How would Kali fare versus Kendo?

[Shintake]

hmmmm....with my looking into it, i think kendo might come out on top. I have friends that study kendo, and from what i have seen, the single longer weapon would likely come out on top. Literally.
I witnessed a match with kendo versus a two-weapon style once before, and the limited reach versus the extensive had much trouble getting close enough to reach the opponent. Attempts at tying up the kendo shinai with the two smaller ones resulted in the guy just looking clumsy and getting popped on top of the head. His weapons were faster, but their lack of reach more often than not got him tagged pretty cleanly when he tried to close in...gimme some feedback if you will...

[sikal]

Re: How would Kali fare versus Kendo?

Originally posted by Shintake
hmmmm....with my looking into it, i think kendo might come out on top. I have friends that study kendo, and from what i have seen, the single longer weapon would likely come out on top. Literally.
I witnessed a match with kendo versus a two-weapon style once before, and the limited reach versus the extensive had much trouble getting close enough to reach the opponent. Attempts at tying up the kendo shinai with the two smaller ones resulted in the guy just looking clumsy and getting popped on top of the head. His weapons were faster, but their lack of reach more often than not got him tagged pretty cleanly when he tried to close in...gimme some feedback if you will...

Depends on the people and the rules. I played this with a friend of mine. He earned his shodan in Kendo (and in Iaido) in Japan. He said he wanted to try Kendo vs. Kali ... so we did ... kind of.

I was using two shinai that I had cut down to the length of my regular Kali sticks. I moved in, tied up his shinai with my left hand shinai and cut his throat with my right hand shinai. I stepped back and he clocked me on top of the head. I was puzzled until I realized he was playing by Kendo rules (i.e.: only the top of the head, ribs, and hands are considered targets).

But, once I realized he was using Kendo rules, I tried to play by those rules (which, btw, isn't "Kendo vs. Kali" ... it's Kendo vs. Kendo with short weapons). I got my keester handed to me nine ways from Sunday. Kendo is a long range game. Playing with short weapons puts you at a serious disadvantage.

But, as I said, this wasn't "Kendo vs. Kali" ... before I started playing by Kendo rules, I had no problem with him. With real blades, I'd have killed him and walked away.

Now, this isn't to say that it was "easy" or that he was no good. He was very good. That long shinai can be very deceptive in the hands of someone who knows what to do with it. But he couldn't get out of the "sport" mentality.

Before anyone gets on me for taking advantage of him by not playing by the rules ... he didn't stipulate any rules before we started. He said, "Kendo vs. Kali" ... well, to me this means that we're both going to go as we normally would. I had to figure out that he was playing by rules and then ask him what they were. As I mentioned earlier, playing by Kendo rules *is not* "Kendo vs. Kali" ... if you take a short weapon (or 2 short weapons) into a Kendo match (with Kendo rules) you'll probably lose (though it wasn't a completely one-sided game ... I did get a few licks in ... about 3 to his 7). But "Kendo vs. Kali" ... well, there really is no such thing. It's one man/woman vs. another and whoever's better at their game at that given moment will come out on top.

Mike

[Shintake]

Better at their game at the given moment? Sounds like you leave it a little too much to chance, and kind of eliminate the purpose of training. I've heard it said here and there that the untrained man can beat the trained, were he having a good day while the trained has a bad one, but this makes no sense to me. The way i see it, we train to eliminate the 'luck' factor. If you train with the idea that anyone can beat you, then why train at all? For sport? If you train for sport in a world where anyone can beat you, why compete other than to find out who's lucky that day?

[sikal]

Originally posted by Shintake
Better at their game at the given moment? Sounds like you leave it a little too much to chance, and kind of eliminate the purpose of training. I've heard it said here and there that the untrained man can beat the trained, were he having a good day while the trained has a bad one, but this makes no sense to me. The way i see it, we train to eliminate the 'luck' factor. If you train with the idea that anyone can beat you, then why train at all? For sport? If you train for sport in a world where anyone can beat you, why compete other than to find out who's lucky that day?

