Silat is a weapons art first...

[pakarilusi]

If you understand this, then the empty hand moves makes sense.

And this is why it is NOT well suited for the UFC. :)

[Nojon]

ok.:)

[Hannibal]

sweet zombie jesus...........

[Kurtka Jerker]

As I've recently used my allotted "cool story bro" pic for the month, I'll just say that pretty much every military ever to use close contact fighting techniques for fighting rather than to instill aggression primarily relied on sportive grappling and mixfighting a'la UFC and Vale Tudo.

Look it up. Show me specifically why Silat is not appropriate for MMA but the styles of the Soviet Union, Japanese Police, US Military, Brazilian and Russian bareknuckle fighting, Greek, European and Roman wrestling do just fine.

[Bambi]

Look it up. Show me specifically why Silat is not appropriate for MMA but the styles of the Soviet Union, Japanese Police, US Military, Brazilian and Russian bareknuckle fighting, Greek, European and Roman wrestling do just fine.

Because most of those systems don't use weapons at all? :cool:

also "weapons" does not mean "military".

Incidentally my impression of silat is that it's more weapons aware than weapons based

[Nojon]

pakarilusi, was this an idea split from another thread? Or did you just need to tell us this suddenly?





If the latter then.. cake is more of a dessert food, than a breakfast food. Thats why we dont see it on breakfast menus.

[Hannibal]

What about breakfast muffins? They are pretty cakey

[Ular Sawa]

Silat is a generic term like Karate or Kung Fu. There are lots of different systems that stretch across the borders of several counties. Yes, there are weapons oriented (with some of the more awesome weapons in an Asian fighting art) but the op is too much of a generalization.

[Sifu Ben]

What about breakfast muffins? They are pretty cakey

Cinnamon buns, mmmmmmmm

[Griffin]

If you understand this, then the empty hand moves makes sense.

And this is why it is NOT well suited for the UFC. :)

For those of us with an interest in Silat, yet have minimal / no exposure, would you like to expand on that?

Are you talking about fine vs gross motor skills or something - With your comparison to the UFC?
Something like, perhaps more intricate movements, That we might not see say in.. Dog Brothers all out action or something?

With such a general statement, as an opening to a thread, I am left with the impression that there could be a gap in understanding of stationary drilling of technique etc vs live movement and application. I do not mean to be offensive in any way saying that, and would be happy to learn more from your experiences with Silat in relation to your opening statement, as my only experience with a weapon based art is a Doce Pares seminar many years ago :)

:cool:

[Kurtka Jerker]

Because most of those systems don't use weapons at all?

also "weapons" does not mean "military".

Incidentally my impression of silat is that it's more weapons aware than weapons based

Actually, I think you'll find that they all were developed and applied in the context of weaponned fighting and that most do involve a healthy amount of weapons practice either directly or in practice alongside the specific empty hand technique. The fact is, when the goal is application the most commonly trained supplement in history to weaponned training is wrestling, and it's for a damn good reason. Why are all these styles, developed, tested and used for hundreds of years in real weaponned combat, unhindered and even excellent in MMA competition while Silat is not, according to this dude? Is Silat's focus so narrow and cumbersome that its practicioners simply can't cope with a lack of a weapon?

(note, this isn't actually a criticism of silat. I don't know anything about it, just questioning tired logic of the OP.)

[nasigoreng]

httphttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFPO1zdZb08

[pakarilusi]

I see that I have shaken the hornet's nest. I meant to. ;)

Without being too cryptic, The Dogbrothers have it right and that is why they're not in the UFC doing their stuff. I'm sure you could adapt it to suit the UFC, but then it ceases to be what it is.

However, being a Malay (in Malaysia) who has practiced three different Silat styles, one of which is my family style, I am privy to the "Malay mindset"... So, I will tell you that Silat would not wish to have its image be that of the "UFC". Not that there is anything wrong with the UFC (I love it!) but Silat is a "polite gentleman's art".

Imho, modern fencing and kendo are much better representation of what Silat should evolve into rather than the UFC. (I am working towards this btw... ;) )

To add, a lot of misunderstandings about the effectiveness of Silat stems from the fact that it is judged as an unarmed Art, thus dissolving its perceived effectiveness. The highly secretive nature of Silat teachers especially regarding Silat's weapon practices does not help to alter this perception. Imho of course...


And yes, I love those stuff at breakfast too... But my thing is... Pancakes... Or NASI GORENG (fried rice)... Mmmmmm... :)

[nasigoreng]

Not that there is anything wrong with the UFC (I love it!) but Silat is a "polite gentleman's art".


i agree. traditional schools of Silat have codes of conduct that require their techniques be kept secret and only used in life or death situations. It's a double-edged sword because if the fighting applications cannot be demonstrated and taught openly, then it's hard to propagate.

[oosh]

Actually, I think you'll find that they all were developed and applied in the context of weaponned fighting and that most do involve a healthy amount of weapons practice either directly or in practice alongside the specific empty hand technique. The fact is, when the goal is application the most commonly trained supplement in history to weaponned training is wrestling, and it's for a damn good reason. Why are all these styles, developed, tested and used for hundreds of years in real weaponned combat, unhindered and even excellent in MMA competition while Silat is not, according to this dude? Is Silat's focus so narrow and cumbersome that its practicioners simply can't cope with a lack of a weapon?

(note, this isn't actually a criticism of silat. I don't know anything about it, just questioning tired logic of the OP.)

Wrestling a knife wielding individual intent on doing you harm isn't a particularly sensible idea. It's worth checking out the Dog Brothers "Die Less Often" series with Mark Denny and Gabe Suarez, good for those with or without a background in a good weapon orientated MA e.g. Eskrima/Arnis/Kali.

[Yohan]

If you understand this, then the empty hand moves makes sense.

ok.

show me.

i don't know anything about silat, but i do know it is a weapons art first and foremost, so the empty hand moves should make sense to me. so show me the empty hand moves and how much sense they make

And this is why it is NOT well suited for the UFC. :)

um ok. what is your point?

you must really think a lot of the ufc if you are measuring your using it as the yardstick by which to measure your art.

[Sifu Ben]

Without being too cryptic, The Dogbrothers have it right and that is why they're not in the UFC doing their stuff. I'm sure you could adapt it to suit the UFC, but then it ceases to be what it is.



That whole video was about how the dog brothers work stuff for MMA, and many dog brothers guys fight MMA :dunno: :dunno: :dunno:
As for the rest of it, very hard to empiracally prove one way or the other the effectiveness of a weapon art, and there is a vast array of Silat hand to hand techniques, which must be judged as hand to hand techniques.
Again though, as I have stated in countless other threads, LARP training methods leading to fanciful applications thought up by people who've never been in a fight are the issue. If you train like in the Dog Brothers video, your art will probably be effective.

[Yohan]

I see that I have shaken the hornet's nest. I meant to. ;)

Without being too cryptic, The Dogbrothers have it right and that is why they're not in the UFC doing their stuff. I'm sure you could adapt it to suit the UFC, but then it ceases to be what it is.

i would posit that they aren't in the ufc doing their stuff for the following reasons;

they don't use weapons in the ufc
the dog brothers train with weapons

makes sense to me

edit; i'm arguing against a straw man here if sifu_ben is right, and their members fight in mma competitions, which i think is entirely feasible. I'm going to accept his claim as true.

However, being a Malay (in Malaysia) who has practiced three different Silat styles, one of which is my family style, I am privy to the "Malay mindset"... So, I will tell you that Silat would not wish to have its image be that of the "UFC". Not that there is anything wrong with the UFC (I love it!) but Silat is a "polite gentleman's art".

what?

why do you keep comparing a martial art to a single fight promotion? it's like comparing the blues style of guitar playing to a large rock concert. it's like comparing ginger to mangos.

You must really love the ufc to keep using it as the yardstick to measure your art by.

Imho, modern fencing and kendo are much better representation of what Silat should evolve into rather than the UFC. (I am working towards this btw... ;) )

ok so you would rather your art host small amateur competitions among small niche groups then host international televised professional competitions among professionals who represent huge bodies of talent and training resources?

i can understand that, though i don't really understand it.

