R
Rainman
Guest
What does it teach? Why the ebb and flow?
:asian:
:asian:
I like this set. My belief is this set teaches the flow of techniques, depth, speed, and timing. With this you get a visualization of targets and weapons. In our class we perform this 2 different ways. The first way is stop action. Executing 1 move at a time, analyze each movement and preceed on with the form 1 move at a time. The second is a general unbroken flow of the form. The 2 practitioners are moving about the same pace. This just happens to be my opinion.
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth
OP
Rob_Broad
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #3
The form is beautiful to watch and his has many different levels to it. You can look at aestetically, how it teaches the ebb and flow, the timing, the idea of mirroring, and getting in sych with an opponent.
OP
Rainman
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #4
One of the more interesting things 2 man set teaches is "fighting" for the outside leg check and the dominate position as it may relate to a controll manipulation in a particular section of the set.
:asian:
:asian:
OP
Kirk
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #5
Typically, at what level does one learn it?
It sounds really cool!
It sounds really cool!
Sigung86
2nd Black Belt
I don't think too many AK schools teach the two man set anymore, do they? I could be way wrong... 
It is, in many Tracy Schools, also referred to as the Black Belt set, and is taught at that level.
It is kind of going the way of the dinosaur however, along with other really great sets, like the original "Book Set". Many schools no longer teach the two sets...
The actual Two Man set looks very "Kung-fu" or traditional Karate in its content and its performance. Much like Book Set, which is very "Southern Kung fu".
I don't know of any sites that list techniques and kata, that carry the breakdown for either set. If I am wrong about that, any correct input on that would be appreciated.
Take care,
Dan Farmer
It is, in many Tracy Schools, also referred to as the Black Belt set, and is taught at that level.
It is kind of going the way of the dinosaur however, along with other really great sets, like the original "Book Set". Many schools no longer teach the two sets...
The actual Two Man set looks very "Kung-fu" or traditional Karate in its content and its performance. Much like Book Set, which is very "Southern Kung fu".
I don't know of any sites that list techniques and kata, that carry the breakdown for either set. If I am wrong about that, any correct input on that would be appreciated.
Take care,
Dan Farmer
OP
Rainman
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #7
Hmmm interesting. If your circles are too small 2M/S could like karate. If they are too large could also take on the appearance of a southern system. If the circles are elongated they will look like AK.
Beats me what correct is... I have not done mat time with anyone outside our club in 2 and 1/2 years that do AK.
I think green belt for my teachers club. 1st degree black may be the median though.
:asian:
Sigung86
2nd Black Belt
You need to see the original 8mm of SGM Parker and Chuck Sullivan doing the set from back in the early days. If your current version of Two Man Set looks specifically like AK, it has been modified to do so.
As I said, or perhaps meant to, Two Man Set is not, to the best of my knowledge, taught in EPAK schools anymore.
I wish Dennis Conatser were here to either validate my old memories, or to clarify.
Originally Two Man Set was a Black Belt Set. It is still carried that way in many Tracy's Schools. Not because it is technically difficult, but once again, Tracy's still carries many things the way they were originally taught.
Dan
At our school this set is taught for a kenpoist going to first degree black. From what I remember it was supposed to have been a form adopted into AK from a white crane kung-fu system. I guess, I don't know if that's 100% correct but at least that's what I was told and remember.
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth
OP
Rainman
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #10
You didn't get the meaning of what I said- One of the primary goals for those who study EPAK is to round of corners and elongate circles... I've seen that footage, don't stop looking there.
You mean how material was taught to them at a particular point in time. EP evolved and so did his system.
Stay on point Dan this thread is about what 2 man set teaches to the AK student. What do you use it for? How does it aid your students and what has it done for you?
:asian:
Sigung86
2nd Black Belt
Rainman...
It would appear that your condescension is only slighty outshone by your insecurity.
Two Man Set, as I assume you already know, was created at the time to replace what is now taught in Tracy's Karate as "Book Set" for Ed Parker's book, Secrets of Chinese Karate. Two Man Set, or "The Black Belt Set" as Tracy's system, alternately, refers to it as, is taught, as it was "originally" taught by Ed Parker to his folks, including Al Tracy, in those days.
I did not come here to dispute the fact that Ed Parker continued to change his system to reflect his changing perspectives and perceptions. Some American Kenpo folks seem awfully sensitive, and yes, insecure, about that particular issue.
Original is simply that, original or perhaps, more specifically, the point of origin. The techniques of Tracy's Karate or Kenpo, if you will allow that euphemism, and the various forms, are the way that they were taught to the Tracy's before the Tracy's left. For that time, they are and still remain original. Everyone, even Ed Parker had a point of origin ... originally.
Are the Tracy's techniques and forms Ed Parker Kenpo? Of course they are. Don't be so touchy Bubba! No one, particularly me, is disputing differences. I was simply alluding to the fact that the original Two Man Set is more Chinese, or Kung fu, if you will, and very little "evolved" EPAK without some major modifications.
Two Man set, to my particular understanding, is no longer a requirement for straight EPAK Schools. Very few schools use it, period, any longer, even many Tracy's schools.
Insofar as ebb and flow... In my relatively humble opinion, The Two Man set is only as viable or as useful as the instructors imagination. There are, now-a-days, so many ways that are actually better to achieve things that you might try to achieve using a relatively short, and basically, outmoded, Chinese Style Set or form. The Two Man Set was, and still is, essentially, book filler for a commercial product, Secrets of Chinese Karate.
Now... Hopefully, I have staid on point this time?
Dan
It would appear that your condescension is only slighty outshone by your insecurity.
Two Man Set, as I assume you already know, was created at the time to replace what is now taught in Tracy's Karate as "Book Set" for Ed Parker's book, Secrets of Chinese Karate. Two Man Set, or "The Black Belt Set" as Tracy's system, alternately, refers to it as, is taught, as it was "originally" taught by Ed Parker to his folks, including Al Tracy, in those days.
I did not come here to dispute the fact that Ed Parker continued to change his system to reflect his changing perspectives and perceptions. Some American Kenpo folks seem awfully sensitive, and yes, insecure, about that particular issue.
Original is simply that, original or perhaps, more specifically, the point of origin. The techniques of Tracy's Karate or Kenpo, if you will allow that euphemism, and the various forms, are the way that they were taught to the Tracy's before the Tracy's left. For that time, they are and still remain original. Everyone, even Ed Parker had a point of origin ... originally.
Are the Tracy's techniques and forms Ed Parker Kenpo? Of course they are. Don't be so touchy Bubba! No one, particularly me, is disputing differences. I was simply alluding to the fact that the original Two Man Set is more Chinese, or Kung fu, if you will, and very little "evolved" EPAK without some major modifications.
Two Man set, to my particular understanding, is no longer a requirement for straight EPAK Schools. Very few schools use it, period, any longer, even many Tracy's schools.
Insofar as ebb and flow... In my relatively humble opinion, The Two Man set is only as viable or as useful as the instructors imagination. There are, now-a-days, so many ways that are actually better to achieve things that you might try to achieve using a relatively short, and basically, outmoded, Chinese Style Set or form. The Two Man Set was, and still is, essentially, book filler for a commercial product, Secrets of Chinese Karate.
Now... Hopefully, I have staid on point this time?
Dan
OP
Rainman
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #12
No, I tried to teach you something and now you've spit in my face for it. No worries I'll try it again.
If 2 man set takes the appearence of Karate it would look mechanical with an emphasis on the straight line with corners. Kung fu in appearance could mean larger circles as opposed to elongated circles or elipses that EPAK in known for. It is an important distinction. The set will not work at an optimum level if it's leanings are one way or the other.
I disagree. 2 man set is not outmoded and is not a commercial product. It specifically shows alignment, placement, position and intended target. It shows some infighting strategies- controlling the gap- broken rythems- engagement and disengagement. Broken rythems make the set live. If a person mindlessly powers through it the worse thing that can happen is broadening the scope for the conditioned response.
Anything that is not taught by a skilled teacher can be detrimental to the executioner.
Please state your definition of ebb and flow as I don't think we are talking about the same thing.
:asian:
Sigung86
2nd Black Belt
No, I tried to teach you something and now you've spit in my face for it. No worries I'll try it again.
No Sir, that is presumptuous on your part. Your opening line indicates that you are a card carrying member of the First Church of the Immaculate Misconception and Presumptuous Assumption.
I did not spit in your face. I merely strenuously object to the tenor of your post. And trying again, in the same tone, does not make the situation any better. Your method of communication, as you do so with me, is pompous, at best. It is axiomatic that, in communication, that if you are not receiving the responses that you desire, then you should change your method of communication. You have chosen not to do that. Yelling, Where is El Bathroomo at the top of your lungs, deep in the heart of Mexico City, probably will get you no closer to El Bano
Your attempt at teaching appears to be on the face of it, an attempt to make someone think and believe the same way you do through repeated beatings. Brother, thats one reason there are so many offshoots and different schools of Kenpo, with more variants popping up all the time, and such dynamic discord.
Your second great presumptuous assumption is that you are in a position to teach me anything. Teaching requires two way communication, and that, Rainman, we, so far, have not had. You also presume to assume that I am in a position where I wish you to teach me about the Two Man Set. It, perhaps, has escaped your realm of possibility that I have known of, and practiced, and taught the Two Man Set for probably twenty-five years or more.
If 2 man set takes the appearence of Karate it would look mechanical with an emphasis on the straight line with corners. Kung fu in appearance could mean larger circles as opposed to elongated circles or elipses that EPAK in known for. It is an important distinction. The set will not work at an optimum level if it's leanings are one way or the other.
The Two Man Set, on the film and in virtually every version I have seen of it appears to be a short, Kung fu styled Set. I have taught it over the years, and have modified it, and dug in it, much as you have. I have gone past it for anything other than heritage and teach it that way. I also indicate the possibilities and methods of digging in it, but do not require anyone to bow before it. Insofar as elongated circles and elipses, be advised that EPAK is not the only system that has such things in it, nor should you assume that EPAK is the only system that is familiar with the concepts that you are espousing. The up side to this is that EPAK has chosen to closely define and clarify the methods and manners of application.
Insofar as ebb and flow... In my relatively humble opinion, The Two Man set is only as viable or as useful as the instructors imagination. There are, now-a-days, so many ways that are actually better to achieve things that you might try to achieve using a relatively short, and basically, outmoded, Chinese Style Set or form. The Two Man Set was, and still is, essentially, book filler for a commercial product, Secrets of Chinese Karate.
I disagree. 2 man set is not outmoded and is not a commercial product. It specifically shows alignment, placement, position and intended target. It shows some infighting strategies- controlling the gap- broken rythems- engagement and disengagement. Broken rythems make the set live. If a person mindlessly powers through it the worse thing that can happen is broadening the scope for the conditioned response.
I indicated that Two Man Set was a commercial filler. It had other, obvious, intention, as Chuck Sullivan and many others put a lot of time in on it. However, interestingly, it did not appear to have any value in Ed Parkers American Kenpo, after he began to develop his current system. It is, mainly heritage, in the Tracys System. That, is my opinion, much as yours is yours. Different, not necessarily wrong, just different. I stand by what I said. I do not intend to attempt to change your mind. Anymore than you should attempt, yet again, to teach me.
Anything that is not taught by a skilled teacher can be detrimental to the executioner.
Yet again, it seems, this is an indication of a superior attitude, without, necessarily, superior skill or knowledge. Your generalizations, and apparent, off-handed, insults do nothing to endear you to me, much less anybody that you would approach in the manner with which you approached me. I may not have turned out as many Black Belts as you I have no idea who you are, or your bonafides I do however think that if you approach teaching others the same way you approach "teaching" me, that, you may want to rethink your communication skills, as Im sure you are not getting across nearly as much as you think you are.
Please state your definition of ebb and flow as I don't think we are talking about the same thing.
I dont know, actually, what you mean by ebb and flow. Ebb and flow are glittering generalities with no real substance or impact. As I stated before, generally, and here specifically. You need to rethink your method of communication, all the way around. Arrogance, pomposity, as well as presumption and assumption and generally non-defining terms, will lead you down some outstandingly false trails and to some notable disillusionments.
Dan
No Sir, that is presumptuous on your part. Your opening line indicates that you are a card carrying member of the First Church of the Immaculate Misconception and Presumptuous Assumption.
I did not spit in your face. I merely strenuously object to the tenor of your post. And trying again, in the same tone, does not make the situation any better. Your method of communication, as you do so with me, is pompous, at best. It is axiomatic that, in communication, that if you are not receiving the responses that you desire, then you should change your method of communication. You have chosen not to do that. Yelling, Where is El Bathroomo at the top of your lungs, deep in the heart of Mexico City, probably will get you no closer to El Bano
Your attempt at teaching appears to be on the face of it, an attempt to make someone think and believe the same way you do through repeated beatings. Brother, thats one reason there are so many offshoots and different schools of Kenpo, with more variants popping up all the time, and such dynamic discord.
Your second great presumptuous assumption is that you are in a position to teach me anything. Teaching requires two way communication, and that, Rainman, we, so far, have not had. You also presume to assume that I am in a position where I wish you to teach me about the Two Man Set. It, perhaps, has escaped your realm of possibility that I have known of, and practiced, and taught the Two Man Set for probably twenty-five years or more.
If 2 man set takes the appearence of Karate it would look mechanical with an emphasis on the straight line with corners. Kung fu in appearance could mean larger circles as opposed to elongated circles or elipses that EPAK in known for. It is an important distinction. The set will not work at an optimum level if it's leanings are one way or the other.
The Two Man Set, on the film and in virtually every version I have seen of it appears to be a short, Kung fu styled Set. I have taught it over the years, and have modified it, and dug in it, much as you have. I have gone past it for anything other than heritage and teach it that way. I also indicate the possibilities and methods of digging in it, but do not require anyone to bow before it. Insofar as elongated circles and elipses, be advised that EPAK is not the only system that has such things in it, nor should you assume that EPAK is the only system that is familiar with the concepts that you are espousing. The up side to this is that EPAK has chosen to closely define and clarify the methods and manners of application.
Insofar as ebb and flow... In my relatively humble opinion, The Two Man set is only as viable or as useful as the instructors imagination. There are, now-a-days, so many ways that are actually better to achieve things that you might try to achieve using a relatively short, and basically, outmoded, Chinese Style Set or form. The Two Man Set was, and still is, essentially, book filler for a commercial product, Secrets of Chinese Karate.
I disagree. 2 man set is not outmoded and is not a commercial product. It specifically shows alignment, placement, position and intended target. It shows some infighting strategies- controlling the gap- broken rythems- engagement and disengagement. Broken rythems make the set live. If a person mindlessly powers through it the worse thing that can happen is broadening the scope for the conditioned response.
I indicated that Two Man Set was a commercial filler. It had other, obvious, intention, as Chuck Sullivan and many others put a lot of time in on it. However, interestingly, it did not appear to have any value in Ed Parkers American Kenpo, after he began to develop his current system. It is, mainly heritage, in the Tracys System. That, is my opinion, much as yours is yours. Different, not necessarily wrong, just different. I stand by what I said. I do not intend to attempt to change your mind. Anymore than you should attempt, yet again, to teach me.
Anything that is not taught by a skilled teacher can be detrimental to the executioner.
Yet again, it seems, this is an indication of a superior attitude, without, necessarily, superior skill or knowledge. Your generalizations, and apparent, off-handed, insults do nothing to endear you to me, much less anybody that you would approach in the manner with which you approached me. I may not have turned out as many Black Belts as you I have no idea who you are, or your bonafides I do however think that if you approach teaching others the same way you approach "teaching" me, that, you may want to rethink your communication skills, as Im sure you are not getting across nearly as much as you think you are.
Please state your definition of ebb and flow as I don't think we are talking about the same thing.
I dont know, actually, what you mean by ebb and flow. Ebb and flow are glittering generalities with no real substance or impact. As I stated before, generally, and here specifically. You need to rethink your method of communication, all the way around. Arrogance, pomposity, as well as presumption and assumption and generally non-defining terms, will lead you down some outstandingly false trails and to some notable disillusionments.
Dan
eternalwhitebelt
Green Belt
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2002
- Messages
- 104
- Reaction score
- 0
Anyways, to get back on topic. My EPAK school teaches it as part of the curriculum. It does seem to be going the way of the dinosaur. There is not much enthusiasm for it. As far as teaching ebb and flow our school incorporates more of the filipino drills adapted to EPAK.
OP
Rainman
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #15
I have listed some things it contains and things that were taught to me and the value it contains. Not once have I started with informal fallacies and the ad hominims contained in the rant you just presented to me.
I'll remind you again this thread was designed to discuss 2 man set and what it contains not whether you think it is a waste of time.
So you don't understand what I'm talking about and rather than ask questions you hurl personal attacks rather than attack the ideas I convey.
Anything not taught by a skilled teacher can be detrimental to the executioner.... Uh, I was agreeing with you on a particular point you made.
Stay on point was referencing attack the concepts, theories and principles. I have not seen you offer one thing that could be of use to anyone. Just saying 2 man set is commercial garbage doesn't cut it.
You are meandering around all over the place. Where's the bathroom to I am pompous? First it is an old set -to then it is only for motion kenpo- to no one teaches it- to I have taught for 25 years and find it of no value - and then an attempt to invalidate what my teacher has taught me about it and what are some of its uses?
Name one concept, theory or principle you have chosen to take me to task on... you haven't.
Klondike93
Master Black Belt
The school I go to has listed at 2nd Brown, I think that's where it's listed in Infinite Insights as well.
:asian:
:asian:
OP
Rainman
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #17
We have foundations in the 32 that is why it is taught earlier where I train.
:asian:
OP
Scott Bonner
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #18
When I went to the Cappy Camp in Philly one of the seminars was on it (by Mr. Planas, I think) so it's still alive in EPAK. I found it facinating and bursting full of information, but, hey, I'm just a beginner.
Quite an ebb and flow, to say the least.
2-Man Set. Log on to the IKKA webpage for a very nice graphic presentation of the set. I believe you will need Flash loaded to animate it.
The United Kenpo Systems (UKS) still requires 2-Man Set at 1st Black. It is on my webpage as borrowed from Kenpo Connection (I believe.) It is written in 2 different formats.
It is an "Old" set; but that does not mean it does not have lessons - I like the flow part better than the ebb in this set. It inspired some of Bryan Hawkins' Black Belts to create a very nice 2-Man Staff Set. If nothing else it got the creative juices flowing.
You can always "modernize" it with checks or weapons or whatever. Just because it is old does not mean it lacks value, and I do not think that is really what anyone was implying. I guess I forgot what yall were disagreeing about to start with.
-Michael
UKS-Texas
2-Man Set. Log on to the IKKA webpage for a very nice graphic presentation of the set. I believe you will need Flash loaded to animate it.
The United Kenpo Systems (UKS) still requires 2-Man Set at 1st Black. It is on my webpage as borrowed from Kenpo Connection (I believe.) It is written in 2 different formats.
It is an "Old" set; but that does not mean it does not have lessons - I like the flow part better than the ebb in this set. It inspired some of Bryan Hawkins' Black Belts to create a very nice 2-Man Staff Set. If nothing else it got the creative juices flowing.
You can always "modernize" it with checks or weapons or whatever. Just because it is old does not mean it lacks value, and I do not think that is really what anyone was implying. I guess I forgot what yall were disagreeing about to start with.
-Michael
UKS-Texas
When I was re-learning this Set, again, through Ingmar Johansson and good old Jaybacca, I got the feeling that one side felt like it was heavy Chinese influence, but the other almost felt like it had a more Japenese flavour.
Anyone esle get this at all?
Anyone esle get this at all?