LOL.

Luck, my friend, is *always* a factor ... especially in real fights. Competitions are designed to limit the "luck" factor (i.e.: a "sanitized" environment that puts the contestants on as equal a footing as possible).

Training doesn't (and can't) eliminate the luck factor. And luck isn't the only factor. Experience (which has little to do with rank in a martial art) plays a role. Environment plays a role. In a tight area, a long weapon becomes a detriment. In a wide open area, it can be beneficial. And there are other factors that play into it.

When I said, "better at their game at the given moment" ... it means from day to day ... and even moment to moment ... things change. When to trained people come together, the smaller differences have even bigger effects.

All training does is improve our *odds* of coming out of a fight in one piece. A real fight is chaos. The dynamics change from split second to split second.

You have to train with the idea that anyone can beat you ... this drives you to train harder to decrease the odds of anyone beating you.

Of course, others may have other takes ... this is mine :-)

Personally, I'm confident in my abilities and training to see me through a fight (and they have on a few occasions). I *keep* training because I enjoy it.

Mike

[Shintake]

I myself tend not to think that just anyone can beat me, but rather that there is always someone who can. I don't necessarily like to judge my art in that sense, being as it is about self-preservation and improvement of character and spirit, not wether or not i can beat someone up. I am not accusing you of saying that, so let me resume my point. My point is that, first of all, the well-trained will not often find an equal in the untrained.

I have seen the two collide, and the trained participant's finely honed abilities let him soar past his competition on every occasion-even those that had trained longer than he.

I have also seen the untrained dominated by other untrained, and come back after training only to realize how feeble those untrained were.

I do agree with you, though that training does not help us all...particularly those who begin an art pursuing a rank and rocket their way to shodan in less than four years, not perfecting the basics along the way. When asked to perform, i have seen them dominated by those with lesser rank. It is sad, and is likely the motivation behind the idea that anybody can beat anybody depending upon those little factors.

I am enjoying this thread(sincerely), please give me some more feedback.

[sikal]

Originally posted by Shintake
I do agree with you, though that training does not help us all...particularly those who begin an art pursuing a rank and rocket their way to shodan in less than four years, not perfecting the basics along the way. When asked to perform, i have seen them dominated by those with lesser rank. It is sad, and is likely the motivation behind the idea that anybody can beat anybody depending upon those little factors.

I think this helps ... but it's not what I'm referring to.

You're absolutely right that it's very rare for two well-trained martial artists to fight in reality. I also agree that training gives one an advantage. But there are *no* guarantees in a fight ... period.

You don't get to pick when or where you'll fight. You don't get to pick who you fight, what weapons are used or available to either party, or how many you fight. You don't get to pick the surface or the environment.

Take the best trained martial artist in the world and throw him into an environment he's not trained for and he'll have a good chance of losing to the lowliest of predators in that environment.

Put a guy from Indiana on beach and have him fight someone who spends a lot of time on a beach ... regardless of training, the guy who's familiar with the beach environment will have a distinct advantage. Now take the beach guy and have him fight in snow and ice ... no matter how good he is, he'll be at a distinct disadvantage.

We can't train for *every* possibility ... it's impossible. The best martial artist in the world can even be beaten in his own environment by a relative incompetent if a fly happens to fly into the martial artists mouth at the wrong time.

My point is that, first of all, the well-trained will not often find an equal in the untrained.

I have seen the two collide, and the trained participant's finely honed abilities let him soar past his competition on every occasion-even those that had trained longer than he.

I'm not sure I understand this section. You've seen the two collide (in the context, it looks as if you're saying one "well-trained" and one "untrained"). Then you say "even those that had trained longer than he" ... how can an untrained trained longer than a trained?

Also, the type of situation you describe sounds (to me anyway) like a competition. Two guys fighting. Backgrounds known. No friends or weapons.

