(716) 247-5254 admin@wmarnis.com

Not a Magic Wand: The Honest Truth About Cane Self-Defense

Recently I posted a short demonstration video on my social media platforms. Within just a few days it gathered more than four million views between Instagram and YouTube. As you might expect, with that much attention came plenty of praise, and plenty of criticism.

That’s the nature of social media.

The video itself was simple. There was no narration, just a physical demonstration. Around the same time I had also taught a cane seminar, and naturally both the seminar and the video sparked some online commentary.

So let me take a moment to clarify a few things.

When I teach, I’m very clear about setting realistic expectations. Not everything we train has the same purpose. Some training develops gross motor skills. Some focuses on technical precision. And some is aimed at practical application. Too many martial artists fail to distinguish between those categories. They see something and immediately ask whether it would work in a fight, without understanding what the drill was actually designed to accomplish.

In this particular case, both the video and the seminar focused on the hooked cane.

And right on cue, the critics showed up.

Whenever I teach cane, I explain it this way: the cane is a weapon of the future, or more accurately, a weapon of our personal futures. If we’re fortunate enough to live long lives, there’s a good chance many of us will rely on a cane at some point.

That idea alone triggers a common criticism.

People ask, “If you need a cane to stand up, how are you supposed to fight with it?”

It’s a fair question, but it also reveals a misunderstanding about how martial arts training should work.

Any technique, whether it’s empty hand or weapon-based, should be practiced from multiple positions: standing, sitting, kneeling, and even lying on the ground. The reality is that we never know where we’ll be or what position we’ll be in if an attack occurs.

Much of what I teach can be adapted to those positions. Some things can be done from a chair or a stool. Some things can be done from the ground. Other things simply cannot. The only way to truly understand what works, and what doesn’t, is to train from all those positions and test the material honestly.

There’s also another reality we have to acknowledge.

There may come a time in life when, regardless of training or tools, the body simply deteriorates. Injury, illness, and age eventually catch up with all of us. At some point a person may no longer be physically capable of defending themselves.

That’s life.

And I make sure my students understand that.

I don’t tell people, “Train with me and you’ll always be able to protect yourself.”

What I tell them is this:
Training gives you a better chance of surviving a violent encounter.
There’s a difference between improving your chances and guaranteeing an outcome.

Now, when it comes to carrying a cane, there are different reasons people use one. One of my own teachers carried a cane regularly. Like me, he had accumulated his share of injuries over the years. On flat ground he usually didn’t need it. But when it came to stairs, hills, or uneven terrain, that extra support made a big difference.

The same applies to me. I don’t carry a cane because I can’t walk. I carry one because sometimes, going up or down stairs or navigating inclines, that extra support helps.

But the real point goes back to training principles.

If someone truly needs a cane just to remain standing, then yes, many standing techniques won’t apply. But if that same person can use the cane from a chair, a park bench, or even a ground position, suddenly the cane becomes a practical tool again.

That’s why we train from different positions. We test the material. We discover what works and where its limits are.

Unfortunately, many people see a short video clip and form an opinion based on a very narrow perspective. They’re reacting to a snapshot, not the full context of the training.

When I approach martial arts, I try to look at the bigger picture. I want to know how techniques function across different situations, different environments, and different stages of life.

And I’m also realistic.

Depending on how long I live, and how my health holds up, there may come a day when my techniques are limited by age. There may even come a point when I’m no longer physically capable of defending myself.

But honesty is part of responsible teaching.

For decades I’ve made it clear that not everyone can do everything, and not every opponent can be beaten. Martial arts training doesn’t come with guarantees.

What it does is improve your odds.

There’s another factor worth mentioning as well: confidence. People who carry themselves with awareness and confidence often appear less like prey. Criminals typically look for easy targets.
But again, there are no guarantees.

Even the strongest and most athletic person can become a victim if someone is determined enough.

That’s why our responsibility as instructors is to teach honestly. We should explore what works, understand what doesn’t, and make sure the people we train walk away with realistic expectations, not fantasies.

