Checking the Storm...

[kenpo3631]

In any case, staying with Cheking the Storm should still be possible, but I'd think you would have to move to 1:30 instead of 3 (as debated earlier), because if you move too far away from a roundhouse it will be hard to control the hand.

Your opponent has many weapons to include two arms and two legs. If you step to 1:30 you are walking into the opponents back up weapon.

(With the deflect and block against the overhead strike, you are controlling the path of the club more and can then grab the wrist more easily.)

Imagine the club was a machette. Would you want to try to grab your opponents wrist if he was using a machette? I use this analogy with my students to make them move out of the line of attack of the club.

Grabbing the wrist may have to be skipped if you move to 3. No big loss, if the kicks work.

There is no need to grab the wrist. Sure if it is there then fine, grab it I guess. The kick is in the technique to act as a buffer to slow your attacker down. Of course you would leave the left hand up as a position check.

The biggest question is can you stop the force of the club with that left hand block without being knocked off the relatively weak base as you are trying to move to a cat stance.

Why would you want to stop the force of the club directly by blocking it? Have you ever been hit with a billy club or escrima stick? Just a light rap usually does it for most. The key is to "move the target" (move the weapon, move the target, move both). Get out of the way and kick him in the yah yah's. Remember this is a beginners technique.

Now, if they do the switchup from overhead to a strike from the side, roundhouse style but lower on the body like to the ribs or lower body, then being faked into putting your hands high will be very bad for you -- good luck getting those hands down to the lower body again.

If the overhead club attack is delivered by a "commited person" (comitted to the attack), then he should have to re-cock his weapon to hit you with roundhouse change up, giving you some read time. The whole key is for the opponent to commit to the attack.

A crucial key to making kenpo work is to have a good training partner. If they commit to the attack many of the what if's are eliminated because the technique actually works! On the other hand if they over commit then you open up a whole new can of worms as far as what if's go.:asian:

 

[kenpo3631]

"Your opponent has many weapons to include two arms and two legs. If you step to 1:30 you are walking into the opponents back up weapon."

It works on the clock principle...if you step to 1:30 his left fist will br there to meet you.

With the parry and block, you do move out of the way, as well, since you are shooting over to that cat stance. And, yes, I see the wrist grab as a nice bonus, not a requirement.

I read this alot. I teach and have been taught that the block...is actually a position check. In essence you you are moving and putting your hands in a guarding position, just in case the roundhouse gets in there.

That it is a beginners tech may be why it is written for overhead club instead of roundhouse club -- it's easier to deal with overhead than round.

Didn't you say you teach your students that the attack is a roundhouse club? How do you teach them to deal with it? Or was that someone else?

I teach it for an overhead, and we incorporate the roundhouse in to the base technique.

No, I haven't been hit by an escrima stick, but I don't have to get hit with the stick. If the stick hits, I failed.

Sorry. I didn't mean to sound condensending

BTW, I think we have a slightly different idea of what "what if" means. I think you are seeing it as "what if the first step didn't work". I, possibly because of my limited experience dealing with "what if's", see it as dealing with a lot of things, including "what if the guy is feingting, what if the first move doesn't work, what if the guy is throwing a combo, what if..." and a dozen other things. Basically, taking the movement already learned and finding other situations where it will work, situations where it won't, ways to counter it, and what to do if it is countered. My understanding may be too vague and all-encompassing. I don't claim to understand the "what if" or "formulation" stuff yet. I can't.

You're right we are looking at it different, but your points are completely valid...that's the beauty of Kenpo. Don't ever run out of questions... :asian:

 

[kenpo3631]

Originally posted by donald

Blindside,

Ideally I have maintained contact with the offending arm, and if he has managed to hang on to his weapon. I will use(ideally) opposing force to remove said weapon with the checking left . To clarify, (ideally) this tech is against a "overhead" club attack. To which I have intially responded to by stepping to 3 pm into a left 90* cat stance, while executing a r.inward parry,l.outward knifehand block/check, which converts to a hooking check to the inside of the offending forearm, and as previously stated. If the weapon is still there after his beating. I will remove it as mentioned/described.

Salute

which converts to a hooking check to the inside of the offending forearm

Is that the old "waiter's hand" check you are referring to?

