best teachers I've ever met in anything from blacksmithing to orbital mechanics was my wife's old JKD sifu. He once said he only started to be a decent coach when he realized he was there for the students' benefit, not the other way around. --__--__-- _______________________________________________ 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