Hi folks. I did a search and didn't see this on here before, so forgive me if this has already been asked.

Does anyone know why Mr. Parker deleted some of the techniques in the system as time went on?

I specifically remember loving the technique "Intellectual Departure". Even though it was a yellow belt technique, I thought it was very effective and realistic to apply. I have actually used the technique nearly move-for-move in sparring. Great stuff, especially compared to some of the *ahem* less realistic techniques still practiced in the system (Broken Ram, anyone? LOL)

Marketing? Boredom? Whim?

Never did understand that. Any ideas?

This older thread may shed some light.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26284&highlight=category+completion

I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but I think Intellectual Departure was deleted because it's redundant. It covers similar motion as circle of doom and another brown belt technique (I can't think of the name). I would disagree that broken ram is unrealistic, however. The attack is not very prevalent, but it does teach the basics of defending against a guillotine choke.

I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but I think Intellectual Departure was deleted because it's redundant. It covers similar motion as circle of doom and another brown belt technique (I can't think of the name). I would disagree that broken ram is unrealistic, however. The attack is not very prevalent, but it does teach the basics of defending against a guillotine choke.


Erm......Broken Ram is against a front tackle.

There are a few versions, but here is one....

An attacker at 12:00 comes at you to football tackle with their arms spread wide.

From a right neutral bow facing 12:00, step your left foot to 3:00 as you execute a right downward parry to your attacker's left arm simultaneous with a left downward parry to your attacker's right arm. Continue the motion of your right arm and as you settle into a right neutral bow facing 9:00, execute a right inward overhead hammer fist to the back of your attacker's neck. * Left hand should be checking against your attacker's right.

With your attacker's left arm trying to grab your waist, pivot into a right reverse bow as you loop your right arm under your attacker's left arm and execute a left uppercut to 4:30.

Execute a right rear scoop kick to your attacker's nuts.

As you plant your foot back to 10:30, aim to buckle out your attacker's left knee. As you do this, loop your hand counter-clockwise and over your attacker's left arm to execute a right outward downward hammer fist to your attacker's left jaw.

MattJ,

I like your question, not that I know the answer, but if I were to venture a guess it might have something to do with the vast number of white belts whapping each other in the nuts with that nasty little back kick.

As Doc will tell you (without much prompting), Mr. Parker designed the 32 technique system to have commercial appeal, and it did. But when I started in the early 70’s Ed Parker’s Kenpo was mostly an adult driven system and what appealed to us 30 years ago, doesn’t necessarily appeal to the karate moms of today.

I think there’s just something mom doesn’t like about seeing little Johnnie getting his bells rung, that helped make Intellectual Departure go the way of the dinosaurs.

What I don’t understand (and something that defeats my own theory) is if it was a commercial decision, why didn’t he replace The Grasp of Death with a more white belt oriented technique?

My idea of a good commercial model is to make all the yellow techniques simple, easy, and fun (for a beginner) to do. I’m afraid no one will ever convince me that The Grasp of Death is any of these.

I remember Mr. Planas telling us that the Intellectual Departure technique was needed to complete the categories of blocks at yellow belt. It is in conjunction with Delayed sword (Inward), Sword of Destruction (Outward), Deflecting Hammer (Downward), and Intellectual Departure (Reverse of the Downward block). This creates a square through the blocks hitting the four corners. I think Hammer & Sword replaced Intellectual Departure which removes the fourth corner.

Intellectual Departure is the root of the techniques of Circle of Doom and Rotating Destruction. Each is a progression from the last.

I specifically remember loving the technique "Intellectual Departure". Even though it was a yellow belt technique, I thought it was very effective and realistic to apply. I have actually used the technique nearly move-for-move in sparring. Great stuff, especially compared to some of the *ahem* less realistic techniques still practiced in the system (Broken Ram, anyone? LOL)

Marketing? Boredom? Whim?

Never did understand that. Any ideas?

Intellectual Departure is more of a 'sparring' technique than a realistic self-defence technique. Seeing as kenpo is primarily about self-defence and *not* sparring, then I would suggest that this is why I.D. was removed - because it is not realistic outside of a sporting framework.