How do you use it in that technique? When I practice this technique the guy is trying to split me in half right down my centerline, so the club is always well past the point where I can effectively use a check like that.:asian:

 

[kenpo3631]

Mr. Lance, shade your first kick about 3/4 inches to the RIGHT side of his centerline ABOVE the groin in the bladder area. Never kick the groin.

Thanks...I'll give it a whirl

PS- Any reason why I shouldn't kick the groin directly?

 

[kenpo3631]

Originally posted by Doc



In my personal unerstanding of AK, there is no such thing as an "X block."

Strike that, redirect...ummm, the upward cross block...

 

[jfarnsworth]

The way we practice it in our class is after the overhead club the arm bounces back when the stick hits the ground then travels horizontally. Basically overhead club to inward horizontal club attack. Just a thought for everyone.
Jason Farnsworth

 

[jfarnsworth]

Originally posted by Doc



Well sir, I knew I would get a bite but, I didn't think it would be you.

As I was taught, there is no "X cross etc. block" in American Kenpo. In actuality, the block is a singular "upward block" (or downward) defense with an "off hand catcher."

The same applies for the lateral "universal block and vise" It is and inward block or a downward block with the off hand acting as a control medium "catcher" for Control Manipulations.

Both hands are NOT deployed simultaneous but can give the impression it is similar to the traditional "X" block because at one point the forearms do cross. The American kenpo methodology I use is similar to Chin na, but as usual Parker modified and updated it for modern self defense use. A clue to it's proper use is in Long 1.

Thank you Dr. Chapel for many insight on this thread. I've enjoyed reading this more than one time over. My question is this. In Obstructing the Storm, doesn't this technique use the cross block up position? I realize it won't stay there for more than a second. You redirect and step up with the foot immediately but the cross block up position is on my kenpo curriculum basics list. I'm just curious about your thought on this.
Thank you
Jason Farnsworth

 

[jfarnsworth]

The next time I get into class I will try to execute the technique this way.
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth



Dr. Chapel could I ask another question to you. It just came into my mind. After reading your post on the cross block up, I was reminded of Defensive Cross. If I'm not mistaken (maybe I am, b/c it's been a long day for me) doesn't this "supposedly" use the cross block down to block the leg (for a split second) as the left hand rides back to the right ankle to drag the person out. I was just curious about your thought on this opposite.
Humbely,
Jason Farnsworth

 

[jfarnsworth]

Originally posted by Doc




Good question. I see you have your thinking cap on. You're not only asking good questions but, your questions are drawing logical comparisons to see if the conceptual idea holds up under scruitiny. Anytime you guide or capture and use both hands, from "Captured, to Defensive, to Raining," they are always deployed in succession never simultaneously. Sometimes the timing may be tighter than a simple syncopation and end up being Mora beat, but it's still the same in my experience.

Thanks again,
Now, when I got up this morning I notice another technique that I thought used the same action. This was Capturing the Storm. I was taught to use the cross block up then ride it back to the elbow hyperextension and wrist lock. Do you once again employ one hand "and then" the other hand? Again, curious on your view although I'm sure it's still the same.
Salute,
Jason Farnsworth

 

[Seig]

Kenpo 3631 brought up a good point when he said ideally. Remember that when we are teaching a new student Checking the Storm, we are teaching in the ideal phase. The more advanced student would start kicking around the what if stage as we are predominantly doing here. Then as they progress, the move onto the formulation phase, which is a lot of what we seem to be doing here.
Just to use an example of how I teach the technique:
Step out to 1:30 with the right foot while parrying with the right hand. Slide into a 45 Degree Cat as you execute a left EOB. Execute a left fron kick to the groin and follow with a right knife edge kick to the groin.
Now depending on the distance and the elvel of the practioner involved after the left front kick is delivered, i may have them change the weapon to a right twist kick. In both instances,if they are close enough to the attacker, I have them follow up with a downward/diagonal back fist to the temple/or mastoid.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Mace

SB,
I have to agree with Mr Broad here, you asked some very good questions that everyone could benifit from. We are all here to learn.
The what if's for techs are virtually endless, but here is where I've gone with checking the storm. What if the attacker has a clue about using the club or puts some speed and authority behind his strikes. I've found with a foam club ( much to my dismay) that almost all the time if your attacker is running even mildly realistic with the overhead and then inward strike you are going to get hit. Hard. And it stings with the foam club, forget it being a real stick or bottle. Now some may argue that stepping off to 3 and firing out the kick will negate the club, but I haven't seen it done at good speeds without the defender getting whacked with the stick. Just my findings, take em for what they are worth.
As to the X block found in obstructing, there's another one where you probably will get cracked in the head with the stick. The wrist still has mobility when the block is executed and force alone will probably bring the club to the top of your head. Again, just what I've found at good speeds.
Respectfully,
Mace

With a foam club that is unerstandable. However when you add a real club with significant heft to it (which is why he picked it up) you'll find the extra weight on the end of the arm in conjunction with a committed strike will not facilitate a change of direction very easily. Our students are instructed to full commit and hit the floor with the club to insure students get the idea to move. They rae further instructred to recover from the strike and swing horizontally (if they can). If the first kick is executed correctly to the correct place, the secondary strike will not be possible. Guaranteed. We demonstrated it repeated with novice recruits and martial artist alike in the academy. Mr. Lance, shade your first kick about 3/4 inches to the RIGHT side of his centerline ABOVE the groin in the bladder area. Never kick the groin.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

If I could offer a couple of comments on this string--which I liked reading--both would have to do with teaching the technique to beginners.

Sure, there are all sorts of "what-ifs," to be considered, and I particularly agree with the posters who noted that the attack can easily be modified into a roundhouse swing. However, what's the base tech teaching? I'd argue it's to get the hell out of the way, off line, up the circle, etc. etc...and that this dovetails with the way that previous yellow belt techniques (and Short 1) teach retreating first. In other words, I think that Checking the Storm first teaches, and foremost teaches, don't stand under a club.

The second thing I'd note (and it's something I'm struggling with myself) is that a lot of our problems with techniques come out of our tendency to prioritize the hands: we start motion with the upper body, we think of power in terms of the shoulders, we keep worrying about getting the hands into the right position...when in fact it's that first step to the side that counts most. It's just that, together with some of the other posters, I keep worrying about getting the hands to "fit," when I haven't moved to where I should be. And when I do, the hand problem usually goes away...

Thanks,
Robert

Sir,

I have to agree with you completely.

MOTION-KENPO has a structured LESSON PLAN with THREE PILLARS.

1. The Head Instructor or Teacher (Keeper of the Concepts)
2. The Web Of Knowledge
3. The Technique Manuals

Primary and most important is the Head Teacher of a group of students regardless of rank. They are responsible for the Knowledge of the Lesson Plan and a clear understanding of the purpose of the lesson plan as well as Mr. Parker’s Concepts to guide them in the implementation of the Lesson plan. This is where the weakness lies in Motion-Kenpo.

The LESSON PLAN is designed primarily for the TEACHER. Each situation technique is suggested by and taken from the “WEB OF KNOWLEDGE” in the LESSON PLAN. The HEAD TEACHER is then supposed to examine the “ideas” presented in the “TECHNIQUE MANUAL.” The “HEAD TEACHER” then utilizes THEIR KNOWLEDGE of ED PARKER CONCEPTS and designs an “IDEAL RESPONSE” based on the “ideas” in the TECHNIQUE MANUAL that's workable and also teaches a basic skill. Additional physical TAILORING is allowed for individual students who may have a particular physical deficiency with the LESSON PLAN lesson, but is NOT supposed to be done for personal preferences.

Unfortunately many “instructors” who were either taught incorrectly or misunderstood the lesson plan, and mistakenly engage in the commonly misplaced practice of the "what if" from the beginning with students. Students therefore are inundated with inappropriate options when they should instead be learning the simple lessons of the teacher created "ideal" technique well enough to be functional. This counterproductive "what if" mentality stays with the students and ultimately teachers and permeates Kenpo. According to Parker “What ifs” should not be considered at the First Phase. Parker said this was important to be taken well into black belt because the lessons are interrelated. Lessons at lower ranks are examined compounded, reversed, mirrored, prefixed, and suffixed at higher levels IF the lessons remain fixed and consistent. Theefore higher lessons reinforce lower lessons if consistently taught.

I find it ironic many Kenpo students constantly talk about "what ifs” as they conjure up more "Grafting" options while the so-called "ideal" technique, which is where students should be, no longer exists only because teachers don’t create or allow them to exist. That's why students and now “teachers” alike seek solutions in "tailoring," "what ifs," "grafting," and even the study of other arts to fill perceived “holes.” The holes do exist, but they are not in Motion-Kenpo but in the Head Teachers knowledge base to implement the Lesson Plan.

Until teachers use the Lesson Plan correctly, basic skills will not be learned and as now, students will seek their own answers wherever they can find them. These type discussions bear that out. Hordes of students from the same art, all with lineage to Ed Parker and a consensus is difficult to find within some groups. Differences are acceptable but a Head teacher of a group is responsible for functional consistently among their group.

Teachers must do their job. The Teacher created "ideal" technique should be functional and emphasize and teach specific skills at every level. As long as instructors don't do their job, students will continue to talk about what doesn't work, more than what does.

Ed Parker was the only "expert" and he knew he couldn't be everywhere. He wanted his art to proliferate why he continued to evolve, and solidify, what was supposed to eventually be a "strict hard curriculum." That is why the Motion-Kenpo Lesson Plan was created. There is nothing wrong with Motion-Kenpo with competent instruction and the proper use of the Lesson Plan as Ed Parker intended.

What most are unaware of is Parker "imported" the first tier instructors to implement the Motion-Kenpo Lesson Plan from other arts so it worked. Since then the "teachers" are now products of the Lesson Plan itself and have never been subjected to a strict curriculum. Therefore their weakness is passed on to the next generation of "teachers" who have even less information. (And so on)

As you know a "lesson plan" is only a guide to insure the curriculum follows a logical and progressive path for the student, but ultimately the teacher is responsible for the implementation of the information.

But a strict "hard" verbatim curriculum is even more dependent on the teacher’s skill and knowledge so Parker knew the next step would more than likely require a new generation of teachers. It is a sad fact that once significant rank is given, students are no longer interested in curriculum they feel is beneath them, and neither do they embrace the idea of "relearning" something they think they already know.

Students of all levels think they can learn basic and “advanced” materials through videos and personal exploration. You can't even learn basketball through video. Until students learn the lesson that there is much more to learn, and you can’t learn it on your own, Motion-Kenpo will languish at the hands of many mediocre teachers who should be students themselves.

This problem was created by Ed Parker and he knew that under the Lesson Plan Method, His Art would ultimately began to feed upon itself and lose people to other arts. Unfortunately he didn’t live long enough to bring the strict curriculum forth to show you just how great American Kenpo really is. As good as some think it is, it is ten times better than that.

That is not to say all Motion-Kenpo teachers are bad. There are many good teachers in Kenpo, but not as many as the bad ones.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Mace

Thanks for your post Billy, that is something that I had considered.
Doc stated:

With a baseball bat or tire iron this may be the case, but with a broken pool cue or car antenae (have witnessed both) this is not the case. Thank you for your input though, its food for thought.
Respectfully,
Mace

What if, what if, what if..

The Lesson Plan says the attack is with a CLUB for a white belt. Once you go down the "what if road" you never get back because no matter what the answer. you can always say "what if." The Lesson Plan and Web of Knowledge exists to define the attack at the first level of training. The problem is everyone is trying to experience all the levels at the same time. I do not blame students for that mindset, but it is extremely counterproductive to a sound learning experience and creation of significant basic skills.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by kenpo3631



Thanks...I'll give it a whirl

PS- Any reason why I shouldn't kick the groin directly?

Well first of all Sir, I am not really saying you shouldn't kick the groin directly. Motion-Kenpo survives on these "soft tissue" strikes to the groin, eyes, throat, etc. because it's targeting is always general, and these type of strikes at least issure a level of functional destruction no matter what, even though the reaction may not be "immediate." It is important however we realize this may not work, and there is a more effective method.

But back to the groin. Females first of all require a more specific strike for effectiveness, and it coincides with the same targets for men. But, striking a male in the groin does not guarantee either the reaction or timeliness of a reaction. Under certain circumstances, groin strikes to males can be ignored for a period of time. Emotions, adrenal dump, mental state of mind, personal resolve, and chemical intoxication etc., have and can overcome a strike to the groin. Therefore this strike is not a high percentage sophisticated target. Under unemotional classroom conditions they will always work, but in the dirty world of street self defense, a different philosophy of specificity must prevail.

Additionally, the generally accepted reaction where a person bends forward at the waist and "bows" his head is not the initial reaction if the strike is immediately effective. That is at best a secondary reaction. Persons struck in the groin significantly "Explosively" loose height with the knees buckling and the buttocks dropping, and the chin moving upowards, with the back straight. Bending forward and dropping the chin is a secondary response that may occur much later if at all.

In my earlier response Sir, I may have given you the wrong impression. It's not 3/4 but 3 or four inches to the right of centerline above the groin but below the lower abdomen. In our curriculum we almost never attack the testicles because the other mechanisms work so well and are more specific.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Mace

Doc,
As you have achieved that rank that you hold and are knowledgeable in the advanced concepts of American Kenpo, I will only offer these last opinions and from this point differ to you.
I have witnessed Checking the storm, Evading, and Obstructing performed with the prescribed attack with the defender wearing kendo armor. A club was used, but I guess that it did not have the "ideal" weight and heft. My sticks are only slightly heavier than foam ones and move almost at the same speed, fast. I will have to check the web of knowledge to see how many ounces each stick should "ideally" weigh. Anyway, thank God for the armor because the abuse that the defenders forearms and head took was not pretty. The questions that sprang from this were not "what if", but "how". How do we get out of the line of attack without offering up our arms, head, or body to the stick, primarily on the initial attack but also on a follow up as can be done in Checking. I guess this practical examination of the techs is wrong, but I can live with that. I know that the techs that are taught to yellow belts in my association will save their lives as is. And its not checking the storm but a replacement.
As for focusing on basics and not techs, I'm going to assume that was not directed at me, even though I seem to fall in the "motion Kenpo" category. My classes hammer on the basics. Methods of execution, angles, paths, grafting of execution, dimesional striking, forward projection and on and on are all taught through the color ranks, at a level that is compatible with the student and belt. These are then examined within the the framework of the techs as ideas of motion. This is probably wrong as well, but that's okay with me too.
Anyway, thank you for the insights, I'm bowing out from here. These are just my opinions, and as I've stated, I'm probably wrong.
Mace

Hold on there Mr? Mace, don't be so quick to assume you're wrong. Everything you said is reasonable and sounds good to me. I was not directing anything toward you personally for obvious reasons. I speak in general terms about the state of different facets of the arts. I addressed your point about the "club" because it is an argument I hear fairly consistently from those who have been indoctrinated to the "what if mindset." Within the context of most Motion-Kenpo teachings, this mindset is fairly engrained but students will always reflect what and how their teachers have taught, and that includes Mr. Parker.

Back to the "club." Mr. Parker and I had a discussion about what constitutes a "club." I think you alluded to the "sticks" I see many use in Kenpo. These are not "clubs" and weapons of this type are used fairly commonly in many of the Filipino Arts and are quite at home and are derived from those arts. That is the "stick" did not find it's way into the art, the art derived a use around the "cultural stick." where this lightweight, flexible, and durable item was geographically plentiful and available. Because of their adopted design into the arts, they are extremely fast and are of a weight that allows them to be "whipped" and in many instances within the execution, can actually exceed the speed of the human hand throught this "whipping motion." these are specifically NOT clubs.

A club is something by it's very nature has a significant weight to it to facilitate its use as a "bludgeon." Something so heavy that it's very weight itself is the weapon when used against another person, which is why it is being used in the first place. Ed Parker described it as "... something so heavy that if you dropped it, you wouldn't want it to land on your foot." (He smiled when he said that) But he went on to say, "Anything that you can manipulate as fast as your hand itself, would not be considered a club." Additionally when your body has to move or manipulate something of substantial weight, it has to make adjustments that slow it down to prevent injuring itself. It also requires a significant "commitment" to move its mass to use it as a weapon. Therefore once you start your action, the weight of the "club" that you accelerated to use as a weapon, now becomes a liability if your opponent moves. You must complete the motion, stop, recover and begin again.

Think of a baseball player attempting to 'check' his swing at the last moment. Because the object (bat) has significant weight (club) and he is making a fully commited attack (swing), it is very difficult for a trained athlete who does this on a regular basis to stop his action. If he were "swinging" toward the ground allowing gravity to be more of a factor, he could not stop, nor change direction. When a person uses a "club" to swing at your head, he's not trying to get your attention. He's fully commited and as Parker says, "He's trying to give you a split personality." All things considered, getting out of the way will be a lot easier because he will lose that speed that is the problem when he wields a true club with a commited action.

So overall Sir? you and I don't seem to have too much of a disagreement. I thank you for pointing out that a more comprehensive definition of a club was definitely needed for these type of conversations. I always say, it is important that we be on the same page with the same understanding before we can really communicate. Keep examining the techniques. that is what you're supposed to do.Thank you for the opportunity and interaction. Your points are all well taken.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Blindside

This may be an aside, but if the definition of the club is something "that you wouldn't want to drop on your foot." How do you explain the club form. I've heard that the "kenpo club" is different than an escrima stick because it is tailored to you.... yada yada yada. Dr. Chapel, your definition is significantly different than most, and honestly one that I buy more than most. If so, why did (or did he) Mr. Parker call the sticks used in Form 7 kenpo clubs?

Anyone?

Lamont

Sir, well actually he didn't. It was a term that was carried over from his original work in progress.

The origin of the "Club" Forms/Sets is an interesting one. Originally the Club Set was a single weapon utilized with the long portion of the club extending down from the baby finger side of the hand when held naturally. This is what Parker called the "closed position."

This was in a effort to address methods not found in other arts. He had a very unique method for using a club this way that helped to manage its weight, and gave it flexibility and effectiveness. This method Parker orginally began sharing with his friends in law enforcement. He was absolutely fascinated by law enforcement weapons and procedures as well as empty handed strategy. It was never supposed to be a "double weapon." He began working later on formulating a single handed weapon with the position reversed with the long extended portion on the thumb side like holding a conventional club.

But understand the weapon had "club weight" so the weak hand assisted in its uses and implimentation creating a single weapon manipulated by two hands, much like what he knew of the the Chinese broadsword. Taking these methods and converting them to American Kenpo with a club was the goal. During this process the pressure for more weapons and their forms was strong from the commercial schools for competition. Considering he had the largest tournament in the world, he couldn't ignor this and added "Weapons Forms" to the IKC.

Weapons were beginning to be a big part of competition in tournaments and the only other weapon previously addressed suitable for competition from American Kenpo was from the "Staff Set." The "Knife Set," was not generally known. Parker began changing what he was working on to accomodate the demand. At first he was going to modify the form so it was two weapons. A club held as previously mentioned (closed) and a stick held in the conventional (open) way. The club was used in many ways like a heavy shield defensively, but could also strike underhanded with considerable weight, while the stick was like a "foil" or rapier that could be moved and whipped. This created and offense and a defense with two weapons that disorientated your opponent because they both traveled at different speeds. This was straight out of Chinese Weapons.

Parker himself only believed in "practical" modern weapons and saw no usefulness (in general) in traditional weapons. After all, his is a self defense based art which meant any weapon must be something readily available. A broom handle staff, yes. Two sticks of the same size and weight, cut to fit your arm length? No, (unless they are in your pocket when you're attacked.) But the commercial schools demanded "competition forms" which also for a brief period had Parker scrambling to add a Nunchauku Form/Set as well. These weapons were never a part of Ed Parker's self defense philosophy, but demand forced him to spend time on that very popular segment of Motion-Kenpo, and its commercial viability could not be ignored.

Ultimately the pressure caused Parker to just abandon his club plans because his plate was so full. So what did he do to satisfy the masses? He took techniques that were already in existence, strung them together, and then he added "clubs" (sticks) to the hands. What could be more simple? It was easy for him and it satisfied everyone and served a purpose for him in his endeavor to create Ten American Forms. "Knife Set" was moved to and re-named Form 8 and the "Club Set" was dropped, re-created, re-named and surfaced as Form 7, not "club form." So you see Form 7 is not "Club anything" anymore. By changing "philosophy" to a more "Kenpo Kali," it made everyone happy, but moved him away from the self-defense philosophy (club) to a more competition vehicle with limited self defense application.

Additionally there is no such thing as "Kenpo Sticks," and he hated that term. He would say, "There is only Kenpo with sticks in your hands."

As it should be. Great question Sir.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Mace

Your definition is appreciated and points are also well taken. Have you found that you need to alter what you do when dealing with a "stick" as opposed to a "club"? Does your curiculuum address the possibility of both attacks or at least differentiate between the two? Also, do you think that a lighter or heavier weapon will more than likely be encountered on the street? I know I can find examples of both in my truck.
Respectfully,
Mace
(not sure if you were asking, but yes I'm male)

The gender issue was only because a female with a male sounding name was on another forum and I called her "sir." Then a "***** stirer came in to a 2 party issue and suggested I should apologize for not recognizing she was female. Duh! to assume most here are male (unless their name is Shiela) is normal. If you're not, say so.

Anyway, we make a difference between the club and stick, and in fact so should you if you use Parker's Web of Knowledge. All of the "overhead" strikes are "clubs." All the lateral strikes are lighter stick like weapons (except one) and must be delt with differently. The overheads you attempt to avoid and get out of the way. The lateral swinging attacks we block by getting inside. (with one exception which we do the same after avoiding the first swing).

The reasons are simple. Anatomically when you use a weapon with weight with one hand, it is easier and more likely that you will use it in an overhead fashion. You'll get it up in the air and use gravity to help you in striking. If you use two hands on an active target you will swing laterally like a baseball bat swing. "Returning Storm" is that exception and it is really a two handed heavy club attack which is why you avoid it first.

My experience in the street is pretty extensive, but it really depends on the circumsatnces. If a guy is near his home or gets out of his car, he's going to bring something fairly substantial (wouldn't you?) Baseball bats, and tire irons are pretty common when the encounter starts with one in a vehicle. Walking down the street or otherwise usually will find lighter weapons, but interestingly, most in these situations if they cannot find something with heft will use empty hands or revert to something large like a trashcan or flee. "Kali like" weapons used offesively or defensively on the street are non existent. Most under immediate circumstances given the option of picking up a bat or a stick, will op for the bat, (and that includes most kenpoist).

The "Kenpo fanatsy" of 2 guys squaring off with sticks and blades is non existent on the street. Even the Uniform Crime Statistics of the Federal Bureau of Investigation which keeps stats on attacks for the country, say that the statiscal data for "skilled" knife assaults other than forward thrusting or overhead are insignifcant.

Skilled knife fighters sneak up behind you and kill you. 2 guys with knives and skills will not fight each other unless it is a life and death situation. Otherwise, whatever the disagreement is, it isn't worth it.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by eternalwhitebelt

Wow Doc, excellent post. You and I finally agree on something. What next?

Well sir, I suspect we agree on more than we disagree. I encounter people all the time across the country who have been "told" things about me and what I do that are not true. This tends to shape things in their minds. Once I get a chance to interact, most people at least understand my point of view even if they don't agree, and see I really don't have any extra motives. I'm not empire building, and I have all the rank I can use. Some of the stories are pretty wild. As an example a very prominent Kenpoist was told recently I learned "nerve strikes from George Dillman." I never met the man.

Let's just keep working on it sir. I just love Kenpo, and promised my best friend I would always be open and honest and share my expereinces. :asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Kirk



Very interesting, that you've never met him. If I had to wager a
guess, I would've guess that you two have talked for hours over
a couple of adult beverages. Have you done any comparative
studying of his techniques?

Yes I have. You see Ed Parker knew him well and always said nice things about him, but we never met. But that wasn't unusual. There were people in kenpo I had little or no contact with as well.

Anyway, there is no comparison in the techniques. Mr. Dillman uses essentially the same principles from TCM but in a completely different way. His applications are based on his knowledge of point locations (for which he is awesome) and Okinawan Kata Bunkai because that is his primary source from Ota, Sensei.

Ed Parker dictated very modern and specific "American Kenpo perameters" of application that are from a more "modern" Chinese perspective and much different from the Okinawa Form Indexed method. Ed Parker believed (as I do) that Okinawa Kata hold some of the information regarding sequence etc,, but do not show or teach actual application as He (we) would use it in American Kenpo. That does not affect its effectiveness for those who apply it well. It's just not the "American Kenpo Way" as I use and teach it.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by kenpo3631



The "X" block is a thread all in its own...

However, if used it is a great transitional way of rerouting the overhead club.

I don't really care for the Technique just b/c both my hands are up in the air (violates the high/low theory) and leaves my body wide open for a possible strike with one of my opponents back up weapons.:asian:

In my personal unerstanding of AK, there is no such thing as an "X block."