Jeff Speakman and Kenpo 5.0

[MJS]

Looking at the Jan. 07 issue of Black Belt, there is an article on Jeff, one of his students, and his new Kenpo 5.0 material.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on where he is taking the art. Lets not turn this into a bash session on the man.

Mike

 

[Doc]

Looking at the Jan. 07 issue of Black Belt, there is an article on Jeff, one of his students, and his new Kenpo 5.0 material.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on where he is taking the art. Lets not turn this into a bash session on the man.

Mike

Start by designating it as HIS art not THE art.

 

[matt.m]

I found it a very interesting read

 

[Danjo]

Looks like he slapped on some BJJ to what he already had. He teaches this on video?

 

[MJS]

Start by designating it as HIS art not THE art.

Ok, lets start again. I'm curious to know what everyone thinks of what he is doing to his version of the art.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Looks like he slapped on some BJJ to what he already had. He teaches this on video?

Apparently he has a video series that is supposed to be coming out. There has been alot of talk about it on the KN. I was just looking to see what everyone else thought of what he was doing.

Mike

 

[Danjo]

Apparently he has a video series that is supposed to be coming out. There has been alot of talk about it on the KN. I was just looking to see what everyone else thought of what he was doing.

Mike

Well, I think you can learn certain things from a video such as kata if you already have the basics down, but the idea of learning anything beyond that I am very sceptical of as I have said before. They're great for supplemental work, but not for actual instruction on anything very technical. I REALLY don't see how you can get good at grappling from watching videos.

 

[dianhsuhe]

Well I finally read that article today...I enjoyed it and it seemed to me to be well thought-out and a logical progression based in a post 1993 UFC world. I like fish-hooking as much as the next bloke but it seems like my fingers might get bit off!

I did not catch the "video learning" part however. I am not a fan of learning via video but I suppose that is up to the individual...

In my opinion the ground should be avoided as much as the opponent- it will be more unpredictable, it will hit just as hard, and even be more forgiving than my opponent. My first move when on the ground is to try my darndest to get back up.

 

[James Kovacich]

1) Well, I think you can learn certain things from a video such as kata if you already have the basics down,

2) but the idea of learning anything beyond that I am very sceptical of as I have said before. They're great for supplemental work,

3) but not for actual instruction on anything very technical.

It's easy to "flip the coin" on that one.

1) I think many will post that learning kata through video training one misses all the fine-tuning and "can" ingrain error into their muscle memory.

2) Supplemental, definately.

3) As you stated in #1 having the basics down is a plus but I think from a technical standpoint, training via video is far more effective training a systems fight attributes rather than something complex like a kata which at the end of the they will not be able to use.

If you just want to go through the motions, then you can learn practically anything in the martial art with video. But if you want to learn something with substance through video it wouldn't be kata. Even learning from an instructor, it takes many years to decifer the kata and to be able to apply the techniques in a real situation.

"Just about anyone" can effectively learn fight attributes through video.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

Well, I think you can learn certain things from a video such as kata if you already have the basics down, but the idea of learning anything beyond that I am very sceptical of as I have said before. They're great for supplemental work, but not for actual instruction on anything very technical. I REALLY don't see how you can get good at grappling from watching videos.

If it's the same, or nearly the same, art then I think you can learn Kata passably well - provided you have hundreds of actual class hours under your belt. Right now I'm rather successfully (so far, at least!) re-learning the Heian Katas via DVD. However; for the life of me, I don't see how someone without grappling training could pick up grappling skills from video. Perhaps a few useful tricks (I did from BJJ videos - but I already had 4+ years of Judo), but not the art itself. This concerns me if Mr. Speakman actually intends to teach, test and certify students via video. Heck, even the Karate Connnection (one of the first video training orgs.) admits that groundwork is important to well rounded self-defence skills - but it is not possible to teach effectively strictly from video.

 

[MJS]

Well, I think you can learn certain things from a video such as kata if you already have the basics down, but the idea of learning anything beyond that I am very sceptical of as I have said before. They're great for supplemental work, but not for actual instruction on anything very technical. I REALLY don't see how you can get good at grappling from watching videos.

