ikenpo
Black Belt
Originally posted by GouRonin
I just had my very first private lesson with Huk Planas ....
Doug,
Are you coming back to the dark side (Kenpo that is)? Or did you never leave? Or are ya just dabbling...
jb:asian:
Basics of Kenpo
- Thread starter Bob Hubbard
- Start date
Doug,
Are you coming back to the dark side (Kenpo that is)? Or did you never leave? Or are ya just dabbling...
jb:asian:
G
GouRonin
Guest
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.
E
Elfan
Guest
Kaith Rustaz, did you ever get a satisfactory answer out of all that?
Ender
Black Belt
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2003
- Messages
- 684
- Reaction score
- 21
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
XtremeJ_AKKI
Green Belt
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.
kenpo3631
Black Belt
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.
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!
Goldendragon7
Grandmaster
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.......)
kenpo3631
Black Belt
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:
I figured that out but I thought I'd thow my hat in the ring anyway.
Thanks for the reply though:asian:
Atlanta-Kenpo
Blue Belt
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 *** kicken
. :asian:
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 *** kicken
. :asian:
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?
P
ProfessorKenpo
Guest
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
ikenpo
Black Belt
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.
P
ProfessorKenpo
Guest
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
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?
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
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.
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,
respectfully,
P
ProfessorKenpo
Guest
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.
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.
P
ProfessorKenpo
Guest
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-
-Arnisador
-MT Admin-