As I said before, competitions eliminate as many unknowns as possible. In a real fight, there are always unknown and unexpected elements ... and those elements are the ones that can sway a fight in an unexpected direction. All we can do ... all we can ever *hope* to accomplish ... with training is to increase our odds. Develop our minds, bodies, and spirits to the point that they can balance the scales some against these unknown and unexpected elements.

Mike

[Chuzo]

Kendo no koto

As one who plays Kendo, I feel that I should speak. You both have interesting points. I am not here to say kendo is better than other arts, nor am I here to critsize other art forms. But you both are losing the point of why we train in the first place. Sikal speaks from the body and not from the mind. The environment in which we are performing has consequences on both sides, yes but the good kendo-shi are those who are mentally prepared to fight anywhere at anytime without fear of his own demize. If you step in the sand or snow...the mind should react differently. Whether or not the kendo-shi has been on that surface before, he will soon learn to adapt to it. This adaptation does not take place in the feet, but in the mind. ALAS, have not we progressed to a present day of martial arts where we are not training to go out and use it in the streets or battlefields, but to learn how to grow as individuals? It does not matter who wins, loses or is better in strength. Only that we come out of the training with better knowlegde of ourselves and our abilities. It surprised me to see Sikal suggest that he "cut" his friend's throat during practice. If this is the image that you saw in your mind, where does your true spirit lay? Within bloodshed or the art of training?

[sikal]

Re: Kendo no koto

Originally posted by Chuzo
As one who plays Kendo, I feel that I should speak. You both have interesting points. I am not here to say kendo is better than other arts, nor am I here to critsize other art forms. But you both are losing the point of why we train in the first place. Sikal speaks from the body and not from the mind. The environment in which we are performing has consequences on both sides, yes but the good kendo-shi are those who are mentally prepared to fight anywhere at anytime without fear of his own demize. If you step in the sand or snow...the mind should react differently. Whether or not the kendo-shi has been on that surface before, he will soon learn to adapt to it. This adaptation does not take place in the feet, but in the mind. ALAS, have not we progressed to a present day of martial arts where we are not training to go out and use it in the streets or battlefields, but to learn how to grow as individuals? It does not matter who wins, loses or is better in strength. Only that we come out of the training with better knowlegde of ourselves and our abilities. It surprised me to see Sikal suggest that he "cut" his friend's throat during practice. If this is the image that you saw in your mind, where does your true spirit lay? Within bloodshed or the art of training?

I think all arts strive for this ... but this doesn't negate the fact that the person in his/her element will have the advantage when the fight starts. Training improves our odds for overcoming this ... but there is no guarantee ... that's the whole point that I was trying to make :-)

You ask "where does your true spirit lay? Within bloodshed or the art of training"?

I say both. Hence "martial" and "art" :-)

You say I've lost the point of why we train ... well, my reasons for training aren't your reasons. I've gained a lot of benefits over the years from my martial arts including confidence, security, ability, maturity, and others. In training, I seek only to better myself ... on both sides of the coin (martial and art). In teaching, I seek to lead people to the same sorts of benefits I've gained from the martial arts.

As to "cutting" his throat ... of course this is my imagery. A shinai represents a sword, right? When I place this alongside his neck and draw, I cut his carotid artery ... not actually his "throat" so I used the wrong word ... oops, my bad.

