I’ve been studying Filipino Martial Arts (FMA) for about a month now. Between my classes and the reading I’m doing on FMA, I’m noticing some interesting differences between it and my past experiences studying a traditional Korean martial art. This is by no means any sort of a complete analysis, just some initial observations based upon my own experiences.

The approach to weapons study

In Kuk Sool, weapons study was saved for later. In terms of formal curriculum, there’s no real weapon study done until black belt. At the brown-black level there is a defense against knife technique set, but you’re not learning how to use the knife. As well, the WKSA tournaments allow brown belts to perform staff spinning techniques. Nevertheless, any actual “fighting” techniques with weapons is pretty much reserved until black belt level. Why? Reasons can vary, but I recall the reason I was given when I first started my study was that you needed to learn discipline with your hands. That if you’re moving a sword around, you need to learn where to put your hands both the hand holding the sword and the free hand; allows you to wield the sword effectively but also keep your free hand from getting cut off! There’s some sense to that and certainly I know after years of practice my hands have gained some good default positions to keep them in “proper places” when moving. Nevertheless, traditional arts like Kuk Sool have designs to first teach empty hand then weaponry.

On the other hand, Filipino arts teach weapons first and empty hand comes later. The reasoning is that they’re teaching people for combat. While it’s nice to be able to fight with your fists, weapons give you greater advantages. You can hit harder, have more reach, be more effective in combat and increase your chances of success, even if all you’re fighting with is a stick. This lies in stark contrast to Kuk Sool, not just because they have opposite locations for weapons teaching in their curriculum, but also the reasoning for it. Kuk Sool says you need discipline first; FMA says you need to be combat effective. I guess which you deem more valuable depends upon what your goals are. I tend to agree with the FMA approach, but only because my goals these days are to be more combat effective.

Open vs. Closed

Kuk Sool, at least as promoted by the World Kuk Sool Association, is very closed. They don’t want you to cross train. They don’t want to look at new ideas or different approaches to things. It’s their way, period. Kuk Sool is perfect as-is and never needs to change, adapt, or grow. If someone leaves the association, the association tries to prohibit you from any further ties with those that left. It’s very close-minded, very controlling.

FMA seems to be very open and encouraging of cross-training. Reading some history of the “recent” (within the last 100 years) FMA evolution, it seems to have willingly adopted useful techniques from other groups such as aikido, jujutsu, karate, kendo. Various FMA groups will even train with each other. There’s an openness towards finding what works and what can make you a more effective fighter.

Mindset

The Kuk Sool mindset (apart from the financial drive) seemed to be well… hard to define. Was it about preserving Korean martial heritage? Was it about physical development? Was it about internal development (e.g. “ki/chi”)? Was it about mental development (e.g. discipline, loyalty). Or was it actually about learning how to fight? I don’t think it was much about the latter. It tried to, but there just wasn’t enough being done to make that so.

The FMA mindset seems to speak a lot about actual self-defense. “Haging laging handa” or “always be prepared”. It’s not about paranoia, just being aware and keeping sharp. To be prepared for the unexpected. “Huwag kang magpapauna” or “don’t let the opponent get the jump on you”. “Pagmamasdan mo ang kamay” or “watch the opponent’s hands”. These are actual principles, tactical maxims towards helping you succeed. I saw no such things in Kuk Sool. If anything I saw there it’d be about being loyal, or how to practice hyung. You Won Hwa was perhaps the closest thing I saw towards actual fighting principles.

Body Mechanics

One strong point of similarity is the body mechanics. But I would say this has less to do with any sort of style vs. style trappings and more just with how the body works. The elbow only bends one way, so an arm bar is an arm bar is an arm bar regardless of what style you learn it in. Vital points at which to target strikes (e.g. eyes, throat, side of jaw, downward clavicle, floating ribs, etc.), all the same.

The nice part here is whatever existing knowledge I have, it all flows and continues to be useful. That is one strength of Kuk Sool is their “soo” emphasis; all the joint locking, throwing, and sweeping techniques. It’s a strong part of what makes up Kuk Sool. I just wish they would do more practical work with it. Nevertheless, the textbook knowledge gained from it is quite good.

Don’t get me wrong. This isn’t to disparage Kuk Sool. It’s just to point out the differences that I’m seeing between my old study and my new study. Certainly I am biased, but only because I have particular goals; Kuk Sool no longer served towards meeting my goals, and FMA appears to be serving those goals quite well. If your goals are different, you may find that FMA isn’t what you want and Kuk Sool is perfect. That’s the thing about martial arts: it’s a personal journey.