The cane isn’t a magic wand.

But in the right hands, and with the right understanding, it can be another tool that improves someone’s chances.
And sometimes, that’s exactly what training is about.

Respectfully,
Datu Tim Hartman
Modern Arnis Tribal Chief

#modernarnis #cane #selfdefense 

Learning From a Master Doesn’t Always Make You a Student

Recently, I was listening to an FMA discussion podcast featuring several Modern Arnis practitioners when a comment by Bruce Chu of Florida really made me think.

He said:

“Professor had a lot of followers and participants, but not a lot of students.”

At first, that statement might sound controversial, but the more I thought about it, the more I understood exactly what he meant.

Professor Remy Presas introduced Modern Arnis to thousands of martial artists through seminars, camps, and demonstrations around the world. Those who attended absolutely learned from him, and many even hosted his events. His influence is beyond question.

But it raises an interesting question:

Does learning from a master automatically make you their student?

I don’t believe it does.

A student-teacher relationship is built through consistency, guidance, correction, accountability, and mutual commitment. It is an ongoing relationship, not simply a shared experience.

Here’s one way to look at it.

I’ve spoken with people who say they trained with Professor for ten years. That sounds impressive until you learn they may have only attended one seminar each year. If each seminar lasted five hours, that’s roughly fifty hours of instruction over an entire decade.

Now compare that to your own school.

If someone attended only five hours of class each year for ten years, would you consider them one of your active students? Most instructors probably wouldn’t. We’d likely describe them as someone who participated occasionally.

So why should the definition change simply because the instructor lived in another state or another country?

Distance doesn’t redefine the relationship. It only changes the opportunity for interaction.

My own experience was different.

I began training in Modern Arnis in 1985 and trained with Professor regularly for many years. Between monthly training, seminars, camps, private instruction, and extended weekends together, I estimate I accumulated well over 1,500 hours of direct training with him.

I don’t mention that to elevate my experience. I mention it to illustrate what an ongoing student-teacher relationship can look like. It was built over years of repeated instruction, correction, conversation, and mentorship—not just memorable seminars.

That doesn’t diminish anyone else’s experience.

A single seminar with a master can change the direction of your martial arts journey. You can learn lessons that stay with you for life.

But inspiration and mentorship are not always the same thing.

Learning from a master doesn’t always make you a student.

I’ve always made a distinction in my own school between participants, members, and students. Every person who walks through the door has value, but occasional participation isn’t the same as an ongoing student-teacher relationship.

The same applies to me.

I’ve attended seminars taught by exceptional martial artists throughout my career. I gladly give those instructors credit for what they taught me. But if I trained with someone once—or even several times—I wouldn’t honestly claim to be their student. I was a participant who had the privilege of learning from them.

The same principle applies outside of martial arts. I regularly attend business conferences and seminars where I learn from outstanding presenters. Their knowledge has helped me grow, but attending a presentation doesn’t make them my mentor. Just as in martial arts, a true student-teacher relationship requires an ongoing connection.

None of this diminishes Professor Presas’ legacy.

If anything, it highlights the extraordinary reach of his influence. Thousands learned from him. Thousands were inspired by him. His impact on Filipino Martial Arts is immeasurable.

At the same time, I believe we honor our teachers best by honestly describing the relationships we had with them.

Words matter.

Relationships matter.

Giving proper credit doesn’t diminish anyone’s experience—it puts it into its proper perspective.

So I’ll leave you with this question:

Where did your relationship with Professor fit? Were you a long-term student under his guidance, or were you someone who had the privilege of learning from him through seminars and camps? Both experiences have value—they’re simply different.

The original thought came from Bruce Chu, and I wanted to give him full credit for planting the seed for this discussion.

My goal isn’t to divide anyone or diminish anyone’s journey. It’s simply to encourage thoughtful reflection about what it truly means to be a student.

I’d genuinely like to hear your perspective.

Respectfully,
Datu Tim Hartman
The Tribal Chief