Mike

[Chuzo]

An interesting reply, Sikal

I am not saying that your goals are different than mine in the study of the arts. You say "I've gained a lot of benefits over the years from my martial arts including confidence, security, ability, maturity, and others. In training, I seek only to better myself ... ", this is my point. We train to better ourselves, NOT to learn how to kill. You say "cut" his throat, instead of a common phrase of "I struck the opponents neck" or "I was able to score a point on the throat area." It is your outlook that surprised me. The word "Martial Art" means an Art that is Martial, not training that is both art and martial. This word has been generalized in meaning any form that causes pain to your opponent. When I practice kendo, I do so as a sport and not as they did little over 200 years ago on the battlefields to kill and "cut" the throats of their opponents(or carotid artery).
This is a flaw I see in some of the attitudes of those who train. If you are training to kill or do harm to your opponent, what are you doing for yourself? All arts are different but those meant for positive mental growth are (in my opinion) those that are more defensive, striking hurt upon your opponent to the extent that is reasonable in the situation, whether they are played as a sport or not.
Is your personal growth in "confidence, security, ability, maturity, and others" based on the idea of your butt-kicking ability? Is this an Art at all? Why not just train in boxing?

----Shintake-san, doshite henji wo shinai no?

[sikal]

Re: An interesting reply, Sikal

Originally posted by Chuzo
I am not saying that your goals are different than mine in the study of the arts. You say "I've gained a lot of benefits over the years from my martial arts including confidence, security, ability, maturity, and others. In training, I seek only to better myself ... ", this is my point. We train to better ourselves, NOT to learn how to kill. You say "cut" his throat, instead of a common phrase of "I struck the opponents neck" or "I was able to score a point on the throat area." It is your outlook that surprised me. The word "Martial Art" means an Art that is Martial, not training that is both art and martial. This word has been generalized in meaning any form that causes pain to your opponent. When I practice kendo, I do so as a sport and not as they did little over 200 years ago on the battlefields to kill and "cut" the throats of their opponents(or carotid artery).
This is a flaw I see in some of the attitudes of those who train. If you are training to kill or do harm to your opponent, what are you doing for yourself? All arts are different but those meant for positive mental growth are (in my opinion) those that are more defensive, striking hurt upon your opponent to the extent that is reasonable in the situation, whether they are played as a sport or not.
Is your personal growth in "confidence, security, ability, maturity, and others" based on the idea of your butt-kicking ability? Is this an Art at all? Why not just train in boxing?

No, my personal growth isn't based in my idea of butt-kicking ability :-)

"striking hurt upon your opponent to the extent that is reasonable in the situation" ... he's got a weapon, I've got a weapon ... he's trying to kill me, I'm trying to kill him ... this is the visualization for me in the sparring we were doing. If we'd both had swords, it would have been the same.

You train in Kendo as a sport ... this is precisely what I mean by the difference in our "reason" for training. I don't train in Kali as a sport. While I gain other benefits from my training, the other benefits are not my primary objective. Enjoying myself is my primary objective. Secondarily, learning skills which are practical to me. Winning a competition has no practical value for me. Learning how to nullify a threat to myself or another has practical value to me. If nullifying a threat means walking away, GREAT! If it means dislocating someone's joint or breaking their bone, fine. If it means killing them, fine.

I'm a nice, easy going person. The first impression most people get from me is that I'm a teddy bear ... and that's relatively accurate. I abhor fighting and will avoid it whenever possible. I also know, though, that sometimes it's unavoidable ... this is what I train for. I'm good at avoiding fights. I'm good at cooling situations down without fighting. But that's communication skills ... I hone my communication skills every day talking to people and writing. So, what I worry about in my training is honing the skills necessary when I have no other alternative. When the fit has hit the shan. That's what I train for. It's not about being a bada$$ ... there are too many of those in the world already ... and a lot of them badder than I'll ever be. It's about being prepared.