Intellectual Departure is more of a 'sparring' technique than a realistic self-defence technique. Seeing as kenpo is primarily about self-defence and *not* sparring, then I would suggest that this is why I.D. was removed - because it is not realistic outside of a sporting framework.
James,
If we have not interacted before, welcome to Martial Talk. Your post has a good idea but is not really accurate.
Intellectual Departure may not be in the required curriculuum for Yellow Belt, but it has by no means been "removed" from the system completely. Trying to state that Kenpo is primarily anything is an erroneous statement completely. That's why we have the Three Divisions of the Art; Basics, Self Defense, and Free Style. Free Style is simply another way of saying sparring. If you think Kenpo is not about sparring, I suggest you investigate Professor White. The reason that ID was removed from the Yellow Belt curriculuum is simply that it was deemed to sophisticated to require of a yellow belt.

Thanks for the replies, folks.

Quote by Rich Hale -

like your question, not that I know the answer, but if I were to venture a guess it might have something to do with the vast number of white belts whapping each other in the nuts with that nasty little back kick.

Interesting, but unlikely IMHO. How do you explain the groin shots in Delayed Sword and Sword of Destruction? Many white belts don't have ANY control, LOL, front kick or back kick.

Quote by JamesB -

Intellectual Departure is more of a 'sparring' technique than a realistic self-defence technique. Seeing as kenpo is primarily about self-defence and *not* sparring, then I would suggest that this is why I.D. was removed - because it is not realistic outside of a sporting framework

I do not understand how you are making that distinction, James. I-D is "sparring", but Thrusting Salute is not?

?????????????????????????????

In any case, wouldn't the principles of the technique be the same?

James,
If we have not interacted before, welcome to Martial Talk. Your post has a good idea but is not really accurate.
Intellectual Departure may not be in the required curriculuum for Yellow Belt, but it has by no means been "removed" from the system completely. Trying to state that Kenpo is primarily anything is an erroneous statement completely. That's why we have the Three Divisions of the Art; Basics, Self Defense, and Free Style. Free Style is simply another way of saying sparring. If you think Kenpo is not about sparring, I suggest you investigate Professor White. The reason that ID was removed from the Yellow Belt curriculuum is simply that it was deemed to sophisticated to require of a yellow belt.

Hi,
yes, I did not mean to say intellectual-departure had been removed completely (we do it in our school for example) - rather I was referring to the original post and suggesting why it may have been removed from the curriculum in that instance.

You are right also, kenpo is a very general term and means different things to different people and I didn't phrase my post very well. I've not heard that I.D was removed because it was too 'sophisticated'....rather, I view it as a rather simple technique compared to others such as Delayed Sword, Attacking Mace etc. I was under the impression that one of the reasons I.D. was removed because of the way one's back is turned on your 'opponent' - fine for sparring maybe, but not a great idea if someone is intent on attacking you??

I do not understand how you are making that distinction, James. I-D is "sparring", but Thrusting Salute is not?

In any case, wouldn't the principles of the technique be the same

sorry I wasn't very clear, but I agree with your sentiment that I-D. is a nice technique for sparring. And so too would Thrusting Salute. However I would suggest that Thrusting Salute would work equally well outside of the studio, whereas I have my doubts about Intellectual Departure:

1. turning your back on your 'opponent' - is this really a good idea?
2. not establishing a strong base to defend yourself from.

These are just two of the problems with this technique. Sure you can make it work, but I don't believe it is the most effective tactic when in a self-defence scenario, which is why I believe that *some* schools have taken it out of their syllabus.

What I was trying to write, was to query your reasoning when comparing 'less realistic' techniques (your words) against Intellectual Departure. Many techniques aren't designed for sparring because you would never encounter the situations (in sparring) that they are designed to deal with. You seemed to be suggesting that therefore these techniques (Broken Ram is your example) aren't realistic. This seems a little strange to me, because in my opinion it is sparring which is unrealistic. Broken Ram works great for me, but again there appears to be a wide variance in how many of the kenpo techniques are practiced.

btw I do practise Intellectual Departure - I happen to rather like it - but I would choose Thrusting Salute should I need to defend myself against that kind of kick.

*some* schools have taken it out of their syllabus.

I think I am not being clear - Mr. Parker removed it from the syllabus in the change-over from 32 tpb to 24 tpb. I was curious if anyone (Hello Higher-ups? LOL) had an idea why.

With regards to your distinction between sparring and realistic SD, I will have to say that I disagree. A technique that works against a resisting opponent is a good technique, IMHO. I think the pecentage of people that could make Broken Ram work (nearly move for move on a resisting opponent) would be pretty small.

With regards to your distinction between sparring and realistic SD, I will have to say that I disagree. A technique that works against a resisting opponent is a good technique, IMHO. I think the pecentage of people that could make Broken Ram work (nearly move for move on a resisting opponent) would be pretty small.

I see where you're coming from now and will (reluctantly :) ) agree to some extent - because you are right, I suspect that some kenpoists couldn't make Broken Ram work. Which is a shame, because it's supposed to, as long as the correct foundation of basics is in place..

if i might be so bold,this is only my opinion so dont take it to deeply.
maybe the growing amount of "karate clubs" that made getting a bb easy could be the reason for a few being removed, the ak system is very long and contains a lot,it would take someone quite some time to grade in it, so maybe the techs were removed to reduce the learning curve and make it a little bit faster to grade,after they have graded the techs that were removed could be taught as variations.
ive seen this done and then theirs the triangle sylabus idea but thats not the case here.
the true meaning though of the arts is knowledge...not a peice of material,but in todays world the fashionable black belt can send some people down the " dark and easy " path.

ID was removed from the required curric by Mr. Parker because he felt it was too hard for white/yellow belts.

Seig -

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Too hard! Really. Hmmmm, can't say as I agree with Mr. Parker on that one. Thanks for the insight, though.

I mean .... Grasp of Death! I can't tell you how many beginners had a hard time with that one. Interesting.

I like Intellectual Departure. But, I like Spreading Branch more. Much more than Captured Twigs that replaced it.

There are a few techniques in yellow that are difficult to perform with correct body mechanics. I don't see where Intellectual Departure is any different.

There are a few techniques in yellow that are difficult to perform with correct body mechanics. I don't see where Intellectual Departure is any different.Both shortening the cicle and moving up the circle are a complex foot maneuver, and if I am not mistaken "Intellectual departure" puts your back to your opponent. These things take practice to do well. The very name of the technique suggest you are breaking rules. Learning the rules first is not a bad thing. Of course you would eventulay incorporate moving up the circle in all your techs but that would be another lesson.
Sean

I remember Mr. Planas telling us that the Intellectual Departure technique was needed to complete the categories of blocks at yellow belt. It is in conjunction with Delayed sword (Inward), Sword of Destruction (Outward), Deflecting Hammer (Downward), and Intellectual Departure (Reverse of the Downward block). This creates a square through the blocks hitting the four corners. I think Hammer & Sword replaced Intellectual Departure which removes the fourth corner.

Intellectual Departure is the root of the techniques of Circle of Doom and Rotating Destruction. Each is a progression from the last.

We keep Intellectual Departure in our yellow belt cirricullum for exactly this reason. It gives you another angle with which to complete a downward block (category completion) and it is the basis/foundation to the aforementioned techniques. I alway's liked this technique as a yellow belt. I hadn't heard that school's were no longer teaching this technique. I would be curious to see what other key techniques are not being taught that form the basis for the system (Agressive Twins? Spreading Branch? etc..).

Both AT and SB were deleted along with ID in the conversion to 24 techs per belt - at least at my former AKK school. Can't remember if there were any others.

circle of doom?broken twigs?........Kenpo has some interesting names for moves.lol


No disrespect intended.

circle of doom?broken twigs?........Kenpo has some interesting names for moves.lol


No disrespect intended.

yeah it does, "Squeezing the Peach" always gets a few chuckles from the non-kenpoists.

yeah it does, "Squeezing the Peach" always gets a few chuckles from the non-kenpoists.

lol!squeezing the peach!lol!!!!

we have one in muay thai that translates into ''king ramma slaps the monkey'' or something like that lol

This is an interesting thread, some here feel the I.D. technique was moved to keep with a better progression for students at the beginnner stage, others are of the opinion that the I.D. was always kept in mind as a progression- until a point where i t works. (which is mostly idealistic for everyone who has respect for the system) Some feel the technique is not practical ie a 'sparring' tool? (this response is the most confused of them all perhaps)

32 to 24 techniques? big deal- if you learn the 24 well, each one perfectly (which means your base stances-movements and overall coordination) the best you can come up with after say 10 yrs. is a knowledgable proficiency of how they should work- but you will only be good at your favorites. (everyone has their specialty(ies)) and if one is lucky they can learn the most effectice couter-extensions to follow-up their techniques if failed.

Back-ups is how I saw kenpo always- and the freestyle component does kindof come into play here. But no technique was ever deleted, just tucked inside the others is all.

I specialize in a mantis style where I had to become proficient at what many say 18 or (less or more) techniques. That is left and right handed (actually I do not know the number of techniques- i just do, some I don't know the names for). Regardless, that is my specialty -mantis- and I'm best at maybe 3 or so of those to a degree that would take the same degree of skill from any kenpo expert 20 or more yrs to attain. So, where does this lead?

Techniques from basics- turn into extentions (add-ons), and do you know what my peers say if they see old kenpo from a video i show them? "Wow"/"Awesome" -that -is the true 'whirling palm style' -or something to that regard.

The parts make the machine, the whirling power of dynamic kempo. Mr. Parker taught an awesome art, I don't believe that anything was deleted more so that techniques were 'added' to fluff things up from the path to the final result from a begginner.

sad part is I do not see this kenpo anymore.

best regards,
...

Erm......Broken Ram is against a front tackle.

I'm sorry, did I say broken ram? I meant Locking Horns.

here's a list of 'purple blt manual' of the late 60's (68-69?)...

how many of these are deleted/renamed or moved?

eagle pin
striking fang
crane leap
shackle break
drawbridge
kung fu cross
divided swords
gift
opening cowl
slicing dragon
raising the sword
crossing guard
arm hook
crossing the sun
ascending to heaven
attack from the temple
crouching falcon
dart
opening the fan
wing break
bowing to buddha
darkness
sweeping arm hook
spinning from the sun
flashing wings
snapping twig
prayer of death
striking serpent
arcing blades
attacking the wall
circle of china
blocking the sun
dance of death
returning viper
returning thunder
the serpent
broken staff
circling serpent
chinese "L" choke
sticks of satin

here's a list of 'purple blt manual' of the late 60's (68-69?)...

how many of these are deleted/renamed or moved?

eagle pin
striking fang
crane leap
shackle break
drawbridge
kung fu cross
divided swords
gift
opening cowl
slicing dragon
raising the sword
crossing guard
arm hook
crossing the sun
ascending to heaven
attack from the temple
crouching falcon
dart
opening the fan
wing break
bowing to buddha
darkness
sweeping arm hook
spinning from the sun
flashing wings
snapping twig
prayer of death
striking serpent
arcing blades
attacking the wall
circle of china
blocking the sun
dance of death
returning viper
returning thunder
the serpent
broken staff
circling serpent
chinese "L" choke
sticks of satin

Every one of these is still contained in Tracys, altho the order and belt assignments are different.

Hi,
yes, I did not mean to say intellectual-departure had been removed completely (we do it in our school for example) - rather I was referring to the original post and suggesting why it may have been removed from the curriculum in that instance.

You are right also, kenpo is a very general term and means different things to different people and I didn't phrase my post very well. I've not heard that I.D was removed because it was too 'sophisticated'....rather, I view it as a rather simple technique compared to others such as Delayed Sword, Attacking Mace etc. I was under the impression that one of the reasons I.D. was removed because of the way one's back is turned on your 'opponent' - fine for sparring maybe, but not a great idea if someone is intent on attacking you??

James,
In ID, you are not turning your back (blindly) to the attacker. The technique teachs you to transisiton into a reverse cat stance to set up the back thrust kick while keeping your eye's focused on the threat. We don't turn our back to the attacker in kenpo - until we have softened him up (ex. flashing mace - brief spin to set up the flashing mace portion of the technque).