Taking a long range look at Kenpo, the art appears to have a technique for every situation. On closer inspection, you find alot of variants of other techniques, sometimes with shades of difference, othertimes with major changes. With this in mind, what are the basics of Kenpo? If you could distill it down to a few base movements and concepts, what would they be?

I realize this is both an overly simplistic and overly broad question/look, but I am currious where the experienced see the basics at.

:asian:

Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz

Taking a long range look at Kenpo, the art appears to have a technique for every situation. On closer inspection, you find alot of variants of other techniques, sometimes with shades of difference, othertimes with major changes. With this in mind, what are the basics of Kenpo? If you could distill it down to a few base movements and concepts, what would they be?

I realize this is both an overly simplistic and overly broad question/look, but I am currious where the experienced see the basics at.

:asian:

See Master Key movements and techniques

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

See Master Key movements and techniques

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Clyde,

You always ask me if I have any questions and I always draw a blank finnally have one for you.......would you mind listing them for me??? Or getting ahold of me and letting me know???? I left you a message a few days ago figured you where doing the yuma thing still.


Brian Hunter

brian...the master key techniques have been listed on the forum. type in master key or something similar for a search and you will probably have no problem finding them. I'm almost positive that Mr. Connaster's "Question and Answer" thread has them listed.

Originally posted by brianhunter

Clyde,

You always ask me if I have any questions and I always draw a blank finnally have one for you.......would you mind listing them for me??? Or getting ahold of me and letting me know???? I left you a message a few days ago figured you where doing the yuma thing still.


Brian Hunter

Of course there are Master Key Techniques as well as Master Key Movements and Master Key Drills..... LOL why do you think we talk of them - just to tease the northerners... HA!

MASTER KEY MOVEMENT(S) are defined as being a move or series of moves that can be used in more than one predicament with equal effect. For example a rear heel kick, shin scrape, and instep stomp can be used for a FULL NELSON, BEAR HUG with the arms free or pinned, REAR ARM LOCK, etc. Or, an arm break can be applied to a cross wrist grab, a lapel grab, or hair grab - application of the arm break would remain constant, but the methods of controlling the wrist would vary.

In comparison,

MASTER KEY TECHNIQUES entail sequential arrangements of movements that can be applied to a number of predicaments. In the case of a MASTER KEY TECHNIQUE it is a single technique that may be used as a BASE MOVE. Other similar techniques may then be perceived as formulations of it.

In many ways they are like Family Groupings and Associated Moves; they are the result of an individual's further association of movements; they are the next logical step in the search for spontaneity. Remember, the following are only one set of model groupings. The art of Master Key Techniques is to eventually be able to use any and all techniques as a BASE MOVE and to see how all
other techniques are formulations of it. This should lead you to the next level of spontaneity.

MASTER KEY DRILLS are training drills that work actions that are incorporated over and over all throughout the system such as the Training Horse and straight 2 - Knuckle Punch (Master Key Drill).

OK, Ok Here are the Sought after 10:

THUNDERING HAMMERS + 32 "variations of"
FIVE SWORDS + 44
LONE KIMONO + 9
SHIELDING HAMMER + 17
REPEATING MACE + 8
LOCKED WING + 1
INTELLECTUAL DEPARTURE + 4
THRUSTING SALUTE + 2
PARTING WINGS + 24
HOOKING WINGS + 4

Now don't tell anyone I did this!

This is Dennis's post, figured I'd put it here again in case they had any questions on this subject. I'll give you a call later Brian, and think of some good questions.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde



__________________

Thanks for the info!
Lots of info there all at once for a beginner like myself, so just to
start off with a tiny part of it:

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

In many ways they are like Family Groupings and Associated Moves;

Can you (or anyone for that matter I guess) define these terms,
and give me an example? I would venture a guess that family
groupings are grouped by attacks, e.g. Sword and Hammer,
Obscure Wing, Obscure Sword? Would these be family
groupings?

Associated Moves?? what's that?


:asian:

Originally posted by Kirk

Thanks for the info!
Lots of info there all at once for a beginner like myself, so just to
start off with a tiny part of it:



Can you (or anyone for that matter I guess) define these terms,
and give me an example? I would venture a guess that family
groupings are grouped by attacks, e.g. Sword and Hammer,
Obscure Wing, Obscure Sword? Would these be family
groupings?

Associated Moves?? what's that?


:asian:

Actually they're not related by attack but by similar movement. You have a Father and Mother move with sister, brother, cousin and so forth. Let's take three techniques almost identical in motion, except on different planes. Dance of Death, Thundering Hammers, and Sleeper. The first move is the same, the left inward block (the mother), with the next move being the inward right hand (the father). They are the same action on different planes on the Universal pattern, and with different circumstance. You can also add in sister and brother moves on the lower planes to attack the legs should you want to. Or say for example Parting Wings and Shield and Sword have alot of the same movement but with one being on the inside (PW) and the other being the outside of a left punch (S&S). Hope that was helpful.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I guess the question I
should've asked first is at what level should one be exposed to
this information, so that he/she will understand it best?

Dance of Death I've actually tested on. Thundering Hammers I
learned at a seminar, and I didn't even know a tech called
Sleeper exists. Parting Wings I've SEEN done, and Shield and
Sword I've only heard of. I might be testing for purple next
weekend, just to give you an idea where I'm at, presently.

So master key movements, master techs, master key drills, family
groupings ... are they something that should be introduced
further down the road??

Again, I appreciate the time you, and other high rankers spend
with us lowly "skittles" as one of our assistant instructors refer
to us as :)

Originally posted by Kirk

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I guess the question I
should've asked first is at what level should one be exposed to
this information, so that he/she will understand it best?

Dance of Death I've actually tested on. Thundering Hammers I
learned at a seminar, and I didn't even know a tech called
Sleeper exists. Parting Wings I've SEEN done, and Shield and
Sword I've only heard of. I might be testing for purple next
weekend, just to give you an idea where I'm at, presently.

So master key movements, master techs, master key drills, family
groupings ... are they something that should be introduced
further down the road??

Again, I appreciate the time you, and other high rankers spend
with us lowly "skittles" as one of our assistant instructors refer
to us as :)


Exactly what curriculum are you learning? All the techniques I mentioned above are Orange and Purple belt material and can be introduced at that level.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

Exactly what curriculum are you learning? All the techniques I mentioned above are Orange and Purple belt material and can be introduced at that level.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Yellow Belt

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

Orange Belt
1. Clutching Feathers
2. Triggered Salute
3. Gift Of Destruction
4. Locking Horns
5. Dance Of Death
6. Lone Kimono
7. Five Swords
8. Scraping Hoof
9. Grip Of Death
10. Crossing Talon
11. Shielding Hammer
12. Obscure Wing
13. Thrusting Salute
14. Striking Serpent's Head
15. Locked Wing
16. Glancing Salute

Purple Belt
1. Reversing Mace
2. Buckling Branch
3. Thrusting Prongs
4. Twisted Twig
5. Obscure Sword
6. Repeating Mace
7. Raining Claw
8. Crashing Wings
9. Twirling Wings
10. Snapping Twigs
11. Leaping Crane
12. Swinging Pendulum
13. Crushing Hammer
14. Captured Leaves
15. Evading the Storm
16. Charging Ram

Originally posted by Kirk

Yellow Belt

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

Orange Belt
1. Clutching Feathers
2. Triggered Salute
3. Gift Of Destruction
4. Locking Horns
5. Dance Of Death
6. Lone Kimono
7. Five Swords
8. Scraping Hoof
9. Grip Of Death
10. Crossing Talon
11. Shielding Hammer
12. Obscure Wing
13. Thrusting Salute
14. Striking Serpent's Head
15. Locked Wing
16. Glancing Salute

Purple Belt
1. Reversing Mace
2. Buckling Branch
3. Thrusting Prongs
4. Twisted Twig
5. Obscure Sword
6. Repeating Mace
7. Raining Claw
8. Crashing Wings
9. Twirling Wings
10. Snapping Twigs
11. Leaping Crane
12. Swinging Pendulum
13. Crushing Hammer
14. Captured Leaves
15. Evading the Storm
16. Charging Ram

That's what I thought, all the more reason for bashing the 16 curriculum. I have never liked it or will ever use it because it's lacking, severely. It leaves you too far out of the loop for those that study the 24 system, but you might catch up somewhere around 5th Black, but by then, those that study the 24 are so far ahead in knowledge and skill it isn't even funny. Oh well, I'll get off my soapbox now cuz I know Dennis will defend it to the end.


Have a great Kenpo day

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
That's what I thought, all the more reason for bashing the 16 curriculum. I have never liked it or will ever use it because it's lacking, severely. It leaves you too far out of the loop for those that study the 24 system, but you might catch up somewhere around 5th Black, but by then, those that study the 24 are so far ahead in knowledge and skill it isn't even funny. Oh well, I'll get off my soapbox now cuz I know Dennis will defend it to the end.

You just better shut up mister or I am going to get on the next plane and beat your fists with my face until you give up crying for mercy!

I like the 24 system too. Leaves people with more time in the art before black. But that's just the opinion of an ex-Kenpo fool.
:D

24 vs. 16, isn't it still 154(5) techs before earning a black belt?

The only problem that I've personally encountered is with buying
videos. I have yet to find one where I can buy a purple belt tape,
and get the same techs as being taught for purple in my school.

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

That's what I thought, all the more reason for bashing the 16 curriculum. I have never liked it or will ever use it because it's lacking, severely. It leaves you too far out of the loop for those that study the 24 system, but you might catch up somewhere around 5th Black, but by then, those that study the 24 are so far ahead in knowledge and skill it isn't even funny. Oh well, I'll get off my soapbox now cuz I know Dennis will defend it to the end.


