Dog Brothers Public Forum

DBMA Martial Arts Forum => Martial Arts Topics => Topic started by: Michael Brown on January 25, 2006, 10:57:59 PM

Title: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: Michael Brown on January 25, 2006, 10:57:59 PM
Let me first preface what I am saying by stating that I am operating from a base of minimal knowledge in this field of stickfighting and FMA so please excuse any uneducated comments or assumptions on my part.

I have been closely watching the fights on several DBMA DVD's (amidst working the material) and it seems like almost all of the fighting occurs at either Larga Mano range or in clinch range when standing.  It doesn't look like there is a whole lot of trapping or intentional disarming/stripping that has always appeared, to me at least, to be so prevelant in FMA.

I also recall reading something about ten years ago by the late Grandmaster Leo Giron where he stated something to the effect of "if its real, its got to be Larga Mano."

Since its clear that a major premise of DBMA is testing the material via contact, is it safe to say that in the context of live contact stickfighting a student should spend the bulk of his basics time working in the Larga mano range, clinching, and on the ground?

I believe there is a similar matrix for MMA, as that is my base of experience, so hopefully I'm not being presumptive in making the comparison.

Any opinions are greatly appreciated.

Michael Brown
Title: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: Sheep Dog on January 26, 2006, 09:59:20 AM

I work Largo, clinch and ground, in fact all of my matches at DB gatherings have ended with me and my opponent on the ground.

That being said I think that where you win the fights a lot of times is the space in between long range and clinch, learning how to get in and get out of that range is one of the best skill syou can have. Having a good clinch but lacking the skills to get there will not do you much good.

As for traps, well I think compound trapping really doesn't work very well in my *own* experience at a gathering. When I think trapping I think more in the line of wrestling, over hook is a good "trap", underhooks, etc.

I have used a snake disarm a few times where from overhook I strip the stick there are a few pics of me doing it in the photo galleries, I will look for them and post them.
Title: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: Stickgrappler on January 26, 2006, 02:05:37 PM

a slight digression if i may:

although the fights may physically start in largo, what many don't see is that the fight actually starts in the outermost range of (the 7 ranges of stickfighting in DBMA) of Snake Range. in this range it is where the fighter analyzes his opponent, move around to look for openings and test his opponent's defenses. this is an often overlooked range. you can analyze your opponent's structure, responses, preferences, etc.

to followup on the 7 ranges, starting from the outermost to the closest to the opponent:  1) snake, 2) stick squared (there may be a new term that i'm not up to speed on yet), 3) largo, 4) medio, 5) corto, 6) standing grappling/clinch, and 7) ground grappling.

with regard to the late GM Giron, he may be referring to the style Larga Mano and not the range, although that style specialized in the range of largo mano :-)
Title: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: Michael Brown on January 26, 2006, 03:24:50 PM
I guess I am generalizing the term Larga mano.  the range you describe is what I am observing and what I am referring to as larga mano.

I guess what I'm asking, in roundabout fashion, is could a participant be successful essentially learning the longer ranges and then simply how to close them (easier said than done) and relying on clinch and ground ranges?

It doesn't look like a lot of the techniques I have observed practiced in FMA are used a whole lot in the DBMA fights especially the medio and corto ranges.

Is this observation wrong and perhaps I am just not educated enough in this area to see what is really going on?

I have noticed a ton of subtleties in the fights but not within the ranges it seems FMA is known for.

Again, I appreciate everyone's opinions.

Michael Brown
Title: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 26, 2006, 10:15:17 PM
Woof Michael:

Some preliminary points:

GM Giron described his system as "jungle warfare bolo knife (in American English this would be a machete) system".     Closing on a skilled, or even simply athletic, man with a bolo can be a real challenging trick. :shock:

Even as we go to stick, we need to keep in mind that there are sticks and there are sticks.  The more lethal the stick, the less likely the closing game.  By the time we get to rattan with fencing masks on, closing and clinching becomes distinctly more plausible.   IMHO the fights we do allow us to test our closing training.  We want to see ourselves get in without the head or other important targets being touched.  Many of us can do this with considerable consistency-- no brag, just fact.  Although it may take an instant, a lot of training goes into being able to create that instant with consistency.