To add, a lot of misunderstandings about the effectiveness of Silat stems from the fact that it is judged as an unarmed Art, thus dissolving its perceived effectiveness. The highly secretive nature of Silat teachers especially regarding Silat's weapon practices does not help to alter this perception. Imho of course...

you just wrote a whole paragraph and said nothing. silat is a weapon art. it is known. you are arguing against a straw man. no one thinks it is an unarmed art.

[Kurtka Jerker]

Wrestling a knife wielding individual intent on doing you harm isn't a particularly sensible idea. It's worth checking out the Dog Brothers "Die Less Often" series with Mark Denny and Gabe Suarez, good for those with or without a background in a good weapon orientated MA e.g. Eskrima/Arnis/Kali.

Oh I agree that the ideal is to have and use your own weapon, but otherwise, what are you gonna do? Try and knock him out before he shanks you?



And yeah, the DBMA setup is basically MMA with weapons. I don't see how mentioning them is supposed to put a gulf between MMA and what Silat guys do.


Silat is a "polite gentleman's art".

Fighting, especiallly with weapons, is neither polite nor gentlemanly. You have to understand exactly how ridiculous it sounds to say "I specialize in cutting people up, but I'm far too polite to be seen as one of those guys." I mean there is a bit of an image associated with that particular promotion, but I think it's pretty clear you're using UFC erroneously to mean MMA as a whole, and they're not the same thing.


To add, a lot of misunderstandings about the effectiveness of Silat stems from the fact that it is judged as an unarmed Art, thus dissolving its perceived effectiveness. The highly secretive nature of Silat teachers especially regarding Silat's weapon practices does not help to alter this perception. Imho of course...
If viewing Silat without weapons makes it ineffective compared to the other arts involved in MMA, why not just practice those for your empty hand component? You're making it sound like Silat is better as a part of a whole training program rather than an art in and of itself.

[pakarilusi]

Whoa... Too many questions to answer really. Forgive me if I miss any...

To the question "Show me...", I hope we can train together some day. No bad blood, as I respect your query to my statement bro, I really do. ;)

Why the UFC reference?

Firstly, I do love watching the UFC and hold MMA fighters in high regard. Real tough guys... I train in BJJ myself, but I am just a beginner though, still a white belt.

The reason I use the UFC as a yardstick however is because others I've spoken too have used it as such. That "If your Silat moves are so good why don't I see Silat guys winning in the UFC?" thingy... That's all really...

As to the "polite gentleman's art" I did not mean to be callous or insensitive to the fact that killing is killing, sad and gruesome any way you look at it really... What I meant was that the older Silat practitioner's tend not to want to promote Silat as "the world's most lethal hardcore killing" Art. Just like in modern fencing (also a killing art at one time), you tone the "blood lust" image down. Certainly you CAN kill with any weapon Art, you just don't glorify that ability.

Btw, I do only want a niche audience. An audience that understands this... An Art can be effective while not needing to lose its "civility". I am NOT saying that MMA practitioners aren't civil, it's just that the sport has taken it's Marketing lead from Pro Boxing it seems... Thus the Marketing is geared towards machismo, at least imo...

On the contrary, you don't see this with modern fencing, even less with Kendo, even though they're also sports and they can be lethal for sure. I know, some will just say it is all just hype and marketing but I personally feel that MMA and the UFC (I lump them together I know...) have lost that "Martial Spirit", if just a little bit.

As to the straw man argument, I am a bit relieved actually... I get a lot of people thinking that Silat is primarily an unarmed Art but that's just the people I meet. It must be different in the West...

Again, if you want to understand Silat properly as a fighting Art, imho, you have to learn its weapons applications to do so.

[Yohan]

Whoa... Too many questions to answer really. Forgive me if I miss any...

To the question "Show me...", I hope we can train together some day. No bad blood, as I respect your query to my statement bro, I really do. ;)

well you'll have to excuse me if I don't believe claims that are made without any evidence to support. You haven't managed to convince me about Silat's effectiveness as a weapons or unarmed art, one way or the other.

The reason I use the UFC as a yardstick however is because others I've spoken too have used it as such. That "If your Silat moves are so good why don't I see Silat guys winning in the UFC?" thingy... That's all really...

Why are you arguing against that position in this thread? No one in this thread is arguing that position.

Btw, I do only want a niche audience. An audience that understands this... An Art can be effective while not needing to lose its "civility". I am NOT saying that MMA practitioners aren't civil, it's just that the sport has taken it's Marketing lead from Pro Boxing it seems... Thus the Marketing is geared towards machismo, at least imo...

Look. You want to talk trash about the UFC and MMA, go right ahead. Just don't pretend you aren't. You don't like the attitude of UFC fighters and fans, and MMA practitioners, fine. Come out and say it, but don't pretend to hide behind this "I'm a civil gentlemen" crap when you are on a forum trash talking MMA practitioners and UFC fans and fighters.

I have strong opinions too and I'm not afraid of voicing them. I'm also not afraid of what people think of me.

On the contrary, you don't see this with modern fencing, even less with Kendo, even though they're also sports and they can be lethal for sure. I know, some will just say it is all just hype and marketing but I personally feel that MMA and the UFC (I lump them together I know...) have lost that "Martial Spirit", if just a little bit.

Ok I'll bite on your little jab. What is "The Martial Spirit?"

[nasigoreng]

I see the character of PS not as exclusively weapon-oriented or empty-hand, but as strategies for weaker individuals to persevere against an attacker with some advantage: either physically stronger, using a weapon, multiple attackers, etc...In this sense, I consider it a self-defense art, and like other self-defense arts, it includes counters to grabs, punches, kicks, and weapons.

The Dogbrothers have it right and that is why they're not in the UFC doing their stuff. I'm sure you could adapt it to suit the UFC, but then it ceases to be what it is.

Is there's a bit of a false dichotomy here? Why can't people do both bela-diri (self-defense) and some kind of sparring (boxing, MMA, TKD)? The point is to practice the principles and techniques under pressure so the practitioners can refine their skills.

The beauty of MMA is that it well rounded having punching, kicks, and grappling. So, if you can pull of a kali-silat move in that situation, you can have a high degree of confidence the technique will work under pressure.

Although it may not be "true to its nature" to practice Silat in a sport modality, that type of training would improve the practitioner's attributes (speed, timing, reflexes) for self-defense applications, so I think it's worthwhile.

the DBMA setup is basically MMA with weapons. I don't see how mentioning them is supposed to put a gulf between MMA and what Silat guys do. this is my point exactly, DBMA real-contact stickfighting is like sparring, or competitive MMA, not self-defense, which is what they present in "Die Less Often".

I attached the KaliTudo clip to show that Kali-Silat principles can be effective in an MMA modality. it just takes lots of research and training.

[pakarilusi]

Why are you arguing against that position in this thread? No one in this thread is arguing that position.

Look. You want to talk trash about the UFC and MMA, go right ahead. Just don't pretend you aren't. You don't like the attitude of UFC fighters and fans, and MMA practitioners, fine. Come out and say it, but don't pretend to hide behind this "I'm a civil gentlemen" crap when you are on a forum trash talking MMA practitioners and UFC fans and fighters.

I have strong opinions too and I'm not afraid of voicing them. I'm also not afraid of what people think of me.

Ok I'll bite on your little jab. What is "The Martial Spirit?"

Hmm... Strange that you think I want to bash the UFC or MMA... (My favourite fighter is Lyoto Machida btw... )

I bring it up as others around me always use as that as the yardstick against Silat.

I really feel that it is like comparing BJJ to Modern Fencing. You don't get my point on this? You may not agree though, but that's fine...

I would NOT be practicing BJJ if I thought that that MMA approach was totally ineffective.

It might seem naive or cliche to you but as a life long practitioner of Silat, I really do believe in that "I'm a civil gentlemen crap", as you put it so eloquently... Sorry if this dissapoints you.

