Dan Anderson
Master of Arts
Now that the furor has died down a bit on the Kelly/Paul issue, it does bring up a interesting couple of points for discussion. To recap without bias, we have a situation where Paul sent Kelly a rough video and got blasted for it. Paul and Kelly post about balintawak empty hands techniques. Paul posts a "difference between Modern Arnis and balintawak" post. Kelly disagrees on a number of items in the post. Kelly, who has never been known to mince words, pulls the senior card on Paul and let's him have it over the net. They go back and forth which culminates in Paul calling him on the hard guy persona and challenging Kelly to a legal match of Kelly's choosing.
Point 1) Kelly has had his way in challenging the credentials and skills of others including inviting them up to his school "any time" to trade sticks, etc. These replies have been anywhere from semi-polite to downright insulting to the recipient. Is this the way for a senior player in any art to act? Pro or con?
Point 2) Paul goes public with the challenge. Should this have been kept private? Pro or con?
Point 3) Who has what to win or lose here (besides the outcome of the match itself)? Is Kelly in a lose/lose situation? He feels Paul is a punk so if he wins, "Did he only whip a punk?" and if he lost, "He got whipped by a punk?" Or is there a win in this in that, "Kelly is 53 years old and is not long in the tooth yet."? Same with Paul - Is he in a win/win situation in that "He was just a punk who got what was coming." or "Whoa! The punk won."
I am putting these out as points for discussion. I have had private discussions about these points. I'm curious how others think on this. Personally, I don't exactly know how a legal match could occur in the first place as waivers can be broken by any good attorney. Also, if we kept Kelly and Paul off this thread (so it doesn't get hot again) it could actually turn out to be a good discussion.
Yours,
Dan Anderson
Point 1) Kelly has had his way in challenging the credentials and skills of others including inviting them up to his school "any time" to trade sticks, etc. These replies have been anywhere from semi-polite to downright insulting to the recipient. Is this the way for a senior player in any art to act? Pro or con?
Point 2) Paul goes public with the challenge. Should this have been kept private? Pro or con?
Point 3) Who has what to win or lose here (besides the outcome of the match itself)? Is Kelly in a lose/lose situation? He feels Paul is a punk so if he wins, "Did he only whip a punk?" and if he lost, "He got whipped by a punk?" Or is there a win in this in that, "Kelly is 53 years old and is not long in the tooth yet."? Same with Paul - Is he in a win/win situation in that "He was just a punk who got what was coming." or "Whoa! The punk won."
I am putting these out as points for discussion. I have had private discussions about these points. I'm curious how others think on this. Personally, I don't exactly know how a legal match could occur in the first place as waivers can be broken by any good attorney. Also, if we kept Kelly and Paul off this thread (so it doesn't get hot again) it could actually turn out to be a good discussion.
Yours,
Dan Anderson