View Full Version : Help on Squating Sacrifice.
Chronuss
08-31-2002, 10:49 AM
Here is Squating Sacrifice from the IKKO belt curriculum:
SQUATTING SACRIFICE (read bear hug - arms free)
1. With opponent applying rear bear hug (arms free) and with feet together, step to your right (to 3 o'clock) with your right foot into a horse, as both of your elbows strike down to opponent's forearm, squat on opponent's right knee as both of your hands then grab and pull on opponent's right ankle; the pulling and squatting could cause the knee to break of the counter force.
2. Immediately twist opponent's right ankle counter clockwise as your right leg circles clockwise (preferably raking across opponent's face in the process) and plants to 7 o'clock into a left close kneel stance while still facing 12 o'clock.
3. Pivot (in place) into a right forward bow as you now face 6 o'clock.
4. While still maintaining grab with your right hand, step forward with your left foot to 6 o'clock into a left close kneel stance (paralleling opponent's body) and have your left hand grab opponent's left wrist.
5. Support your weight onto your left leg as you cock your right leg high to your waist.
6. Pull and jerk up with both of your arms as your right foot stomps to lower spine of opponent.
7. Right front crossover, sweeping in opponent's arm down and cover out twice toward 4 o'clock.
okay, my question is when the left foot steps the 6. while still mainting the right ankle with the right hand, where exactly is the left foot to step? does it step over the oppenent or does it step in between their legs? also, if you step over the oppenent, wouldn't your body be at a ninety degree angle to their body? and if you do step over their body, how do you maintain the ankle without running into or straddling their leg? I'm so cornfused...
KenpoTess
08-31-2002, 10:53 AM
Hey you..
why didn't you ask Sensei last night?
duh....
Me
Chronuss
08-31-2002, 10:59 AM
cause he's a bit cornfused like we are. that left foot thing is quite weird.
Chronuss
08-31-2002, 11:01 AM
...ant eater noise, eh?
KenpoTess
08-31-2002, 11:04 AM
Quote from sensei.. " I wasn't even asked about it"
some of the printed copies of the tecs are in need of editing.. one I was working on last night had a right punch left kick in the title.. that in the tec changed to left punch.. right kick.. so I got pretty confused too.. so read it.. and see if it's just a typo..
Originally posted by Chronuss
cause he's a bit cornfused like we are. that left foot thing is quite weird.
Please tell me Kile grabbed your keyboard or you are suffering sleep deprivation or my sister put you in a bad mood. You did not just say that.:flammad:
PS, this should have been in the technical forum
KenpoTess
08-31-2002, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by Chronuss
...ant eater noise, eh?
kinda nasally sounding ..*smirks* ya know .. on Pink Panther..
Chronuss
08-31-2002, 11:08 AM
Janie and I had asked Sensei once before about that damn left step, I just thought I'd see what type of info I could muster out of the people on here. tis, all, don't beat me...
Originally posted by Chronuss
Janie and I had asked Sensei once before about that damn left step, I just thought I'd see what type of info I could muster out of the people on here. tis, all, don't beat me...
That's fine. And on that occassion, I believe I gave you a couple of options as you ar 6 foot plus and Janie is 5 foot minus. I was not and am not cornfused. Asking for other opinions is ok, but you will get a different answer from every person that does it.;)
Are you not supposed to be in school doing school work? :rofl:
Chronuss
08-31-2002, 11:14 AM
I'm in class right now, he's babbling on about how a .txt extension is a notepad file and what have you. SAVE ME.
Originally posted by Chronuss
I'm in class right now, he's babbling on about how a .txt extension is a notepad file and what have you. SAVE ME.
No, I shall reboot without saving changes!
Chronuss
08-31-2002, 11:17 AM
no...not saving a file... SAVE ME! rescue me from the this arbitrary hell...
jfarnsworth
08-31-2002, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Chronuss
Here is Squating Sacrifice from the IKKO belt curriculum:
SQUATTING SACRIFICE (read bear hug - arms free)
1. With opponent applying rear bear hug (arms free) and with feet together, step to your right (to 3 o'clock) with your right foot into a horse, as both of your elbows strike down to opponent's forearm, squat on opponent's right knee as both of your hands then grab and pull on opponent's right ankle; the pulling and squatting could cause the knee to break of the counter force.
2. Immediately twist opponent's right ankle counter clockwise as your right leg circles clockwise (preferably raking across opponent's face in the process) and plants to 7 o'clock into a left close kneel stance while still facing 12 o'clock.
3. Pivot (in place) into a right forward bow as you now face 6 o'clock.
4. While still maintaining grab with your right hand, step forward with your left foot to 6 o'clock into a left close kneel stance (paralleling opponent's body) and have your left hand grab opponent's left wrist.
5. Support your weight onto your left leg as you cock your right leg high to your waist.
6. Pull and jerk up with both of your arms as your right foot stomps to lower spine of opponent.
7. Right front crossover, sweeping in opponent's arm down and cover out twice toward 4 o'clock.
okay, my question is when the left foot steps the 6. while still mainting the right ankle with the right hand, where exactly is the left foot to step? does it step over the oppenent or does it step in between their legs? also, if you step over the oppenent, wouldn't your body be at a ninety degree angle to their body? and if you do step over their body, how do you maintain the ankle without running into or straddling their leg? I'm so cornfused...
The left foot should step up by the left side of the hip or slightly above. Try to insert a right knee to the lower spine when in your left close kneel.
Jason Farnsworth
Chronuss
08-31-2002, 11:24 AM
okay, if the left foot is to step up by their left hip, how are still holding the right ankle with the right foot? cause when I do this, their leg ends up in bewteen mine, so should I alter the grab and have it to the right side of my body and on the outside of my right leg? also, when you grab the left wrist and go into a left close kneel, should the right knee go into the small of the back? also, instead of paralleling their body, wouldn't that put you at a nintey degree angle to their body?
jfarnsworth
08-31-2002, 11:32 AM
Yes, you need to slide the grab over to the right side of your body. The grip is the same as used in dance of death. After using the slicing hook kick through the head the right foot and hand moves towards your right side. Now when dropping into the close kneel (remember: a close kneel is a forward bow lowered) you still face the same direction parallel. This gains in keeping the attacker down plus an inserted right scoop to the groin when using the 3x rule for the stomp. Hope this helps.
Jason
Bill Smith
08-31-2002, 02:34 PM
Seig,
I need to make some time to come up. I could help you guys with some of the material.
I'll keep you posted.
Bill Smith
Hi, here is some more advice when you pick up the opponent leg make sure:
1. Yanking it and the opponent for the floor
2. Puling to the side of your left thigh and not between you legs you’re a (remember future kids are involved)
3. Hold the feet with your right hand under the fit and left over the top of the fit
The left leg move:
As far as I understand there is only one movement of the left leg (maybe a small adjustment in the begging going in to the forward stance
But in the end the left leg is going to be almost ready in the accurate location if the opponent was turned properly then you only have to take one step a head with your left foot forward (and right leg is still checking lower back of opponent) i.e. left feet is under opponent left arm pit.
In order to finish the Teq. One has to basically squat on one foot and then stand up (like pulling up a pair of tarsus) and stomping with the right on opponent back or kidneys!
I hope this is helpful!
Meni
ProfessorKenpo
09-01-2002, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Chronuss
Here is Squating Sacrifice from the IKKO belt curriculum:
SQUATTING SACRIFICE (read bear hug - arms free)
1. With opponent applying rear bear hug (arms free) and with feet together, step to your right (to 3 o'clock) with your right foot into a horse, as both of your elbows strike down to opponent's forearm, squat on opponent's right knee as both of your hands then grab and pull on opponent's right ankle; the pulling and squatting could cause the knee to break of the counter force.
2. Immediately twist opponent's right ankle counter clockwise as your right leg circles clockwise (preferably raking across opponent's face in the process) and plants to 7 o'clock into a left close kneel stance while still facing 12 o'clock.
3. Pivot (in place) into a right forward bow as you now face 6 o'clock.
4. While still maintaining grab with your right hand, step forward with your left foot to 6 o'clock into a left close kneel stance (paralleling opponent's body) and have your left hand grab opponent's left wrist.
5. Support your weight onto your left leg as you cock your right leg high to your waist.
6. Pull and jerk up with both of your arms as your right foot stomps to lower spine of opponent.
7. Right front crossover, sweeping in opponent's arm down and cover out twice toward 4 o'clock.
okay, my question is when the left foot steps the 6. while still mainting the right ankle with the right hand, where exactly is the left foot to step? does it step over the oppenent or does it step in between their legs? also, if you step over the oppenent, wouldn't your body be at a ninety degree angle to their body? and if you do step over their body, how do you maintain the ankle without running into or straddling their leg? I'm so cornfused...
Your right foot should end up between their legs in their groin when you put it down. The left foot will step to 6 oclock and under their left arm pit as you drop into the left close kneel stance pinning their body to the floor as you make the grab to the left wrist. Your right hand should still have hold of the right ankle with the opponents toes pointing down. At least that's how I do it.
Have a great Kenpo day
Clyde
Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
Your right foot should end up between their legs in their groin when you put it down. The left foot will step to 6 oclock and under their left arm pit as you drop into the left close kneel stance pinning their body to the floor as you make the grab to the left wrist. Your right hand should still have hold of the right ankle with the opponents toes pointing down. At least that's how I do it.
Have a great Kenpo day
Clyde
Thank you, that sounds suspiciously like what I told them.:D
Chronuss
09-01-2002, 11:03 PM
how's the right foot to end up between their legs when you're sopposed to rake the heel across the back of the head and plant towards 7?
jfarnsworth
09-02-2002, 09:22 AM
Look at the action. The right leg is pinned against your right hip. The right leg has no way to be on the outside.
Jason Farnsworth
ProfessorKenpo
09-02-2002, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by Chronuss
how's the right foot to end up between their legs when you're sopposed to rake the heel across the back of the head and plant towards 7?
I would suggest you view some technique tapes to see the action. If you know of anyone that have them, it would certainly be an asset to your training.
Have a great Kenpo day
Clyde
Kempojujutsu
09-02-2002, 11:58 AM
I have done this and also have a book on Small Circle Jujutsu where Wally Jay has done this also. The opening movement is similar to what you have described. He shows this from a bear hug with the arms pinned and I have done it with the arms pin and free. But I would step back and hook the ankle with your right foot. instead of try to reach down to grab the foot. Sit down on top of his thigh as you try to pull your foot that is hooked forward. Follow ups could be stomp to the groin, knee bar. On a side note you might mention or show what a grappler would do if you try to defending against a grappler.
Before you have grab his leg but are bent over. Grappler might drive you forward with his body or grab one or both of the legs and do a tackle.
You have grab his leg but as he falls back he grabs you to pull you down with him or what we call Ushiro otoshi. Which is a rear body throw.
Without hooking you leg around their ankle attacker could throw a knee strike to tailbone. If the foot is hooked you are checking his leg to prevent this.
Bob :asian:
Mr. Conatser is teantatively scheduled to be here at the end of the month. I think I will let him resolve Chronuss' issue.....come to think of it, I will let him use Chronuss as the Uki.:EG:
FUZZYJ692000
09-03-2002, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by Seig
That's fine. And on that occassion, I believe I gave you a couple of options as you ar 6 foot plus and Janie is 5 foot minus. I was not and am not cornfused. Asking for other opinions is ok, but you will get a different answer from every person that does it.;)
Are you not supposed to be in school doing school work? :rofl:
HEY NOW, I do reach 5 ft...barely but I do!!!! Boy am I glad that Chad started this thread, I don't want to be uki when Mr. Conaster comes. :eek: . Good luck to Chad
Jani (look no "e")
Stick Dummy
09-03-2002, 07:56 PM
Standing by to "roll" that beautiful UKI footage................
I HAVE to be there for this one..................
Flying Sasquatches - What Next?
Chronuss
09-04-2002, 12:52 PM
not good. but hopefully Master Conatser will shed some light on the issue as to where I need to place my darn foot...maybe I should take out an issurance policy in case I no longer have my foot...
KenpoTess
09-04-2002, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by Chronuss
not good. but hopefully Master Conatser will shed some light on the issue as to where I need to place my darn foot...maybe I should take out an issurance policy in case I no longer have my foot...
You seriously think he's going to stop at just your foot? Ha~! *scoffing chortle* I think you need a whole life insurance policy and make me the beneficiary.. not that you'll need it of course..
Michael just got news he doesn't have to go to Fla next week.. woohoo.. :)
jfarnsworth
09-04-2002, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by Seig
Mr. Conatser is teantatively scheduled to be here at the end of the month.
I wish that I could be there!!!:mad:
Jason Farnsworth
Originally posted by jfarnsworth
I wish that I could be there!!!:mad:
Jason Farnsworth
Well, I am near Harper's Ferry, WV. You are welcome to come. If you want any info on the area, contact me off list.
Seig
headkick
09-04-2002, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
Your right foot should end up between their legs in their groin when you put it down. The left foot will step to 6 oclock and under their left arm pit as you drop into the left close kneel stance pinning their body to the floor as you make the grab to the left wrist. Your right hand should still have hold of the right ankle with the opponents toes pointing down. At least that's how I do it.
Have a great Kenpo day
Clyde
Also, when you step the left to 6 o'clock, kick them in the ribs. There's no guarantee here that the left arm will be in a position for you to grab. you might get a reaction from the kick to ribs. Also, as you move your right foot to position for the spinal stomp, scoop kick the groin. Hey, it's free, take two! :D
R
rmcrobertson
09-04-2002, 06:37 PM
I'm afraid I disagree with the "kick them in the ribs," and "scoop the groin as you step," approach. First, the point of stepping forward with the left foot is to ensure that they don't get up; to take out and then to kneel on their left arm/shoulder as they attempt to rise. If you go for the ribs, this may get lost. Second, there's already a scoop to the groin built into the technique; as you move your right foot to stomp the spine (if necessary), you scoop with your right as you pull it through (like the "bicycle" scoop in Squeezing the Peach), then nail the lower spine.
Thanks,
Robert
Originally posted by Chronuss
Here is Squating Sacrifice from the IKKO belt curriculum:
SQUATTING SACRIFICE (read bear hug - arms free)
1. With opponent applying rear bear hug (arms free) and with feet together, step to your right (to 3 o'clock) with your right foot into a horse, as both of your elbows strike down to opponent's forearm, squat on opponent's right knee as both of your hands then grab and pull on opponent's right ankle; the pulling and squatting could cause the knee to break of the counter force.
2. Immediately twist opponent's right ankle counter clockwise as your right leg circles clockwise (preferably raking across opponent's face in the process) and plants to 7 o'clock into a left close kneel stance while still facing 12 o'clock.
3. Pivot (in place) into a right forward bow as you now face 6 o'clock.
4. While still maintaining grab with your right hand, step forward with your left foot to 6 o'clock into a left close kneel stance (paralleling opponent's body) and have your left hand grab opponent's left wrist.
5. Support your weight onto your left leg as you cock your right leg high to your waist.
6. Pull and jerk up with both of your arms as your right foot stomps to lower spine of opponent.
7. Right front crossover, sweeping in opponent's arm down and cover out twice toward 4 o'clock.
okay, my question is when the left foot steps the 6. while still mainting the right ankle with the right hand, where exactly is the left foot to step? does it step over the oppenent or does it step in between their legs? also, if you step over the oppenent, wouldn't your body be at a ninety degree angle to their body? and if you do step over their body, how do you maintain the ankle without running into or straddling their leg? I'm so cornfused...
Won't work. Why are you being bear hugged? What do you think he's doing? Certainly not just holding on.
headkick
09-05-2002, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
I'm afraid I disagree with the "kick them in the ribs," and "scoop the groin as you step," approach. First, the point of stepping forward with the left foot is to ensure that they don't get up; to take out and then to kneel on their left arm/shoulder as they attempt to rise. If you go for the ribs, this may get lost. Second, there's already a scoop to the groin built into the technique; as you move your right foot to stomp the spine (if necessary), you scoop with your right as you pull it through (like the "bicycle" scoop in Squeezing the Peach), then nail the lower spine.
Thanks,
Robert
That's what I meant on the scoop. The kick to the ribs in no way obstructs your ability to prevent them getting up. At least it doesn't for me.
R
jfarnsworth
09-05-2002, 08:12 PM
your referring to the scoop kick to the groin comment that I made look at where your at. A left close kneel position where the right knee is at the small of the back. The right foot is only mere inches away from the groin. If you have to raise your foot up to get any travel you might as hit the groin on your way up when raising the leg. The attacker is pinned down with their right leg in the air and their left arm is in your left hand. They ain't rolling or going anywhere. If you weren't referring to my comment then disregard the post.
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth
rmcrobertson
09-05-2002, 08:32 PM
So you're doing a modified c-step forward to include the ribs?
And is the leg merely raised, catching the groin, or is there what I'd called a "bicycle scoop," much like the one in Squeezing the peach?
I also stand by my original point. In the rush to include strikes, we may miss out on the real point of the maneuver.
Thanks,
Robert
Originally posted by Chronuss
Here is Squating Sacrifice from the IKKO belt curriculum:
SQUATTING SACRIFICE (read bear hug - arms free)
1. With opponent applying rear bear hug (arms free) and with feet together, step to your right (to 3 o'clock) with your right foot into a horse, as both of your elbows strike down to opponent's forearm, squat on opponent's right knee as both of your hands then grab and pull on opponent's right ankle; the pulling and squatting could cause the knee to break of the counter force.
2. Immediately twist opponent's right ankle counter clockwise as your right leg circles clockwise (preferably raking across opponent's face in the process) and plants to 7 o'clock into a left close kneel stance while still facing 12 o'clock.
3. Pivot (in place) into a right forward bow as you now face 6 o'clock.
4. While still maintaining grab with your right hand, step forward with your left foot to 6 o'clock into a left close kneel stance (paralleling opponent's body) and have your left hand grab opponent's left wrist.
5. Support your weight onto your left leg as you cock your right leg high to your waist.
6. Pull and jerk up with both of your arms as your right foot stomps to lower spine of opponent.
7. Right front crossover, sweeping in opponent's arm down and cover out twice toward 4 o'clock.
okay, my question is when the left foot steps the 6. while still mainting the right ankle with the right hand, where exactly is the left foot to step? does it step over the oppenent or does it step in between their legs? also, if you step over the oppenent, wouldn't your body be at a ninety degree angle to their body? and if you do step over their body, how do you maintain the ankle without running into or straddling their leg? I'm so cornfused...
