The one thing is I would say is that "no other weapon system organizing by timing" is probably off a bit. What he lays out for the structure of the Doce Methodos is also a description of Nach/Indes/Vor in like....all of Kunst De fechtens and the Zettel was written in what...1400? Even the basic structure of sport fencing and Right of Way is more or less lined up with those categorizations
@@selfcritical correct. Because that was/is sword fighting. The source of filipino edged weapons. But most fma these days look nothing like sword fighting and more like caveman clubbing.
Yeah, it's funny how certain individuals take it personally and get hell bent out of shape and rant on and on about how Tim uses the term "authentic" to describe the system of PTK as it was taught to him... yet these very same people with no real skill or understanding, but are "loud" in social media would claim to know better 'cause they constantly need to feel validated.
Got to disagree with Guru a bit here. I say that as someone who has trained with him a number of times and has the utmost respect. But I believe he’s a bit wrong There is no “perfected system” that is also scientific. Because science constantly changes and evolves as new data comes in. Same with any system of fighting or combat. Look at Weaver. That was the gunfightinv paradigm for quite a while. It was taught in the system. Today not many folk are shooting people with Weaver because it has shortcomings when shooting in kit, shooting and moving, etc. It’s simply suboptimal. Times changes. Mores change. Equipment and technology changes. A system must change with them at times. Like PTK would have to change if people carried weapons with hand guards regularly. Targeting the hand when it’s protected by a crossguard/handguard is bad tactics. So PTK would have to evolve its targeting, for instance. Just a small example but there is no perfect system because there is no perfect, ever changing paradigm. Maybe the system is perfect for what it’s been developed for but if new elements are exposed or what have you the system may not address those new elements Any system must evolve when change occurs if necessary. Otherwise it stagnates and stagnation is death.
The one thing is I would say is that "no other weapon system organizing by timing" is probably off a bit. What he lays out for the structure of the Doce Methodos is also a description of Nach/Indes/Vor in like....all of Kunst De fechtens and the Zettel was written in what...1400? Even the basic structure of sport fencing and Right of Way is more or less lined up with those categorizations
@@selfcritical correct. Because that was/is sword fighting. The source of filipino edged weapons. But most fma these days look nothing like sword fighting and more like caveman clubbing.
Yeah, it's funny how certain individuals take it personally and get hell bent out of shape and rant on and on about how Tim uses the term "authentic" to describe the system of PTK as it was taught to him... yet these very same people with no real skill or understanding, but are "loud" in social media would claim to know better 'cause they constantly need to feel validated.
Amen.
Got to disagree with Guru a bit here. I say that as someone who has trained with him a number of times and has the utmost respect. But I believe he’s a bit wrong
There is no “perfected system” that is also scientific. Because science constantly changes and evolves as new data comes in. Same with any system of fighting or combat. Look at Weaver. That was the gunfightinv paradigm for quite a while. It was taught in the system. Today not many folk are shooting people with Weaver because it has shortcomings when shooting in kit, shooting and moving, etc. It’s simply suboptimal.
Times changes. Mores change. Equipment and technology changes. A system must change with them at times. Like PTK would have to change if people carried weapons with hand guards regularly. Targeting the hand when it’s protected by a crossguard/handguard is bad tactics. So PTK would have to evolve its targeting, for instance. Just a small example but there is no perfect system because there is no perfect, ever changing paradigm. Maybe the system is perfect for what it’s been developed for but if new elements are exposed or what have you the system may not address those new elements
Any system must evolve when change occurs if necessary. Otherwise it stagnates and stagnation is death.