A kem/npo sytem

[Brother John]

So, Let's create our Kem/npo style. I want specifics about EVERY detail we can think of. Let's start basic and build from there.

Wowie!!!
I'm glad you're not asking for any BIG task.....


Your Brother
John

 

[RevIV]

If it's a bar fight there's a lot of chance a pool cue will be swing at you..., the first time I went close to a fight that's what happens, maybe we can call it the Dufferin technique lol (Dufferin is the biggest cue maker)

I have seen more pool balls thrown and used to bash someone than i have seen them hit people with the cue. We better work faster blocking or a iron palm to catch that sucka'

 

[Hand Sword]

Wowie!!!
I'm glad you're not asking for any BIG task.....


Your Brother
John

Hey, I'm moving us around area by area (at least Trying to

)! Just follow my guidance, my brother, and you'll be fine. Big things are nothing more than a bunch of small things put together.

Start off with my last post.

 

[Hand Sword]

"The boxing stance is fine, but I still think that we shouldn't overlook the natural position."

Agreed! As well as transitioning from that to the boxing way.

Well, if we're going to adapt the boxing stance, it would be good to include the standard punches you'd find in boxing. The jab, cross, hook and uppercut. I think that open hand strikes should be taught as well. This can fall into the category of a slap, palm strike as well as raking strikes. Not sure if elbows are falling into this category, but those should be included as well. I think that the gunting or limb destruction that is found in the FMAs and some of the Kaju techniques is another good thing to add.

Mike

Just to play devil's advocate...Do we want the punches? Hands break, and get damaged for real, woulding it be better for the same movements, and rythm, execution etc..but, with open hand strikes? Plus, If we're focussing on Boxing attacks, wouldn't gung tanging be very difficult to pull off? Isn't that for a big, one punch attack? Wouldn't keeping it simpler be better?

 

[Touch Of Death]

"The boxing stance is fine, but I still think that we shouldn't overlook the natural position."

Agreed! As well as transitioning from that to the boxing way.



Just to play devil's advocate...Do we want the punches? Hands break, and get damaged for real, woulding it be better for the same movements, and rythm, execution etc..but, with open hand strikes? Plus, If we're focussing on Boxing attacks, wouldn't gung tanging be very difficult to pull off? Isn't that for a big, one punch attack? Wouldn't keeping it simpler be better?

That is why we should move a way from boxing style punches and teach dimensional stages of action. Punches would then not be so mutualy destructive.
Sean

 

[DavidCC]

Well, I don't think I agree that if we train to fight a trained boxer we will also be optimally trained to deal with what (I thought) we had identified as our most likely attack - the overhand right.

Yeah it's in there, but will we be spending time learning to deal with attacks we will likely never see (solid boxer's combos) ?

I also don't prefer the boxing-style mobility, I think of Kempo as more destructive and 'to-the-point' than boxing...

 

[bayonet]

I think of Kempo as more destructive and 'to-the-point' than boxing

Your opinion will change quickly if you ever come up against a skilled boxer. Some boxers can be brutally destructive. Does the name Mike Tyson ring any bells? Gee, imagine how much more "destructive" Tyson would be if he studied kempo. Since your fond of traveling, try taking a trip to the Kronk gym in Detroit, walk in and tell them you think your kempo is more "to the point". Report back to us with your findings.

 

[Hand Sword]

That is why we should move a way from boxing style punches and teach dimensional stages of action. Punches would then not be so mutualy destructive.
Sean

Sounds interesting. Care to elaborate further?

 

[Hand Sword]

Well, I don't think I agree that if we train to fight a trained boxer we will also be optimally trained to deal with what (I thought) we had identified as our most likely attack - the overhand right.

Yeah it's in there, but will we be spending time learning to deal with attacks we will likely never see (solid boxer's combos) ?

I also don't prefer the boxing-style mobility, I think of Kempo as more destructive and 'to-the-point' than boxing...

Actually, I kept asking the question about what would be the most common, but, it was never answered directly.

So, I figured, if we can get used to Boxers, who are faster and better punchers than any over hand puncher on the street, we would be able to deal with any puncher. Next I figured, if we now have to deal with fast moving boxers, then we should look at those that specialize in doing so, which are boxers. I then realised, for all of our ways, stances and blocks, or even our way of parrying, would have to change, or be upgraded.

As "to the point", I don't think it gets anymore so, than a flurry of punches, coming right at you.

I agree that kempo strikes can be more destructive, than punches, to the opponent, so that's why I still kept "open" hand strikes, with the boxing way of executing.

Just to be fair, I have had it out with a few boxers in my time, Their attacking methods, shouldn't be dealt with nuetral bows and blocks, IMHO. Those were designed for the one, big punch attack.

 

[Hand Sword]

Your opinion will change quickly if you ever come up against a skilled boxer. Some boxers can be brutally destructive. Does the name Mike Tyson ring any bells? Gee, imagine how much more "destructive" Tyson would be if he studied kempo. Since your fond of traveling, try taking a trip to the Kronk gym in Detroit, walk in and tell them you think your kempo is more "to the point". Report back to us with your findings.

We have to play nice about this. However, the point IS a valid one. No dojo person is going to replicate boxing as well as boxers (unless they also box). So for a punch and defense of the punch situations, boxers do have an advantage over us. You can't out slug them.


In general, I want us all to think through what we're saying or thinking. I don't want a flame fest of "my way is better than yours", so please no further sniping at each other. Just express the points/ counetr points without the " 'tude "


So for further posts, we are in a punch defense mode for now. The manner in which we'll do it has been touched on, a little above. Let's focus our thinking on this area for now, and what is related, which I've touched on, above.

 

[MJS]

"The boxing stance is fine, but I still think that we shouldn't overlook the natural position."

Agreed! As well as transitioning from that to the boxing way.



Just to play devil's advocate...Do we want the punches? Hands break, and get damaged for real, woulding it be better for the same movements, and rythm, execution etc..but, with open hand strikes?

Isn't eliminating punches going to limit what we an do? I mean sure we can apply a palm strike to the face or substitute a hook to the head for a slap to the ear, but what about the body?

Plus, If we're focussing on Boxing attacks, wouldn't gung tanging be very difficult to pull off? Isn't that for a big, one punch attack? Wouldn't keeping it simpler be better?

For myself, I'd rather not stand toe to toe and trade strikes. Also, is it wise to limit our defense to taking these shots? For example: One possible defense against a hook to the head, is to raise the arm, placing your hand on the back of your head/neck and using the arm to absorb the punch. Boxing has been around for a long time. I just find it hard to believe that the founders of various arts, ie, Kenpo, Kajukenbo, did not have solid defenses against a boxer. I mean, the last part of Kajukenbo stands for boxing.

As for the gunting....this is why I was advocating the use of footwork. With the proper angles, the gunting is possible. Not meant to be a fight stopper but applied correctly, it'll cause some damage.

Mike

 

[Hand Sword]

Isn't eliminating punches going to limit what we an do? I mean sure we can apply a palm strike to the face or substitute a hook to the head for a slap to the ear, but what about the body?

Kicks to the body and lower, from out there, knees to the body, on the way in, and after high attacks, elbows to the body, over uppercuts. More body weight and power. Otherwise your saying throw a punch from further out to the body, which would leave you compromised. If your close enough for correct uppercuts, elbows can be used in their place.

For myself, I'd rather not stand toe to toe and trade strikes. Also, is it wise to limit our defense to taking these shots? For example: One possible defense against a hook to the head, is to raise the arm, placing your hand on the back of your head/neck and using the arm to absorb the punch. Boxing has been around for a long time. I just find it hard to believe that the founders of various arts, ie, Kenpo, Kajukenbo, did not have solid defenses against a boxer. I mean, the last part of Kajukenbo stands for boxing.

Me neither, and you would't be. Bobbing, weaving, slipping etc.. is going on, with covering. Besides taking the shots is bad because that means the punches are landing on your jaw. Absorbing with an arm is a valid defense especially if getting blitzed with a fluury. A one puncher, no problem there. As for the founder's and their ways. Yes, they all had boxing, and supposedly devised to deal with it. Yet, stances, and hard blocks, in the Asian manner still permiate the systems. (the bo stands for Chinese boxing (kung fu)

)

As for the gunting....this is why I was advocating the use of footwork. With the proper angles, the gunting is possible. Not meant to be a fight stopper but applied correctly, it'll cause some damage.

Mike

I agree. Just thinking maybe a little too complex and dangerous to pull off, when it's fast and furious. Covering, moving, and countering much better IMHO. Against a one puncher, which is when they are used normally, just fine. My theme was train for the most difficult punchers, and this would easily prepare you to deal with the haymaker. Gung tings could be used, but, not truly necessary. For real self defense, keep it simplified and fast.


Just throwing stuff around for conversation and thinking purposes.

 

[John Bishop]

As for the founder's and their ways. Yes, they all had boxing, and supposedly devised to deal with it. Yet, stances, and hard blocks, in the Asian manner still permiate the systems. (the bo stands for Chinese boxing (kung fu)

)

Another inaccuracy that has been passed down in some telling of history. The "bo" stands for Chinese and Western boxing. 4 of the 5 Kajukenbo founders had western boxing experience. Peter Choo's was very extensive, having won several military (Army) titles.
Much of the footwork in Kajukenbo fighting is from western boxing or escrima. Unlike many of the kenpo arts, open hand strikes are seldom used. Only an occassional knife hand to the throat, palm heal strike to the jaw or ear.
The majority of hand strikes are either boxer style punches, snap punches, or escrima type hammerfists (cutting). The karate & kenpo punches and kicks in Kajukenbo are primarily "snapped" verses thrusted. The founders knew from their collaborations that a judo or jujitsu man could easily catch a thrusted punch, or kick.

 

[Hand Sword]

:asian:

Thank you for the input, sir!

Good point on the thrusting vs. snapping, and getting "caught". Definitely something to consider for defense and offense.

 

[Hand Sword]

Since we'll keep the punches, should we add the conditioning of the hands to the training? For the open hand strikes, the knife hand and palm heel, is that enough? Add more?

 

[Touch Of Death]

Since we'll keep the punches, should we add the conditioning of the hands to the training? For the open hand strikes, the knife hand and palm heel, is that enough? Add more?

Conditioning sounds good.
Sean

 

[DavidCC]

What kind of conditioning? You mean like, hitting successively harder targets, building up bone deposits until the hands are hard like rocks (and disfigured)?

Do we need to break thru the bamboo armor of the invading samurai LOL?

Are we planning to use our style to break out of pine boxes when we get buried alive ROFL?

I vote NO on "conditioning"

Totally unnecessary nowadays.
Causes permanent damage to the body. (Unlike warriors of the 17th century, I plan to live to old age...).
It requires lots of time that can be better spent.

HOWEVER students should be hitting heavy bags, and each other, frequently.

 

[Touch Of Death]

What kind of conditioning? You mean like, hitting successively harder targets, building up bone deposits until the hands are hard like rocks (and disfigured)?

Do we need to break thru the bamboo armor of the invading samurai LOL?

Are we planning to use our style to break out of pine boxes when we get buried alive ROFL?

I vote NO on "conditioning"

Totally unnecessary nowadays.
Causes permanent damage to the body. (Unlike warriors of the 17th century, I plan to live to old age...).
It requires lots of time that can be better spent.

HOWEVER students should be hitting heavy bags, and each other, frequently.

Laughs

 

[MJS]

Kicks to the body and lower, from out there, knees to the body, on the way in, and after high attacks, elbows to the body, over uppercuts. More body weight and power. Otherwise your saying throw a punch from further out to the body, which would leave you compromised. If your close enough for correct uppercuts, elbows can be used in their place.

So are all of the techniques going to use open hands?

Me neither, and you would't be. Bobbing, weaving, slipping etc.. is going on, with covering. Besides taking the shots is bad because that means the punches are landing on your jaw. Absorbing with an arm is a valid defense especially if getting blitzed with a fluury. A one puncher, no problem there. As for the founder's and their ways. Yes, they all had boxing, and supposedly devised to deal with it. Yet, stances, and hard blocks, in the Asian manner still permiate the systems. (the bo stands for Chinese boxing (kung fu)

)

So are we just using boxing defense or keeping some blocks?

I agree. Just thinking maybe a little too complex and dangerous to pull off, when it's fast and furious. Covering, moving, and countering much better IMHO. Against a one puncher, which is when they are used normally, just fine. My theme was train for the most difficult punchers, and this would easily prepare you to deal with the haymaker. Gung tings could be used, but, not truly necessary. For real self defense, keep it simplified and fast.

This is why I was stressing the use of footwork. Like I said, its not necessarily a fight stopper, but used correctly, it'll chip away, opening you up to other things.

 

[MJS]

Since we'll keep the punches, should we add the conditioning of the hands to the training? For the open hand strikes, the knife hand and palm heel, is that enough? Add more?

Hmm...I'm not a big fan of that, so I vote to leave it out, mostly for the reasons Dave mentioned.