I recognize the "Idea" for this attack defense comes from the Technique Manual portion of the Lesson Plan. Unfortunately, this idea is not a workable one for various reasons. First this response comes from the old wrestling days. Translation: it only works when your opponent cooperates. If your opponent is holding on he is probably attempting to move you unless there is a second opponent. If he is lifting, than you can't bend down. If you sit on his leg, you pin it to the ground so you can't lift it. This is just a "bad idea" and is a good example of why instructors must create "ideal" techniques and never take some ideas literally. Attempting to do this technique this way is asking for a supplex response.
First chance you get, ask the grapplers if they can pull off just the takedown this way when attacked with serious intent. If you can't do the takedown, no use arguing about the rest. BYA, No, we don't do this technique this way. The concept of the rear bear hug, arms free is covered in other one and two man techniques so this one is unneccessary.
Sigung86
09-05-2002, 09:39 PM
Thanks Doc! :toilclaw:
Dan
satans.barber
09-20-2002, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by meni
2. Puling to the side of your left thigh and not between you legs you’re a (remember future kids are involved)
[/B]
Sorry to rake up an old thread...been away!
In our school we're taught to put the knees together and pull against them, not against the groin.
Also, from the stated IKKO method of doing this, you guys don't seem to kick the groin after you've flipped the person over, that's something we do as well.
Ian.
Originally posted by satans.barber
Sorry to rake up an old thread...been away!
In our school we're taught to put the knees together and pull against them, not against the groin.
Also, from the stated IKKO method of doing this, you guys don't seem to kick the groin after you've flipped the person over, that's something we do as well.
Ian.
I say again. If a person has you in a bear hug with your arms free, and he is attempting to lift you up, you will not be able to bend down. Reaching between your legs and grabbing his leg therefore will not be possible.
satans.barber
09-20-2002, 09:38 PM
Originally posted by Doc
I say again. If a person has you in a bear hug with your arms free, and he is attempting to lift you up, you will not be able to bend down. Reaching between your legs and grabbing his leg therefore will not be possible.
Doc, did you not see the thread where I said squatting scarifice was crap and useless, and that I hated it!? Hehe, you don't need to tell me how badly it isn't going to work, after consideration I came to that conclusion myself!
I'm interested to know if a senior such as yourself finds any of the other techniques as flawed as this one?
Ian.
Here we go again...:( I jumped my student's collective a@@es for stating that something will not work. Whatever happened to the ideal phase? The fantasy land? Maybe every technique does not work perfectly in the what if phase, but most work well or set you up for something else. We do use a kick to the groin after we flip them over, I have demonstrated that repeatedly. For any grab, the time to react is the moment they grab you, not after they have had time to solidify their own base and lift you up. There are myriad techniques for any given scenario, each with an intended purpose. Remember, learning goes in stages....:asian:
WilliamTLear
09-21-2002, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by satans.barber
Doc, did you not see the thread where I said squatting scarifice was crap and useless, and that I hated it!? Hehe, you don't need to tell me how badly it isn't going to work, after consideration I came to that conclusion myself!
I'm interested to know if a senior such as yourself finds any of the other techniques as flawed as this one?
Ian.
You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, and here it is...
Squatting Sacrifice isn't crap at all, and I find that statement a little abbrasive. Maybe you don't understand the nature of the attack. I don't know... Chapel doesn't seem to be
I will offer you the following... This technique isn't for a bear - hug in which the defender is lifted off the ground, but instead for a Bear hug in which the attacker has his right leg in between the defenders as a brace while he is restraining him with a bear - hug (not lifting him off the ground). Just a thought. Try it for that circumstance.
In my expereince I have found many to think that alot of the techniques defend against the same attack. This is not so. There are slight variations in the nature of the attack for each technique that make that technique unique. Your post seems a little shallow to me.
I hope this helps,
Billy Lear :asian:
Originally posted by satans.barber
Doc, did you not see the thread where I said squatting scarifice was crap and useless, and that I hated it!? Hehe, you don't need to tell me how badly it isn't going to work, after consideration I came to that conclusion myself!
I'm interested to know if a senior such as yourself finds any of the other techniques as flawed as this one?
Ian.
You're right, this technique as presented is unworkable for many reasons. Although some might suggest some weird configuration where the attacker is not trying to pick you up and he's just "holding on" for some reason, this is ludicrous. Why would someone attack you from the rear in a bear hug and just hold you? Then what? It's not a 2 man technique so what's the point. Maybe he wants you to say "uncle."
Clearly anyone may address this or any technique anyway they want, but here's a tip. If he's just holding on, it still won't work. It doesn't take much experimentation with a partner to figure that out. Anyone want to try it, and report?
Well, as far as techniques being flawed. They are all flawed until an instructor clearly defines the offensive and defensive side of the control model. The manuals only give you ideas. Some of those ideas were born along time ago in a galaxy far far away for many reasons. Many techniques have been created and ultimately dropped from consideration. Nothing new. I believe it's called "evolution." There are some that want to hold onto the "manuals" as if they were gospel. If they do, their Kenpo can't be too good. Ed Parker said that himself. After 46 years I've seen them come and go. Like the drunk driver who insists he's not drunk, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it doesn't change a thing.
Originally posted by Seig
Here we go again...:( I jumped my student's collective a@@es for stating that something will not work. Whatever happened to the ideal phase? The fantasy land? Maybe every technique does not work perfectly in the what if phase, but most work well or set you up for something else. We do use a kick to the groin after we flip them over, I have demonstrated that repeatedly. For any grab, the time to react is the moment they grab you, not after they have had time to solidify their own base and lift you up. There are myriad techniques for any given scenario, each with an intended purpose. Remember, learning goes in stages....:asian:
You have to understand where some of these "ideas" came from. Ed Parker dropped techniques as "not feesable" or changed the attacks all the time. Surely you don't think he was finished with Kenpo when he passed on. You surely don't think everything was suddenly cast in stone and completed.
But you are right. The majority of the techniques can be worked out with a good teacher, but there is a such a thing as "a bad idea" that you can't rationalize or fix. Squatting Sacrifice was an idea borrowed from the professional wrestlers of the day like Gene LaBell who did this all the time in the ring. Of course being professionals, they "cooperated" with each other.
Go grab someone realistically and hold on like you mean it. They won't be able to touch your leg. If you use your leg to "brace" him as one genius underbelt suggests, the more he tries to bend down, the stronger the brace becomes. There are many things people can argue with me about, but when it comes to body mechanics, you'll loose everytime and I can prove my hypothesis to anyone.
rmcrobertson
09-21-2002, 10:29 PM
First off, could we all maybe stick to the technical questions? I'd strongly argue that stuff like, "one genius underbelt," is exactly why I'm about to stay off Kenponet permanently, a la dangerous Dan Farmer...
I thought that Mr. Lear's idea was to stick up for the system as it presently more or less stands, several nations really rather divisible. I agree with him, in part because every time I see posts stating, "this technique is worthless," I see somebody ripping chips out of a computer on the ground they're not using that junk.
It would be better, I'd argue, to use the discussion of "Squatting Scarifice," to discuss: what is essential to the kenpo system; what is the kenpo system; why are we so willing to re-edit what we don't immediately find productive; does this contribute to a watering-down of kenpo from generation to generation.
Let me repeat something I've previously noted: every time I find a technique, "worthless," Mr. Tatum or Das Clyde demonstrates the error of my ways. And I also note that Mr. Lear is by no means the first or the eighty-second to respond to a question about a technique by trying to explain how the attack might work, or how the first response might work, or how a, "what if," might be included.
Thanks,
Robert
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
First off, could we all maybe stick to the technical questions? I'd strongly argue that stuff like, "one genius underbelt," is exactly why I'm about to stay off Kenponet permanently, a la dangerous Dan Farmer...
I thought that Mr. Lear's idea was to stick up for the system as it presently more or less stands, several nations really rather divisible. I agree with him, in part because every time I see posts stating, "this technique is worthless," I see somebody ripping chips out of a computer on the ground they're not using that junk.
It would be better, I'd argue, to use the discussion of "Squatting Scarifice," to discuss: what is essential to the kenpo system; what is the kenpo system; why are we so willing to re-edit what we don't immediately find productive; does this contribute to a watering-down of kenpo from generation to generation.
Let me repeat something I've previously noted: every time I find a technique, "worthless," Mr. Tatum or Das Clyde demonstrates the error of my ways. And I also note that Mr. Lear is by no means the first or the eighty-second to respond to a question about a technique by trying to explain how the attack might work, or how the first response might work, or how a, "what if," might be included.
Thanks,
Robert
He wasn't "sticking up for the system" He was taking a shot at me. Anybody who looks back at the posts will find certain people who "stalk" me from forum to forum with negative assertions. He gave his opinion and I gave mine. I am always willing to discuss techniques and I dare say more technical than most, but I'm not taking crap from anyone.
I f you don't like what I have to say, or the way I say it, ignore my name when you see it. The webmaster here sees all my posts and I'm respectful to everybody, even the person who made the comment, but this "stalking" (noticed by quite a few who have e-mailed me,) is stupid. After 46 years in the art and being a black belt longer than some have been alive, I don't have to be "respectful" to some underbelt or anybody else with a problem. In fact I was a black belt when his teachers, teachers, teacher started.