I too don't really care about what most people think about me, except those I care about, my loved ones. Their opinions of me do matter. :)

"The Martial Spirit", wow... That's a whole thread. I would sum it up with the practices you see in Kendo, a beautiful approach to a weapon Art imho...


Nasigoreng, that is a great post. I really feel that the Dogbrothers approach is not usual approach taken by Silat practitioners... Not that it is wrong, just that we don't approach it that way. Maybe it should be. Regardless, they're very effective though.

[Yohan]

Hmm... Strange that you think I want to bash the UFC or MMA... I bring it up as others around me always use as the yardstick against Silat. I really feel that it is like comparing BJJ to Modern Fencing.

I will NOT be doing BJJ if I thought that that approach was totally ineffective.

It might seem naive or cliche to you but as a life long practitioner of Silat, I really do believe in that "I'm a civil gentlemen" crap... Sorry if this dissapoints you.

I too don't really care about what most people think about me, except those I care about, my loved ones. Their opinions of me do matter. :)

You assigned negative qualities to "MMA and UFC" insinuating that it's practitioners are uncivil and have lost the Martial Spirit. I don't think you want to bash "MMA and UFC." You said it. It's a fact.

"The Martial Spirit", wow... That's a whole thread. I would sum it up with the practices you see in Kendo, a beautiful approach to a weapon Art imho...

Back to "Martial Spirit" - if you don't know what it is, how can you make the claim that "MMA and UFC" have lost it?

I don't see many of the Kendo practices in Silat. Does that mean that Kendo has "Martial Spirit" and Silat doesn't?

Also, where do you train BJJ? Who is your coach?

[pakarilusi]

You assigned negative qualities to "MMA and UFC" insinuating that it's practitioners are uncivil and have lost the Martial Spirit. I don't think you want to bash "MMA and UFC." You said it. It's a fact.



Back to "Martial Spirit" - if you don't know what it is, how can you make the claim that "MMA and UFC" have lost it?

I don't see many of the Kendo practices in Silat. Does that mean that Kendo has "Martial Spirit" and Silat doesn't?

Also, where do you train BJJ? Who is your coach?

Wow, saying that they've lost a bit of the Martial Spirit is bashing the WHOLE of MMA and the UFC? You sure do see the world in black and white yah?

I will be the first to say that I've met a lot of Silat practitioners who have lost the Martial Spirit, that means I'm bashing the whole of Silat? Hmmm....

I know what the Martial Spirit is, just wanted to give you a point of reference that would be easier to look up.It is too long to explain here. Just because you don't see those practices in Silat (that you see in Kendo) that does not mean it is not there. It is NOT in the fighting methods btw... Techniques will always be different, thus creating the myriad of styles that we now have. Martial Spirit should stay the same.

My BJJ Coach(es) in Malaysia? First was Adam Kayoom, here... He's in the States now quite a bit...

http://www.bjjheroes.com/bjj-fighters/adam-shahir-kayoom

http://www.karate-shotokan-kata.com/Adam-Kayoom.html

Now, I train here, under Marcos Escobar...

http://www.escobarbjj.com/blog/

http://www.escobarbjj.com/bio.php

Both incredibly nice guys btw... ;)

[Yohan]

My BJJ Coach(es) in Malaysia? First was Adam Kayoom, here...

http://www.bjjheroes.com/bjj-fighters/adam-shahir-kayoom

http://www.karate-shotokan-kata.com/Adam-Kayoom.html

Now, I train here, under Marcos Escobar...

http://www.escobarbjj.com/blog/

http://www.escobarbjj.com/bio.php

Both incredible nice guys... ;)

Awesome!

Keep up the good work!


Wow, saying that they've lost a bit of the Martial Spirit is bashing the WHOLE of MMA and the UFC? You sure do see the world in black and white yah?

No - that's what YOU are saying - let's go back and check what you said:

I will tell you that Silat would not wish to have its image be that of the "UFC". Not that there is anything wrong with the UFC (I love it!) but Silat is a "polite gentleman's art".

You are saying that the UFC has a negative image, and that you would not want Silat to have that same negative image, but would prefer it to have the image of a "polite gentlemen's art." Inferring that MMA is not a "polite gentlemen's art."

I disagree with you on that point sir. I believe MMA to be a "polite gentlemen's art" practiced by polite gentlemen such as myself.

I personally feel that MMA and the UFC (I lump them together I know...) have lost that "Martial Spirit"

I will be the first to say that I've met a lot of Silat practitioners who have lost the Martial Spirit, that means I'm bashing the whole of Silat? Hmmm....

So first you are saying that you lump all of MMA and UFC into one pile that has lost the Martial Spirit, but then you say that your comments about Silat practitioners not having Martial Spirit isn't applicable to all of Silat? Why the double standard?

I know what the Martial Spirit is, just wanted to give you a point of reference that would be easier to look up.It is too long to explain here. Just because you don't see those practices in Silat (that you see in Kendo) that does not mean it is not there. It is NOT in the fighting methods btw... Techniques will always be different, thus creating the myriad of styles that we now have. Martial Spirit should stay the same.

Well if you know what Martial Spirit is, explain it to me. Everyone has a different definition of what Martial Spirit is, so you are going to have to explain it to me if you want to have a reasonable discussion on whether "MMA and UFC" and Silat have "Martial Spirit."

[nasigoreng]

Nasigoreng, that is a great post. I really feel that the Dogbrothers approach is not usual approach taken by Silat practitioners... Not that it is wrong, just that we don't approach it that way. Maybe it should be. Regardless, they're very effective though.

three words kawan: tradition, tradition, tradition. Silat, for many is not just self-defense, but cultural inheritance. so, many feel it's inappropriate to cross-train or train openly.

[pakarilusi]

Ahhh... It has now become a discussion of Martial Spirit I see...

By my definition, in a nutshell, it is first, the ability to practice Martial Arts at the highest intensity without showing disrespect to your "opponent" (in reality only your "training partner"). Second, to keep "the bigger picture" in mind of what Martial Art training is about, how it not only affects you but society at large (especially if it is a spectator sport).

For this reason, I say that some in MMA and the UFC have lost this Martial Spirit. Talking down to your opponent is normal, but this goes against the first rule. Feuds being highlighted is also normal, and this goes against the second rule (especially bad since kids and teenagers are some of the fans). The prevailing attitude seems to be this in the UFC, at least from my point of view.

Some just call it "hyped up marketing", well that may be true as the conflict does bring in more viewers. More viewers mean more money (and the Martial Spirit is the first thing to go out the door when more money comes in!).

Again, I am NOT saying that all the fighters are disrespectful but the business model doesn't help. They love to play up the "bad-blood-score-to-settle"-angle for the pay-per-view crowd.

While I can understand it with boxing and pro wrestling, I wish with Mixed Martial Arts the Martial Spirit would prevail. But alas...

I bring up Kendo because you are not allowed to be condescending. Or even celebrate overtly after scoring a point. It would be totally out of the norm to hear of any Kendo match billed as a "grudge match". I am sure there are some bad apples in Kendo (as in anything), but they would be the exception to the rule.

It is this Martial Spirit that makes the difference between a "polite gentlemen's art" and a brute sport. (And I am sure you are a gentleman Yohan. :) )

It is also the reason why you don't see me say anything bad about The Dogbrother's training because they hold on to this (by their creed) quite strongly.

It is not the intensity of the training that dictates this, it is in the intention of the training.

Well, at least to me.

Feel free to disagree. ;)




Anyway,

[pakarilusi]

three words kawan: tradition, tradition, tradition. Silat, for many is not just self-defense, but cultural inheritance. so, many feel it's inappropriate to cross-train or train openly.

You're right sahabat. ;)

Tradition is a double-edged Keris. :)

[Yohan]

Ahhh... It has now become a discussion of Martial Spirit I see...

By my definition, in a nutshell, it is first, the ability to practice Martial Arts at the highest intensity without showing disrespect to your "opponent" (in reality your only training partner.) Second, to keep "the bigger picture" in mind of what Martial Art training is about, how it not only affects you but society at large (especially if it is a spectator sport).

