One drill we do is hit payong heaven six which is forehand backhand payong (with initial hand) then heaven 6 (forehand backhand backhand), that causes the payong hand to come behind the head ready for the 3rd strike
So, "standard" double sinawali runs:
1. Forehand lobtik
2. Backhand lobtik
3. Backhand witik
Diamond sinawali runs:
1. Forehand lobtik
2a. That hand continues its motion, to make a full circle around the head, returning it to its starting point.
2b. Backhand lobtik
3. Forehand lobtik
That second forehand lobtik really hits hard thanks to the windup - practice against smaller training partners if possible ;-)
2a. Payong circle motion behind head
2b. Backhand elastico
actually I may have messed my terminology up here was not 100% sure or lobtic and witik to me is a wrist snap which is not how we drill
As for your question: "If I can explain the practicality of movements that someone would call twirling, does it cease being twirling?"
I would say no, but I guess ut depends on how you define the word twirling as you mentioned. If you consider twirling to exclusively mean a move that has no martial application than by that definition a move that does have martial application ceases to be considered twirling. If twirling is just a general term for the 360 degree rotation of the stick used for some strikes than I suppose a strike that has practical martial application can still be considered a twirling strike.
I hope I didn't take that and run too far with it and lose everyone. Either way if a twirl is a motion intended to have practical application I question the effectiveness of such a technique.
Ok, I tried some of those behind the head moves tonight and definitely could see the increase in power you were talking about! Thanks for the help!
@speedy, I definitely was confused by the twirling terminology because I thought twirling was just where you spin the stick in your hand by opening up your hand and letting the stick spin between your thumb and pointer finger.
I suppose if a twirling strike can not have any practical martial use than the double strikes i've described either aren't true "twirling" (i.e. no martial value) or they are just an attempt by my instructor to give a practical use to something that has no real martial value, kind of like the secret applications (bunkai? maybe) that George Dillman professes for his kata. Perhaps that is why my styles' GM removed the double strikes from the shadow fighting form I described earlier.
Is anyone else aware of martial applications for double strikes? So far the replies I recall are the twirling techniques are purely for show, or to instill confidence and familiarity wielding the stick, and/or to train wrist flexiblity, but no actual martial value.
In my view, twirling is circles or figure eights applied with continuity. Does that have fighting application? Sure, used intelligently. Linking circular motions can be used to force a block high and strike across the torso or leg. They can be used to block then counter fluidly. They can be used to insert a wrap/sunkiti/doblado before a standard strike. But less subtly, they are used to recover after a power forehand or backhand. After a hard fast swing, the energy has to either bleed off in a controlled circle or be forcefully stopped. This motion is what some people call a tail, and with the proper dexterity the tail can load up a power shot in the other direction. On the other hand while twirling can be applicable, it is not necessarily applicable.
I try not to use too many Filipino terms, for a couple reasons.Quote:
That's one thing about my style of Arnis that has concerned me in the past. We don't really use any Filipino terms for what we do
First, I just assume I'm mangling the pronounciation.
Second, the terms aren't universal - f'rinstance, I was taught the term dumog for grappling, but in some dialects, it means "a fight to the death" and buno is the term for grappling. Not a good mistake to make. Or mention that you were practicing hubud and get weird looks from the Pinoy who wonders why you got half-naked.
Third, I don't need people getting confused about what I'm asking 'em to do. If it's a specific term (like when I use largo, medio, corto in discussions about range) it is because I'm talking about a very specific context.