It is very easy for the MMA mind to make the leap of logic that this is pretty similar to closing in the MMA context.  IT IS NOT.   I sometimes tell the story of a situation where a fine MMA fighter, with several notable championships to his credit as a heavyweight, in an appropriate context (those there were American heroes he might be putting their lives on the line with my teachings and thus were fully entitled to test me) challenged me to prove my point in this regard.  I did.  The two of us and all there agreed that he would have been left permanently stupid or worse had it been a no headgear fight.

Another faulty assumption easily made is to correlate % of time in the fight in which something appears with its importance.  I disagree.  

Although we are in agreement that many people train media and corto range techniques in a manner that leaves them still unable to fight with the material, in my opinion when viewed with the fighter's eye and the fighter's understanding there is much of great value to be gleaned from this material.

It may help you to think of this material as pre-electronic recordings of knowledge.  After all, how does one record knowledge so that it can survive transmission by the clueless in times of peace when there are no videos or DVDs?  

Of course there are people who can acquire great skill at these training methods and still lack fighting spirit or the fighter's understanding-- but in my experience if one brings heart and the willingness to acquire experience, then in the apparent chaos of real fights one recognizes opportunities that one would not-- but for this training.  The result is mental speed-- which is the most important kind of speed of all.  (One also brings considerable technical skill with one's weapon-- and this is a real good thing too.)

My understanding is that these things we see taught are not literal stories: "When he throws one hummer of a caveman this is what you do" blah blah.  It is when I am in the fight and the engagement is on, I am helped to see things that I otherwise would not, but for this training.  The application of the idea takes but a moment-- but it is in these moments that the fight can be decided.  

Does this make sense?

I understand well that you are looking to be as efficient as possible in the time you invest in your training.  Correctly so!  We can talk more about this in Tulsa :twisted:  :wink:  

Anyway, for you I pull this article from our DBMA Association website.  I forget when and where it was originally published, but here it is:

Guro Crafty


The Seven Ranges of Stickfighting by Guro Crafty

In the United States today, and perhaps in the United Kingdom as well, most Filipino Martial Arts systems and styles teach the concept of range by breaking it down into the three ranges of Largo, Medio, and Corto-which are usually translated as long range, mid-range, and close range. Some systems prefer one range, some prefer another, some prefer to work all three equally. Largo is usually defined as the distance where you can strike your opponent's weapon hand or he yours. Medio is usually defined as the distance where you can strike your opponent's head or body and your live hand (the empty hand when fighting with single stick) can check/trap the opponent's limb. Corto is the distance where the butt of the stick and the live hand can strike the opponent's head/body.

For most teaching purposes here in the US these ranges suffice. Yet it is known that some systems in the Philippines organized around more than three ranges. Unable to imagine anything else, the general assumption here in the US seems to have been that these ranges must be subdivisions of the basic three and as such, prossibly too nitpicky.

Those of us a bit longer in the tooth may remember a cover story in Inside Kung Fu on Guro Dan Inosanto in the early 1980s in his capacity as a teacher of Filipino Arts. In the article, there are fotos of him demonstrating much more than the three generic ranges. Similarly, in my very brief but valuable to me training with Grandmaster Ramiro Estalilla of Kabaroan Eskrima I have been exposed to a concept of range very different from that of the three generic ranges.

I mention these examples because I wish to make it clear that although the Dog Brothers Martial Arts expression of seven ranges may be distinctive, and I hope has value, there is no claim to be the only one with more than the three basic ranges, nor is there a claim to be better than those with three.

In our first series of videos (a second is in the works) which featured Eric "Top Dog" Knaus, our best fighter and in my opinion the best stickfighter of our time, I organized the tapes around a concept of "If you see it taught, you see it fought." We did the fights in those tapes several years before the UFC. At that time, most of the FMA being taught in the US had drifted away from the "martial" and more towards the "art" end of the spectrum. I believe that this was necessary for the art to take root in the US. As my teacher has pointed out when he talks to us in class, most Americans will not last under the teaching style of many of the teachers from the Philippines.

But what happened when our tapes came out and I began to travel around a bit was that I became aware that many people had concluded that because they did not see the "artsy stuff" in our fights, that as far as application went everything they had been taught was malarkey. Many of those who brought considerable training skills to their fighting without much success also blamed their training. Many people concluded that this was also was the Dog Brother message. Although I readily understand how some people came to such conclusions, I feel that these conclusions are mistaken, especially that regarding the Dog Brothers message.

