Parker American Kenpo systems for the most part use a base of 154 techniques with extensions.

They use a limited number per belt. Some systems work 16 techs per belt until brown then it's 20 per 3 levels and 20 at black.

Some use 24 techs per belt then teach the extentions for the black material.

I have even seen people have half belts and make 10 techs per belt.

What system would you favour and why? Reasons can be financial or personal or social. Whatever.
:confused:

I personally like the idea of 10 techniques for yellow belt and then 24 techniques per belt after that. The reason for such it allows for good stability and structure. This way the student starts into the extensions before black blet, therefore letting them see more of the style and what it is really about.

I like the 10/24 too but I can see how they would be moving towards the 10/16/20 as it would retain the students longer. The question is would they have gone to the half belts too like some people have done now? The half belts make it easier to see where people are in the system for larger schools I suppose and they offer more incentive to the student, longer retention and more $$$ for the school. But are they worth it? I think they can be IF the school uses them right.

:soapbox:

i teach the 24 like the way i learned it and i think i turned out ok! to each his own the only problem is training with people on the other count and them saying i know brown belt when really they know the green material. i guess when in rome ,don't feed the lions? i stuck it out at my instructor's school for 14yrs so i don't think the technique numbers have anything to do with retention but it does have to do with the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
later yall
jay

Ah ha ha ha ha! "I turned out ok" he says! Ah ha ha ha ha! oooh...wait...this is going to be painful for me...
:boing2::hammer:

Jaybaca

Don't you usually end up naked and running around outside, when you drink rye. Ya... I guess thats ok.

Just curious, we discussed that the number system for the belts isn't really an issue for many people. However, there are systems that have taken the techniques and re-arranged them so that they do not appear in the same order.

I am of the personal opinion that they are in a specific order for a reason. However, that is not to say they could not be moved but what reasons would people have to move them? Would you or would you not? Thoughts?
:confused:

I agree, the techniques are in that specific order for a reason. Some people sometimes re-arrange the order to make it easier for students, and more often for themselves. Some techniques at higher levels appear to easier than lower level techniques, usually because of the knowledge gained in the earlier technique.

In another thread Mr. Billings stated that it had to do with the web of knowledge and the 16 was set up to reflect that

I learned the system in the 10/24 version. Many do not want to stray from the "old " ways of teaching the system. I guess what I am trying to say is, does it really matter what technique goes where if we as instructors completely know the system?

If you "know" the system and the relationships within the self defense techniques and you also know the whys AND how of the forms, you should be able to teach in any order.

Isn't the goal for the hardcore student of EPAK to learn the system to the point where you are pure sponteneity? If you can master the system...teaching is cake.

My though is this, Joe Blow from Cocamoe doesn't care what order the system is in, he just want to be able to defend himself.:asian:

good point! and I think you are right on the goals of kenpo!

But the techniques were originally arranged in their order for specific reasons. Someone who knows about the arrangement could do a "little" rearrangement but It is my belief that "most" that have done this have no clue to anything.

:p

Have you tried to re-arrange the order any GD?

I know if you read Infinite vol 5 Mr. Parker tells why he laid them out that way. I think it's vol 5, is it, er no matter. You know start with dead attack (grab), semi - live (push) live (punch).
But what if you took the ones that are what if's or brother/sister, opposite/reverse techniques and taught them together? Does this make any sense?

:asian:

I have lists upon lists of variables.......

right hand punch techniques
front grabs
read grabs
all clubs
all knives
all guns

but to rearrange the base curriculum is not really to be tampered with. It works as is...... Why fix something that works.

extra curricular arrangements are necessary for understanding!
:asian:

I see said the blind kenpo man, boy that's a bright light ya got there GD ;)


:asian:

leads to a lot of understandings....... and is fun to boot.

:asian:

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

leads to a lot of understandings....... and is fun to boot.