So by your definition, Martial Spirit means having respect for your training partners, and presenting your art such that it retains the best public perception possible.

For this reason, I say that some in MMA and the UFC have lost this Martial Spirit. Talking down to your opponent is normal, but this goes against the first rule. Feuds being highlighted is also normal, and this goes against the second rule (especially bad since kids and teenagers are some of the fans). The prevailing attitude seems to be this in the UFC, at least from my point of view.

First off - how does the demeanor and behavior of an MMA athlete in a competitive environment have anything to do with having respect for training partners? Have you been to their gyms and seen how they interact with their training partners? No, so how can you legitimately make the claim that MMA practitioners and UFC athletes have lost the Martial Spirit in that regard.

Second off - how does the behavior of one athlete affect the reputation of MMA as a whole, when each athlete practices a variety of arts that are different from athlete to athlete. So why does one athlete who trains jiu jutsu and acts like a slob affect another athlete's reputation who primarily trains Muay Thai and acts like a gentleman?

Because people are too ignorant to see what each athlete trains and put back his crap attitude on his school or his coach instead of "UFC and MMA." Because people can't tell the difference between the marketing tactics employed by an individual promotion, and the behavior and activity of people who train MMA.

Like I said, just because nickelback has crappy music, doesn't make the blues style of guitar playing bad.

Some just call it "hyped up marketing", well that may be true as the conflict does bring in more viewers. More viewers mean more money (and the Martial Spirit is the first thing to go out the door when more money comes in!).

Well in this case the money is helping to develop highly skilled stables of fighters all over the world, who train hard and fight harder and continually push up the bar on Martial Arts skill. So in this case, I'd say the money is increasing the Martial Spirit and the aggregate skill of the practitioners. Large, international promotions have only increased the quality of schools and the Martial Spirit of it's practitioners.

Again, I am NOT saying that all the fighters are disrespectful but the business model doesn't help. They love to play up the "bad-blood-score-to-settle"-angle for the pay-per-view crowd.

So you are not saying that all UFC atheletes and MMA practitioners have lost the "Martial Spirit", but that some fighters have lost the "Martial Spirit." That I can agree with.

While I can understand it with boxing and pro wrestling, I wish with Mixed Martial Arts the Martial Spirit would prevail. But alas...

Why can you "understand it with boxing?" Are you saying that boxing has lost the Martial Spirit?

I bring up Kendo because you are not allowed to be condescending. Or even celebrate overtly after scoring a point. It would be totally out of the norm to hear of any Kendo match get billed as a "grudge match". I am sure there are some bad apples in Kendo (as in anything), but they would be the exception to the rule.

And that's why it will never be an international sport, funneling money and attention onto the practitioners to increase their skills by leaps and bounds.

It is this Martial Spirit that makes the difference between a "polite gentlemen's art" and a brute sport. (And I am sure you are a gentleman Yohan. :) )

A brute sport. Is that how you would describe the UFC?

It is also the reason why you don't see me say anything bad about The Dogbrother's training because they hold on to this by their creed quite strongly. It is not the intensity of the training that dictates this, it is in the intention of the training.

So are you saying that the UFC is a "brute sport," but dog brothers fights are not brutish?

[pakarilusi]

You misunderstand me Yohan.

The fighters, for as long as they have respect for their training partners, including their opponent in the ring/octagon/cage have the Martial Spirit. Regardless of their Arts.

My point is that the organization itself (the company) promotes this "feud oriented marketing". Gudge match this, grudge match that. For as long the fighter himself is not affected, fine. However, from what I see, the fighter's love to play it up too. Talking "smack" about their opponent (ala Muhammad Ali, which is why I brought up boxing) at their Press Conferences has become a norm. Respect is not shown on purpose. They want to show the "animosity".

The problem is this, it seem to permeate almost all of MMA, as they want the "hype". This is the norm in Boxing from the time of Muhammad Ali, maybe even before.

The Martial Spirit is just not there.

I said "I bring up Kendo because you are not allowed to be condescending. Or even celebrate overtly after scoring a point. It would be totally out of the norm to hear of any Kendo match get billed as a "grudge match". I am sure there are some bad apples in Kendo (as in anything), but they would be the exception to the rule."

You then said "And that's why it will never be an international sport, funneling money and attention onto the practitioners to increase their skills by leaps and bounds."

If that is the price to be paid, I am sure Kendokas (and Silat players) would rather be "small time". It's okay, you can keep your money and attention.

Again, you miss my point on the "brute sport". Any Martial Art can drop to that level if it loses its Martial Spirit.

It is not in the "intensity" that makes an MMA or a Dogbrother's match "a brute sport" or not. It is in the respect that is shown in the whole exercise. A Silat match can become a brute sport if the proper etiquette and respect (The Martial Spirit) is not shown.

I really don't know how to explain this any clearer.


And we have gone off topic in this thread. :)

[Yohan]

You misunderstand me Yohan.

The fighters, for as long as they have respect for their training partners, including their opponent in the ring/octagon/cage have the Martial Spirit. Regardless of their Arts.

I don't understand.

What does having respect for training partners have to do with having respect for your opponents? It seems like you are putting them in the same ball park. You can't really do that. Are you really going to lump the guys at your gym into the same pile as a guy who tries to knife you for your wallet? Are you going to respect that guy?

What does this have to do with MMA as a whole? We have a bunch of people who do different arts with varying levels of respect. So what are you claiming about MMA practitioners regarding the level of respect they have for their training partners and opponents?

My point is that the organization itself (the company) promotes this "feud oriented marketing". Gudge match this, grudge match that. For as long the fighter himself is not affected, fine. However, from what I see, the fighter's love to play it up too. Talking "smack" about their opponent (ala Muhammad Ali, which is why I brought up boxing) at their Press Conferences has become a norm. Respect is not shown on purpose.

Ok, so what does the UFC's marketing campaign have to do with MMA? Like I said - rock concert compared to the blues style of playing the guitar.

The problem is this, it seem to permeate almost all of MMA, as they want the "hype". This is the norm in Boxing from the time of Muhammad Ali, maybe even before.

The Martial Spirit is just not there.

I trained MMA for years. Are you saying that I don't respect my training partners in the gym?

If that is the price to be paid, I am sure Kendokas (and Silat players) would rather be "small time". It's okay, you can keep your money and attention.

And our skill, and our physical prowess, and the pride of doing something that has been proven time and time again in an adverse environment. That's what I'll take.

Again, you miss my point on the "brute sport". Any Martial Art can drop to that level if it loses its Martial Spirit.

It is not in the "intensity" that makes an MMA or a Dogbrother's match "a brute sport" or not. It is in the respect that is shown in the whole exercise. A Silat match can become a brute sport if the proper etiquette and respect (The Martial Spirit) is not shown.

So are you making the claim that MMA is a "brute sport?"

[pakarilusi]

Need to go to sleep now guys... Early morning here now... :)

Later yah!

[pakarilusi]

And here I was just going to sleep. :)

My point is that your opponent in your fight also deserves the respect you give your training partner. You don't talk smack about your opponent in your fight. That's the Martial Spirit.

My other point is that MMA as a whole has adopted Boxing's hyped up Marketing style, focusing on the "feuds" and "grudge match" attitude. The problem is that it affects not just the players but also the kids and teens watching. To sell tickets, they had to adopt the "pro wrestling" type of Marketing and Advertising. Well then, respect and etiquette takes a back seat.

You're saying a Kendoka could not use his skills under duress? Hmm...

How do I make myself clear on this "brute sport" thing?

ALL Martial Arts training can become just a "brute sport" IF it doesn't have The Martial Spirit in its practice.

MMA can, TKD can, BJJ can, Silat can, Karate can, Kalari Payat can (etc.) IF they don't inculcate The Martial Spirit...

I was not singling out MMA... It is a concept subject to context and perspective bro...