All of what we call "the first tier fighters" of the Dog Brothers (Top Dog, Salty Dog, Sled Dog, and myself) have considerable training from some of the finest Filipino teachers in the world: Grand Tuhon Leo Gaje of Pekiti Tirsia, the legendary Guro Dan Inosanto, and the late Punong Guro Edgar Sulite in particular. The message of the first tape series was directed at what we perceived to be the weak link of most FMA practitioners in the US at the time that we made the videos (1992) which was a lack of hard work on the basics done with a fighter's understanding.

This matter of "the fighter's understanding" also explains the matter of skill in training not necessarily yielding skill in fighting. In the Philippines, people understood the meaning of the training because they had at least SEEN stickfights-often on Friday nights after the cockfight pits, there would be stickfighting after the cockfights were over. Just as someone can practically benefit from training in Muay Thai without getting in the ring for a full bore Muay Thai fight, so too in the Philippines training in the art could benefit those who were not actually fighters/warriors.

In contrast however, when the art came to the US, virtually all practitioners had never even seen a stickfight, let alone been in one. Football (i.e. American football) players benefit from walking through plays, but if you went to somewhere they had never seen football (Outer Mongolia?) and had them walk through some plays from the Denver Broncos playbook and said "If you are ever in a game, then this is what you do," then that first game may not go too well. We need to remember that THESE TRAINING METHODS WERE DEVELOPED IN THE PHILIPPINES BY THOSE WHO ALREADY WERE WARRIORS TO TRAIN WELL AND SAFELY. HERE IN THE UNITED STATES WE TRY TO USE THEM TO DEVELOP WARRIORS, WHICH IS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT TASK, AND BLAME THE METHODS INSTEAD OF OURSELVES WHEN WE STILL CAN'T FIGHT.

Thus, in organizing the first Dog Brothers' video series, I made a deliberate decision to organize the material principally around solo training and communicating something about the essence of fights with sticks. This does NOT mean that the plethora of two man training methods of the various FMA are not relevant. It just means they weren't in the videos!

But still I thought about why people can have good training skills but not have them appear when they fight. And what I realized was that most people train in two man drills and that the drills are principally in either Media or Corto range yet WHEN THE FIGHT STARTS IT STARTS OUTSIDE OF LARGO and most people, beyond trying to be quicker and/or more powerful, haven't a clue as to what to do out there or how to get to the ranges where their skills lie IN COMPOSED BALANCE. Thus, often little or none of their cultivated skills show up in their fighting. This thought was the beginning of the understanding that led to the seven ranges.

So lets look at them. Two of the seven ranges lie outside of largo-medio-corto, and two lie inside. These ranges do not bump up against each other like bricks, instead, rather like the links of a chain, they overlap. Understand too that this is all only "a manner of talking" and should not be taken too literally. To use the JKD metaphor, once the canoe gets you across the river, you do not need to carry it on your back as you continue on your way. Fights are dynamic and in application the ranges blend freely.

SNAKE RANGE: As I have studied and been hit by Top Dog over the years I have come to appreciate that he has a unique way of moving before contact is made, both in stickwork and footwork, that distinguishes him from all other fighters I have seen, even ones trained in the same system as him (Pekiti Tirsia). I like putting nicknames to things, and to the sinuous, flowing quality of his stick, I put the name "the snaky stick". This has nothing to do with "snake disarms".

In DBMA, we define "The Snake" as "the skill of moving your stick to protect your hand, hide your intent, create your opening, and mask your initiation." Although the starting point is based upon what Top Dog does, we also draw upon the movements of several other quality fighters as well. No one structure, even that of "the best", works best for everyone and no one structure solves all problems.

The material of Snake range in our curriculum also includes how to analyze and solve your opponent's structure. If you can quickly recognize your opponent's structure and already know its basic strengths and weaknesses, you have less choices to make and hence can react more quickly and confidently.

It is also important to remember that there are times in a fight, as well as situations in the street, that one wants to avoid engagement and to keep the opponent(s) away. This development of this skill is also part of our curriculum for Snake range.

