Tulisan said:A lot of Modern Arnis is done through drills and demonstrations, where you get a lot of theory rather then an actual understanding of what will work in a fight, under stress, against a resisting and unpredictable opponent. So, in Balintawak, empty hand or otherwise, there isn't as much theory as much as there is, "This is what gets the best results." Modern Arnis on the other hand you will get a great diversity, depending on who you talk too, in theory and claims (and arguments even) as to how it is or how it is supposed to be. Some Modern Arnis people train their Modern Arnis in a results based fashion, but many don't. So, depending on whom you train with in Modern Arnis, you could run into a great variety of differences in theory and approaches. This diversity in theory doesn't exist so much in Manong Ted's Balintawak due to the very specific way in which he teaches, and due to the results based approach.
I would have to disagree with the "best results" argument here. This appears to be positing, implicitly, that Balintawak is superior to Modern Arnis with respect to "what gets best results." It's dangerous to generalize and say that one style is superior to another. Didn't Bruce Lee emphasize the importance of the individual over styles or systems ? I believe that Professor Presas meant the same thing when he encouraged people to find "the art within the art." Whether you train in a "results oriented" system depends on who you train with. I think that, properly trained, Modern Arnis is a "results oriented" style......think of the empty hand work, joint locks, stick work, ground work, trapping hands, tapi tapi etc etc. If you train with a Master of Tapi Tapi, a Datu or any other high ranking Modern Arnis player, you will find that the art of Modern Arnis "is very much alive" and progressive. Let me tell ya, you could not get more results oriented than the tapi tapi that Professor was teaching in the last few years of his life. It did not matter if you "cooperated" or tried to counter what he did, he beat the crap out of you.......his art was "very much alive" and results oriented.
When Mao and I visited Professor in Victoria in February of 2001, he told me directly that he considered Balintawak to be the most deadly martial art that he had encountered in his life and that he developed tapi tapi to counter Balintawak. However, to me, it's much more than countering Balintawak......it's a way to counter anything out there and QUICKLY. It ain't no game of patty cakes and it ain't a DRILL !!
Some folks think of "tapi tapi" in terms of "stick vs. stick." That is a gross misunderstanding of the Professor's philosophy of the art. Professor emphasized the concept of tapi tapi in the ENTIRE art of Modern Arnis. That, to me, is very much alive and very results oriented.
The thing that I admired about Professor is that he was not an exclusivist. He was a democrat (with small case "d"). In other words, Professor did not hold notions of superiority with respect to other martial arts. He was always learning and investigating new fighting concepts...."making the connections" in other words. He was democratic when it came to investigating other arts and working with other elite level martial artists. He never stopped learning. He would proclaim more times than I can remember "I will never stop learning !!"
Professor gave us more than just the art of Modern Arnis. He gave us a way of looking at other arts and making the connections. He also taught us to be "alive", progressive and dynamic in ALL aspects and not just in stick work. Because of that, Modern Arnis is a results oriented art. How well that is taught by an individual is another matter entirely.
Take care,
Brian Johns
Columbus, Ohio