I repeat The technique is a bad idea anyway you or anybody else wants to look at it. If you choose to use it, that's your business. Seldom if ever have you heard me say a technique is not salvageable. This one is an exception. As far as staying "technical" where were you when others went "off subject" making jokes and such? Only when I say something you need to show up to "remind" me to stay technical. Well I was. I said why the technique wouldn't work in his or any other scenario. I submit, let the webmaster do his job and you too stay out of my kool-aid. I don't need you to remind me of anything.
Originally posted by Doc
You have to understand where some of these "ideas" came from. Ed Parker dropped techniques as "not feesable" or changed the attacks all the time. Surely you don't think he was finished with Kenpo when he passed on. You surely don't think everything was suddenly cast in stone and completed.
But you are right. The majority of the techniques can be worked out with a good teacher, but there is a such a thing as "a bad idea" that you can't rationalize or fix. Squatting Sacrifice was an idea borrowed from the professional wrestlers of the day like Gene LaBell who did this all the time in the ring. Of course being professionals, they "cooperated" with each other.
Go grab someone realistically and hold on like you mean it. They won't be able to touch your leg. If you use your leg to "brace" him as one genius underbelt suggests, the more he tries to bend down, the stronger the brace becomes. There are many things people can argue with me about, but when it comes to body mechanics, you'll loose everytime and I can prove my hypothesis to anyone.
You know looking back that was a pretty good post with some decent thought provoking information, a stated opinion, and a suggested experiment to draw a conclusion. The fact that someone would read it and "pick out" only 2 words to complain about without addressing any of the other many points suggests something as well. Dan Farmer quit KenpoNet because of what some are doing right here right now, while they complain about kenponet. Ironic.
KenpoRush
09-22-2002, 05:37 AM
I think after reading all the replies I have a solution. (Not THE solution, but one nonetheless.) Here it goes:
1.) When the attacker bear-hugs and attempts to lift you, aren't you already initiating the technique with a double elbow strike at the attacker's grip (arm or hands)? Even if the attacker is attempting to lift you, you should be able to get the grip loose enough with the elbow strikes so that you are not lifted off the ground completely. Maybe appending a knuckle strike to the attacker's hands as the attack is being initiated may help in keeping the hug in check;
2.) If you are successful in the initial elbow strike and are temporarily released, if you were lifted momentarily off the ground, graviational marriage should help you in completing the next step-step to the right towards 3 o'clock and while anchoring your elbows to secure the attacker's arms drop your body into a lower horse stance so that you can reach down and grab the attacker's right ankle;
3.) The next steps of lifting and twisting the attacker's ankle should be done simultaneously while stepping with your right leg towards 7 o'clock and turning your body to face 6 o'clock. If this is pratcised diligently, your right leg should land between your attacker's legs while the attacker is face-down. At this time you would finish the technique as usual with the wrist grab and so on and so forth.
That's my story and I'm sticking with it!
Later dudes!!!
rmcrobertson
09-22-2002, 11:45 AM
I cannot find the post I was specifically referring to at this point--hmmm--so maybe I'm hallucinating. I don't think so. However, I did re-read Mr. Lear's post, and I don't see the personal attack there. I only found a disagreement.
I will add, however, that while I suspect that there are those on the forum that know rather more than I know about kenpo, I disagree on this particular technique. Among other things, I've tried to grab the likes of Clyde in a rear bear hug and prevent him from grabbing my leg, and it hasn't worked.
I quite agree that the "reach down and grab the leg," bit feels awkward. It makes sense that the tech may have come from Gorgeous George and the like. Nonetheless, I should prefer to discuss issues rather than to be simply told that, "this is the way it is, shut up." I guess I thought that, regardless of rank--and why did that even come up as an issue?--we were all supposed to be respectful of each other.
I think it best if I do shut up, on this subject, after this post. I'd rather trade facts, ideas, etc., than rhetoric--and this post seems rhetorical enough for my taste.
Ragnar
09-22-2002, 01:36 PM
rmcrobertson:
"I cannot find the post I was specifically referring to at this point--hmmm--so maybe I'm hallucinating. I don't think so. However, I did re-read Mr. Lear's post, and I don't see the personal attack there. I only found a disagreement."
Billy did write the following about 8 posts up:
"Squatting Sacrifice isn't crap at all, and I find that statement a little abbrasive. Maybe you don't understand the nature of the attack. I don't know... Chapel doesn't seem to be "
He was responding directly to satans.barber who earlier wrote:
"Doc, did you not see the thread where I said squatting scarifice was crap and useless, and that I hated it!? Hehe, you don't need to tell me how badly it isn't going to work, after consideration I came to that conclusion myself!
I'm interested to know if a senior such as yourself finds any of the other techniques as flawed as this one?"
Perhaps this juxtaposition will help in deciding who was knocking what (or who). As for me, I would look at Billy's post in the following manner.
The sentence actually ends: " I don't know... Chapel doesn't seem to be "
I think that is a typo, but I'm not sure. It is ambiguous. Does Billy mean that Dr. Chapel doesn't "understand the nature of the attack" or does he mean that Dr. Chapel "doesn't seem to be" saying that the technique is crap or is he saying something else entirely (hence my argument that what Billy wrote is ambiguous)?
Given that Billy didn't rewrite or elaborate on what he meant, I think it is entirely justifiable to look at the wider context in which his post occurs. If you read some of Mr. Lear's recents posts on Kenponet you will see that he has been highly critical (arguably to the point of name calling and insult) of Dr. Chapel. Thus, I think it is reasonable to suppose that the current post here in question fits generally into his wider diatribe against Dr. Chapel. Therefore, barring further elaboration from Billy, I read his post above as an attack on Dr. Chapel. Perhaps it is not an attack. I would welcome a clarification from Mr. Lear on this.
Regards,
Ragnar
Originally posted by Doc
You have to understand where some of these "ideas" came from. Ed Parker dropped techniques as "not feesable" or changed the attacks all the time. Surely you don't think he was finished with Kenpo when he passed on. You surely don't think everything was suddenly cast in stone and completed.
Nope, never believed, never said I did. I did say I can see the importance of the technique.
But you are right. The majority of the techniques can be worked out with a good teacher, but there is a such a thing as "a bad idea" that you can't rationalize or fix. Squatting Sacrifice was an idea borrowed from the professional wrestlers of the day like Gene LaBell who did this all the time in the ring. Of course being professionals, they "cooperated" with each other.
So, they too were working in the ideal phase? That is what I keep bringing up. The techniques, at least at first, are to be taught and worked in the ideal phase.
Go grab someone realistically and hold on like you mean it. They won't be able to touch your leg. If you use your leg to "brace" him as one genius underbelt suggests, the more he tries to bend down, the stronger the brace becomes. There are many things people can argue with me about, but when it comes to body mechanics, you'll loose everytime and I can prove my hypothesis to anyone.
There is always an exception to the rule. But what about "unaware vs unaware, aware vs unaware, unaware vs aware, and aware vs aware"? As for the atack being totally unfeasible, I'm 5'8" and 240 pounds, most people cannot get their arms around me with mine pinned, if they try to lift me, most cannot. For me, this is a feasbile technique. Doc, you keep pointing out body mechanics on this technique, isn't part of the principle in this technique, to teach body mechanics? Isn't everything we do designed to produce a specific response in our opponent? Maybe Mr. Parker would have dropped the technique, maybe not. I do the best I can with the material I have. I would not presume at this point in MY journey to discount anything. Maybe in another 20 or 30 years......:asian:
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
I cannot find the post I was specifically referring to at this point--hmmm--so maybe I'm hallucinating. I don't think so. However, I did re-read Mr. Lear's post, and I don't see the personal attack there. I only found a disagreement.
I will add, however, that while I suspect that there are those on the forum that know rather more than I know about kenpo, I disagree on this particular technique. Among other things, I've tried to grab the likes of Clyde in a rear bear hug and prevent him from grabbing my leg, and it hasn't worked.
I quite agree that the "reach down and grab the leg," bit feels awkward. It makes sense that the tech may have come from Gorgeous George and the like. Nonetheless, I should prefer to discuss issues rather than to be simply told that, "this is the way it is, shut up." I guess I thought that, regardless of rank--and why did that even come up as an issue?--we were all supposed to be respectful of each other.
I think it best if I do shut up, on this subject, after this post. I'd rather trade facts, ideas, etc., than rhetoric--and this post seems rhetorical enough for my taste.
In my opinion, there are many technique ideas that are not properly explored because of a tendancy to turn grab and seizing type assaults into "attempted grabs." Under those circumstances, they all work. But the real question is, "When does a student learn to extricate themselves from a completed grab?" "Ideally" we would all like to move before someone grabs, but in the real world that is not always a possibility. To omit such an important element of your training and knowledge could prove to be catastrophic. It is my experience those who think such techniques work as they know them, always respond before the attack. If a technique is labeled a grab, then it should be studied as is and not changed to an attempt.
To gain an understanding, perhaps it is necessary to step outside of your school and practice such a technique with non-kenpo grappler types and allow them to grab you. Then the truth can be discovered. Many are supplementing or leaving Kenpo for this very reason. They have recognized this knowledge gap in their instruction (not the kenpo). In our situation, we have multiple diciplines within our student body. Separate but one student body that includes a modern jiu-jitsu componant along with Indonesian arts as well. I personally have a background in the Chinese, Korean, and Japanese arts as well, coupled with a law enforcement background of many years on the street. This forces us to look at everything from a broad perspective of practicality.