Have a great Kenpo day


Do you think learning the master key techniques later in the curriculum effects the skill and knowledge of the practitioner directly?

Originally posted by Kirk
24 vs. 16, isn't it still 154(5) techs before earning a black belt?

Sure. The difference is that you know all the techs longer and have more time in on them to work them and play with them before black.

In the 24 system there are no techniques for 1st brown or black. Just extentions. The extentions re-enforce the previously learned material and add onto them. I don't see any particular extentions as the important thing but just that they are done.

Some people say the etxtentions were just to keep students and in a way they are right but they also work on the re-enforcement concept.

The 16 system allows for more student retention I believe. But Both Dennis and Clyde have their reasons for likeing using both I am sure and whom am I to question the things they do? I worked in a 24 and 16 and a 20 per belt system and I liked the 24. But that was just me. So it's just my 2 cents. Both those guys have a deeper understanding of the system than myself. I just used them to protect my @ss.
Heh heh heh...

Originally posted by Kirk
The only problem that I've personally encountered is with buying videos. I have yet to find one where I can buy a purple belt tape, and get the same techs as being taught for purple in my school.

I hear ya. Maybe you can speak to your instructor and ask him if he minds if you video him doing the tech for your own study purposes?

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

That's what I thought, all the more reason for bashing the 16 curriculum.

Just so everyone is on the same page.
THE Original 16 Technique Curriculum that Mr. Parker endorsed is listed properly at the AKF Website here:
http://www.akfkenpo.com/curriculum/index.html

If any of the HTML is still screwed up it is my fault. I may work on it this weekend.

The curriculum is explained there briefly if you want to go look. Kirk's school does not follow this curriculum. They follow "a curriculum with 16 techniques on most of the charts" but the Original one as linked to above is consistent with the Web of Knowledge, etc.

I put this up because there are a lot of "16 Technique Curriculums" out there and they are not all the same. I think that when the news of this originally got out a lot of people thought "I can put 16 techniques on a chart" and just made one up. This is unfortunate but this section of the AKF site will hopefully clear up some of the myths about what the 16 Technique Curriculum is, where it came from, and how it is supposed to work properly within Mr. Parker's system.

:asian:

Originally posted by cdhall

Just so everyone is on the same page.
THE Original 16 Technique Curriculum that Mr. Parker endorsed is listed properly at the AKF Website here:
http://www.akfkenpo.com/curriculum/index.html



El Linko No Worko

So a 3rd in the 24 system would hold as much knowledge as a 5th in the 16?

By the way...the website is really nice. I like how it's simple to look at and easy to read as well as fast on the download.
:D

Originally posted by GouRonin

So a 3rd in the 24 system would hold as much knowledge as a 5th in the 16?

By the way...the website is really nice. I like how it's simple to look at and easy to read as well as fast on the download.
:D

Yes, a 3rd in the 24 system is equivalent to a 5th in this 16 system. Sometimes that depresses me, but as you can see from the posts about my recent promotion, I am not primarily interested in chasing rank for its own sake. If it matters though, Mr. Duffy was promoted to 5th by Mr. Parker so he came up through the 24 system himself.

Thank you very much for the compliment on the website. That is exactly what we are shooting for.
:ubercool:

Originally posted by cdhall
Yes, a 3rd in the 24 system is equivalent to a 5th in this 16 system. Sometimes that depresses me, but as you can see from the posts about my recent promotion, I am not primarily interested in chasing rank for its own sake. If it matters though, Mr. Duffy was promoted to 5th by Mr. Parker so he came up through the 24 system himself.

I have absolutly no beef with Mr. Duffy at all. I don't even know the man and I hear nothing but good things about him. Please don't think that is where I am going.

My only beef with the 16 is that it lets people be in the art for less time to black. I like the 24 because, like a nice chili, you have to simmer and work the material in. I love EPAK. I left because the politics were out of this world. Sadly, over inflated rank etc is what I think might be causing the Kenpo world more problems than not.

I agree though that the 16 system is great for student retention. Mr. Duffy uses it. Dennis uses it. They are 2 great Kenpoists and if they can make it work then more power to them.

Originally posted by cdhall
Thank you very much for the compliment on the website. That is exactly what we are shooting for.
:ubercool:

No worries. I like to call it as I see it and that means both bad & good. Kudos.

Originally posted by GouRonin

I have absolutly no beef with Mr. Duffy at all. I don't even know the man and I hear nothing but good things about him. Please don't think that is where I am going.

My only beef with the 16 is that it lets people be in the art for less time to black. I like the 24 because, like a nice chili, you have to simmer and work the material in. I love EPAK. I left because the politics were out of this world. Sadly, over inflated rank etc is what I think might be causing the Kenpo world more problems than not.

I agree though that the 16 system is great for student retention. Mr. Duffy uses it. Dennis uses it. They are 2 great Kenpoists and if they can make it work then more power to them.

No worries. I like to call it as I see it and that means both bad & good. Kudos.

No sweat. It did not even occur to me that you might have a beef with Mr. Duffy. I never thought that. Also, I can assure you that you are not in the art "less time" with Mr. Duffy.

I think he has one guy that made it to 1st Black in 4.5 years. The others were more like 6-7 I think. The last guy that got promoted to Black started when he was a kid so I think he was here for at least 10 years. I think having less material to perfect is what led Mr. Duffy to develop the 16. Like Kirk said in another post, Mr. Duffy is strict. I think he came up with it to get you to Black "better" not to get you there "faster" if that makes any sense.

:asian:

Originally posted by Kirk

El Linko No Worko

Yes it does. Even in Canada!
Did you figure out what was wrong?
:confused:

Originally posted by cdhall
I think he came up with it to get you to Black "better" not to get you there "faster" if that makes any sense.

Sounds like the hallmark of a good teacher to me. You have lucked out.
:D

Originally posted by cdhall

Yes it does. Even in Canada!
Did you figure out what was wrong?
:confused:

Yeah, the DNS server was acting all weird. Not all pages
everywhere were comin' up.

Originally posted by brianhunter

Do you think learning the master key techniques later in the curriculum effects the skill and knowledge of the practitioner directly?

For me and my students, a resounding YES. Learning the 24 system develops the students more thoroughly because we don't put time on belts, only when you have the knowledge, and physical skills will you be promoted. For some it may be 4 months, and others it may be up to a year between colored belt levels. Exposure to the concepts, theories and principles of the teks in the 24 system engrain the art so to speak in a more palatable fashion and keeps the themes of the belt levels appropiate while learning the Master Key movements earlier in the curriculum so you have a better grasp of them at the upper and advanced ranks. Others will argue it makes no difference but just from our little suare' here you can tell there is a huge gap in the learning curve in the 16 vs 24 and you would see a huge difference in movement as well from two equal practicioners of the same rank with one doing 16 and the other 24 per belt level.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Thanks for the link, Doug. I've seen several posts that have indicated that there's basically a two-belt difference between 16- and 24-technique systems, but that doesn't add up mathematically; now that I see that the final four belts have 20 techniques, it adds up.

The school where I've been studying for about a year is not an EPAK school. We've got between 10 and 14 required techniques per belt (there's a red belt thrown in between green and 3rd brown), along with 2 to 5 "optional" techniques (which I think is sort of silly, I think they should either be required or not on the chart; I've asked my instructor to teach me all of the optionals, even though I've never been tested on them, just to make sure I'm getting the most bang for my buck). From what I've heard, there used to be more techniques per belt, and the yellow and red belts were added -- thus decreasing the number of techniques per belt -- for student retention purposes. Since you and others have pointed me in the direction of technique descriptions, I'm looking forward to comparing them to the techniques that we have and seeing how closely our techniques match the EPAK techniques.

I'm happy that the school where I'm studying apparently doesn't hand out belts lightly. Although I've progressed to blue fairly quickly, I imagine that a black belt is at least 3 or 4 years away (and quite possibly longer!).

I'm curious what sorts of technique requirements are out there at other non-EPAK schools.

Rich

I was taught through purple on the 32-technique/belt level system, and Toni's still pissed that the requirements were lowered to the mere 24.

I absolutely agree, though, that the 24-technique demands more time-in-grade. It should--at least for people like me, slow as death and iced molasses. Seven years plus to black, and I worked out at least five days a week for most of that--usually six. And, I taught. Not tooting my horn, either--it takes me forever to learn new material. Shoulda seen the look on Scott Higgins' face, at times...particularly frustrating, having to train around the likes of Angela, Juan, and that creepy little Cliff guy.

We cold further that argument that a 1st degree black under the 32 tech system knows as much as a third in the 24 and so on. What is not being mentioned here is that at some point, the practitioner allegedly knows the whole system. At what point should a practitioner know the entire system?

Originally posted by SingingTiger

Thanks for the link, Doug. I've seen several posts that have indicated that there's basically a two-belt difference between 16- and 24-technique systems, but that doesn't add up mathematically; now that I see that the final four belts have 20 techniques, it adds up.

The school where I've been studying for about a year is not an EPAK school. We've got between 10 and 14 required techniques per belt (there's a red belt thrown in between green and 3rd brown), along with 2 to 5 "optional" techniques (which I think is sort of silly, I think they should either be required or not on the chart; I've asked my instructor to teach me all of the optionals, even though I've never been tested on them, just to make sure I'm getting the most bang for my buck). From what I've heard, there used to be more techniques per belt, and the yellow and red belts were added -- thus decreasing the number of techniques per belt -- for student retention purposes. Since you and others have pointed me in the direction of technique descriptions, I'm looking forward to comparing them to the techniques that we have and seeing how closely our techniques match the EPAK techniques.

I'm happy that the school where I'm studying apparently doesn't hand out belts lightly. Although I've progressed to blue fairly quickly, I imagine that a black belt is at least 3 or 4 years away (and quite possibly longer!).

I'm curious what sorts of technique requirements are out there at other non-EPAK schools.

Rich

You should really go see John Sepulveda's studio and see what they're doing compared to your's if you live in the San Jose area. They are doing the 16 curriculum but it's EPAK and so is the belt ranking. John is probably the best EPAK instructor up there that I know regardless if I disagree with the AKKS's policies or not.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

This blows. So many willing to share info, but can't, because of
the drastic differences in curriculum :mad:

Originally posted by Kirk

This blows. So many willing to share info, but can't, because of
the drastic differences in curriculum :mad:

I would suggest videos or DVD's as a supplement to your training as well. You just might get ahead of your peers that way is all, but at least you'll have seen and possibly done the technique already when you get to those teks in your training and apply the concepts you've already learned up to that point.

Yes it blows, why people changed the 24 is unbeknownst to me other than keeping people in the studio paying the bills. It's a sellout to me and I would never do it but some out there have to make a living selling the art and no one wants the hard way. Just visit most TKD schools that have the 1 1/2 year BB program and look how full their classses are with wannabees.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

You should really go see John Sepulveda's studio and see what they're doing compared to your's if you live in the San Jose area.
Thanks, Clyde! I looked him up in the phone book, and he's quite a ways from me, but when I get a chance, I'll find out what his schedule is and see if I can visit and watch a class.

This blows. So many willing to share info, but can't, because of the drastic differences in curriculum
Yes it blows, why people changed the 24 is unbeknownst to me other than keeping people in the studio paying the bills.
I'm not sure I understand this. I started looking for descriptions of all of the original techniques so that I could compare them to what I'm being taught. My original reason for doing this was so that if I find a discussion here or elsewhere about a specific technique, I can understand the conversation, even if I know the technique by a different name. But aside from that difficulty, I don't feel like I can't share information with other kenpoists; after all, the techniques are all made up of what Mr. Parker called "basics," right? So you can always discuss the basics, and if you put a few together, you have a technique that you can discuss. Or have you found that curriculum differences extend into the basics as well, making it substantially more difficult to share information?

It's a sellout to me and I would never do it
I'm curious as to why you feel this way. The way that I look at it is that keeping people interested is an inherent goal in keeping any art alive. As long as you stay true to the art, changing things so that more people stay interested should be fine. And whether 154 techniques gets you to 2nd brown or 1st black, you haven't changed the art, only the method by which practitioners are "graded"; changing the names of the techniques and perhaps even some of the methods or orders of execution would just be an extension of this idea. Being a very organized person, I like the idea of having absolute standards; but being a realist, it seems to me that once you increase the number of schools to more than one -- let alone the thousands that exist now -- it's virtually impossible to maintain absolute standards, so accepting differences becomes a necessity.

Here's an analogy I see in another area of interest to me:

I sing barbershop (go ahead, call me a nerd :) ), and I belong to a worldwide organization that supports local chapters. This organization has seen a steady decline in membership for several years, since most of the members are older (I'm a youngster at 39), so one of their primary goals is increasing membership. They've come up with lots of creative ideas to get people interested, all of which I support. But if they suddenly say, "okay, we want to increase membership with younger members, so every chapter must now devote 30 minutes of each session to singing rap," I'd bail in a second because that would be taking away from the art, not enhancing it. On the other hand, if they start grading those of us who sing it, I won't care whether they want to call me a "yellow throat" or a "purple throat," regardless of what I've been called before (and I've been called worse than that ;) ).

Anyway, I like all of the different perspectives that I see here. Keep 'em coming!

Rich

Originally posted by SingingTiger

I'm curious as to why you feel this way. The way that I look at it is that keeping people interested is an inherent goal in keeping any art alive. As long as you stay true to the art, changing things so that more people stay interested should be fine. And whether 154 techniques gets you to 2nd brown or 1st black, you haven't changed the art, only the method by which practitioners are "graded"; changing the names of the techniques and perhaps even some of the methods or orders of execution would just be an extension of this idea. Being a very organized person, I like the idea of having absolute standards; but being a realist, it seems to me that once you increase the number of schools to more than one -- let alone the thousands that exist now -- it's virtually impossible to maintain absolute standards, so accepting differences becomes a necessity.


Rich

We could also lower the driving age to 14 and let those kids drive too, as long as they had the classes, but would you feel comfortable on the road with a bunch of 14 yr olds out there driving. It amounts to maturity of the art, same concept.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

We could also lower the driving age to 14 and let those kids drive too, as long as they had the classes, but would you feel comfortable on the road with a bunch of 14 yr olds out there driving. It amounts to maturity of the art, same concept.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Clyde,
With all due respect you have lost me completely. I don't understand what you mean by your analogy or by "maturity in the art."

Of course someone with 24 techniques knows more material than someone with 16 techniques.

But if 1 guy spends one year working on 24 techniques and one guy spends one year working on 16 techniques, then who has had more repetition and practice with each technique and its principles and concepts? :confused:


:asian:

Originally posted by cdhall

Clyde,
With all due respect you have lost me completely. I don't understand what you mean by your analogy or by "maturity in the art."

Of course someone with 24 techniques knows more material than someone with 16 techniques.

But if 1 guy spends one year working on 24 techniques and one guy spends one year working on 16 techniques, then who has had more repetition and practice with each technique and its principles and concepts? :confused:


:asian:

That's OK, I loose people all the time. Let's take the average green belt on the 24 and the same average green belt on the 16 as an example. Both have been practicing approximately 2 1/2 years at that level (at least how I do it). Who is going to know more and perform at a more advanced level, the one on 16 or the one on 24? You could say that equal amounts of time is the consistent factor yes, but what about physical abilities and knowledge. The one with the 24 is going to be much more advanced by sheer exposure to material (concepts, theories, principles), and ready to move into the advanced ranks of Brown and Black. The one on 16 has not even been exposed to any of the green belts technique concepts (according to Mr. Duffy's list), and according to the Web of Knowledge, how can they possibly be ready for advanced concepts at that level?

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

We could also lower the driving age to 14 and let those kids drive too, as long as they had the classes, but would you feel comfortable on the road with a bunch of 14 yr olds out there driving. It amounts to maturity of the art, same concept.

Boy, I'd have to disagree with that analogy completely. First of all, the "grading" of prospective drivers -- i.e., the issuing of a license -- is a single event, it's not a ladder with many rungs. Secondly, the "maturity" factor in issuing a driver's license has to do with the maturity of the individual as a whole, not their maturity in the "art" of driving: one can obtain a license regardless of how many hours they have spent behind the wheel.

Let's take the average green belt on the 24 and the same average green belt on the 16 as an example. Both have been practicing approximately 2 1/2 years at that level (at least how I do it). Who is going to know more and perform at a more advanced level, the one on 16 or the one on 24?

Well, based on the way you've described the situation, clearly the individual who has learned 24 techniques per belt would have more knowledge, and would presumably perform at a more advanced level on that basis alone. But what surprises me about your description is the fact that both students are "average" green belts and both have been studying for the same amount of time. What if there was an 8-technique per belt system? Would a student (of yours) in that system still study for 2 and a half years to become an average green belt? What about 4 techniques? If that's the case, it seems to me that the number of techniques is then irrelevant, because you're basing your belt system on time, not on the amount of material learned. I'm not saying there is necessarily anything wrong with that, but it seems to me to sort of invalidate your whole premise for the 24 vs. 16 debate.

I can understand the argument that 24 techniques per belt is better because you have to learn more material -- in a greater amount of time -- before becoming a green belt. I would still argue against that position, because there are so many variables in terms of instruction that even if everyone's on the same number of techinques per belt there are going to be great differences among students with the same belt color, and decreasing slightly the time and material before a certain belt isn't really a big deal. But if it takes the same amount of time to reach a certain level regardless of the amount of material taught, I'm not sure it makes any difference at all how many techniques are included in the material.

Notice I did say "slightly." Clearly, if you're going to award a yellow belt because a student can perform a front snap kick, and then an orange belt because they can perform a side knife-edge kick, and then a purple belt because they can perform a backfist, etc., the grading system has become somewhat of a sham. But I don't think that's what we're talking about here.

Rich

Originally posted by SingingTiger

Boy, I'd have to disagree with that analogy completely. First of all, the "grading" of prospective drivers -- i.e., the issuing of a license -- is a single event, it's not a ladder with many rungs. Secondly, the "maturity" factor in issuing a driver's license has to do with the maturity of the individual as a whole, not their maturity in the "art" of driving: one can obtain a license regardless of how many hours they have spent behind the wheel.



Rich

OK you win.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

That's OK, I loose people all the time. Let's take the average green belt on the 24 and the same average green belt on the 16 as an example. Both have been practicing approximately 2 1/2 years at that level (at least how I do it). Who is going to know more and perform at a more advanced level, the one on 16 or the one on 24? You could say that equal amounts of time is the consistent factor yes, but what about physical abilities and knowledge. The one with the 24 is going to be much more advanced by sheer exposure to material (concepts, theories, principles), and ready to move into the advanced ranks of Brown and Black. The one on 16 has not even been exposed to any of the green belts technique concepts (according to Mr. Duffy's list), and according to the Web of Knowledge, how can they possibly be ready for advanced concepts at that level?


Clyde,

I am not sure we are on exactly the same page. Here is the way I see and I think this may illustrate that we don't have a large disagreement.

If you learn 24 techniques in year and I learn 16, then with all other factors being equal, you would know more material than I would, more concepts, etc, but I should be more proficient on the 16 techniques that I do know. Naturally, I will be behind you, but since Mr. Duffy's 16 follows the Web of Knowledge, I'll stay behind you, I am not moving into advanced concepts out of order, I am simply taking longer to get there, hopefully I am better prepared for all the next/new material when I get to it.