Anyway, later yah... ;)

[Yohan]

My point is that your opponent in your fight also deserves the respect you give your training partner. You don't talk smack about your opponent in your fight. That's the Martial Spirit.

No, that's bloody human decency. It has nothing to do with Martial Arts or Martial Spirit.

My other point is that MMA as a whole has adopted Boxing's hyped up Marketing style, focusing on the "feuds" and "grudge match" attitude. The problem is that it affects not just the players but also the kids and teens watching. To sell tickets, they had to adopt the "pro wrestling" type of Marketing and Advertising. Well then, respect and etiquette takes a back seat.

So? They aren't selling respect and etiquette. They are selling fighting and violence! Since when was respect and etiquette part of the equation? Once again - what do these marketing promotions have to do with the Martial Arts that the athletes that compete in them?

ALL Martial Arts training can become just a "brute sport" IF it doesn't have The Martial Spirit in its practice.

MMA can, TKD can, BJJ can, Silat can, Karate can, Kalari Payat can (etc.) IF they don't inculcate The Martial Spirit...

I was not singling out MMA... It is a concept subject to context and perspective bro...

See that statement? It's a blatant lie. Just one page ago, you said:

I personally feel that MMA and the UFC (I lump them together I know...) have lost that "Martial Spirit", if just a little bit.

Why are you lying about what you said when it's written down? What is your deal?

You come on here talking about how your art is a "proper gentleman's art" and that you believe in all that "proper gentleman stuff," but the first thing you do is come on here and talk down about other peoples art, attempting to put yourself above those that practice and enjoy that art. You talk down about promotions that other people enjoy, attempting to put the sporting presentation of your art above a promotion that other people enjoy. Then you lie when you get called on it.

That's what I call hypocritical. Way to represent your art - by lying, by displaying hypocrisy, and by denigrating other hard working well meaning Martial Artists. Go Silat.

[pakarilusi]

Bro, I see that there is no convincing you as your emotional outburst is showing. And it is telling.

Mature people don't resort to attacking the person in an argument, they debate the argument.

Look back at this thread in a few months with a clearer mind and heart, you'll see I was being consistent with my thoughts. You're "fighting angry" now, my friend, and it is clouding your judgement.

Many things can lose The Martial Spirit (I agree, it is bloody human decency, not so common in life though). Some things already are slowly losing it. Which is sad. :(

This however is the part that worries me... This glorification of FIGHTING AND VIOLENCE ABOVE ALL ELSE, LEAST OF ALL COMMON HUMAN DECENCY.

Quote:
"My other point is that MMA as a whole has adopted Boxing's hyped up Marketing style, focusing on the "feuds" and "grudge match" attitude. The problem is that it affects not just the players but also the kids and teens watching. To sell tickets, they had to adopt the "pro wrestling" type of Marketing and Advertising. Well then, respect and etiquette takes a back seat."

You said.. "So? They aren't selling respect and etiquette. They are selling fighting and violence! Since when was respect and etiquette part of the equation? Once again - what do these marketing promotions have to do with the Martial Arts that the athletes that compete in them?"

I agree, they're selling fighting and violence. That there is the problem. :(
We Martial Artists are guardians of violent techniques (with weapons even), to glorify it is self-destructive imho... This is why Silat wishes to focus on respect and etiquette.

Since when was respect and etiquette part of the equation?
Since the beginning really, as it is as you say "bloody human decency".

Once again - what do these marketing promotions have to do with the Martial Arts that the athletes that compete in them?
Everything my friend, everything, if you would only see it with your heart.

However, in the spirit of that Martial Spirit, respecting your opponent and looking at the bigger picture...

I bow out respectfully out of this argument with you Yohan.

It seems that it means a lot to you that you win this one.

I forfeit, you win my friend.

I bow to you with hands clasped in respect.

May happiness and peace be with you and yours. :)

If I have hurt your feelings, please forgive me.

[Bambi]

Actually, I think you'll find that they all were developed and applied in the context of weaponned fighting and that most do involve a healthy amount of weapons practice either directly or in practice alongside the specific empty hand technique. The fact is, when the goal is application the most commonly trained supplement in history to weaponned training is wrestling, and it's for a damn good reason. Why are all these styles, developed, tested and used for hundreds of years in real weaponned combat, unhindered and even excellent in MMA competition while Silat is not, according to this dude? Is Silat's focus so narrow and cumbersome that its practicioners simply can't cope with a lack of a weapon?


That's news to me so forgive me if I don't take your word for it and ask for references to back that assertion up. What styles that constitute the components of modern MMA were developed, tested and used in battlefield conditions?

Greco roman and freestyle wrestling? Both modern inventions that were never designed for warfare, if you want to look at their ancient precursors they were strictly sports too from what I know. I'll wager that the romans did'nt spent valuable time training their legions to wrestle and greek hoplites didn't put much effort into it either because the chances of two people being unarmed on a battle field are roughly zero.

Boxing? Developed as a sport by the Victorians. It's pugilistic forbears? Not that I'm aware of

BJJ? Nope

Judo? Nope, Its older precursors were designed for warfare and they look pretty damn different to judo

Muay Thai? Nope, modern sport too.

The list of arts used in MMA looks pretty damn slim after that


I'm pretty sure the dog brothers would maintain that modern mma is dog brothers fighting without weapons and a different attitude :woo:

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Well, many of the Western weapon MAs were originally taught somewhat differently from today's methods. I think (can't remember exactly and don't have the texts with me) that it was Al Fiore who said that the first step was to learn to wrestle, then to learn to wrestle with weapons in your hands (badly paraphrased) so unarmed fighting was taught first, and more tools were added as skills developed.

Nowadays we have sport fencing, which basically takes one aspect of this as a standalone, and the other WMAs which tend to integrate the whole lot together, but starting from a different point.

[Sifu Ben]

That's news to me so forgive me if I don't take your word for it and ask for references to back that assertion up. What styles that constitute the components of modern MMA were developed, tested and used in battlefield conditions?

Greco roman and freestyle wrestling? Both modern inventions that were never designed for warfare, if you want to look at their ancient precursors they were strictly sports too from what I know. I'll wager that the romans did'nt spent valuable time training their legions to wrestle and greek hoplites didn't put much effort into it either because the chances of two people being unarmed on a battle field are roughly zero.

Boxing? Developed as a sport by the Victorians. It's pugilistic forbears? Not that I'm aware of

BJJ? Nope

Judo? Nope, Its older precursors were designed for warfare and they look pretty damn different to judo

Muay Thai? Nope, modern sport too.

The list of arts used in MMA looks pretty damn slim after that


I'm pretty sure the dog brothers would maintain that modern mma is dog brothers fighting without weapons and a different attitude :woo:

Wow, so much wrong in one post.
Yes Greek soldiers trained in wrestling and boxing, and there was even a sport vs combat debate then! Becoming unarmed was a constant issue on ancient battlefield as the weapons simply weren't up to being used for the duration of a battle. Bronze and iron swords blunt, bend and break pretty quickly, and spears snap fairly readily. Even once steel weapons came into general use it was still an issue.
Pugilism and wrestling remained core elements of military training until the widespread use of firearms. However, the internal logic of this argument is flawed anyway, as most Silat systems have extensive hand to hand syllabi, so what is the point of them if it's a battlefield art?
To argue that Jujitsu looks different from Judo and BJJ is complicated, as Jujitsu as a term is about as meaningful as Kung Fu. There's a lot of variation between Ryu anyway, and Judo is really just 2 of the Waza of it's source arts, isolated and developed, just as BJJ is Judo Ne Waza isolated and developed. While the aesthetic of Judo may be different to Koryu unarmed arts, the bulk of the techniques can be found within them, which is the issue at hand.
What we call Muay Thai is a sporting development of Muay Boran, the traditional Thai Military unarmed art.

Now, yes they are sports today, but then so is Silat (or not, see my next post). Show me meaningful evidence of Silat as a force on the battlefield in the last 80 years.
This is what the Dog Brothers actually say
we are ready to begin testing our weaponry-based empty hand movements in the adrenal laboratory of MMA and thus achieve "consistency across categories" -- we move and fight the same way whether the fight involves weapons or not!