WEAPON RANGE: Weapon Range is still outside of largo. It is the range where the weapons strike each other. Since we mostly fight with sticks, it is the range where stick strikes stick, or stick times stick if you will, and thus is sometimes called "Stick Squared". The shorter the weapons, e.g. folding knives, the less relevant this range. In your basic stickfight, depending upon the dynamics this can be an important range in the hands of a fighter who understands it, but even then not necessarily so. However, when the weapons are longer it is likely to be essential. For example, when two men of roughly equal skill face of with staffs, it is probable that the weapons will make contact with each other before anyone is actually hit.

There are three basic categories of Weapon range: meet the force, merge the force, and follow the force. Most readers probably understand meet the force, and some will already appreciate that a follow the force is not so likely on an initial strike of an exchange, but may be unfamiliar with what we call "merging". My awareness on this point was triggered by Grand Master Ramiro Estalilla, whose very interesting Kabaroan system has many longer weapons, some of which are sometimes thrown. Simply put, a merge is, as we use the term in DBMA, where the force of my strike on my opponent's weapon is approximately at an angle of 90 degrees to the line of force of his strike, i.e. halfway between meet and merge. The purpose of a merge is to knock your opponent's weapon off course and disrupt his control of it so as to create an opening for your follow up strike. There are even angles where disarms can be accomplished by mere impact on the weapon. A scientific understanding of this range can open the door to a composed, balanced entry into the hitting ranges (largo/medio/corto). This is very valuable.

Now lets take a look at the ranges inside of Largo/Medio/Corto

STANDING GRAPPLE: Exactly as it is named, this is where both fighters are tied up while standing. As defined in DBMA, Corto can be a similar distance, although it is usually a little bit further, but it has a very different dynamic; there, apart from the possibility of trapping, the fighters are not holding on to each other. Here, by definition, they are.

In Real Contact Stickfighting almost all entries to the standing grapple are on the high line. To try to shoot low from the greater distance of a stickfight is to expose the top or back of one's head to a full force stick shot. Because of the requirements of coming in with one's head protected, the arm positions of the tie-up are often somewhat different from emptyhand standing grapple. There are important differences in the dynamics as well, as anyone who has gotten cracked in the head with a punyo (butt strike), thrust in the belly, whacked in the third leg with the stick, "fang choked" with the stick, or thrown with the stick can attest. Furthermore, in a stickfight it is not uncommon for a standing grapple to open out back into the striking ranges. These differences however do not change the fact that the skills of a stickfighting standing grapple must be on top of a good base-you ignore the emptyhand standing grapple game at your peril.

GROUND GRAPPLE: Again, the name is self-explanatory. DBMA Stickgrappling is like a game of pinball when three balls are released at once. If you pay too much attention to one ball, you lose track of the others and down the chute they go. Similarly, in stickgrappling there are the three simultaneous games of Kali, empty hand, and stickgrappling-and just like that pinball game you can rack up some really big points if you can keep track of all three.

For example, if the man is in your guard and seeks to post as an initiation to a pass of your guard as he would in empty hand, play Kali and just crack him in the elbow with your punyo and bring him to you, where you can play stickgrappling and choke him with the stick. A stickgrappling guard can be very aggressive.

In stickgrappling in is very common for one or both fighters to be disarmed or to lose a stick and then regain it by picking it up from where it lies. Thus there is a often dynamic where only one fighter or the other has a stick. Ambidexterity is also highly useful. And, as in the standing grapple, ground grapple often opens back out into the striking ranges too.

As a teacher as well as a fighter, it has been my experience that this concept of seven ranges is of great practical use. A fighter trained in these additional ranges will have both the skills and understanding of these ranges. He will not be baffled at how to get to where his Largo-Medio-Corto skills apply. He will have a more composed mind and clearer sense of mission of how to get into these ranges technically and with the composure necessary to make his opponent feel "the wrath of the rattan." Similarly, when the fight gets tied up, he has the skills and understanding to respond more fluidly and spontaneously.
Title: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: Michael Brown on January 27, 2006, 08:19:40 AM

That was like asking for a sip of water and being handed a bucket! :shock:

That really was an incredible summation of what I was looking for.

I watched the explanation of the seven ranges on the DVD but this really puts it into context for me.  Normally I am much better comprehening video than the written word but this was an exception.

I also appreciate the distinction between closing in an MMA context as opposed to a stickfight.  It seems that how to get into position to use the striking skills in medio/corto/clinching range is an area that your group has developed to an incredibly high level and is certainly not the same line-crashing/entry used in MMA.  

