Originally posted by bloodwood
Does anyone know why Professor Remy used the present strike location for the twelve angles of attack in Modern Arnis as opposed to what he had learned in the Balintawak system. Strikes 1,2,5 + 12 are the same but all the others are reversed?
Was it mechanics, personal preference, or just to be different from Balintawak as he formed his new system?
When training Balintawak drills that I have acquired from different sources I have to rewrite them into Modern Arnis format as not to make myself nuts. Do you guys who train both systems find this confusing, or do you just get used to it?
I like the answers that you have received from thus far and they are all quite interesting, informative. Regarding to the Balintawak numerado as taught by GM Bobby Taboada, Mike, is correct. Now to answer your question, Bloodwood, the striking system **was not** changed in the early years of the Modern Arnis system being taught, it was augemented by teaching what Professor called the "basic" and the "traditional" strikes.
Professor, would teach the basic strikes - the Modern Arnis numerado - to beginners because it flowed better, particularly at strikes 3, 4, and 5. The problem for most beginners is that they could not generate enough power with the retraction and strike combination from 2 to 3 and 4 to 5 in the "traditional" - Balintawak pattern. By using the full follow through from 2 to 3 to 4 to 5, there is a smooth transition and power curve.
I learned both striking pattern from Professor and Sifu Don Zanghi between 1981 and 1986. I know that Tim Hartman, was using both numerados in the late 1980's. Rocky Paswik, taught both right through the 80's into the 90's. Tom Bolden, Richard Roy and Bram Frank have taught both numerados, as did a number of other instructors that I have met and trained with in Modern Arnis.
The full follow through strokes of Mdern Arnis, crossing the body from right to left, returned and repeated until you get to the #5 thrust is so much easier to teach to beginners. It is a common and smooth mechanical motion, it does not start and stop, then re-start. It also allows one to "flow" without a time and motion wasting retraction that telegraphs the #3 and #5 strikes. That delay could be very costly to a beginning stick fighter.
The Balintawak first 5 have a very clear and functional purpose, but is more difficult for beginners to use in a smooth, powerful manner. It is neither inferior or superior, it simply meets a different set of needs that a beginner in training does not have to be concerned with for some time to come.
I still teach a third numerado that I develped in 1986. It meets the smooth flow transitions from strike to strike better in my opinion. When I showed to Professor in 1989, during the review of my college curriculum, that he approved, he was pleased and congratulated me on the innovation; however, he did stress that he wanted me to continue to teach the Modern Arnis numerado so that when my students went to seminars/camps, they would know the same standard (my word) striking system as all of the others in attendance. He was right. If everyone had and used a standard numerado pattern, then it would be safer and easier for people from different areas to work together. But the key point for me is that he did not discourage my innovation and specificly endorsed me to continue using it for MY Own Students.
The strikes of my beginners program follow the Modern Arnis pattern 1 - 9, however I carry #9 through to the left side and use a reverse thrust to the eye for #10, then a straight thrust to the eye for #11, then circle the stick around my head for a forehand #12. In short from 9 through 12 my numerado is a Balintawak pattern, although the #12 follows the Modern Arnis method of delivery.
So now you know the answer and the reasoning behind Professor using both numerado systems.
Jerome Barber, Ed.D.