I agree. Trying to learn from a tape is not the best way to learn. It seems that Jeff is adding this material to fill a void. Do you think that this is necessary? If grappling really is in Kenpo, why would he be taking the time to add this material in?

 

[Danjo]

It's easy to "flip the coin" on that one.

1) I think many will post that learning kata through video training one misses all the fine-tuning and "can" ingrain error into their muscle memory.

2) Supplemental, definately.

3) As you stated in #1 having the basics down is a plus but I think from a technical standpoint, training via video is far more effective training a systems fight attributes rather than something complex like a kata which at the end of the they will not be able to use.

If you just want to go through the motions, then you can learn practically anything in the martial art with video. But if you want to learn something with substance through video it wouldn't be kata. Even learning from an instructor, it takes many years to decifer the kata and to be able to apply the techniques in a real situation.

"Just about anyone" can effectively learn fight attributes through video.

1. No doubt. By having the basics down, I mean REALLY having them down.

3. Like I said, I'm sceptical. not like I haven't been wrong before though.

 

[Danjo]

I agree. Trying to learn from a tape is not the best way to learn. It seems that Jeff is adding this material to fill a void. Do you think that this is necessary? If grappling really is in Kenpo, why would he be taking the time to add this material in?

I think it has to do with a basic problem in Kenpo and Karate as taught in the USA for the past forty years or so. Tournaments, and the techniques required to be successful in them had taken the front seat ever since these arts have been introduced to the public at large. After the PKA etc. was established, you saw a slight move away from the tournament fighting and a move into kick-boxing skills. Then, when the UFC came in 1993, everyone realized that they had been leaving out a very important part of their studies: GROUND WORK. I think that many didn't realize that their art ever contained effective groundwork originally because they had never been taught it. So, when they realized the need for it, they simply tried to insert BJJ or whatever they could find (Including freestyle wrestling). Those that never left groundwork out of their teaching pretty much kept on doing what they were doing.

Most of the original ground work in the Karate and Kenpo styles had to do with take downs, throws and locks and holds. Not a lot of wrestling. If you went to the ground, you escaped and got back up. Motobu, Funakoshi, Chow etc. all had grappling techniques in their original curriculum. It just didn't really involve very much rolling around on the ground.

If you notice that the Gracies are not nearly as dominant in the MMA stuff as they were ten years ago, you might also notice it's because people have largely learned how to sprawl and get back to their feet if they're taken down. People like Chuck Liddell are prime examples of this. can he grapple? Yes, but he mainly uses it to avoid takedowns and get back to his feet so he can start hitting again.

 

[MJS]

I think it has to do with a basic problem in Kenpo and Karate as taught in the USA for the past forty years or so. Tournaments, and the techniques required to be successful in them had taken the front seat ever since these arts have been introduced to the public at large. After the PKA etc. was established, you saw a slight move away from the tournament fighting and a move into kick-boxing skills. Then, when the UFC came in 1993, everyone realized that they had been leaving out a very important part of their studies: GROUND WORK. I think that many didn't realize that their art ever contained effective groundwork originally because they had never been taught it. So, when they realized the need for it, they simply tried to insert BJJ or whatever they could find (Including freestyle wrestling). Those that never left groundwork out of their teaching pretty much kept on doing what they were doing.

Most of the original ground work in the Karate and Kenpo styles had to do with take downs, throws and locks and holds. Not a lot of wrestling. If you went to the ground, you escaped and got back up. Motobu, Funakoshi, Chow etc. all had grappling techniques in their original curriculum. It just didn't really involve very much rolling around on the ground.

If you notice that the Gracies are not nearly as dominant in the MMA stuff as they were ten years ago, you might also notice it's because people have largely learned how to sprawl and get back to their feet if they're taken down. People like Chuck Liddell are prime examples of this. can he grapple? Yes, but he mainly uses it to avoid takedowns and get back to his feet so he can start hitting again.

I still havent read the full article in BB, but it seems to me that this is along the lines Jeff is trying to take it...simple moves to get back up, rather than prolong the process by staying on the ground rolling.

In your opinion, do you feel that some of the techniques in the system, or parts of them, can be used laying down?