The solution presented by a poster is predicated on turning the grab into an attempt. Bottom line is everyone must do what they feel is best. After all it is their butt on the line. My experiences say this one is a bad idea. Finally when I told Ed Parker (senior) it wouldn't work, he said, "A lot of things need to be refined or dropped. They are just ideas."
He also shared some further wisdom wth me. He said, "People only do two things in life - What they want to do and what they have to do." Let's hope what you want to do works.
WilliamTLear
09-22-2002, 07:11 PM
:( Ragnar,
To answer your post... It was not an attack on Chapel. It was instead a type-o. I would edit the original post, or even post the complete sentence here, but if I did... who would believe it? Too late... I screwed up. What can I say? I'm sorry.
As for name calling on Kenpo Net... "Whatever the attitude so is the response." :asian:
:) Robert,
While we've had our differences in the past on Kenpo Net, I find myself greatful for your post below. I'd been at our annual Kenpo Camp all weekend, and thank you for posting on my behalf.
:) KenpoRush,
Great post. I think you have something there. You have a good head on your shoulders. Your annalysis of the technique and the reaction of your opponent seems to be an informed one.
:cool: Chapel,
I'm sorry that you feel that way. I wish you well on your Kenpo Journey.
Sincerely,
Billy Lear :asian:
Originally posted by Seig
There is always an exception to the rule. But what about "unaware vs unaware, aware vs unaware, unaware vs aware, and aware vs aware"? As for the atack being totally unfeasible, I'm 5'8" and 240 pounds, most people cannot get their arms around me with mine pinned, if they try to lift me, most cannot. For me, this is a feasbile technique. Doc, you keep pointing out body mechanics on this technique, isn't part of the principle in this technique, to teach body mechanics? Isn't everything we do designed to produce a specific response in our opponent? Maybe Mr. Parker would have dropped the technique, maybe not. I do the best I can with the material I have. I would not presume at this point in MY journey to discount anything. Maybe in another 20 or 30 years......:asian:
According to Ed Parker, the proper ideal technique is "fixed and inflexible for a reason." Questions of awareness are part of that process.
arnisador
09-22-2002, 10:22 PM
Please, keep the discussion polite and respectful.
-Arnisador
-MT Admin-
Originally posted by arnisador
Please, keep the discussion polite and respectful.
-Arnisador
-MT Admin-
Um, I think we already got back to that.....
Originally posted by Doc
According to Ed Parker, the proper ideal technique is "fixed and inflexible for a reason." Questions of awareness are part of that process.[/B]
Sir,
Doesn't that make my point? It's all part of a process of learning.
Respectfully,
Seig
:asian:
Originally posted by Seig
Sir,
Doesn't that make my point? It's all part of a process of learning.
Respectfully,
Seig
:asian:
Of course you're correct sir, but there are limitations to "self learning." You always seem to have your head on straight and a good thinker. Don't stop. Because of the limited information in MK there has been promoted by some teachers this "journey approach" to the art.
What other technical physical activity teaches a bunch of variables and no specifics for several years, and then expects you to "self explore" to mastery? Illogical in a physical science. That's not the way it's supposed to be. The best athletes in any activity always seem to have a coach who tells them what they are doing wrong. Motion mastery and Martial arts mastery are not the same. The latter requires long tern instruction from a competent source. As much as some would like to think those quick belts have long lasting benefit, they are wrong. To paraphrase Ed Parker, "Remember, if everybody is doing it, it can't be that hard or that good."
Keep up the good work and thank you for your input. It is always appreciated sir.
WilliamTLear
09-23-2002, 12:50 PM
Doesn't the "Ideal Phase" teach specifics?
Doesn't the "What if Phase" teach variables?
Doesn't developing the "Spontanious Phase" teach you how to handle the unexpected?
If it weren't for exploring the variables and the unexpected in science I don't think we would have many of our modern day convieniences today, just a thought.
For years the church told us that the Earth was flat... then one day someone disagreed (saying it was round), and then someone else proved it... Now I'm not saying that the church was uneducated. For many centuries the church was the most educated tier of society. Jeeze many commoners could not even read. But, if it weren't for someone's disagreement, or curiousity then we would still be living in Europe. Blind to innovation, exploration, and modern science.
I disagree with Chapel... I think exploration is good... and I think that it works for everyone's benefit.
Hasta,
Billy Lear
Wes Idol
09-23-2002, 02:35 PM
In examining this technique, provided the bear hug is near waist height, allowing for the hip hinging of my torso to fold, this technique presents a great surprise to the attacker.
Ron Chapel, your offer to check the "Kenpoist's" height with your knee is a significant arguement. I have actually done this with partners. I have found some solution is shooting my hips into the attacker's. I won't tell you this is the "answer", but rather a possible counter. None the less, your offer of examination is appreciated.
Concerning some of the other statements made on this string......I try to consider this....
Everytime I post, I imagine countless eyes of young minds are tuned in with recorders. Everything I post will be analyzed and held up to the world. Sometimes this helps me decide how I might represent all of us.
By the way, I'm not perfect, I'm human. I'm also just grateful that Parker did what he did.
Respectfully,
Wes Idol, HI
United Kenpo Systems
http://www.uks-kenpo.com
p.s. Billy, I thought your response was mature......for what ever it is worth, thanks for standing up straight. Your friend, W.
Ragnar
09-23-2002, 02:48 PM
Billy Lear writes:
If it weren't for exploring the variables and the unexpected in science I don't think we would have many of our modern day convieniences today, just a thought.
While it is true that the exploration of the unknown is vital to the scientific process, that is only part of the picture. Generally speaking, in order to successfully make discoveries there must be a specific background of knowledge. If you took a ten year old that had an uncertain understanding of rudimentary arithmetic, and no real specific knowledge of science, and asked him to invent a new drug or a new form of transportation to replace the automobile or a new form of gene therapy, he obviously would be completely unable to know even where to begin. The geniuses who can reach the requisite insight on their own without massive amounts of formal training, such as the Ed Parker's or the Thomas Edison's, are exceedingly rare as to be almost unique (and they devoted their lives to their respective fields).
Scientists, if they want to discover new laws of the universe, or engineers if they want to invent a new modern day convenience, such the cell phone, need to be trained in school with specific knowledge of advanced mathematics, and scientific training. If prospective scientists as students were given some arithmetic and a bit of algebra and told to explore on their own to discover the rest, including calculus (which took a genius, Newton, to discover), I don't think they would get anywhere.
So, while I agree that exploration is important, I think it is only viable within a context of already established knowledge. In other words, exploration in a vacuum will be relatively fruitless (certainly compared to exploration within a context of specific and actual knowledge).
For years the church told us that the Earth was flat... then one day someone disagreed (saying it was round), and then someone else proved it... Now I'm not saying that the church was uneducated. For many centuries the church was the most educated tier of society. Jeeze many commoners could not even read. But, if it weren't for someone's disagreement, or curiousity then we would still be living in Europe. Blind to innovation, exploration, and modern science.
One could make the argument that Dr. Chapel is the one who is disagreeing and shouting that the Emperror has no clothes. To me it seems that he is saying that people have been doing these kenpo techniques with customization, and exploration as an axiom, but he suggests that perhaps there is a more fruitful way (specific basics/techniques) of pursuing the same end of self-defense.
I disagree with Chapel... I think exploration is good... and I think that it works for everyone's benefit.
From a slightly different angle, I don't recall Dr. Chapel saying that exploration as such is bad, but exploration without a firm background, exploration as an end-in-itself, is what is not going to get you to the same place as a strict curriculum fully ingrained (upon which eventually one can explore).
Regards,
Ragnar
Wes Idol
09-23-2002, 03:57 PM
Ragnar,
You posted...
"So, while I agree that exploration is important, I think it is only viable within a context of already established knowledge."
What a very good point you bring to the table....."context"......in regards to experience. Not to completely take away from the child who stumbles across a deep truth, an experienced eye might travel more deeply over and into the exploration at hand. With that said, what is the context of experience? If we are discussing the kitchen, I suppose we need someone who has really been over the pans and flames. And certainly if we are discussing Ed Parker's American Kenpo, I suppose then we only want to speak with someone who has actually studied with the man.
I would argue that even second hand informed individuals might have something to bring to the table. To their arguement, I've met many who never really trained with Parker who have added some very interesting ideas to the mat.
Respectfully,
WI, HI
UKS
www.uks-kenpo.com
Originally posted by Ragnar
Billy Lear writes:
From a slightly different angle, I don't recall Dr. Chapel saying that exploration as such is bad, but exploration without a firm background, exploration as an end-in-itself, is what is not going to get you to the same place as a strict curriculum fully ingrained (upon which eventually one can explore).
Regards,
Ragnar
Sir, that is exactly what I said and meant. It seems many take what I say and completely ignore what's actually said, and interject their own thoughts. I never suggested one should not explore, but without a foundation it will not be possible as you stated so well.
A superficial understanding of "motion" is not a foundation to explore significant body mechanics, let alone applications in human anatomy. It is true "motion is infinite" but human anatomy has very significant effective applications and limitations beyond the popular rapid fire general "blunt force trauma" of the popular version of AK.