Mike

[Harley]

kendo vs. kali

Hello Guys,
I was just catchin up and thought this thread was interesting. So, not that anyone cares, i thought i'd jump in with my view.
1. Kendo vs. Kali has happened. In WWII the japanese attempted to fight in hand to hand combat vs. filipino freedom fighters. They failed. In many different occasions they failed. As a system it is limited somewhat, as an art it is valuable, as a current combat ready system, it is not. I have played the game of kendo, interesting, fun, rewarding. But not something i could use in most self defense situations.
2. Sikal's mentality of "cut his opponents throat" was not an inaccurate or beginner mentality. It is not based on the need to "kick butt" or feel "bad". Instead it shows the inherent difference between Kali and Kendo/Iaido. Kali is a combat system still used as such in today's world. Kendo/Iaido are arts of self perfection and harmony with the blade and opponent. Neither of these views are wrong, just different. In Kali students are taught to deal with the visualization of cutting someones throat because it is a very real possiblity. Consider that the people who brought this art to this land had actually done this things to other people! With that in mind, you can see they felt it important to prepare the students for the reality of blade fighting. The people who teach kendo in the U.S. have probably never been in a blade fight of any kind. I am sure they have recieved TONS of benefit from their training, and I'm sure their students recieve tons of benefit from training with them, just a different view.
The Post was on Kali vs. Kendo, it's already happened. In the blade vs. blade combat arena, no one beats the filipinos!
Gumagalang,
Harley

[Shintake]

Before i can take stock in the WWII statement, i think i need a little more to go on...particularly since the statement leaves a wide-open gap;

"They failed. In many different occasions they failed."

I'm certain they did not fail on every occasion...and if you look at how many occasions there likely were, well, you could safely say that anything happened on many occasions...that doesn't convince me of anything. If we were talking about 1000 battles and the FFF won 500, well you can say they won many. Heck, if you say they won 100, that is still many.

"I have played the game of kendo, interesting, fun, rewarding. But not something i could use in most self defense situations."

Did you spend enough time playing it to decide wether it was practical in most self-defense situations? I'm honestly curious.

"In the blade vs. blade combat arena, no one beats the filipinos!"

ummmm..........does this mean that no Fillipino has ever been beaten by anyone under those circumstances? Need i go on?

You are right, though, that there is a drastically different view. I dare to say, at risk of someone getting angry at me, but it sounds like those views are the difference between a style of battle and a martial ART. I am no weapons practitioner mind you (i am karateka), but i have seen many studies in battle that employ no spiritual or mental side and not even kata, that claim their studies as an art...i tend to disagree. Can someone tell me what makes a martial study a martial art? Throw me a frickin' bone, here!

[sikal]

Originally posted by Shintake
You are right, though, that there is a drastically different view. I dare to say, at risk of someone getting angry at me, but it sounds like those views are the difference between a style of battle and a martial ART. I am no weapons practitioner mind you (i am karateka), but i have seen many studies in battle that employ no spiritual or mental side and not even kata, that claim their studies as an art...i tend to disagree. Can someone tell me what makes a martial study a martial art? Throw me a frickin' bone, here!

I'll let Harley address the other points. I can only speak for myself. I feel that, for me, the Filipino method of weapons training is superior to the others that I've seen. This may not be true for other people (every one is different and, therefore, different methods will suit different people).

However, to address the question I quoted above:
I don't feel that the spiritual or mental side have anything to do with it being a "martial art" ... these elements are in the FMA ... the degree of exposure a student will see depends on the instructor and system.

But, IMHO, this has nothing to do with whether or not a system is a "martial art."

To me: "martial" is the fighting aspect. "art" is the ability to take what one has learned -- the tools of the trade -- and utilize them to express his/her own way.

Take any other art. For instance, painting:

All painters use the same tools (i.e.: canvass, paints, brush, etc.) ... it's what they do with those tools that makes it art. If a painter makes an exact copy of a masterpiece, is this art? No, it's replication (at best) or forgery (at worst). If, however, he re-paints the masterpiece in his own expression then it's art.

Knowledge of the tools does not make an artist. Understanding the tools; using them to create something unique makes an artist. I think martial arts is the same.

Just my opinion, though :-) I'm sure every one has his/her own definition that is just as valid.

Mike

[Shintake]

Do your styles have kata, though? Where does one express his/her self with it?