It is also interesting to see your insight into the difference between unarmed grappling and stick grappling.  Interesting enough, our group tried that just this morning for the first time and the results were really cool as I have never appreciated the use of the stick in a grounded context.  

Do any of the DVD's cover the grappling component?

I think this is REALLY where its application will have great merit for police officers that I had never really addressed before.

I was really looking forward to the Tulsa seminar.  I am now chomping at the bit.

This is area of combat is a very exciting new challenge.

Thank you very much.

Michael Brown
Title: Re: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2011, 10:21:26 AM
Title: Re: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: sting on May 23, 2011, 02:29:52 PM
Crafty has the word on the topic, particularly with that treatise.

I'll add that in most martial arts, the fighting does not resemble the training, most of the training offers little preparation for fighting, and most of the fighting looks the same.  Most techniques are trained at quarter speed/power on cooperative opponents for practical reasons and usually fail due to the latency in the response of our nervous systems, both in detection/reaction as well as execution.  It is assumed that these techniques can be simply sped up when the need arrives, but that is as false as assuming a 100 mph fast pitch will be accomplished by regular pitch at 25 mph.

I have sparred with eskrima groups that train and spar with disarms.  While disarms are important and useful, I believe that the no clinch and strike rules of the sparring allow for the disarms to occur more often.  The typically thinner and shorter WEKAF weapon (something like 24", skinned 1/2" rattan) coupled with head, body, hand protection encourage players to stay in the "fun" range.

At DB Gatherings (sigh, a distant memory) and in my own weapons fighting group, I made a special attempt to use many of the seemingly exotic Kenpo techniques.  Most seem to work better on fatigued opponents, which isn't a surprise given that they are trained at 1/4 speed/power and require more effort to recall.  Only a small repertoire of motions can be mastered and remembered.
Title: Re: Ranges observed in the fights
Post by: bjung on May 24, 2011, 03:34:54 AM
I'll add that in most martial arts, the fighting does not resemble the training,
response to Gints:

Well, I wouldn't group DBMA with most martial arts either :wink: but I think for a few guys the fighting resembles the training. I remember watching Guro Lonely Dog (who is an exceptional fighter, but not the exception) control the range of the fights he was in quite well, choosing when to close, and imposing his game/strategy on others. No doubt the training is on specific skills like crashing appropriately,etc. but it's amazing that in the full speed, adrenalized chaos of a fight he (and others) pull them out consistently. I would hazard a guess that in the lead up to a Gatheirng they practice several drills at full speed to develop timing and comfort in the adrenal state, but a lot of skills, such as coordination, moving feet and sticks together in concert take time to develop and most likely require development at slower speeds of training with cooperative opponents. Training for fighting and other skill development occur jointly.

Arts where constant testing are applied need to go at two speeds also. Boxers add pad work, bag work, footwork, and other drills as well since you can't afford to have someone trying to punch your head all the time. There's a learning speed and a fighting speed. Teaching people to differentiate between their conditioning/training/learning speed and fighting speed is important, I think the first time I competed in martial arts I was amazed at how fast things seemed to move (adrenal state), though learning at slower speeds helped me identify what my opponent was trying to do.

Practicing BJJ at different speeds, whether 1/2 speed or full speed, seems to make no difference when going against a blackbelt (for me). Whether I'm fatigued or not they are able to contol the game and impose many varied techniques against me, even when I know what they are trying to do and how to counter it. Through balance, control, understanding, and years of training they move between different ground positions (ranges?),and while a choke is a choke there seemed to be many variations top guys employ to get that extra bite, just like i can think of several kinds of jabs, I can think of several rear naked choke variations, the more you have in your repertoire the better prepared you are.

Really can't add anything more to what Guro Crafty said. it's well worth the re - read (and another).
I think training in transitioning between the ranges has helped me quite a bit. Within the transition to the clinch or out of the clinch, the clinch to the ground, or the ground back to the feet lots of little things, adjustments, head position, stick position, etc make a difference. Although I feel some ranges come and go quite quickly, that space between corto and clinch, out of the clinch, and clinch to ground requires solid time training in the ranges to understand their possibilities. There's a need to understand the 'traditional' ranges, the fighting ranges,  plus transitions between ranges which reflects Guro Crafty's comments on composure in his final paragraph.