That is really it. I advance more slowly naturally, but I should be better at what I have, all other factors being equal. I think we both have a point. Do we agree on this? I am putting this here because I think you and I are both in agreement on these 2 separate items:
1. The 16 system is skewed toward higher proficiency
2. The 24 system is skewed toward higher knowledge and exposure

If we agree on this then I understand the arguments and I am happy to agree on these positions.

:asian:

I believe none of this really matters. I have seen crappy kenpoists from both curriculums. Just because you know more dance moves doesn't make you a better dancer. People always want to equate number of techniques and rank with skill. I quit looking at belts and stripes along time ago, I have usually found that tells me nothing about a persons skill level.

Originally posted by Kirk

This blows. So many willing to share info, but can't, because of
the drastic differences in curriculum :mad:

The longer you stay in the more you will see the similarities than the differences. In the end thier are only two things, either you can move or you can't.

Originally posted by cdhall

Clyde,

I am not sure we are on exactly the same page. Here is the way I see and I think this may illustrate that we don't have a large disagreement.

If you learn 24 techniques in year and I learn 16, then with all other factors being equal, you would know more material than I would, more concepts, etc, but I should be more proficient on the 16 techniques that I do know. Naturally, I will be behind you, but since Mr. Duffy's 16 follows the Web of Knowledge, I'll stay behind you, I am not moving into advanced concepts out of order, I am simply taking longer to get there, hopefully I am better prepared for all the next/new material when I get to it.

That is really it. I advance more slowly naturally, but I should be better at what I have, all other factors being equal. I think we both have a point. Do we agree on this? I am putting this here because I think you and I are both in agreement on these 2 separate items:
1. The 16 system is skewed toward higher proficiency
2. The 24 system is skewed toward higher knowledge and exposure

If we agree on this then I understand the arguments and I am happy to agree on these positions.

:asian:


If we should go on your analysis then if we learned 16 words in a year as opposed to 24, who is going to learn to speak more words with a larger vocabulary (of motion) first and speak more fluently with conjugations, grammar, etc.?

Oh well, you win too.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

If we should go on your analysis then if we learned 16 words in a year as opposed to 24, who is going to learn to speak more words with a larger vocabulary (of motion) first and speak more fluently with conjugations, grammar, etc.?

Oh well, you win too.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde Then according to that logic should we just learn the whole system in one day? I do not think it really matters as long as the concepts and principles are being taught with the techniques.

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

OK you win.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Damn, and I was having such a good time debating. Ah well, in debating, as in kumite, I'll take the point whenever it's given. :)

Rich

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

If we should go on your analysis then if we learned 16 words in a year as opposed to 24, who is going to learn to speak more words with a larger vocabulary (of motion) first and speak more fluently with conjugations, grammar, etc.?

Oh well, you win too.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Sir, by my analysis the person who learns 16 words in a year is a master of the 16 words and the person who learns the 24 words can say more things, but not say them as well. The person with 16 is more of a master of his system because there is less there to master.

I see that for whatever reason, you and I are not going to resolve our difference on this issue so I will also concede that we are done.

I want to thank you for being polite with me and I also wish you a great day. Thank you for participating in this discussion in a civil manner. I do enjoy reading many your posts and even if we don't agree, I think I can count on you to call them like you see them.
:asian:

Originally posted by cdhall

Sir, by my analysis the person who learns 16 words in a year is a master of the 16 words and the person who learns the 24 words can say more things, but not say them as well. The person with 16 is more of a master of his system because there is less there to master.

I see that for whatever reason, you and I are not going to resolve our difference on this issue so I will also concede that we are done.

I want to thank you for being polite with me and I also wish you a great day. Thank you for participating in this discussion in a civil manner. I do enjoy reading many your posts and even if we don't agree, I think I can count on you to call them like you see them.
:asian:

We are in what is considered in chess as an Impasse'. I definitely won't yield my position in this area, and vice versa. I would say the point is moot . The floor is yours.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by cdhall

I want to thank you for being polite with me and I also wish you a great day. Thank you for participating in this discussion in a civil manner. I do enjoy reading many your posts and even if we don't agree, I think I can count on you to call them like you see them.
:asian:

I too have enjoyed reading this. This has been a totally free
exchange of ideas, without getting heated.

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

We are in what is considered in chess as an Impasse'. I definitely won't yield my position in this area, and vice versa. I would say the point is moot . The floor is yours.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

It's not an Impasse. So long as it's a discussion free of insult
and anger, those of us who are just beginning our Journey
are learning a LOT! I wouldn't leave my current instructor for
anything, but knowledge of the pros and cons of 24 tech system,
or 16 tech system, will help me more on the social end of things
with kenpoists outside my school. And with the basic ideas on
the table, a free exchange of more complex ideas can happen.
I've enjoyed reading/learning from this thread.
:asian:

There might be two other things worth considering.

First, it isn't necessarily true that someone who learns 16 techniques per belt level will spend more time on each technique, and so "master," them. (I'm extremely dubious about this idea of "mastering," techniques or anything else, but perhaps that's another conversation.)It also doesn't necessarily follow that somebody learning 24 will necessarily learn more, if they're taught badly. But it has been my observation that many folks in kenpo want to get that next belt just as quick as they can, and that the longer list of techniques does tend to increase the time-in-grade.

And second--just to be totally contradictory of what I just suggested--I wonder about the idea that the curriculum should be watered down just to maintain people's interest. In fact, I sometimes think that the whole colored belt thing was a mistake: too much in our culture already encourages the notion that students need to be given a cookie every day, or they won't study. Encouragement, sure--but shouldn't we be trying to communicate the notion that the knowledge, and its pursuit, are valuable in and of themselves?

Thank you.

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

...I sometimes think that the whole colored belt thing was a mistake...

I've thought about this a lot, and I have to say that I sometimes reach the same conclusion. I seem to recall that even Ed Parker was originally against the colored belt ranking system.

Even when I try to focus on learning material instead of trying to attain the next belt, I find myself wondering how long it will be before I can test, and that's a distraction. After reading and participating in this thread, I've actually thought about going to the owner of my school and asking him if I can skip the whole belt thing and just have him teach me stuff. I'm not thinking it very seriously, but it came to mind.

Just yesterday I read the following in "Zen In The Martial Arts" by Joe Hyams:

"When one eye is fixed upon your destination, there is only one eye left with which to find the Way."

My thanks also to those participating in an enjoyable exchange of ideas.

Rich

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

We are in what is considered in chess as an Impasse'. I definitely won't yield my position in this area, and vice versa. I would say the point is moot . The floor is yours.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

At the risk of turning this into a mutual admiration society, I want to thank you again for being courteous and I am please that we have covered this topic without degenerating into some of the nonsense that has invaded other threads on this board recently.

I am proud of the way we were able to discuss this issue in a mature manner and I hope it speaks well of both of us. Thanks again.

At least I have a much better understanding of the arguement on both sides, and can now form my own opinion. Thanks for the insight.

jb:asian:

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
Oh well, I'll get off my soapbox now cuz I know Dennis will defend it to the end.


Right! But I need you to maintain your position so I can use you as an example.

:rofl:

:asian:

Much insight to these two curriculums. I have often wondered about the difference. I now feel like it has been answered very well.

Best Regards


JD

Screw all the color belts...

Maybe we should remain white belts until we learn all 154 techniques, all the forms, and all of the sets... then test for our black belts. Besides, you're not a serious student until you reach black belt anyway... Right?

Or maybe we should just buy our black belt, complete with certificate, from Chief Roman (http://www.blackbelt4you.com/) for $995.00

Sheesh, you can skip all the ranks according to what he says on his web site. Why not??? Just remember that the certificate that you get in no way certifies you, or endorses you. LOL!

Sincerely,
Billy "I don' need no stinkin' belts" Lear :shrug:

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

Right! But I need you to maintain your position so I can use you as an example.

:rofl:

:asian:


As an outstanding example of what a 6th degree BB in the EPAK system should be Dennis. But I attritubute alot of that due to Larry's skill as a great instructor, and the people in his studio and organization that keep my head on straight.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

:D

I certainly don't feel the urge to rush up ranks. I study 16/belt and currently have all my material for Blue, but usually have to be told to test because I am not satisfied with my "mastery" of the techniques I have, and certainly don't want 16 more to contend with.
As for the belts themselves, I like having a logical progression and a sense of place. If you said "here, learn these 155 techniques and I'll give you a black belt" I would run away.

Whats all the hub bub - Bub? 16 or 24, if you have a good instructor, and a decent attitude. You should do all right. I know(I think?) the main thrust of the debate is understanding what you know. Does quantity equal quality? If thats the case, should'nt we be discussing the 32 tek curriculum? Was'nt the whole point of technique names/list. To professianalize the material, and the approach there of? I whole heartedly agree that a standardization of material across the board. Would make comparasions a whole lot easier. Even if they were only Association by Association. For the novice kenpoist. There is a reason for all the differences. From studio to studio, and technique list to technique list. Can you guess what the major underlying factor would be? Keep trying you'll get it...

By His Grace,
:D

I thought I was done with this topic, but I got more info/guidance from Mr. Duffy last night so I'll go ahead and put it up.

He said that the purpose and the importance of any curriculum is in its ability to transmit knowledge from the teacher to the student.

Mr. Duffy developed this curriculum because he feels comfortable transmitting the information to his students at this speed. He is comfortable transmitting it and he is comfortable that his students can absorb it.

I think everything else has been covered pretty well judging from other posts on this thread. The whole thing is laid out on the site and if you have any questions Mr. Duffy's email address is there and he would likely entertain any questions or comments you may have.
http://www.akfkenpo.com/curriculum/index.html

Thanks to everyone, I can see by the nature of the posts that we have covered this pretty well.
:asian:

The "methods used" during the teaching of these movements. This can make all the difference in the world as to how quickly you can learn and absorb the material... regardless of 32, 24, or 16.

:asian:

I just had my very first private lesson with Huk Planas and let me tell you this. 16, 24, or 32, I am the absolutly, most stupid mother %$#@er to walk the planet earth.

But I'm ok with that. That means I can only get better from here ...right?
:rolleyes:

Originally posted by GouRonin

I just had my very first private lesson with Huk Planas ....:rolleyes:

Doug,

Are you coming back to the dark side (Kenpo that is)? Or did you never leave? Or are ya just dabbling...

jb:asian:

Originally posted by jbkenpo
Doug,
Are you coming back to the dark side (Kenpo that is)? Or did you never leave? Or are ya just dabbling...

First of all, let me say this. What I am about to say is my opinion. So any one out there who feels the needs to message me after I say this or e-mail me to complain, don't bother. I could care less about your whiney tirades.

I think American Kenpo is a great self defense system. I also think that it is fast becoming the McKarate of North America. Ed Parker was a genious but there are a lot of people in Kenpo who think they're Ed Parker. I have news for you. You aren't.

Now I have met some of the best people from working out in American Kenpo. I have also met some of the worst. However, when I make a friend, and it's not all that often I do, I like to stay loyal to my friends. This being the case, Jeff Blay is a great friend of mine and when he has a seminar, hell, it could be on the martial applications of tiddly winks, I'm gonna be there.

American Kenpo has a lot of stuff. It's a damn good art. I'd be a fool to skip out on the good stuff it has to offer. I've dabbled in Judo, BJJ, Arnis, Pekiti Tersia, and gone deeper into Boxing ans American Kenpo and Systema. Along the way I have hit seminars for many different styles of arts. Even TKD.

So I'm around. I'm keeping my eyes open. Motion, is motion. Action is action. Until somone shows me how to grow and use a 3rd arm it's all going to be the same eventually. So in answer to your question...yeah, I'm keeping an eye on certain Kenpoists and what they're doing with their art.

Kaith Rustaz, did you ever get a satisfactory answer out of all that?

Well..I was brought up on the 16 technique cirriculum. but...we learned the extensions from the start..soooo....by the time we got to black belt we had to go back and find the techniques we missed before. but all that didn't matter, to be sure we were black belts, our instructor took us to all the local martial arts schools and we sparred. His perspective was it had to come down to fighting. if you can't fight, then you don't deserve to be a black belt. btw...we did kick alot of butt tho...hehehe

Originally posted by Ender
Well..I was brought up on the 16 technique cirriculum. but...we learned the extensions from the start..soooo....by the time we got to black belt we had to go back and find the techniques we missed before. but all that didn't matter, to be sure we were black belts, our instructor took us to all the local martial arts schools and we sparred. His perspective was it had to come down to fighting. if you can't fight, then you don't deserve to be a black belt. btw...we did kick alot of butt tho...hehehe

In my professional opinion, being an American Kenpo black belt boils down to three things:

1. Handling yourself on the street.

2. Handling yourself on the mat.

3. Handling yourself when life comes to test you.

Originally posted by GouRonin
You just better shut up mister or I am going to get on the next plane and beat your fists with my face until you give up crying for mercy!

I like the 24 system too. Leaves people with more time in the art before black. But that's just the opinion of an ex-Kenpo fool.
:D

Why not just go back to the 32 techniques per belt. We know the "cuts" were made for primarily ease of learning, (Americans, always in a hurry), and for financial (the longer you keep em' the longer you collect tuition). The original 32's had everything Clyde said almost wrapped up into one or two belts max!

Originally posted by kenpo3631
Why not just go ........


Lance, you are behind a bit...... Gou has been Banned from Martial talk for a couple of months.... (I just didn't want you talking to yourself.......)

:D

sure are intelligent:rofl:

I figured that out but I thought I'd thow my hat in the ring anyway.

Thanks for the reply though:asian:

When I first started EPAK in 1991 I learned the 24 tech/ belt thur blue. However, I am now in Mr Lee Wedlake's lineage and the # of techniques are much less but the expectation and the quality is much much higher. Basically, looking for quality and understanding over quanity. You can simply do a web search and find all sorts of clips that have "advanced kenpoist" performing advanced techniques that look not so advance.

1/3 of the system to 1st BLK
2/3" "2nd BLK
3/3" "3rd BLK

I really like this b/c it allows for the person to grow as a person. Being a WARRIOR is just as much about personal growth as it is techniques and ass kicken
. :asian:

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
That's what I thought, all the more reason for bashing the 16 curriculum. I have never liked it or will ever use it because it's lacking, severely. It leaves you too far out of the loop for those that study the 24 system, but you might catch up somewhere around 5th Black, but by then, those that study the 24 are so far ahead in knowledge and skill it isn't even funny. Oh well, I'll get off my soapbox now cuz I know Dennis will defend it to the end.


Have a great Kenpo day
Oh brother,
so if my school switched to a 30 technique system would that make us better than you 24 guys? or does that logic end with you at that point? Since its all variations of say Starblock wouldnt you say there is only one master key tech? why split hairs?

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
Oh brother,
so if my school switched to a 30 technique system would that make us better than you 24 guys? or does that logic end with you at that point? Since its all variations of say Starblock wouldnt you say there is only one master key tech? why split hairs?

You really don't get it do you? I personally think you have a very warped view of what American Kenpo really is by your posts. That's OK, as long as you can live with it.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
You really don't get it do you? I personally think you have a very warped view of what American Kenpo really is by your posts. That's OK, as long as you can live with it.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Clyde,

Have you ever heard that the 24 tech system was broken down in such a way that the first 8 techs reviewed concepts from the previous belt, the 2nd 8 were the core concepts to be trained for that belt and the last 8 were designed as a preview of concepts to come in future belts? I've heard this before and was just wondering if you'd ever explored this idea. I know in many ways the beginning forms are broken down like this.

jb:asian:

p.s. This is an honest question and isn't a baited question to eventually push ANY numbered AK belt chart.

Originally posted by jbkenpo
Clyde,

Have you ever heard that the 24 tech system was broken down in such a way that the first 8 techs reviewed concepts from the previous belt, the 2nd 8 were the core concepts to be trained for that belt and the last 8 were designed as a preview of concepts to come in future belts? I've heard this before and was just wondering if you'd ever explored this idea. I know in many ways the beginning forms are broken down like this.

jb:asian:

p.s. This is an honest question and isn't a baited question to eventually push ANY numbered AK belt chart.

That's about right, it looks different when it was the 32 and only went to green but essentially that's it. The sets and forms are taught at an appropriate level to match what the student is learning in the techniques. Don't get me wrong, I don't profess to know everything but I've been playing with this system for a few years now under the tutelage of (at least I believe) the best Kenpo instructor out there. He's opened my eyes to so many aspects of this art I wouldn't normally have thought of, and still continues to do so. I just hope I can get everything I need out of him before he retires.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
You really don't get it do you? I personally think you have a very warped view of what American Kenpo really is by your posts. That's OK, as long as you can live with it.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde
If you call the belief that a martial artist should just train hard on ideas that will work in as many situations as possible that is work the basics until its black belt level, before one becomes an academia junky, warped then I'm just that. It would seem that you teach a technique to illistrate every principle and we illistrate every principle in a single technique. Your one to talk about master keys. Just a side note where do you supose the family related moves concept came from?

Uh...how do you have a family with just one member?

Sure, every technique will, if you dissect it, illustrate damn near all the kenpo principles. For example, I had a big moment of illumination around blue/green belt, when I realized that everything is Parting Wings. For that matter, a reverse punch, if applied to a body, will illustrate damn near all the basic principles.

The point is this: in any one technique, they're tucked away and inaccessible to the student. And when you take away techniques, you are depriving students of the chance to learn what you know...and no, illustrating everything from one or two techs isn't the same at all.

Here's why: when you illustrate everything from one or two techniques, you are changing everything into theory alone. One of the reasons all those techs are there, is to illustrate and to put into action--not to tell, but to illustrate and to put into action--basics concepts and principles in an ISOLATED, and therefore accessible, format.

Is there any chance that this penchant for making students learn all that's in one tech has a lot more to do with the instructor's demonstration of knowledge than it does teaching? I apologize, I apologize, I apologize for toe-stepping--but you know, it looks like a desire we all have, an expression of a certain boredom that sets in at a certain point in training/teaching.

Look. Beyond the fact that if Clyde and I are both being academical, it's certainly not in any fashion that I ever heard of (and as an actual academic, I can definitely tell you that if we were doing academic kenpo I would not have the bruises I've got today, and my hands wouldn't hurt--that damn Bill, your student Clyde, smacked me UP on Wednesday night...perfectly right to do so, too, dammit), I'd argue that the desire to pull everything out of only a few techniques is really the dry, pure theory, academical side of the issues. It reduces actions to discussing action, for one thing.

If you'll look at "Infinite Insights," you'll note that Mr. Parker several times stops to pull everything possible out of one tech--Parting Wings, for example--before going on. Well, then why'd he bother to have people learn more than the couple of techniques he dissects? Because they're illustrations only, not statements of all there is to be illustrated.

I'm going to repeat a point I've made before: when you yank out chunks of kenpo on the grounds that they, "don't work," you are yanking out the wiring of a complex bit of technology. Then, to be sure, you're going to need to go outside kenpo to make kenpo work...

Thanks for the discussion, which helped me figure a few things out.