[Chuzo]

To Harley:
Well, it is good that you joined the conversation because we always invite new voices, but please think about what you say before you write it. You use Kendo and Iai as they are the same. They are not. They are two distinct arts arising from ken-jitsu and in no way comparable. You state that Kendo is not a battle form, yes it is not. But then you turn around and claim kendo was used in the Second World War. With the most respect to you, THIS IS ABSURD!
When you refer to battle kendo you should consider that form called "ken-jitsu" which is rarely practiced anymore because it was outlawed by the government in the late 1800's. They changed the "jitsu" into "do" or the way and made it a sport to keep tradition. The last true Bu-shi or Kenjitsu players were slain in the battle taken place to over throw the Meji Government (Meiji Restoration or Revolution)so that Japan would remain independant. The day of Samurai are long dead, dispite your image of Japan based on your movie veiwing habits.
Your Remarks about the history of WWII leaves me puzzled. I must admit that I am not sure what took place in the Phillipines but it was occupied by the Japanese for many years. While the Phillipines was a mass of under-developed islands, the Japanese never entered with just their Swords. This is a foolish thought. If you seriously have a book or reference that I could refer to, please list it when you reply. However, I am well versed in the Japanese history.
The style that Japanese military in WWII would use to fight with a sword is NOT KENDO! They were more of a short or bayonette style. I know this because I received my Grandfather's blade when I turned the age of majority. He was killed in WWII and stated that his sword be passed down. This is a sword of last resort of when other weapons were gone, such as a gun. I would be pathetic if I were to try to play kendo with it.
You stated, "Consider that the people who brought this art to this land had actually done this things to other people! With that in mind, you can see they felt it important to prepare the students for the reality of blade fighting". Where do you think Kendo came from? Kenjitsu was the art of war of the ancient warriors of Feudal Japan, an art spanning and developing for over a thousand years. It was slit into Kendo, and Iaido, as well as some other various arts. kendo was the fighting side while Iai was the art of drawing and striking from the saya (scabbord). if you were to put them together you would have more of a kenjitsu style. So these forms are very much different in both the mental and phyiscal dimensions. However, it is true that I have rank and practice Iai-do, it should not be assumed that all kendo players also play Iai.
You stated "The people who teach kendo in the U.S. have probably never been in a blade fight of any kind " have you? If so, why? Is this what we are fighting for? Your brothern in this art, Sikal, stated "When the fit has hit the shan. That's what I train for". Does this mean that you all carry swords with you where ever you go? Will you be sure that you will have access to one when the time demands it? Keep in mind, we are talking about sword arts, not empty hands.
You also stated "I have played the game of kendo, interesting, fun, rewarding. But not something i could use in most self defense situations". You have practiced kendo? Maybe not, right. You may have picked up a shinai and bashed your opponent in the head but I doubt that you tried the art. How long were you in? And under what type of instructor?
Lastly, I wanted to ask you if you consider Kendo to be the stuff that you see in the US. I am sure that are a number of great players in the US, but I feel that the Kendo in Japan is greatly different. In Japan, the traditions are passed from teacher to student, father to son, keeping alive the treasures of culture in the Muro-machi and Tokugawa Eras in Japan. There is so much more to it than mere self defense, this is the by-product, not the goal. Sikal mentioned that he fought his friend in Kendo, do you really think that he was practicing true Kendo? I play Kendo, if someone were to attack me on the streets with or without a weapon, giving the discipline, control and speed of good kendo, I feel that I would have no problems defending myself with a long stick of anykind. If no sticks were avaiable, I have been in Karate since I was a boy. However, if this is why I practiced, to beat those who attack me...I would be dissapponited if no one did. Which leads to those going to a bar and starting a fight just "to try out their new moves". Or those who enter live blade fights just for the fun of it....
All-in-all an interesting discussion but we are all of different minds on the subject. If, you were ever in the Tokyo area, give me a call and I would be happy to introduce Kendo to you, maybe as you never saw it before. There are many great Kendo dojos in the Tokyo area. 090-2940-4825 Chuzo