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Wow, so much wrong in one post.
Yes Greek soldiers trained in wrestling and boxing, and there was even a sport vs combat debate then! Becoming unarmed was a constant issue on ancient battlefield as the weapons simply weren't up to being used for the duration of a battle. Bronze and iron swords blunt, bend and break pretty quickly, and spears snap fairly readily. Even once steel weapons came into general use it was still an issue.

It still is now - in a WMA class it's not rare to see someone stamping on their sword to straighten it, and blades do occasionally break.

Pugilism and wrestling remained core elements of military training until the widespread use of firearms.

Again, even then, for the same reason that wheel locks, matchlocks and flintlocks tended to have a nice hefty club-like grip. If you're designing your firearms for melee work, it's guaranteed that there'll be times when you'll need to drop back to pugilism in melee.

Now, yes they are sports today, but then so is Silat (or not, see my next post). Show me meaningful evidence of Silat as a force on the battlefield in the last 80 years.

Whether an art was a force on the battlefield or not doesn't stop it being a sport now in any case. WMA is definitely a sport, as is archery, and they were certainly forces on the battlefield.

[Sifu Ben]

What exactly is the point of the initial and subsequent arguments of Silat being an armed and battlefield art, so it's unarmed effectiveness is not readily apparent?
What exactly are you saying?
That Silat is an anachronism and it's study is more about the maintenence of an Indo-Malay warrior culture through LARP? That Silat teachers teaching hand to hand combat are either deluded or fraudulent?
It's an argument that lacks internal consistency. If it's the former, you don't see Iaido practitioners getting defensive about it's modern effectiveness. If it's the latter then everyone else is right. It's not a meaningful explanation for the general experience.

[Yohan]

Bro, I see that there is no convincing you as your emotional outburst is showing. And it is telling.

Mature people don't resort to attacking the person in an argument, they debate the argument.

don't flatter yourself. you haven't hurt anyone's feelings and you aren't going to.

i'm not attacking you by any stretch of the imagination. all i did is point out the inconsistencies in your argument, and where you lied.

Look back at this thread in a few months with a clearer mind and heart, you'll see I was being consistent with my thoughts. You're "fighting angry" now, my friend, and it is clouding your judgement.


ok first you lied and it didn't gain you any ground, now you are trying to attack me instead of addressing my arguments. my judgement has not been compromised at any level. i'm not fighting angry. this is my normal level of intensity during a debate. if you can't deal with it - don't take me on. if you can - counter my points. debate instead of backtracking and lying.

my opinions will be the same in a few months. your arguments will still be inconsistent, without merit, and unsupported by evidence.

This however is the part that worries me... This glorification of FIGHTING AND VIOLENCE ABOVE ALL ELSE, LEAST OF ALL COMMON HUMAN DECENCY.

ok, so fight organizations glorify and sell fighting and violence.

gyms train a lot of people, including hard working, highly motivated amateur and professional athletes.

the only connection you have established is that some of those athletes go on to fight in the fight orgs you are so opposed to.

so where is the connection? why are you trying to put the responsibility of glorification of violence back on mma practitioners who are not involved with the actual glorification of violence at all?

Quote:
"My other point is that MMA as a whole has adopted Boxing's hyped up Marketing style, focusing on the "feuds" and "grudge match" attitude. The problem is that it affects not just the players but also the kids and teens watching. To sell tickets, they had to adopt the "pro wrestling" type of Marketing and Advertising. Well then, respect and etiquette takes a back seat."

You said.. "So? They aren't selling respect and etiquette. They are selling fighting and violence! Since when was respect and etiquette part of the equation? Once again - what do these marketing promotions have to do with the Martial Arts that the athletes that compete in them?"

I agree, they're selling fighting and violence. That there is the problem. :(
We Martial Artists are guardians of violent techniques (with weapons even), to glorify it is self-destructive imho... This is why Silat wishes to focus on respect and etiquette.

get off your high horse. if you are so worried about selling violence why don't you go start a thread about violent martial arts movies, violent video games, and the endless wars in the middle east? If you were so concerned about selling violence you'd be complaining about something more important.

Thing is, I don't think you have a problem with violence. I think you have a problem with people who are motivated enough to train hard and get in shape and compete at a very high level. I think you are jealous because no matter how long you train, you will never get to the same level as those athletes. you have to come up with some way to put them down below you, because you don't have the motivation or drive to rise above them.

Since when was respect and etiquette part of the equation?
Since the beginning really, as it is as you say "bloody human decency".

well considering the fact that you've been lying and slandering other peoples chosen arts since you started posting in this thread, i'd say that respect and etiquette were never part of your equation. I am happy to pay respect to hard working martial artists who follow any banner, silat included. i just won't pay respect to people who lie and slander other arts, just to patch up their own insecurities.

Everything my friend, everything, if you would only see it with your heart.

i can't respectfully respond to this

However, in the spirit of that Martial Spirit, respecting your opponent and looking at the bigger picture...

I bow out respectfully out of this argument with you Yohan.

It seems that it means a lot to you that you win this one.

I forfeit, you win my friend.

I bow to you with hands clasped in respect.

May happiness and peace be with you and yours. :)

thanks. later.

[Bambi]

Wow, so much wrong in one post.
Yes Greek soldiers trained in wrestling and boxing, and there was even a sport vs combat debate then!

Modern soldiers might train in TKD now, that's very different from saying tkd is being trained for the battlefield. Show me from reputable sources that a conscript or standing army from before the use of muskets were being trained to wrestle or box in order to wage war. I'm open to persuasion

Yes weapons broke all the time, thats why people carried side arms, that why they picked up weapons, that why they broke and ran, the odds of two combatants meeting each other unarmed in a battle? Very low imo. The odds of them surviving if they went at it unarmed? Lower still.

Oddly enough, you're assuming that my reference to judo's precusors was jujutsu. Take a look at the koryu that existed back when war was a way of life in Japan. They are very different creatures to judo.


yes they are sports today

That is the whole point, they are modern sports, they are not their precursors (and I'm of the opinion that their precursors were not useful for military engagements). Being modern full contact sports is what makes them so useful in MMA and by extension less useful in an environment where weapons are the order of the day.

This is what the Dog Brothers actually say

About their unarmed curriculum, kali tudo. Clue's in the name. :hat:

When people claim that the dog brothers is "mma with weapons" they tend to point out that the development is, in fact, in the opposite direction.

[Rebo Paing]

People often mis-communicate and sometimes contradict themsleves.

If I were to level an accusation I would offer that there is a contradiction and maybe suggest that a re-wording would be beneficial.

Under these circumstances I think to publicly accuse a person of lying smacks of slander and lacks character.

[Hannibal]

Modern soldiers might train in TKD now, that's very different from saying tkd is being trained for the battlefield. Show me from reputable sources that a conscript or standing army from before the use of muskets were being trained to wrestle or box in order to wage war. I'm open to persuasion

http://www.thehaca.com/manuals.htm

[Yohan]

People often mis-communicate and sometimes contradict themsleves.

If I were to level an accusation I would offer that there is a contradiction and maybe suggest that a re-wording would be beneficial.

Under these circumstances I think to publicly accuse a person of lying smacks of slander and lacks character.

In opposition to your statement I would posit that any decent person has the right to defend themselves and others from bullies who seek to insult and slander their peers. In defense of themselves and others, pointing out the lies and inconsistencies in said bullies statements is not only acceptable, but commendable.

to publicly accuse a person of lying smacks of slander and lacks character.

Additionally, your own attempted insults of my character are noted and illuminated to the other readers of the thread. I will not respond to your belittling, as you are merely a supporter of those who wish to utilize this forum to bully and slander others.

I appreciate your conscience, but your application thereof is misguided. I will continue to exercise my right to debate any matter brought up on this forum. I will continue to do so within the rules prescribed by this forum. Any person who wishes to the same, may, and I will be happy to take them on.

Good day.

[Hannibal]

Modern soldiers might train in TKD now, that's very different from saying tkd is being trained for the battlefield. Show me from reputable sources that a conscript or standing army from before the use of muskets were being trained to wrestle or box in order to wage war. I'm open to persuasion


Just in case you missed it the first time around

http://www.thehaca.com/manuals.htm

[nasigoreng]

silat is a weapons art first


Steve Gartin asserts something similar: "there is no silat without the knife" from his "secrets of silat" video. I honestly don't remember much about that video except that he showed empty-hand vs. knife and then knife vs. knife.
His expression of silat is very much influenced by kuntau which helps to show just how diverse the silat world is.

It's interesting though the Filipino MA start with stick and knife right away and Silat tends to start out with empty-hands. Whatever, different strokes....

[Yohan]

in Filipino Martial Arts, the stick trains the hands.

[Yohan]

Steve Gartin asserts something similar: "there is no silat without the knife" from his "secrets of silat" video. I honestly don't remember much about that video except that he showed empty-hand vs. knife and then knife vs. knife.
His expression of silat is very much influenced by kuntau which helps to show just how diverse the silat world is.

It's interesting though the Filipino MA start with stick and knife right away and Silat tends to start out with empty-hands. Whatever, different strokes....

so i don't understand - in silat, at your first lesson, do they hand you a stick or a knife, or do you start learning empty hand?

[fire cobra]

The concept I learnt in Silat was if you have a weapon(or2 or 3 :)) great if you dont still great ,
put another way dont rely on the weapon in case you drop it or it breaks or gets taken of you etc etc:) .

The hand is the knfie the knife is the hand maybe:)

[nasigoreng]

in silat, at your first lesson, do they hand you a stick or a knife, or do you start learning empty hand?

based on my experiences training in Indonesia, it's traditionally empty-hand at the beginning and weapons techniques are revealed at the more advanced stages of training.

[Yohan]

based on my experiences training in Indonesia, it's traditionally empty-hand at the beginning and weapons techniques are revealed at the more advanced stages of training.

wouldn't that directly contradict the original poster's original statement? Not to be splitting hairs, but if what you say is true, chronologically, silat is an empty handed art first.

[Ular Sawa]

wouldn't that directly contradict the original poster's original statement? Not to be splitting hairs, but if what you say is true, chronologically, silat is an empty handed art first.

That's the way I've been learning it, yep.

[Yohan]

That's the way I've been learning it, yep.

Ouch. You mean the entire premise of the original posters misguided argument may be false? Who knew??

[nasigoreng]

Ouch. You mean the entire premise of the original posters misguided argument may be false?

i wouldn't go that far. even training silat empty-hand, i can see the weapons applications. the way I see it, the weapons techniques were introduced last to guarantee that only those loyal students with the best character would get "the big picture."

[LCC]

Looking back at the original OPs statement I have to say I agree with the generals of the statement. Silat is concerned with instilling skills that are primarily applicable to the combative field that its SE Asian practitioners will find themselves in. Namely, everyone carrying some kind of small to medium size, bladed weapon. So yes, it's a weapons' based and weapons' focused martial arts. Thus having it be the core of an unarmed MMA syllabus is going to be highly problematic. The ideological transition, not to mention the lack of teachers who could effectively or willingly formulate such a syllabus, creates a very difficult hurdle to surmount.

[Sifu Ben]

Which takes us right back to post 41.......

[LCC]

Which takes us right back to post 41.......
I didn't read post 41, as the moment an argument labels a system as LARP, is the moment I place it in the Trolling bin. In light of your other more intelligent posts, I'll pass post 41 off as you being frustrated and try to explain a few points.

1) Weapons based does not necessarily equate to Battlefield training: Silat being a weapons focused system does not mean it is a modern battlefield system (a system that trains with the equipment and tactics most likely to be utilized in modern, firearms based warfare). Although certain Indonesian and possibly Malaysian military groups may practice it, I doubt it forms the crux of their military combatives anymore then wrestling takes precedence over firearms training in American military combatives. Weapons focused does not necessarily equal modern battlefield training. Knightly jousting continued into the 17th century, long past it's actual use as an efficient battlefield art. Silat's practitioners are training to defend themselves against the threats which are most likely to present themselves to a civilian living in countries with strict gun laws but where it's also very easy to access bladed weapons. They are not training for modern mass warfare.

2) Weapons focused does not mean there is no empty hand training: Silat being a weapons focused system does not mean it has no empty hand syllabus. It does, but as a secondary (or fall back) syllabus, the unarmed component of Silat is inferior to its armed training. Inferior in technical development, sophistication and I daresay prestige. Silat's unarmed training seems to predominate more in those regions where it's culturally inappropriate to train weapons based combat. However, even in those areas, weapons training remains important and is often focused on in higher level/belt classes.

3) Silat's inferior empty hand techniques are a poor base for MMA: Silat's unarmed syllabus is not only inferior to it's own armed syllabus but also inferior to the unarmed skills of those systems which focus on the empty hand. Which means that if you wish to compete in an unarmed sport such as MMA, you are better served with focusing on true empty hand systems than on Silat's limited unarmed syllabus. All systems have a priority and other aspects of combat thus take a back seat.

4) Silat's cultural dance training is not the same as training it's combat techniques: Silat has cultural dance aspects. This is pretty obvious. However to confuse these with the actual martial arts is akin to confusing Wai Kru Ram Muay dance training with Muay Thai combat training. There may be some similar body dynamics and even aping of combat moves, but the two are not one and the same.

[taoizt]

1) I agree

2) I call B.S. since when are you the authority on ALL silat systems throughout SEA to make such a general and bold statement? How many silat styles have you seen, and also in what country?

3) Again what gives you the authority to claim that unarmed skills of ALL silat is inferior. I do agree that when you are talking about 'unarmed sport' than MMA is probably much better to work with. Let me guess: unarmed silat is inferior since you see no silat-fighters in the UFC....YAWN.

4) I agree that dancing is not the same as combat. There probably is more to it than mere mimicking body moves but no...not combat

To make it clearer, yes I train silat (or pukulan) and yes 90% of my training is unarmed. The principles you learn unarmed also work when you hold a knife.. I think it is silly to start training with a knife from day one since most people don't even have control over their body to hit with the proper body mechanics.

First start with the basics, then on to the more advanced stuff. The further you come in your training, the more you realise how important the basics is. And most people just briefly look at the basics (a year or 2 max.) and then move on to the advanced stuff.

[LCC]

2) I call B.S. since when are you the authority on ALL silat systems throughout SEA to make such a general and bold statement? How many silat styles have you seen, and also in what country?
First off I don't consider myself an authority on ALL Silat styles. As others have posited, Silat can be viewed as a catch all term much like Kung Fu or Karate of which there are hundreds if not thousands of systems. I'm just making a statement based on what I have personally seen and what others have told me. I have seen and been told of dozens of Silat systems from regions as diverse as SE Asia to NW Europe (though considering colonial history those regions do share a long history). Many of these systems have within them dozens of sub systems. Yes I have generalized. Kun Tao influenced Silat is different from Ksatria derived systems which have differences to those of Muslim origin. There are literally hundreds of variances from viallage to village and ofcourse new lineages are starting up all the time.

3) Again what gives you the authority to claim that unarmed skills of ALL silat is inferior. I do agree that when you are talking about 'unarmed sport' than MMA is probably much better to work with. Let me guess: unarmed silat is inferior since you see no silat-fighters in the UFC....YAWN.
Again I admit I was making generalizations but once more my experiences have shown that even empty hand training makes more sense when one realizes the weapons application. Thus to me, Silat's armed techniques are more sophisticated and advanced than it's unarmed techniques (also why they are often viewed as higher level techniques). As for being inferior to MMA, I'm discoursing within the framework set up by the OP. That is, Silat's unarmed techniques did not make it into the UFC (except that one time in the very early years) because there are better systems for unarmed sports combatives.

To make it clearer, yes I train silat (or pukulan) and yes 90% of my training is unarmed. The principles you learn unarmed also work when you hold a knife.. I think it is silly to start training with a knife from day one since most people don't even have control over their body to hit with the proper body mechanics. First start with the basics, then on to the more advanced stuff. The further you come in your training, the more you realise how important the basics is. And most people just briefly look at the basics (a year or 2 max.) and then move on to the advanced stuff.
Training without a weapon in hand does not equate to training an empty hand system. Understand the application and you'll realize just how integral weapons are to Silat. Furthermore, Kali and many FMA systems train knife or stick first just as readily as empty hand. These FMA systems have time and again shown their validity. So the belief that one must train hand before knife is due to your personal choice. You are not an authority on how to best train knife combatives any more than I am an authority on ALL Silat (but hey, few people on Forums actually claim to be an Authority so it doesn't really matter). Also never make the mistake that unarmed moves are directly transferable to all aspects of armed combatives, there are numerous nuances, some more obvious than others whereby armed and unarmed combat differ. As for the basics... well I agree with you on that. I have trained the basic jabs, hooks, straights and upper cuts (both unarmed and armed) more than anything else.

On a personal note, I understand why you feel slighted. You are obviously enamored of your system and view my comments as an attack. For that I apologize. Silat, like any other system has it's pros and cons. The reason I have stopped bothering with Silat is the fact that so many schools (at least here in Australia) spend an inordinate amount of time training empty handed without pointing out the weapons application. It's frustrating because it clashes with everything I was taught as I beginner. Knife combatives within the first three months... not anymore there isn't. However, this same focus on unarmed combat no doubt not only fits better with culturally acceptable norms in Australia but also draws in those who want to focus on an empty handed syllabus. All systems evolve and what I may see as cons to Silat's evolution are no doubt seen as pros by other practitioners.

[taoizt]

Hi LCC,

Thanks for the nuances. I can get a bit tired of the 'MMA' is 'da ultimatez' in unarmed combat. Sure compare a serious MMA students with a Silat hobbyist and the MMA guy would probably win. Don't forget that MMA school train often with a lot more intensity and frequency than the average Silat hobbyist. So apart from being another system they often just put a lot more time into it. I have respect for MMA!

In the contrary to what you are saying, for me there is also a lot of high level stuff in the unarmed stuff of silat. Refinement in punch, in kicking in positioning yourself towards your opponent etc. In attack strategy. There is so much to learn.

It's sad you didn't get to learn this stuff with silat, because it's there, you just have to dig a little deeper. Then again if you're happy with MMA that could work for you as well.

It's also about the goals you have (ringsports, art, combat on the street, military etc.)

Good luck with your endeavours.

[Sifu Ben]

I'm not discussing the whole system, I'm discussing the satements made by some people in the first 2 pages which I don't see the point of, as addressed in post 41. It's not the system I'm addressing, it's this somewhat dogmatic viewpoint.

[LCC]

To taosist, thanks for the good will. I trained Silat for 7+ years and totally enjoyed the majority of my training (I wouldn't have spent 20 to 40 hrs a week training if I hadn't thought it of value). I still consider it a valid system and am more than willing to explain what I consider its pros and cons to those who are interested. Though with the systems and schools I have access to, I do not feel Silat is the style for me, at least as a sole-system (and the Silat I studied is now pretty much against training other styles).

To Sifu Ben, in that context I begin to understand your statements. Though I would ask you to consider that a number of posters may not be particularly proficient with expressing themselves in English and/or the internet. I myself am at times a poor internet communicator (I tend to communicate with my hands and other nuances). I hope that my explanations were understandable and if not please ask me to clarify.

[Rebo Paing]

The original post wasn't any more misguided than to posit that silat is taught empty hands first.
With over 800 different types and styles of silat in Indonesia alone (not counting Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand etc, it would be mistaken to assume that there is a rule with regard to how training commences. There is NO standard.
It is equally remiss to generalise about silat being only a weapons art. Again, that is NOT a standard.
Training in the old way was usually specific to a perception of the student's needs and might not even look like what westerners would call 'silat'.
For example, an aspiring student might be cutting grass for the guru's buffalo's and horses for a few years before being shown any jurus using the arit. But he's been training with the arit for those years cutting grass. He also learnt humility and meditative attention and focus ... and he's becoming very familiar with a weapon.
Silat is not easy to categorise because essentially silat just means martial arts. Categorisation was never important in the sense that it was localised. It is the influence of Japanese that categorisation became an issue I think. And this continues in western application.

Yohan, the original poster is Malaysian, so any reference to the ways of Indonesian silat has little bearing on his point of view. However, in my opinion as well, I see my silat as a warisan leluhur, a ksatria's heirloom from my ancestors, while I see UFC or fighting for money as crass and tacky, pandering to a public's desire for instant gratification and not in the same ball park. Sure they have their own code of honour, and so too do any grouping, but I rarely compare them in public (except now .. because of this discussion).
I happily accept that mine is an elitist perspective, I'm positive similar practice happens in the west.

N.B. Not to diminish any westerner's experience of learning in Indonesia, but I doubt that any westerners wanting to study silat in the traditional ways would actually experience these ways. Sing nduwe ora nduweni ... 'those who have it don't speak about it'. There are plenty of "guru's", who will provide what is sought ... opportunistic as long as they are paid (no different than UFC!) ... in money if not in ego coin. And there is the popular modern movements that pattern after what they see as modernisation. I think they are misguided (my personal opinion).
It takes a lifetime for an outsider to become truly Javanese ... yes, this is elitist too lol.

[taoizt]

I totally agree with you Rebo Paing, silat is not 'one way of doing things'. So the personal experiences of people practicing a fom of silat, including me, is not valid for ALL of the silat styles.

The stuff of silat I have been in contact with is mainly focussed on unarmed combat and still I would never exchange it for a more modern MMA class. It's not to everyones taste but it sure as hell is effective. And yes the basics can be used with weapons as well as stated before.

I've seen silat practitioners making pretzels out of MMA practitioners, but offcourse the same could be said the other way around. It's just a different ball game. Some Silat styles remain traditional, some evolved and incorporated a lot of modern influences and some styles just look for all the answers to modern styles in their old knowledge.

[nasigoreng]

I've seen silat practitioners making pretzels out of MMA practitioners, but offcourse the same could be said the other way around. It's just a different ball game.

I agree. They have two different mindsets; you can't take one and put it in the others format without something essential being 'lost in translation'.

[windtalker]

As I've recently used my allotted "cool story bro" pic for the month, I'll just say that pretty much every military ever to use close contact fighting techniques for fighting rather than to instill aggression primarily relied on sportive grappling and mixfighting a'la UFC and Vale Tudo.

Look it up. Show me specifically why Silat is not appropriate for MMA but the styles of the Soviet Union, Japanese Police, US Military, Brazilian and Russian bareknuckle fighting, Greek, European and Roman wrestling do just fine.

Umm...Because you can't hit somebody with a stick or stab them with a knife? Also my cousin Jester did a lot of that U.S. military h2h and it was a lot of strikes aimed for the neck and throat, not to mention eye gouges. Except for a few punches and kicks, nothing in the army stuff he learned appears legit for sportfighting.

[pakarilusi]

Wow, this is STILL going on... Thanks. :)

I'll add something to clarify my position...

Silat IS a weapons art first not because YOU get to attack people with weapons.

On the contrary, it is because it is assumed that people will attack YOU with weapons.

Check your beginners techniques (in any form of Silat style*), it will be effective for both weapon attacks and maybe similar unarmed attacks. I am sure we can agree that it is more important to be effective in weapons defense. Now, if you think that the weapons defense mindset (and techniques) is the same as for unarmed defense, well I would ask you to test it out in sparring against a fully resisting opponent in safety gear (ala Tony Blauer's SPEAR System). It is not the same mindset from my experience.

*A caveat... I am speaking of Traditional Styles from the Malay Archipelago, not the more Modern Silat styles.

Well, that's how I see it. Feel free to disagree. :)