Would you recommend practicing them in order? I don't know
if they're all numbered the same among each belt or not.
At my school, for yellow, it's:

1) Delayed Sword
2) Alternating Mace
3) Sword Of Destruction
4) Deflecting Hammer
5) Captured Twigs
6) The Grasp Of Death
7) Checking The Storm
8) Mace Of Aggresion
9) Attacking Mace
10) Sword And Hammer
11) Intellectual Departure

Is this a common order? If so, then would you recommed that
when I workout at home, that I do them in this order?

And on both sides.

:asian:

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

And on both sides.

:asian:

So do you have your students do all the techniques from both sides or just the yellow? How come?

:asian:

I teach the 24 technique system. I went to half belts to keep the testing schedule on track. That was, as they used to call it in the corporate world, a business decision.

Originally posted by Klondike93

So do you have your students do all the techniques from both sides or just the yellow? How come?
:asian:

We do everything on both sides.......... basics, techniques, forms, sets, freestyle techniques...... everything!

"How come?" you ask.......

I ask why not!

For Skill
Flexability
Mental Freedom
Coordination expansion
Self Confidence
Drilling
Conditioning
Study

Need I say more......


:asian:

Gd7,
Have you always taught the system this way? When I began in kenpo. We were taught the forms this way, but not the techniques! Ironically, this was at a Tracy studio. With a gentleman who used a Parker/Tracy approach. Now when I began learning the "complete" Parker system. Under a former blackbelt of the aforementioned studio. We were no longer taught the A & B sides of a form! Is this, or was this a common practice in EPAK studios? I think the way you described is probably the best way to train/teach/learn the system. For that matter any system. Can you imagine a european style boxer(Marvin Hagler etc.) training one side of their body for combat?
Salute in Christ,
Donald :asian:

Just my $00.02 worth.

I teach all techniques left and right, for kids I allow right side only for the current chart .. then at the next belt they must have the previous belt's techniques on the opposite side and the current belt on the right.

I know different techniques are for variable environmental considerations, but there are some advantages to knowing the left side of Delayed Sword when your right arm is injured and you are grabbed by the opponent's left arm. ESPECIALLY FOR BEGINNING STUDENTS whose repertoire is very limited (Yellow & Orange Belts.) Other environmental considerations apply, like where the friends of the attacker are, or which arm are you leaning on the bar with, limiting the opponent's angle of attack, etc.

Besides, I need help getting coordinated and being more bilateral (No comments Dennis!) :)

-Michael B.

Donald posted:
"Can you imagine a european style boxer(Marvin Hagler etc.) training one side of their body for combat?"

I would argue that they do only train one side of their body, there are no "switch-hitters" that I know of in the professional ranks. Righties are right hand back fighters, lefties are left hand back fighters. They can throw off either hand off course, but their fighting style is designed for power side back, they don't switch leads.

Hey Gou! As our resident "boxing guy" is what I posted anywhere near accurate?

Lamont

Originally posted by Goldendragon7



We do everything on both sides.......... basics, techniques, forms, sets, freestyle techniques...... everything!

"How come?" you ask.......

I ask why not!

For Skill
Flexability
Mental Freedom
Coordination expansion
Self Confidence
Drilling
Conditioning
Study

Need I say more......


:asian:

Question: when you do this say for delayed sword, do you still do it for the right grab or do you do a left grab or..... OWWWW...
Sorry head exploded..:(

You give a kenpo person so much to think about....:confused:


:asian:

Originally posted by Michael Billings

I know different techniques are for variable environmental considerations, but there are some advantages to knowing the left side of Delayed Sword when your right arm is injured and you are grabbed by the opponent's left arm. ESPECIALLY FOR BEGINNING STUDENTS whose repertoire is very limited (Yellow & Orange Belts.)

Isn't Sword of Destruction the opposite of Delayed Sword??

:confused:

Originally posted by Blindside
I would argue that they do only train one side of their body, there are no "switch-hitters" that I know of in the professional ranks. Righties are right hand back fighters, lefties are left hand back fighters. They can throw off either hand off course, but their fighting style is designed for power side back, they don't switch leads.
Hey Gou! As our resident "boxing guy" is what I posted anywhere near accurate?

It's true. Most boxers train in a specific side forward style and stick with it. There are a few that are ambi and can switch. (Roy Jones Jr.) and there are a few who are southpaws that have been trained as righties. (Oscar De La Hoya) Then there are plan southpaws who fight with their right hand forward.

The concept it that you keep this positioning and use footwork to move yourself. Which is why most boxers run circles around karateka. They practice footwork ad nauseum.

Originally posted by Kirk

Isn't Sword of Destruction the opposite of Delayed Sword??
:confused:

No...... the opposite of Delayed Sword is ......... Delayed Sword "left"

although there are similarities between the two...... Delayed Sword is for a grab........ Sword of destruction is for a punch.

minor but still a difference

:asian:

But most schools teach Delayed Sword for a right punch.

I'll bet Kirk was shown it that way too which is why he thought the opposite would be Sword of Destruction.

It's the way I was thinking too by the way....(there's that smell of smoke again).......Ooohhh my head hurts bad now :(


:asian:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Klondike93

[B]But most schools teach Delayed Sword for a right punch.

I'll bet Kirk was shown it that way too which is why he thought the opposite would be Sword of Destruction.

It's the way I was thinking too by the way....(there's that smell of smoke again).......Ooohhh my head hurts bad now :(


Even if delayed sword was performed for a right punch it would still not be the opposite of sword of destruction. The upper body movements yes but both teks still done from a rt nuetral bow and have a rt front snap kick.

:asian:

Originally posted by Klondike93

But most schools teach Delayed Sword for a right punch.

:asian:

But not True Ed Parker studios......... now it "CAN" be for a right punch as well as a front 2 hand or 1 hand (right or left) push, or a high front kick, or high roundhouse kick, or hook kick, or....... or.... or.....

but the reason it is for a "grab" specifically is to conform to the Web of Knowledge (Infinite Insights Book V, pages 67-88 .........

Grabs & Tackles
Pushes
Punches
Kicks
Hugs & Holds
Locks & Chokes
Weapons
Multiples of the above

:asian:

Originally posted by Klondike93

But most schools teach Delayed Sword for a right punch.
I'll bet Kirk was shown it that way too which is why he thought the opposite would be Sword of Destruction.


Yes, this is exactly right!

Originally posted by Klondike93
Even if delayed sword was performed for a right punch it would still not be the opposite of sword of destruction. The upper body movements yes but both teks still done from a rt nuetral bow and have a rt front snap kick


Didn't even realize, thanks for pointing out the differences

So try Delayed Sword, in the ideal phase against a right hand front lapel grab, then against a right push (which is a sped up grab) or a right punch (a sped up push.)

If that was not fun .. why not use Delayed Sword against the left grab (attempted right punch) - gee, it sorta looks like Conquoring Shield ... which we can't teach to a white belt, or can we, as a "what if" of Delayed Sword. We just don't tell them yet - or we let them know that the techniques gets better later on. I do this, as well as against the left push and left punch. I usually wait until Orange to bring all the "What If's" into play ... but sometimes, as the mood strikes me, we may play with the idea Delayed Sword, not just the mechanics of it.

Once again, this is to increase the student's repetoire without requiring them to master more material yet. Especially effective for those who are in a rush, but need more time in grade before moving up.

Just some thoughts .....
-Michael B.

Michael, you are right on target. Man, maybe that 6 hour seminar really sank into someone!

:rofl:

strawberry fields forever...... remember?

:asian:

Originally posted by Goldendragon7



But not True Ed Parker studios.........
but the reason it is for a "grab" specifically is to conform to the Web of Knowledge (Infinite Insights Book V, pages 67-88 .........

Grabs & Tackles
Pushes
Punches
Kicks
Hugs & Holds
Locks & Chokes
Weapons
Multiples of the above

:asian:

I discovered that when I finally bought the Infinite Insights books and saw it listed as a right lapel grab.


:asian:

lol:asian: