Basics of Kenpo

[ProfessorKenpo]

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

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

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.

 

[SingingTiger]

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

 

[cdhall]

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:

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

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

 

[Kirk]

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:

 

[rmcrobertson]

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.

 

[SingingTiger]

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

 

[cdhall]

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.

 

[ikenpo]

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:

 

[Goldendragon7]

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:

 

[JD_Nelson]

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

 

[WilliamTLear]

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 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:

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

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

 

[Goldendragon7]

 

[roryneil]

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.

 

[donald]

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,

 

[cdhall]

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:

 

[Goldendragon7]

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:

 

[GouRonin]

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?