and here is a random video of "full triangle" pattern as one example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo7rX5K8liQ
One thing caught my eye more after all the "stick adhere follow" blah blah: the assumption that your attacker is armed, even if you can't see it, so you prefer to evade and can not take a hit or block or absorb.
https://steemit.com/martial-arts/@cheah ... f-footwork
In Filipino martial arts, when faced with an incoming blow, the preferred approach is to get out of the way. To understand why, simply replace Drago’s gloves with knives.
You can be as tough as Rocky, but mere flesh and bone isn’t going to stop steel and hardwood.
FMA originates from a weapon-based culture. The main assumption is that everyone is either armed or has ready access to a weapon. There is no way you can block a blade or stick with your body. You’ll just end up a bleeding, broken mess. Even if you don’t see a weapon, it doesn’t mean that the threat doesn’t have one—in the dark, against a small blade, you can’t tell if the threat is armed until your lifeblood gushes out on the floor.
You cannot afford to take a hit in FMA. The surest defence is to evade.
Not really sure what my question is here...