So if I follow yours and Clydes logic, the more techniques you learn the better the martial artist. Clyde never bothered to answer wheather or not a school would be better than his if they taught more techs but I would suppose he doesnt't have an answer. Memorizing 200 some odd techs and their endings does not make you a better fighter than the guy that only works 60. All the techs are similar in principles and basic motion but with a signiture of some specific tactics unique to that technique. If I follow your line of thinking it would seem that if we apply those tactics to the yellow through purple techniques, we are missing the pure art and are instructors are idiots. My instructor has just as much legitimacy as yours but you guys are the ones white washing the sorted past strifes that have gone on in the past not us. As for the techs themselves I say memorizing different nuances of the same thing is unusefull ( not useless ). Tactics are just that tactics they fulfil the strategy which is your method of carrying out a plan. From past posts Iv'e discovered that Clyde doesnt believe in the posture/balance strategies so its just tactics, tactics, tactics. You can't see the forest for the trees my freinds. Perhaps we are a bit more academic than you.
respectfully,

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
So if I follow yours and Clydes logic, the more techniques you learn the better the martial artist. Clyde never bothered to answer wheather or not a school would be better than his if they taught more techs but I would suppose he doesnt't have an answer. Memorizing 200 some odd techs and their endings does not make you a better fighter than the guy that only works 60. All the techs are similar in principles and basic motion but with a signiture of some specific tactics unique to that technique. If I follow your line of thinking it would seem that if we apply those tactics to the yellow through purple techniques, we are missing the pure art and are instructors are idiots. My instructor has just as much legitimacy as yours but you guys are the ones white washing the sorted past strifes that have gone on in the past not us. As for the techs themselves I say memorizing different nuances of the same thing is unusefull ( not useless ). Tactics are just that tactics they fulfil the strategy which is your method of carrying out a plan. From past posts Iv'e discovered that Clyde doesnt believe in the posture/balance strategies so its just tactics, tactics, tactics. You can't see the forest for the trees my freinds. Perhaps we are a bit more academic than you.
respectfully,

No, more techniques will not make you better, however, it will help you understand the dynamics of motion throughout the Universal Pattern. If you want to do Star Block and create a system around that, be my guest.

When did I bring up legitamacy of instructors and past strifes?

How can you say I don't believe in posture/balance stratagies? I just feel there's a better way to explain it to the common layman or beginning student, I never said it was without merit.

If I'm correct you're talking about Kenpo 2000, that being said the Head guy would be Skip Hancock. I've seen his video tapes, can't say I got anything useful from them, never said he wasn't legit or didn't have any knowledge. I really don't know how you could've interpreted it that way.

I do see the forest, it's vibrant green with leaves and branches and animals. I see it much like I do Kenpo, full of new and exciting aspects to discover and explore.

You are truly distorting my words to meet your expectations, and doing so in a negative way. You've said yourself, you're not an instructor, so how do you know what's best to teach? I am an instructor, and have been for many years, and even have BB's to my name, can you say the same? I get results, great results from my students, and travel quite a bit to teach others that would like acquire the skills and knowledge I have. Once again, can you say the same?

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Clyde,
Its just that you guys keep trying to jam this EPAK or what ever down our throats. I'll say it again there are no Tatum schools in this neck of the woods so unless you have a concrete answer to a kenpo question the whole Advertisment for your systm thing is about worthless to just about any one outside your area ( i'm sure Tatum has other schools in other cities, maybe you could list a few for the benefit of people not living in your area). I only brought my instructor up because Robert keeps aluding to my "instuctors lack of knowlege". As for your inability to gain any thing usefull from his video series, I am not the least bit suprised.

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
Clyde,
Its just that you guys keep trying to jam this EPAK or what ever down our throats. I'll say it again there are no Tatum schools in this neck of the woods so unless you have a concrete answer to a kenpo question the whole Advertisment for your systm thing is about worthless to just about any one outside your area ( i'm sure Tatum has other schools in other cities, maybe you could list a few for the benefit of people not living in your area). I only brought my instructor up because Robert keeps aluding to my "instuctors lack of knowlege". As for your inability to gain any thing usefull from his video series, I am not the least bit suprised.


I really don't recall this forum being a bed for advertisement, I'm certainly not doing it, I'm talking about Kenpo, not my org. or my instructor, though he is a large part of what I do. I don't know who you're studying under, is it Skip Hancock directly or one of his instructors, I have no idea? The problem being is some people are afraid for whatever reason to list this info in their profiles. If you know nothing of what we do, why would you comment on it. I usually scrutinize material before I make judgement on it. Videos, books, etc. are there for the reading and viewing, and I make good use of them. I recognize the material I can use and that which I cannot. I recently viewed some videotape of Huk Planas doing a seminar. I wasn't impressed in the least, but I never made comments good or bad until I'd seen it for myself. Now that I have, you can bet I'm not going to pay money for the material he's teaching, or buy his video tapes, they would be of no use to me. They have value for others but from what I saw, I'm a little beyond what he was teaching. The same can be said of what I thought about Skip's videos. I never knew what he was teaching before I saw the videos. I do know some of his students (Dennis Lawson and Chris Crewz) who seem to be very knowledgable, and have the utmost respect for them. Let's base this conversation on the merits of Kenpo and solid logic from now on could we?

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Please, keep the discussion polite and respectful.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

Ok I'll list the instructors that ive had over the years so that I don't seem "afraid": Matt David (sterling Peacock), Skip Hancock, Damon Tong, Tehuro Chinen, Kimo Fiera , and Shihan (somthing or other in Everet WA). I currently train with Damon Tong but am a direct Skip Hancock student. Sorry for seeming so elusive.
If you are so above all those vid series out there, why don't you release your own series. I would love to check out a pirated copy.

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I would love to check out a pirated copy.

Touch 'O' Death:

You know, a little etiquette would go a long way.

Clyde and I have had a disagreement on this very same thread by the way and it was handled rather well. You could learn from it. Your attitude and your logic is deplorable.

I'm sure, at least I hope, Mr. Hancock would not appreciate your attitude. I'm sure he (at least) would be interested to hear about your video pirating habits. I'm sure he would also be amazed at your inability to construct a logical train of thought.

For example:

Mr. Hancock does not have 1 school here in Austin, Texas. I don't think he has 1 school in Texas anywhere but I could be wrong. According to your "logic" he is not worthy to have a school here and is only relevant to people in Louisiana or Montana or wherever you guys are.

Of course that is B.S. In reality it only means that he does not have a school here, much as Mr. Tatum apparently does not have one in Louisiana.

I bet there is not one charging rhinoceros in Louisiana either, does this also mean that they do not exist? Or that they are ineffective?

While looking at the Kenpo 2000 website I found this list:
KENPO 2000 is:
Do
Learn
Train
Practice
Be kind
Stand up for what is right and wrong
Be honest
Be fit: Spiritually, Perceptually, Mentally, Emotionally, and Physically
Help the less fortunate

Tell me, are you being Kinkd, being honest or helping the less fortunate here on MartialTalk where you are very purposefully NOT engaging in "friendly discussion of the Martial Arts?"

And tell me as well do you go up to 6th Degree Black Belts at Tournament and seminars and talk to them this way or do you only behave like this on the internet?

You need to concede that you have degenerated into a name-calling contest and see if you can find someone to show you how to behave. If this keeps up I will email Mr. Hancock myself and ask him if this is how he expects to see his students behave in public.
:soapbox:

Orig Posted by TOD

"unusefull ( not useless )"

I think I was a 2nd or 3rd Black when I met Skip Hancock, and done several seminars with him over the past 15 years. He is an excellent writer and "organizer". The UKS students really enjoyed his guest appearance at one of our camps (my former Association.)

He wrote the current Technique Manuals that were being prepared at the time of Mr. Parker's death. They went out for feedback, then back to Mr. Parker for final revision. Skip has a lot of talent and an exceptional understanding of Motion and the "families" of techniques, including Master Key Moves, and Master Key Techniques.

I am prefacing this just so you know I know where you are coming from.

He does teach differently from Clyde, myself, and most other EPAK black belts. However, He would be the last one to say that any motiion, found within the techniques are useless. If you follow his curriculum to the bitter end, ALL of the techniques are there, in their appropriate family catagory, as he designed. I am not defending this, I have just seen the written material. I cannot imagine him saying any movement is unuseful if executed correctly with proper utilization of Principles, Concepts, and Theories of Motion.

He may not have shared the entire system with you yet, but it is all there. You are training in other things elsewhere obviously, so put into perspective, that Mr. Parker cut the chaff, several times. What he left us with he considered useful, as do we.

Clyde is not a walking advertisement for Kenpo, any more than any of the rest of us advocated for what we beleive ... in the martial art's context. Look at posts by yourself, OFK, etc. Everyone has some type of agenda. This is not a bad thing. Sometimes that agenda is just to learn, or get one new idea a day, for other's it is to teach, or spread their idea of what Kenpo is, other's still get a vicareous emotional charge from the dialogue engaged in on forums, etc.

Put it in perspective; you know when you make a statement that you will elicit a response from Clyde, myself, Robert, etc. Likewise, we know the probable response from you. Does that stop either of us from making the response? Obviously not. What secondary gain are we getting from engaging in this dialogue? Now that is a more interesting question and varies from individual to individual.

Sic gloria transit Kenpo

My Agenda, as with many others here is to promote Kenpo. I've stated before that I'm worse than any door-darkening Jehova's Witness when it comes to doing Kenpo. My sole and true objective is to teach Kenpo well and I can't stand to see it done badly. I still believe everything is in the system, I've found alot of it, but there's much more discovery ahead for me. I see no reason to change or delete the techniques, forms, or sets because I've found the value in them, and I didn't at one time. I thought the sets and forms were a joke we didn't need. My eyes were opened by a great instructor and tons of students that needed those forms and sets to make them complete. I still can't stand Form VII, but over time I'm sure I'll find the value of it for either me or my students, so I refuse to throw it out on that basis. I have no reason to go outside the system to learn what already exists, though I used to think that as well, and cross-trained in other arts when I had no need to, I just thought I did. Times and attitudes change the more knowledge you have, I know, I'm a prime example of it.



Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

And can I have an "Amen"?

Originally posted by Michael Billings
And can I have an "Amen"?

Yes, I was going to say that I think that might be the best post on this entire website. So now that you mention it I'll say it now.
:asian:

Amen brother!:D

Originally posted by cdhall
Touch 'O' Death:

You know, a little etiquette would go a long way.

Clyde and I have had a disagreement on this very same thread by the way and it was handled rather well. You could learn from it. Your attitude and your logic is deplorable.

I'm sure, at least I hope, Mr. Hancock would not appreciate your attitude. I'm sure he (at least) would be interested to hear about your video pirating habits. I'm sure he would also be amazed at your inability to construct a logical train of thought.

For example:

Mr. Hancock does not have 1 school here in Austin, Texas. I don't think he has 1 school in Texas anywhere but I could be wrong. According to your "logic" he is not worthy to have a school here and is only relevant to people in Louisiana or Montana or wherever you guys are.

Of course that is B.S. In reality it only means that he does not have a school here, much as Mr. Tatum apparently does not have one in Louisiana.

I bet there is not one charging rhinoceros in Louisiana either, does this also mean that they do not exist? Or that they are ineffective?

While looking at the Kenpo 2000 website I found this list:
KENPO 2000 is:
Do
Learn
Train
Practice
Be kind
Stand up for what is right and wrong
Be honest
Be fit: Spiritually, Perceptually, Mentally, Emotionally, and Physically
Help the less fortunate

Tell me, are you being Kinkd, being honest or helping the less fortunate here on MartialTalk where you are very purposefully NOT engaging in "friendly discussion of the Martial Arts?"

And tell me as well do you go up to 6th Degree Black Belts at Tournament and seminars and talk to them this way or do you only behave like this on the internet?

You need to concede that you have degenerated into a name-calling contest and see if you can find someone to show you how to behave. If this keeps up I will email Mr. Hancock myself and ask him if this is how he expects to see his students behave in public.
:soapbox:

I don't remember calling any one any names. Could you give an example. I was trying to illistrate that I propbably wouldn't get a chance to see these videos that his instructor put out because you actualy have to buy them and I can't even afford to pay attention. If you need to tell my instructor I'm a vid pirate you go boy. I don't own any pirated vids though. I am expressing my own opinions here and in no way atribute my thoughts to Skip or any one. Lastly I should be able to debate with any one on any topic and if a person should attack me physically, even if I say it to their face, that person should be in prison not runnig a Karate school teaching children to solve arguments with their fists; however, if you need to call my intructor or what ever it is you are gonna do, go for it. Maybe he will fire me... Oh yea, I DON'T WORK FOR HIM! now if you could provide those names I called people I will personal write them an appology. Thank you for your time.
respectfully,

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
Ok I'll list the instructors that ive had over the years so that I don't seem "afraid": Matt David (sterling Peacock), Skip Hancock, Damon Tong, Tehuro Chinen, Kimo Fiera , and Shihan (somthing or other in Everet WA). I currently train with Damon Tong but am a direct Skip Hancock student. Sorry for seeming so elusive.
If you are so above all those vid series out there, why don't you release your own series. I would love to check out a pirated copy.

Just FYI, the videos I watched were not pirated, they were purchased at an exhorbitant price. The Form V video I've seen of Mr. Hancock's is of horrible quality. It looks like a third generation clone, The video is horrible and the sound is barely audible but he still want $49 for it. I couldn't make heads or tails of what he was doing or saying so I couldn't say if it was any good. The stick videos I saw were of a much better production value but the material was boring. The videos I watched of Huk Planas were from KenpoJoe's vault and they were of him doing seminars. They weren't bad but the material was boring for me as well. If they have value to you, great, they just don't for me.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

It seems much of this could be taken to e-mail--or at least out of the Kenpo Technical Forum.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

Originally posted by arnisador
It seems much of this could be taken to e-mail--or at least out of the Kenpo Technical Forum.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

So how would this not be technical discussing Kenpo and it's instructors?

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Since I was the camera man on the long 5 video I would tend to agree with you on the "quality" thing. I didn't have the right switch flipped on the camera. The forms long and short five were well performed though and broken down into the individual techs in spite of my efforts; so , I guess you can blame that one on me.:D


I am deeply sorry for all the names I called you but I don't remeber typing them on the computer(ha ha). I was JOKING about that pirate thing for gods sake and I hope you don't think I'm activly involved in illeagaly obtaining Tatum tapes... maybe yours though.

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
So how would this not be technical discussing Kenpo and it's instructors?

Per this post (http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3256), suggested topics for this forum are:
Kenpo/Kempo forms, techniques, concepts, training drills and theory.

Instructors might fit better in Kenpo-General. However, I was referring more to the discussion of possible video piracy.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
Since I was the camera man on the long 5 video I would tend to agree with you on the "quality" thing. I didn't have the right switch flipped on the camera. The forms long and short five were well performed though and broken down into the individual techs in spite of my efforts; so , I guess you can blame that one on me.:D


I am deeply sorry for all the names I called you but I don't remeber typing them on the computer(ha ha). I was JOKING about that pirate thing for gods sake and I hope you don't think I'm activly involved in illeagaly obtaining Tatum tapes... maybe yours though.

Then I must have seen you in one of the videos, I'll have to look for you next time I watch the tape.

If you manage to get a copy of the tapes I did, they're crap. I made an inexpensive set of tapes for my students to learn the techs., sets, and forms and never put them on the open market. If you can find a copy of one good luck, since I closed my studio, most ended up in a closet somewhere, at a thrift store or swap meet LOL. I'm thinking about another set much more professionally done, concerning reversals, enhancements, and using the equation formula to maximize the efficiency of your techniques. Look for it on the shelves soon.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

I have been sitting back reading much more then writting since I started martialtalk.com.

Before I get on my soap box let me first just say that I have learned quit a bit from the post's that many of you have written and your knowledge and understanding of the rules and principles of this system is AWSOME. However, sadly I have only seen a few of you conduct yourselve's like a ranking black belt should. Mr C is a great example of how twe should conduct ourselves and we should all thank him for his leadership and example

I can not beleave that I have read that someone could not learn from any well respected first generation Ed Parker black belt. If you think you are that good and know that much then maybe you all should be a 10th's. I don't think that 10 or 20 more would do any more harm do you.

I use to think like many of you and have the same trivial debates about techniques and organizations. However, I woke up and happened to see that EPAK or any other martial art is about becomming the best PERSON that you can be through martial arts training.

I have never meet Mr Parker but one of the things that I have heard and read from thoses who have spent time with him was that he was a very respectful, loving and caring person to everyone no matter what the thought of him or his beloved system. Not only was he a AWSOME example for us as a Kenpo Master but he was also a great example for us to follow on conducting ourselves.

I am no expert on EPAK and for that matter I am having a hard enough time being the best person that I can be. Yet, it seems to me that if you look around and observe you will see so much bull ****. All this ego crap has caused the fractured community that we now have.

We have disease, crime, war and lets not forget about terroist trying to kill us.

So, I ask you all. Must we have all this ego and in the long run/big picture what does any of this arguing get us?

:soapbox:
:asian:

I'm thinking about another set much more professionally done, concerning reversals, enhancements, and using the equation formula to maximize the efficiency of your techniques. Look for it on the shelves soon.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde [/B]

Well,

With the inside track to Tim Bulot your vids should come out excellent. With his skills he could even make a desert yeti look good..lol, and you'll have both and Mr. Tatum's experience and a school full of great uki's. Also, it's about time we get to talk about someone else getting beat up on camera besides you.

jb:asian:

Originally posted by jbkenpo
Well,

With the inside track to Tim Bulot your vids should come out excellent. With his skills he could even make a desert yeti look good..lol, and you'll have both and Mr. Tatum's experience and a school full of great uki's. Also, it's about time we get to talk about someone else getting beat up on camera besides you.

jb:asian:

But it just ain't fun if I don't get beat on so I have to make sure someone is really going at it to make it real. A committed defense is just as important as a committed attack when it comes to reversals baby LOL. But remember, it's just a thought right now, don't know if I'll ever get it off the ground.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by Atlanta-Kenpo
I have been sitting back reading much more then writting since I started martialtalk.com.

Before I get on my soap box let me first just say that I have learned quit a bit from the post's that many of you have written and your knowledge and understanding of the rules and principles of this system is AWSOME. However, sadly I have only seen a few of you conduct yourselve's like a ranking black belt should. Mr C is a great example of how twe should conduct ourselves and we should all thank him for his leadership and example

I can not beleave that I have read that someone could not learn from any well respected first generation Ed Parker black belt. If you think you are that good and know that much then maybe you all should be a 10th's. I don't think that 10 or 20 more would do any more harm do you.

I use to think like many of you and have the same trivial debates about techniques and organizations. However, I woke up and happened to see that EPAK or any other martial art is about becomming the best PERSON that you can be through martial arts training.

I have never meet Mr Parker but one of the things that I have heard and read from thoses who have spent time with him was that he was a very respectful, loving and caring person to everyone no matter what the thought of him or his beloved system. Not only was he a AWSOME example for us as a Kenpo Master but he was also a great example for us to follow on conducting ourselves.

I am no expert on EPAK and for that matter I am having a hard enough time being the best person that I can be. Yet, it seems to me that if you look around and observe you will see so much bull ****. All this ego crap has caused the fractured community that we now have.

We have disease, crime, war and lets not forget about terroist trying to kill us.

So, I ask you all. Must we have all this ego and in the long run/big picture what does any of this arguing get us?

:soapbox:
:asian:

1) Trust me, Mr. C is the last person to be an example of ethics, hell, I'm not either.

2) I don't want to put on as many degrees as my instructor, I'm not that good yet, but one day I may be.

3)Senior in rank does not mean senior in knowledge. Take Steve Spry for example. Being well respected and first generation doesn't make you any more knowledgeable either.

4)If you haven't trained with me, don't underestimate the knowledge I have, I might surprise you as I have lots of folks.

5)Yep, I've got an ego, and I'm the best person I can be right now, and I'm getting better every day.

6)I am an expert in the EPAK curriculum, and I want to know more about it every day.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Well first of all, if I debate somthing with someone I not only learn from the guy I'm talking to but then sombody like Robert will bury my "opponent" with a mountain of evidence to support my claim. Sometimes he turns it on me and refutes my claim.Either way I come away from the whole experience with food for thought. Martial artist without egos... now thats an oxy-moron. Thats right up there with honest polititions and hookers with a heart of gold. All three are figments of your imagination. Sure we all learn to tone it down, some of us more than others. As for Clyde, I feel his beliefs can be a little over the line sometimes and we owe it to him to see if we can chase him back. I'm almost never successfull but I feel I won a small victory by getting him to admit that a school that teaches more techs than his may not be better than his. This negates his prior argument about his school being better than schools with less techs; so, as I've stated, its a small victory. As for people thinking that I'm overstepping my bounds debating with sixth degrees, I suppose they wouln't even engage me in conversation if it bothered them so much. It would bother some I admit but they aren't on this forum are they?

The problem is that fundamentally the premises on which these arguments are being conducted are dead-end, sterile cliches. We can't figure out what we want to figure out, because of Mr. Parker's cliche about, "I'd rather have one technique that works than an hundred that don't," being taken as something more than the cheap homily it was meant to be.

And before anybody jumps down my throat, what is NOT cheap, dead-end cliche is the kenpo system, its concepts, its principles. Any saying was just a saying, just an easy way to communicate, not Holy Writ. And it was never meant to be anything more, I hope.

In other words, we're stuck because of the way we've got the argument set up.

Here's one way out: how do you teach students to look beyond the sayings, and beyond the necessary techniques, sets and forms?

Thanks,

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
Well first of all, if I debate somthing with someone I not only learn from the guy I'm talking to but then sombody like Robert will bury my "opponent" with a mountain of evidence to support my claim. Sometimes he turns it on me and refutes my claim.Either way I come away from the whole experience with food for thought. Martial artist without egos... now thats an oxy-moron. Thats right up there with honest polititions and hookers with a heart of gold. All three are figments of your imagination. Sure we all learn to tone it down, some of us more than others. As for Clyde, I feel his beliefs can be a little over the line sometimes and we owe it to him to see if we can chase him back. I'm almost never successfull but I feel I won a small victory by getting him to admit that a school that teaches more techs than his may not be better than his. This negates his prior argument about his school being better than schools with less techs; so, as I've stated, its a small victory. As for people thinking that I'm overstepping my bounds debating with sixth degrees, I suppose they wouln't even engage me in conversation if it bothered them so much. It would bother some I admit but they aren't on this forum are they?

Hey, I know an Honest Politician, really. I've also met the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy, really.


I wouldn't claim claim a victory over the technique issue, I just believe that teaching all the techniques at the right level makes you a better martial artists for that level. More BS techniques or less BS techniques will only confuse you. But, If you want to say you won, you won.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
The problem is that fundamentally the premises on which these arguments are being conducted are dead-end, sterile cliches. We can't figure out what we want to figure out, because of Mr. Parker's cliche about, "I'd rather have one technique that works than an hundred that don't," being taken as something more than the cheap homily it was meant to be.

And before anybody jumps down my throat, what is NOT cheap, dead-end cliche is the kenpo system, its concepts, its principles. Any saying was just a saying, just an easy way to communicate, not Holy Writ. And it was never meant to be anything more, I hope.

In other words, we're stuck because of the way we've got the argument set up.

Here's one way out: how do you teach students to look beyond the sayings, and beyond the necessary techniques, sets and forms?

Thanks,
Cheap homily... Thats a good one. Keep them jokes commin'. Seriosly though I think Mr. Parker was dead serious.

OKAAAY, I ate. So let's try this, from (I believe) Chekov (no, not the Weapons Officer), to illustrate a) where we're dead-ended, and b) the difference between a homily and practice:

"Any fool can respond to a crisis. It's this day to day living that gets us down."

It isn't in the Big Pronouncements that kenpo lies. It's in day-to-day work.

Or to paraphrase Mr. Tatum, "A teacher is not moved by the claims, but by the passion, of a student." I'd add that that "passion," isn't enacted by one or two bursts of energy, either. It's enacted by continuing to get up.

So to this extent, I can agree that the issue is one of practice.

I think that having a healthly and honorable debate is great. As long as it is health and honorable. It helps us all do the one thing that Mr Parker wanted all of us to do and that is to think and be open to new ideas and new concepts.

I am by no mean anyone to say who should think or act any certian way. However, the one thing that just about all of the true martial arts masters have in common is personalities traits such and honor, courage, code(If you don't understand this one the go put on a pair of boots and serve and you will understand.), loyality, patiences, caring, iron will, and of course the love of thier art and their students. If greatness is what we aspire to be then should we not only learn from our masters from a technical point of veiw but also from the qualities that made them who there are?

There is so much knowledge here and I think it it awsome that we have a place to meet have have these discussions. However, if we are teachers should we all not be receptive from others that are also teachers?

Originally posted by Atlanta-Kenpo
I think that having a healthly and honorable debate is great. As long as it is health and honorable. It helps us all do the one thing that Mr Parker wanted all of us to do and that is to think and be open to new ideas and new concepts.

I am by no mean anyone to say who should think or act any certian way. However, the one thing that just about all of the true martial arts masters have in common is personalities traits such and honor, courage, code(If you don't understand this one the go put on a pair of boots and serve and you will understand.), loyality, patiences, caring, iron will, and of course the love of thier art and their students. If greatness is what we aspire to be then should we not only learn from our masters from a technical point of veiw but also from the qualities that made them who there are?

There is so much knowledge here and I think it it awsome that we have a place to meet have have these discussions. However, if we are teachers should we all not be receptive from others that are also teachers?

1) I did serve, 11 years to be exact with an honorable discharge. I know all about loyalty, honor, respect, and honesty. I've always expressed an honest opinion of what I think and do, but you can't please everyone.

2)Yes, we should be receptive to others that may have something to offer us, as of yet, I've only found one. I'm still searching for others, hence the research of videotaped seminars and lessons. I have always taken this approach because it will benefit not only me, but my students, to be aware of what others are doing.


Don't think I don't have respect for these gentlemen, they've put in many years to hone their skills and spent many hours on the mat. This is not to say that I haven't done my time on the mats either, and played just as hard if not more.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

HMMMM.....

I guess we all have our own paths as well as our opinions and ideas on who to train with, how to train and where to train. Maybe, what is imortant is that we all continue to train and train with focus, desire, guts and comitment and pass on our knowledge to those who seek a higher knowledge of kenpo.

I would be very interested in seeing your tapes when they come out so send me a line and I will invest the cash because I am sure you have lots of kenpo knowledge to offer manny of us.

However, I still do not understand why someone such as you with all of your knowledge, rank and experience would speak about others in a negative tone. I understand being loyal and proud of your lineage and I totaly understand that thinking process. However, is that blabk belt behavior?

Please do not think that I am trying to be disrespectful because I would never conduct myself in that way. I am just a little fish in a big pond trying to learn as much as I can about all that I can.

Originally posted by Atlanta-Kenpo
HMMMM.....

I guess we all have our own paths as well as our opinions and ideas on who to train with, how to train and where to train. Maybe, what is imortant is that we all continue to train and train with focus, desire, guts and comitment and pass on our knowledge to those who seek a higher knowledge of kenpo.

I would be very interested in seeing your tapes when they come out so send me a line and I will invest the cash because I am sure you have lots of kenpo knowledge to offer manny of us.

However, I still do not understand why someone such as you with all of your knowledge, rank and experience would speak about others in a negative tone. I understand being loyal and proud of your lineage and I totaly understand that thinking process. However, is that blabk belt behavior?

Please do not think that I am trying to be disrespectful because I would never conduct myself in that way. I am just a little fish in a big pond trying to learn as much as I can about all that I can.

You're absolutely correct about seeking and passing on knowledge and I couldn't agree more.

What is Black Belt behavior? I've heard this expression many times and for the life of me can't figure it out, would you mind expressing your viewpoint on this?

I have said nothing negative about anyone, the truth, yes, I'm known for it. It may appear negative to some but enlightening to others and I'm forever being admonished for it and can't figure out why.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

I know the feeling

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
This is not to say that I haven't done my time on the mats either, and played just as hard if not more.

Clyde,

Can you give us a timeline on your involvement with Kenpo specifically? I know your bio says 1976 for Shotokan. Didn't you do some time with LaRoux and played with JKD as well? When did you actually start with Mr. Tatum? Early to mid-80's? You were one of the house guys right? How long were you training at the house before he moved back into a studio? Wes was already there when you started right? What yrs did you get your 1st Dan thru 5th?

Thanks, jb:asian:

WOW,

I am not sure of how to respond to your question Sir. I am pretty suprised that you are asking me what black belt behavior is. I am sure that you being a 6th dan understand what it is to be a black belt and how a true black belt should carry themselves and act.

Do you agree that being a black belt is NOT only about your knowledge, understanding and ability but also passing on the knowledge and teaching your students proper actions and behavior toward others?:asian: