IKCA Karate Connection.

Old Fat???

I'm tellin' ...

 

I found the Orange tape at a rummage sale and for ten bucks I thought I'd give it a try. At the least I thought I could see what all this fuss is about. I'm not really convinced on the video testing format but I'm not looking to collect belts, so I guess its not really a factor for me.

After watching the tape and working through the material I gotta say I'm impressed with the techs, the kata is acceptable for a beginner form, but the production quality is so-so (but to be fair the tape was produced in what, 1990?), however on their website there doesn't seem to be any way to get any written versions. I find this to be a bit limiting as I love having a written manual to work with during my private training time and dislike having a tv on while I train. I find it distracting.

Do the 55 techs in the IKCA have direct analogs in Tracy or Parker Kenpo or very closely mirror techs or are they very distinct?

Mark

 

There are techs in the IKCA system that are close analogs of an existing Parker technique, however the vast majority have a piece from tech x, a piece from tech y, etc. Mr. Sullivan did not agree with the motion kenpo philosophy and felt that 15 or 16 moves in a tech would be damn near impossible to pull off and therefore he and Mr. Le Roux restructured the Parker System they were taught into the IKCA curriculum. The IKCA base techniques are designed to be able to be modified on the fly to adapt to a changing situation on the street - kinda you start a tech and if the circumstances change based on what you do and how they react, switch to another tech midflow that fits the situation. Or pull from whatever techs you like to create a spontaneous answer to the problem.

There is no "officially sanctioned" written curriculum because everyone seems to interpret what they see differently, so codifying the video (or in person) instruction is vastly difficult for an extremely mixed audience.

Having said that, I have written curriculum for my own students, and I do not teach only the base IKCA curriculum in my school. Like any system, there are some things that the IKCA curriculum doesn't address adequately for my standards, and there are some better ways of doing things. The base IKCA system is a great foundation for learning kenpo, as are the Parker system, the Tracy system, TRACO, and just about any other version of kenpo. It's all about how much you put into it. If you want a little out of it, put a little into it. If you want to get a lot out, you've got to put a lot in.

 

First of all about the video games comment. Uhmmm....but you can die as many times as you want in a video game and comeback to life until you get it right. How is that saying that they are getting faster? On my 360 I only have 8 buttons I can push plus two more on the analog controllers, ( the two joysticks, they can double as buttons). So really I only have 10 choices to make to any given situation in a video game, and most of the time your not going to use all of them. So video game analogy as it relates to martial arts techniques, now officially debunked in my opinion. NOT THE SAME THING.

Fewer techniques does equate to faster reaction time. It makes sense guys, those that want to argue that, ok, your opinion. YOu can argue till your blue in the face that the moon is made of green cheese that won't make it true. Just means that's what you believe.

Can you learn from videos? In my opinion absolutely if you put the time in, why wouldn't you? If your getting feedback to help to correct you, why couldn't you get proficient? It's not like the technique in the video is going to change everytime that you rewatch it. So yeah I think that you could. Attention to detail is key.

Now, to answer another question NO. Practicing 15 different versions of a technique a 1,000 times is not going to make you as good as the guy who only has one that he's practiced a 1,000 times. Only makes sense. 15 versions regardless of how small the variations, means you have to practice that technique 15,000 times to be as good with yours, as the guy with one. Answer another question that's why it takes 5-10 years to get proficient at AKK because you have 50,000 variations that you have to learn. Which makes no sense. Other than if your in it for the money. I mean ok. 50,000 variotions, means you've probably done every technique, 5,000,000 times, and your still only a blue belt. LOL! Last sentence there was a joke guys don't take it too hard.

Did Ed Parker know more than Bruce Lee? In kenpo karate I would imagine he did. That was his specialty. When it comes to Kung-Fu or Wing Chun, probably not. Case settled I think.

Bruce Lee didn't create a new martial art. He created his own personal style. He gave it a name, which even he regretted doing. Now people learn JKD to learn to fight like Bruce Lee. Bruce Lee was for his time like Ed Parker a special individual, and unless you have the same physical attributes as these two individuals. There martial arts or styles aren't going to work the same way for you. That's why martial arts have to be individualized. You learn the basics, and then you make it your own. My opinion but maybe that's why some people don't appear to have the same power and speed as Bruce Lee, the have different attributes. *SHRUG*

IF Bruce Lee was alive, yeah maybe he might have stomped Royce Gracie, maybe not, we'll never know. I can guarantee Royce would win today, cause like another poster stated, the guys dead.

Now I almost forgot. I love when people come on here and they start, griping about video lessons or learn at home courses, and they say, well so and so doesn't do that. Only to find out that so and so DOES do that. Just because YOU don't do it, OR YOUR school doesn't do that. Doesn't make it wrong or ineffective. It just means that YOU don't do it. Just because YOU can't learn from a video, doesn't mean that JOHNNY down the street CAN'T. It only means that YOU can't.

Now the I have seen the IKC videos. There good for what they are. I have been to schools of various martial arts checking them out. I have seen good students and bad. I've seen good kenpo practitioners and bad. NOt always bad kenpo technique either mind you. But, bad etiquette. THe I'm a badass syndrome, because he's a 4th degree blackbelt, and he wants to brag about how many fights he's won. :erg: I would say that having a partner is key to training with the IKC videos. Without one, it would be very hard to learn and to test if that is what you want to do. Furthermore, they do offer you the ability to pay the testing fee, and make arraingements with an IKC school to simply go there and take your test live with an instructor. You don't necassarily have to do a video test. You will for blackbelt is my understanding. THat goes before a board, but the other stuff. Hey they will even help you find a training partner. So how bad can it be. It seems alot better than alot of other stuff out there. OR at least just as good. That's my opinion do with it what you will. :asian:

 

Lots of stuff here. I'm on the run, so I'll just address two points.

Actually Bruce didn't know very much at all. What he had was incredible physical talent. Bruce began studying the arts as an extension of his dancing skills, to learn how to fight. he began Wing Chun training around the age of sixteen. By the age of nineteen he was a college student in Seattle Washington, and his own teacher. No one in the Traditional Chinese Community would deal with him because he was so cocky and somewhat disrespectful. So he bounced around learning what he could from established master like Ed Parker. When Bruce gave his famous demo at the IKC, he was 24 years old. Parker had been a black belt since 1953 in 4 different arts, studying since since he was 9, and had reputable teachers, and collaborators the entire time, including his original kenpo teacher, Kwai Sun, and Sijo Adriano Emperado.

Yes they can, if you have the knowledge that drives the physical attributes. I may be built like a linebacker, but that don't make me a great tackler.

Close. Maybe they don't know what they know as well.

"The more you know, the more you know."

 

Hmmmm....that's really interesting actually. I mean everything I ever read about Bruce says that he was studying martial arts before he was 14. I seem to recall a book that said he was in trouble all of the time for fighting. That being said, I do believe he trained with Yip Man didn't he? That's a pretty reputable master in the Wing Chun community I do believe. Also isn't physical talent one of those things that either makes you good or makes you great? I see alot of this, and have even met a few martial artists that swear had they had the chance they'd of mopped the floor with Bruce Lee. Very easy thing to say when a man is dead. I think there is a lot jealousy that surrounds him, in the regard that he got and still does get a lot of attention for his martial arts prowess. Tickles me.

Knowledge of what drives a physical attribute is not the same as having a physical attribute. Just because you know what makes someone fast, does not mean your going to be fast. It just means you know what makes you fast. In other words economy of motion, will make you quicker,faster. However, someone else that is or was naturally faster than you, if he has the same training in economy of motion, is still going to beat you to the punch. He was naturally faster, and will remain that way, provided proper training. SO the way he fights is not going to work for you. You WILL have to change things here and there to fit your body style, and attributes. Period. They may be minor changes, but you will have too. Every person is different and every person has different strengths and weaknesses.

Or maybe they do know what they know as well, but they don't have the attributes to execute like the master. There are things that will work for me because of my particular abilities that may not work for you because of yours. THere is no art that is universally applicable to every person. If that were true, there would only be one martial art. There would be no need for more than that.

"The more you know, the more you know", is not necassarily a good thing when it comes to martial arts. If you look, most martial arts when compared to another martial art, are actually very simular in appearance many times. So just because you seek to learn more, is not necassarily a good thing. If you know 5,000 ways to counter a kick, how many more ways do you need? Are you then perhaps inadvertantely adding a lot of confusion, or are you adding something of value. IF it's a counter you do not know, or a gap in your training. Ok I can see it, but if it's just to add, because you want to add more, ( and excuse the word), crap, then what was the point? You've added another thing for your brain to sort out, in a high stress, adrenalized situation. You don't have time for that. Think of your brain as a computer. THe more information you add to your computer the more information that it has to sort out, and eventually all those little bytes of information, slow your computer down. Until you have to either delete some stuff or wipe it clean and start over again. Now computers have RAM which is Random Access Memory. There are various types and sizes of RAM. 1gig, 2gig, 3, etc. The gig tells you how much random access memory that it can process, and therefore makes your computer faster. However, if you have too much info coming in and not enough RAM you lag. SO, our brain works much this same way. We have our conscious brain which can make various everyday decisions. IT's our reasoning brain. You can probably make 3 to 4 decisions at once with the conscious brain. THousands of bits of information take forever to process with the conscious brain. So we have the sub-conscious brain. WHich is like our RAM, much faster. It can make thousands of choices and decisions that your conscious brain can not make. However, the more bits we store in our sub-conscious the more info it has to sift through to get to the proper response. So if I know 3 or 4 really good techniques that will work for a particular attack, how much faster will my sub-conscious process that, to tell my body what to do? As opposed to having to sort through thousands or even just 300 techniques? A lot longer compared to the 3 or 4 for each attack. Knowledge is good, and it is always good to no more, but the question then is am I adding something of value or just adding to be adding?:asian:

 

True, but the more I know the more I realize I don't know all that much. LOL :uhohh:

 

Bruce Lee trained at Yip Man's school, but I have read some accounts that because Yip Man was very traditional he did not personally teach Bruce because he was not full blooded Chinese (His mother was half-german, half-chinese). It is also known that Bruce did not learn the upper levels of Wing Chun during his time with Yip Man.

Bruce's first martial art was Tai Chi that his father taught him. I have read that he started his Wing Chun training between 12-14 yrs old after getting beat up by a local gang. Bruce did get into "turf wars" with the local gangs and "came to the attention of the police" as some sources say. Because Bruce Lee was born in the US (thus being a US citizen), he was sent here when he was 19 yrs old. So even if he started when he was 13, he only had about 6 yrs of training.

Many of the masters who worked with Lee have stated the same thing that Doc has said. Bruce Lee was a talented person and picked up ALOT of stuff very quickly. But, his MA skill was not very deep to what he knew.

 

I agree with this to a great extent. Different people learn most effectively through different senses. Some people see it and pick it up; these are visual learners. Others depend greatly on the verbal content and others need to do something with a literal guiding hand twenty times before they can do it themselves even once.

I have trained in places and seen classes where the students may as well have been watching a video. The instructor was physically present in the room, so yes, it was an in person instructor, but they didn't do anything beyond showing the techiques to the class visually. Needless to say, the visual learners were able to get much more out of these classes than everyone else. A school I trained at years ago had an instructor who taught that way and aside from myself and three others, everyone hated his classes. I preferred the other classes, but didn't hate this guys. But I am also a visual learner. If he had been the only instructor, I would have gone elsewhere, as there were times when I needed more than just a visual demonstration.

I wish that I could say that that sort of instruction wasn't the norm, and maybe it isn't, but it is much more commonplace than it should be, particularly in my area, where McDojos are all over the place. Compared to some very horrible schools I've seen (thankfully not too many) and heard about (more than I'd have cared to know existed), DVD instruction would be preferable.

I havent seen the IKCA vids, so I have no comment on them specifically. Regarding video instruction, I think that the key things to remember with a DVD instructional class are:

Firstly, knowing what kind of learner you are. If you can't pick up things visually, then a DVD instructional course is a complete waste of money.

Secondly, being aware of the limitations of correspondence learning is important: it isn't the same as having an instructor there. You can't ask it a question and get an immediate answer and it cannot critique you.

Thirdly, student with a solid background in either the same style or several similar styles will get a lot more out of a DVD instructional than a novice. An advanced student will already have a good understanding of body mechanics, timing and distance, chambering, sparring and practicing with a resisting opponent and such that someone with no previous experience in any martial art will have. I have a large amount of books and some videos and those have provided a lot of useful and helpful insights to me during my training. But I feel that I get a lot more out of them because I already know what I'm looking at than I would have if I'd never set foot in a dojo.

Daniel

 

On the other hand... If they're happy with it, what's the rub?

 

I don't actually see a rub.

I do think that with any sort of DVD instruction it really helps to have a good foundation, but at the same time, I taught myself to play guitar from a video series (Mel Bay, if I recall) and touched base with a coworker who plays semi-pro about some technique questions and some feedback, and I got to where I could do what I had set out to do and felt that it was money well spent. I had no time to take guitar lessons at the time, still really don't, but at that time, I had zero, thus the vids.

Daniel

 

Well... There ya go. Ddi the same thing many years ago, and it was with Mel Bay. :uhyeah:

 

If this statement is referring to the IKCA it is incorrect.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute

 

Three people I heard say that were Ed Parker, Wally Jay, and Gene LeBell. His training was minimal. But all of the above also said he was the most gifted athlete they had ever seen for his size. Mr. Parker said, "If you show the kid something, the first time he tries it, he's almost as good as you. The second time he tries it, he might be as good as you. And the third time, unless you're really good, he'll be better than you."

 

Very well said sir. Most have the notion that Chuck Sullivan "watered down" the system they are familiar with for the video system. This is not true. Chuck was on the ground when Parker started up in Pasadena, and was there as he began his personal exploration and expansion of his knowledge.

And, as I've written many times before, None of the seniors of the art followed Ed Parker down the commercial Motion-Kenpo road. No one. The majority that some call seniors were either born into, or began in the motion-Kenpo era. Those that pre-date it for the most part, didn't like it and resigned themselves to Ed Parker's previous teaching which worked and served them well.

While what Mr. Sullivan presents is in fact "re-structured," it is a re-structuring of the previous material he learned, not the Motion-based Kenpo of "Big Red."

Further, the idea of "video" supported learning originated with Ed Parker. It was his idea, and it was on the drawing board for small market areas that didn't have enough population to support a commercial school. However, Parker intended that these "video clubs" would be supported by a roving team of instructors in pre-determined increments of time, to correct, guide, and promote students. Chuck SUllivan modified the program to suit his needs.

And once again for the record, I didn't agree with Mr. Parker either on the subject and told him so, To which he replied, "Ron, you're just old school hard ***." To which I replied, "Just like you." He smiled, and said, "Yeah, but business is business." With that, I could not argue.

Also for the record, I've seen video of many of the video students, and a lot of them look a whole bunch better than a whole host of folks from brick and
mortar schools. A whole lot better. I still don't think it's for me, and I know what I teach can't be learned that way, but a fact is a fact. So be careful if you throw stones, you just might be living in a glass house yourself and not know it.

 

So I have a question, Doc, and I think I know part of the answer, but I would appreciate any confirmation you can offer. I studied what was variously billed as Ed Parker's Kenpo, and/or as Ed Parker's Chinese Karate/Kenpo, in northern California, circa '68, '69, and this was prior to the infamous Big Red Binder. We didn't see the binder make it's appearance until the early to mid '70s, at which point the few of us who were locally senior walked away. So where does this put me in the general scheme of history?

I think in the past you characterized some groups as part of the "backwaters" of Kenpo, which I don't take offense to at all because it's a fair description. But nonetheless, backwater though it was, does this mean I was born into a pre Motion Kenpo? And if so, what period could I claim with some general accuracy?

Appreciate any insight you have.

 

Well it makes you pre-commercial Kenpo, but where you were in the Kenpo is dependent upon what, and how your teachers taught.

No sir, wasn't me. I have never used such a term, nor have I disparaged any of the pre-commercial, pre-motion Kenpo students. Remember, I myself started Kenpo with Mr. Parker in 1963, so the description would include me as well.

First, I don't think it was "backwater." The best of what the Parker Lineage had to offer came from those days. It was a time before all the little soccer kids, women, belt programs, and everything became a sales pitch starting with 5 private lessons for 39.95 before a group contract. Before everything was about "closing." It was a cross between health spa commercialism, and dance studio savvy sales.

None of the seniors made the switch. All of them remained "old school" Kenpo, what ever you call it.

Back then classes were rough and tough, and nobody cared if your feelings got hurt ,and you didn't get promoted for showing up. Technique wasn't always the greatest, and maybe you didn't know the name of something, but one thing was for sure, you knew how to make it work because you had to.

It was a time before sophistication, but everybody that came through the door had to prove they physically belonged. The art evolved intellectually, but de-evolved physically.

Now you have a bunch of wannabe intellectual hypothetical Kenpo students, that can name every term, and recite category completions backwards, perform sets and forms in their sleep, and can't fight there way out of their own bathroom after a piss in the middle of the night.

I'd rather have you watch my 6 any day. Where ever you are in Kenpo history, don't let any of the new kenpo nerds who can't fight talk trash because they know all the definitions, and all you can do is kick their collective ***.

I'm sorry, was I ranting?

 

Very well said Doc! It really was much different, even through the mid 70's.

Be safe and strong.

EKP RIP
Big Pat

 

"...a bunch of wannabe intellectual hypothetical Kenpo students, that can name every term, and recite category completions backwards, perform sets and forms in their sleep, and can't fight there way out of their own bathroom after a piss in the middle of the night."

I love it!

 

Thanks Doc. You've made an older guy happy (and a little more wise about his history) with what you've written. It was just as you described.

I've been out of it all for a number of years (career and raising a child), but I'm about to start again at an AK school, and old as I am, my movement will be recognized as something a bit above white belt (although that's where I will gladly start), so I need to have a response to "where did you learn that?", when it's inevitably asked.123