That is not a bad thing because that is what it is designed to do, to generate rather quick basic self defense skills. But no matter how much you study motion, these methods are superficial in the world of anatomical scientific applications used in other arts, and yes in kenpo not motion based. Parker himself said the study of the ideal, once formulated, should be "fixed" without variation. How else can you build a foundation? (IKKA Green Belt Manual last version). My friend Ed Parker made his commercial Kenpo motion and tailoring based because it's an easy method to teach for those of limited knowledge, and on its level it can work. But to deny the existence of other knowledge and methods in the 35 year old Motion-Kenpo compared to other older methodologies and applications (that Parker studied), is like Pop Warner players denying the exsitence of the NFL.
There is no "self-directed study" bridge between abstract motion and hard science. You must be guided and taught to a significant level before you begin to explore what you already know, not look for something "new." There is nothing "new" only what you know and what you don't know. It's funny because most other arts have been saying this for centuries, but they are not very commercial.
Al Tracy and Ed Parker commercialized Kenpo for the masses, much as Henry Ford found a method to get affordable automobles to the masses. Was the Model T the best car? No, not even close! But it wasn't designed to be. It was designed to get you reliably from A to B. No more, no less. Anytime you take something to a mass commercial market, significant compromises are made. "What is the least we can get by with and still have a viable product?" Once that question is answered a product is produced. But the key is to convince the consumer it is a superior product because they want to believe it. To believe anything else is to suggest they are not as good as they think they are.
It is ridiculous to think you can become a "master" of anything in a strip mall school packed with kids, while you self explore. Yes, the emperor is naked, and no matter how much you tell him, he just doesn't want to hear it. The "belts" he has holding his new clothes on are too important.
Ed Parker said it was about the knowledge. "One does not become great until they realize what they don't know." I will keep exposing the emperor because I promised him I would otherwise, I'd let them run naked. Parker also said, "You can tell the facade is down when they drop the sirs and misters, and just start calling you by your name." He also said, "When they figure it out, it'll be too late."
Thanks Mr. Ragner for checking my 6 and understanding what I really said.
Wes Idol
09-23-2002, 06:03 PM
A very good point about having a foundation of knowledge to lead your exploration. Also having an instructor who can open that path with structural clarity.
The sadness for me lies in how this unproven claim seems to rise up to the road, on this electric highway.........
two systems..........MK for Money and Real K for only a few.
In the spirit of pointing at the naked King,
WI, HI
UKS
http://www.uks-kenpo.com
Originally posted by Doc
Sir, that is exactly what I said and meant. It seems many take what I say and completely ignore what's actually said, and interject their own thoughts. I never suggested one should not explore, but without a foundation it will not be possible as you stated so well.
A superficial understanding of "motion" is not a foundation to explore significant body mechanics, let alone applications in human anatomy. It is true "motion is infinite" but human anatomy has very significant effective applications and limitations beyond the popular rapid fire general "blunt force trauma" of the popular version of AK.
That is not a bad thing because that is what it is designed to do, to generate rather quick basic self defense skills. But no matter how much you study motion, these methods are superficial in the world of anatomical scientific applications used in other arts, and yes in kenpo not motion based. Parker himself said the study of the ideal, once formulated, should be "fixed" without variation. How else can you build a foundation? (IKKA Green Belt Manual last version). My friend Ed Parker made his commercial Kenpo motion and tailoring based because it's an easy method to teach for those of limited knowledge, and on its level it can work. But to deny the existence of other knowledge and methods in the 35 year old Motion-Kenpo compared to other older methodologies and applications (that Parker studied), is like Pop Warner players denying the exsitence of the NFL.
There is no "self-directed study" bridge between abstract motion and hard science. You must be guided and taught to a significant level before you begin to explore what you already know, not look for something "new." There is nothing "new" only what you know and what you don't know. It's funny because most other arts have been saying this for centuries, but they are not very commercial.
Al Tracy and Ed Parker commercialized Kenpo for the masses, much as Henry Ford found a method to get affordable automobles to the masses. Was the Model T the best car? No, not even close! But it wasn't designed to be. It was designed to get you reliably from A to B. No more, no less. Anytime you take something to a mass commercial market, significant compromises are made. "What is the least we can get by with and still have a viable product?" Once that question is answered a product is produced. But the key is to convince the consumer it is a superior product because they want to believe it. To believe anything else is to suggest they are not as good as they think they are.
It is ridiculous to think you can become a "master" of anything in a strip mall school packed with kids, while you self explore. Yes, the emperor is naked, and no matter how much you tell him, he just doesn't want to hear it. The "belts" he has holding his new clothes on are too important.
Ed Parker said it was about the knowledge. "One does not become great until they realize what they don't know." I will keep exposing the emperor because I promised him I would otherwise, I'd let them run naked. Parker also said, "You can tell the facade is down when they drop the sirs and misters, and just start calling you by your name." He also said, "When they figure it out, it'll be too late."
Thanks Mr. Ragner for checking my 6 and understanding what I really said.
It is clear no matter how many times I say something some would rather insert their own thoughts and charecterize them as mine. It is not nor has it ever been a matter of good and bad, only of good and better. "Common sense" is truly an oxymoron, even in Kenpo.
Ragnar
09-23-2002, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by Wes Idol
The sadness for me lies in how this unproven claim seems to rise up to the road, on this electric highway.........
two systems..........MK for Money and Real K for only a few.
WI, HI
UKS
http://www.uks-kenpo.com
Mr. Idol,
What would you take as proof of Dr. Chapel's "claim," as you put it? Are you looking for an actual written document or perhaps video confession by SGM Parker wherein he states, "Motion Kenpo is the Kenpo I've sold to commercial studios, while I separately practice and am developing a different, althought certainly related, kind of Kenpo." Or, perhaps, you feel that if a certain number of other instructors claimed something similar then you would accept his claim? I'm just not sure what would satisfy you.
In any cae, I think this raises an interesting epistemological issue, how can we verify claims when we were not first hand witnesses to the original events.
Some things to consider:
Dr. Chapel was associated in various capacities with SGM Parker for an extended period of time. This association may have dealt with such things as video production, the writings on Kenpo (Dr. Chapel was photographed for II), tournament adjudication, etc. These, I presume, are all objectively verifiable facts.
Dr. Chapel was granted a 7th degree ranking, was he not, by SGM Parker? Again, this is verifiable.
As a student of Ed Parker, Dr. Chapel would have, I think, specific interests and needs that he would have pursued with the SGM. This is not unusual. A student may join a school for self-defense, for sport, for cardio-vascular, for self-confidence, and any number of other reasons. A good instructor, if they have the knowledge and inclination, will be able to address the needs and interests of his student. I think it is entirely reasonable to think that Dr. Chapel as a law enforcement officer would have certain interests and needs that might be substantially different from the needs and interests of the typical Kenpo school student (or even teacher).
So to conclude on this point, it's not that Dr. Chapel is just springing up completely out of left field. He had an extensive history with SGM Parker. I think that the above are some of the reasons that indicate why he at least should be considered a reliable authority. However, is that all there is? After all, Kenpo instructors (and, I'd guess, martial art instructors in general) are notorious for telling stories about what SGM said or did. Often, there is no way for a student to verify the story since SGM Parker is no longer with us, and only the instructor was privvy to the event or conversation. I think it is entirely plausible to think such events and conversions did take place between SGM Parker and his students.
There is at least one other source of verification for what Dr. Chapel is saying that can be integrated with his standing as a long time Kenpo Senior. Here are some of the facts, which I think support at least the position that it is possible, if not probable or certain, that what Dr. Chapel has veracity:
1. SGM Parker taught and was interested in law enforcement.
2. SGM Parker has not tied down for lengthy, supervised, day-to-day instruction in the basics and techniques in a particular school past a certain period, say the mid-1960's and certainly after 1970.
3. As an implication of #2, SGM Parker could only provide "ideas" about basics and techniques, therefore, he would have to rely on his instructor's expertise (from other systems) to fill-out the basics. I don't think this is very controversial. After all, was SGM Parker at all of his schools all the time, teaching all of his instructors and students in detail, day in and day out?
4. SGM Parker studied with Chinese Masters who very well could have imparted their knowledge of nerve strikes, slap checks, etc.
5. SGM Parker in video (heck even in the Pink Panther!) would move like Dr. Chapel recommends, powerful strikes with slap checks, stomping to accentuate the power of the strike - and not just a mad flurry of strikes.
6. It is normal for thinkers, writers, philosophers, and certainly martial artists to not include all of their knowledge in their written work. For all we know SGM Parker would have written or created videos on some of this information if he had lived longer.
7. Often teachers will teach students different things depending upon what the student asks them. For instance, if Mr. Idol is teaching a class and a particular student asks him after class about the intricacies of certain knife techniques, I'm sure that student will walk away with a chunk of information that other students that never inquired about knife work would. It just makes sense.
I could go on and on, but I think I have already breached the attention span of most readers here. Sorry for being so long-winded!
Ragnar
rmcrobertson
09-23-2002, 09:10 PM
Oh, Lord.
I'm at a loss, but I do have one question: why is it always, always, always, always a question of proximity to Mr. Parker? And yes, it's a serious question: what, in the opinion of posters, makes this the central question?
Once again someone suggested I said a knee could brace or check an opponent on the technique. I did not. Amazing.
Ragnar
09-23-2002, 10:47 PM
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Oh, Lord.
I'm at a loss, but I do have one question: why is it always, always, always, always a question of proximity to Mr. Parker? And yes, it's a serious question: what, in the opinion of posters, makes this the central question?
How were my points 1-7 dealing with Dr. Chapel's proximity to Mr. Parker? His proximity to Mr. Parker was dealt with in the section above points 1-7. Also, I think to a certain extent his proximity is relevant because of the nature of the challenge that certain individuals are making.
I'm not sure I understand why you think in this case, Dr. Chapel's proximity to Mr. Parker is not relevant (as a partial explanation). Could you please elaborate?
Another point that I failed to mention in my prior post is the fact that there are in my, albeit, brief experience many students who have a significantly difficult time successfully applying certain Kenpo techniques. These seem almost universally to be the techniques which require escape from grabs or holds. Many of these students are seeking outside training for what they consider as gaps in Kenpo. This seems to me to be an argument that the technique manuals were lesson plan ideas that an instructor would need to flesh out according to specific, sound body mechanics, rather than a full workable explanation. Do you disagree?
Thanks, Ragnar
rmcrobertson
09-23-2002, 11:50 PM
I'm afraid that several of your points began with the words, "SGM Parker," and--unless I misread, which I doubt--the entire thrust of the post seemed to be to establish a direct connection, a direct transmission, on several levels.
Again, it was a serious question: why is the direct transmission--I'm using a phrase I've repeatedly seen in English translations of texts on traditional martial arts--always the primary issue?
Personally, I'd argue that the push "outside," kenpo--the quotes come from the fact that I don't actually think there is an "outside kenpo," if I'm reading texts like "Infinite Insights," correctly--has a lot more to do with our limitations as students and instructors than it has to do with the system of kenpo.
Thanks.
Rainman
09-24-2002, 12:20 AM
5. SGM Parker in video (heck even in the Pink Panther!) would move like Dr. Chapel recommends, powerful strikes with slap checks, stomping to accentuate the power of the strike - and not just a mad flurry of strikes.
How does stomping accentuate a strike? That is what the wwf does to fake a strike. Basically what that does is send energy in two different directions and split power.
:asian:
Ragnar
09-24-2002, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by rmcrobertson
I'm afraid that several of your points began with the words, "SGM Parker," and--unless I misread, which I doubt--the entire thrust of the post seemed to be to establish a direct connection, a direct transmission, on several levels.
Again, it was a serious question: why is the direct transmission--I'm using a phrase I've repeatedly seen in English translations of texts on traditional martial arts--always the primary issue?
Personally, I'd argue that the push "outside," kenpo--the quotes come from the fact that I don't actually think there is an "outside kenpo," if I'm reading texts like "Infinite Insights," correctly--has a lot more to do with our limitations as students and instructors than it has to do with the system of kenpo.
Thanks.
Actually, I don't think I have much to disagree with you here. I don't think that direct transmission is necessarily the primary issue. Personally, I wouldn't focus on it. Honestly, the only reason I brought it up reluctantly was because it seemed that was the issue that Dr. Chapel was being constantly hounded about, i.e., the charge that Dr. Chapel was not told or taught by Mr. Parker the theme that Dr. Chapel emphasizes in his teaching of Kenpo.
I'm afraid I'm not being too clear....ugh!
Ragnar
Frank Trejo
09-24-2002, 01:56 AM
I don't wanna disrespect anyone, but I've been teaching Ed Parker's Kenpo almost my entire life and if what I am teaching is "Motion Kenpo" then I challenge anyone and everyone to put your ass on the line and stand infront of me with what you think "Real" Kenpo is. Hence, I will put "YOUR" kenpo ass in Kenpo motion. Name the time and place. My E-mail is Kumupalani@aol.com I'll be there!!!
FRANK TREJO
Sigung86
09-24-2002, 06:14 AM
This kind of response, while it is a little more fitting to Dodge City, Kansas, brings to mind an old Martial Arts thought ... Towit:
The first person to resort to violence loses
Interesting that all those high-minded ideals about our growth, and responsibility, our journey, that we bandy about in magazines, videos, and books, seminars and forums boil down to, "Oh Yeah? So's your Mama, and I'm gonna kick your azz"!!!
"He said ... She said ... Well ... This really classes up the joint and brings a lot of respect to legendary names in the Kenpo World ... :rolleyes:
I feel like this is all my fault. I left Kenponet, in spite of everyone else knowing why I left, because no one could get a word in edgewise for all the slamming, slapping, beating, name calling and accusation going on there. I moved over here to settle in and be a part of a community where everyone wasn't trying to protect their turf or their rep! Where I could read, ponder, study, add to or subtract from my many, but not, perhaps, as illustrious years in "The Art" as some of you have had. :mad:
Frankly, y'all need to take this out on the street and out of the forum.
Doc, you have been my friend for several years, and you are going to always have detractors. You've chosen a different path from the others. You may have to simply accept that not everyone is going to see what you do as good, or believe what you tell them because your path and journey have been so different from the others.
Billy, and Wes, I like both of you guys, but consciously stalking or not, one or the other, and often, both of you guys show up and bring friends, and seem to get embroiled in interchanges with Doc. Perhaps you need to consider your own paths a little more before attempting to derail someone else's.
Frank Trejo, I know you by reputation and picture only. However, I am totally surprised, No ... shocked, at this kind of response from one of the leaders of Kenpo. Tell me, and most of the rest of the viewing audience what your response, even if it should become reality, would prove. Tenth Degree? Showing the way to Yellow Belts? Showing the way to Sixth Degree Tracy Black Belts (That would be me)??? Hardly Man. In the words of Timothy Leary ... Get a grip! Please explain to me what this kind of response is going to straighten out, if you would be so kind.
After I left the Kenponet, and left my "absolute final" post, I received a number of emails and phone calls from people applauding my step and indicating that they were doing the same. And at least one of them was from another country, across a big ocean. You guys need to get beyond the ego trips.
I have also received several private e-mails, one from a rather well known Kenpo Community Leader. Folks, and you know who you are, let me tell you here, and now, that those kinds of posts, filled with unsubstantiated accusations and little integrity or veracity, do not tend to sway me. I'm nobody ... Why would you bother to do this sort of thing if you didn't have a personal agenda.
I volunteered to assist Ed Parker on his new and improved Infinite Insight Series, for the benefit of the community. Don't you think it is time we all just kind of settle down and take care of the family, without all the histrionics, hysteria, and hate? Or am I only dreaming about what could not be?
Man ... Frankly, this whole thing leaves me simply feeling tired, drained and a little less hopeful for what we all could be.
Take care,
Dan Farmer
Nightingale
09-24-2002, 11:59 AM
Honestly, I really don't see anything wrong with Mr. Trejo's challenge. It really seems like a fair way to settle this debate. If Dr. Chapel's kenpo is really the "real kenpo" or more effective than the style that Mr. Trejo uses, a match with a well respected kenpo master seems like a good way to build credibility and gain more acceptance from the mainstream kenpo world.
Some of the SL-4 concepts discussed on Dr. Chapel's website have peaked my interest on occasion, and I've been trying to take an objective view of the issue.
I would very much like to see a match that pits mainstream kenpo against SL-4 concepts. I think it would be a good way to settle the issue, and since Trejo is one of the best out there, I don't think anyone would argue the results. If Mr. Trejo wins the match, then Dr. Chapel would need to concede that what he calls "motion kenpo" is very effective, and if Dr. Chapel is victorious, the rest of us would be forced to acknowledge that there may be something to all this SL-4 stuff. It would be interesting to see two men with enough confidence in their respective systems that they're willing to put it all on the line.
It strikes me as a good learning opportunity, and I must say, gentlemen, if this match does occur....
...please sell tickets.
fist of fury
09-24-2002, 12:03 PM
The match will never happen.:shrug:
satans.barber
09-24-2002, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by nightingale8472
Honestly, I really don't see anything wrong with Mr. Trejo's challenge. It really seems like a fair way to settle this debate. If Dr. Chapel's kenpo is really the "real kenpo" or more effective than the style that Mr. Trejo uses, a match with a well respected kenpo master seems like a good way to build credibility and gain more acceptance from the mainstream kenpo world.
Hehe, this is turning into a cheesy kung-fu film; if it happened we'd need to film it in China somewhere, dub it badly and then sell it as a modern classic to replace The Perfect Weapon!
Personally, I think it sounds like a good idea!
Ian.
WilliamTLear
09-24-2002, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by satans.barber
Hehe, this is turning into a cheesy kung-fu film; if it happened we'd need to film it in China somewhere, dub it badly and then sell it as a modern classic to replace The Perfect Weapon!
Personally, I think it sounds like a good idea!
Ian.
With all due respect... :mad:
I think it is important to understand that Trejo is addressing an issue which involves the life time work of many in Kenpo. Call it cheesy if you want, I personally dont think it's funny. It's about time that someone in the ranks addressed this issue in the open.
And if "IT" does get filmed I think it would be more appropriate to have it in LONG BEACH! :cool:
Nightingale
09-24-2002, 01:39 PM
True...
it would make an AWESOME exhibition match at the Internationals.
It would be a great way to settle a kenpo issue once and for all, and there's no more perfect a place than right in front of the kenpo community.
What do you say, Doc? I've heard a lot about SL-4. Seeing it in action would be a very educational experience.
respectfully,
Nightingale
Ragnar
09-24-2002, 02:19 PM
What a sad day.
This sort of ballyhooing for a fight between senior instructors diminishes the art, and certain people greatly in my eyes.
How childish.
Ragnar
Sigung86
09-24-2002, 02:40 PM
I posted early on this a.m. Coming back, I expected to see someone post a little bit of common sense. Shame of the bunch of you ... Have to say all this mob mentality crap is pretty scary, as well as just ever so slightly pathetic. You all have been watching far too many cheesy Kung-fu flicks.
On the other hand... Make it real... Use guns. Then there's no doubt about who's right. Whoever's left makes right... Ain't that right?
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Dan
jfarnsworth
09-24-2002, 03:04 PM
I'm not even quite sure how to respond to this subject. Well here goes. If these two men have issues it should be dealt with by themselves as men and away from a forum board. I don't think anyone here should be antagonizing any fight between these two. You could probably get your own individual opinion from Mr. Trejo's post. His post did not include Dr. Chapel's name in it. People are just assuming this. If they do have problems between them it doesn't involve any of us as far as I'm concerned. I have much respect for both men. I personally have never met either but I've enjoyed reading Dr. Chapel's postings on this forum. I would hate to see Dr.Chapel leave this forum as well. I'm not taking any side in this debate but only giving an opinion.
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth
Originally posted by Rainman
How does stomping accentuate a strike? That is what the wwf does to fake a strike. Basically what that does is send energy in two different directions and split power.
:asian:
That is a good question (you always seem to have a bunch of good ones). Dropping the foot at the moment of impact does many things. Some subtle some not so subtle. The most obvious one is the reference most would make to "Gravitational Marriage." Ed Parker was very obvious in his execution as they are in "Hung Gar" and "Splashing Hands." All the Chinese Arts use this but many are more subtle in the action.
Although not really true "Gravitatonal Marriage" in the sense most think of with regards to AK, it is an enhancement to the "focus" of a strike and ensures your body weight is "capable" of being used in the strike. In actuality it is not so much a merging of the ever present gravity but more of a most efficient use of what's available.
In addition to that, there are subtle alignment factors of the hip/leg joint that assists in that "Positive Body Posture" we spoke of earlier, and much much more. Recognize it doesn't have to be a "stomping" action, but it must be a significant shifting and planting of the body weight generally in the direction of the strike.
The "pull" of gravity is significant in efficient anatomical movement and structural integrity. In fact they are dependent on this "resistance" to be effective.
Nightingale
09-24-2002, 04:13 PM
Doc wrote:
But to deny the existence of other knowledge and methods in the 35 year old Motion-Kenpo compared to other older methodologies and applications (that Parker studied), is like Pop Warner players denying the exsitence of the NFL.
Doc, correct me if I'm wrong, but this statement makes it sound like you're comparing mainstream kenpo to pee-wee football, and the SL-4 stuff you teach to pro ball.
Wes Idol
09-24-2002, 06:08 PM
He is. Unfortunately he has chosen such statements to support his "Motion Kenpo" and "Parker taught SL4 principles" story. It's all really sad and really takes away from our honor and the positive aspects of Chapel's Kenpo.
WI, HI
UKS
satans.barber
09-24-2002, 06:21 PM
Originally posted by WilliamTLear
With all due respect... :mad:
I think it is important to understand that Trejo is addressing an issue which involves the life time work of many in Kenpo. Call it cheesy if you want, I personally dont think it's funny. It's about time that someone in the ranks addressed this issue in the open.
And if "IT" does get filmed I think it would be more appropriate to have it in LONG BEACH! :cool:
Ah calm down Billy, I'm only joking! The day the kenpo crowd loses it's sense of humour is the day I leave the art!
Ian.
jazkiljok
09-24-2002, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by satans.barber
Ah calm down Billy, I'm only joking! The day the kenpo crowd loses it's sense of humour is the day I leave the art!
Ian.
and so was Trejo.
joking.
peace.:asian:
Rainman
09-24-2002, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by Doc
That is a good question (you always seem to have a bunch of good ones). Dropping the foot at the moment of impact does many things. Some subtle some not so subtle. The most obvious one is the reference most would make to "Gravitational Marriage." Ed Parker was very obvious in his execution as they are in "Hung Gar" and "Splashing Hands." All the Chinese Arts use this but many are more subtle in the action.
Although not really true "Gravitatonal Marriage" in the sense most think of with regards to AK, it is an enhancement to the "focus" of a strike and ensures your body weight is "capable" of being used in the strike. In actuality it is not so much a merging of the ever present gravity but more of a most efficient use of what's available.
In addition to that, there are subtle alignment factors of the hip/leg joint that assists in that "Positive Body Posture" we spoke of earlier, and much much more. Recognize it doesn't have to be a "stomping" action, but it must be a significant shifting and planting of the body weight generally in the direction of the strike.
The "pull" of gravity is significant in efficient anatomical movement and structural integrity. In fact they are dependent on this "resistance" to be effective.
Doc,
He said stomping. I know a thing or 2 about positioning and what happens when a person steps... eh- depending how they step. I will argue stomping the floor creates a NBP. Stomping is good when energy goes through the other person. Bad if you try to return power to a source or something that wont absorb the power.
I agree with the subtle drop and light or springy type of stepping. I don't know of any other way where you can get weight off your feet and thigh muscles. If the weight is put on the feet and such it takes a lot of "effert" to move. Not that I don't appreciate that fact that there is a time to let energy go to the ground but it could cause damage if someone impacted a hard surface with all that force or potential force from a stomp.
Concepts?
Thankyou
RM:asian:
FUZZYJ692000
09-25-2002, 10:11 AM
With all do respect, I've been sitting back reading this thread for the last couple of days and I've just been so disappointed and disgusted with how it has turned out. I first came to Martialtalk because I found that it was very helpful in answering questions that I had regarding techniques, history, and numerious other things. This thread was started by Chronuss because this technique did feel highly ackward to him and me both. But there is something that I have learned so far from this thread and it's how to bash on other people. Not everyone is going to agree on all the techniques. There are always going to be those who want to change them or say that they don't work for some sort of reason. Hey, that's part of the learning process. What works for one person may not work for another. I've learned that there are some techniques that are not made for people my height (5 ft. 1 in) against people who are 6 ft. plus, so I modify it to work for me, but that's not saying that it will work for someone else.
I'm sure there is bad blood between some of you here, I don't know, but I think that the sarcastic remarks and ruid comments are going a bit far. If you feel the need to bash the person than send them a private message or something, don't turn the threads into your battle grounds. As for whose Kenpo is better than whose, if a person believes in their martial arts so much, there is going to be very little that can change their mind on their perspective. It is great to know that some of you feel so strongly about your martial arts. But martial arts is also suppose to teach self-disipline and respect to others. You may not like what they have to say but you shouldn't go about it so nastily.
As for whose is better. I can't say for sure. Compared to most of you I'm just a beginner at this and know very little compared to most, but something my dad has always told me is that no matter how big or bad and good you think you are there is always somebody out there who is better than you! :asian:
Wes Idol
09-25-2002, 11:30 AM
FUZZYJ692000,
You made some good points. Yes, your size in regards to others would be an excellent arguement for the principle of "tailoring." Parker knew this and made this a part of our/his system.....if you are unable to reach the throat, go for the groin......as an example of thought using "tailoring."
Regarding the bashing, it's tough. I'm going to assume that no one starts out with the intent to disrespect, but then passion gets the better of them. Very unfortunately, anyone can come onto these forums, throw on a mail order title and begin twisting history for their own arguement. In it's begining, it's bad enough, but when the lies speak badly about the very art which many have lived for............true students passionately come to stand for what is the truth.
Personally, I'm sorry if you have felt grazed by the bullets.
Respectfully,
Wes Idol, HI
United Kenpo Systems
http://www.uks-kenpo.com
Originally posted by FUZZYJ692000
With all do respect, I've been sitting back reading this thread for the last couple of days and I've just been so disappointed and disgusted with how it has turned out. I first came to Martialtalk because I found that it was very helpful in answering questions that I had regarding techniques, history, and numerious other things. This thread was started by Chronuss because this technique did feel highly ackward to him and me both. But there is something that I have learned so far from this thread and it's how to bash on other people. Not everyone is going to agree on all the techniques. There are always going to be those who want to change them or say that they don't work for some sort of reason. Hey, that's part of the learning process. What works for one person may not work for another. I've learned that there are some techniques that are not made for people my height (5 ft. 1 in) against people who are 6 ft. plus, so I modify it to work for me, but that's not saying that it will work for someone else.
I'm sure there is bad blood between some of you here, I don't know, but I think that the sarcastic remarks and ruid comments are going a bit far. If you feel the need to bash the person than send them a private message or something, don't turn the threads into your battle grounds. As for whose Kenpo is better than whose, if a person believes in their martial arts so much, there is going to be very little that can change their mind on their perspective. It is great to know that some of you feel so strongly about your martial arts. But martial arts is also suppose to teach self-disipline and respect to others. You may not like what they have to say but you shouldn't go about it so nastily.
As for whose is better. I can't say for sure. Compared to most of you I'm just a beginner at this and know very little compared to most, but something my dad has always told me is that no matter how big or bad and good you think you are there is always somebody out there who is better than you! :asian:
You and I shall speak......
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.