 

[Danjo]

I still havent read the full article in BB, but it seems to me that this is along the lines Jeff is trying to take it...simple moves to get back up, rather than prolong the process by staying on the ground rolling.

In your opinion, do you feel that some of the techniques in the system, or parts of them, can be used laying down?

Boy do I feel silly now. You're right. It doesn't really advocate staying on the ground.I read too hastily and thought the article advocated adding ground work to Kenpo, but it looks like it was saying the opposite.

Well, looking at it more carefully....I'd say his idea is pretty sound. The techniques do look like they came out of BJJ though: side-mount, guard, sweep etc.

"What would you do if you were taken to the ground in the street by someone with a knowledge of MMA?" says Speakman, "There really wasn't a system indigenous to kenpo to deal with that problem."

However, I still argue that there WERE grappling moves in Kenpo from the beginning. Even a quick look at Mitose's first book shows a LOT of grab defenses and escapes. Just because it was left out of mainstream teaching for years, doesn't mean it was never there.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

I still havent read the full article in BB, but it seems to me that this is along the lines Jeff is trying to take it...simple moves to get back up, rather than prolong the process by staying on the ground rolling.

In your opinion, do you feel that some of the techniques in the system, or parts of them, can be used laying down?

I'd go along with that. Just teaching someone how to sprawl, bridge, guard and, for life and death matters, apply a collar choke, will have doubled, IMO, the stand up fighter's chances in a self-defence encounter. Maybe we're, myself, at least, too quick to judge Mr. Speakman?

 

[Danjo]

I'd go along with that. Just teaching someone how to sprawl, bridge, guard and, for life and death matters, apply a collar choke, will have doubled, IMO, the stand up fighter's chances in a self-defence encounter. Maybe we're, myself, at least, too quick to judge Mr. Speakman?

Right. He's basically saying that the Kenpo he learned had no way to deal with grappling, and so he had to find a way to deal with that. It doesn't mean that no one else's Kenpo had no way to deal with it, but his was lacking that component.Sort of brings back the stuff that Doc has said over the years about what was being taught at the end of Mr. Parker's life publicly eh?

 

[MJS]

"What would you do if you were taken to the ground in the street by someone with a knowledge of MMA?" says Speakman, "There really wasn't a system indigenous to kenpo to deal with that problem."

However, I still argue that there WERE grappling moves in Kenpo from the beginning. Even a quick look at Mitose's first book shows a LOT of grab defenses and escapes. Just because it was left out of mainstream teaching for years, doesn't mean it was never there.

I agree. I consider a grab or choke along the lines of standing grappling. While I'm not familiar with the book you mention, I curious if there were defenses when you were on the ground.

With the MMA 'craze', I think that having some basic knowledge is a big plus. Looking at some of the pics., I see a bad position being reversed, some strikes, an escape and a finishing move done while standing, ie: a stomp, kick to the downed opponent.

 

[MJS]

I'd go along with that. Just teaching someone how to sprawl, bridge, guard and, for life and death matters, apply a collar choke, will have doubled, IMO, the stand up fighter's chances in a self-defence encounter.

Agreed. Looking at some of the UFC fighters such as Maurice Smith, who trained with Frank Shamrock, he did just enough ground work to survive the initial assault, fend off any further attack, and get back to his feet, to finish where he was stronger.

Maybe we're, myself, at least, too quick to judge Mr. Speakman?

IMHO, I tip my hat to Jeff. I have not been 'around the block' as many times as some others have, so I can only go by what I have seen in the Kenpo world, and that wasn't too much ground work. There are elements of grappling and weapons in the art. However, I personally like to expand upon that area. IMO, if one really wants to learn to defend against something, its good to understand what it is that we're trying to defend against.

Looking outside the box is never a bad thing, and as I said, IMO, Jeff is on the right track.

 

[MJS]

Right. He's basically saying that the Kenpo he learned had no way to deal with grappling, and so he had to find a way to deal with that. It doesn't mean that no one else's Kenpo had no way to deal with it, but his was lacking that component.Sort of brings back the stuff that Doc has said over the years about what was being taught at the end of Mr. Parker's life publicly eh?

I for one, would be very interested in hearing from those that did have that way in their Kenpo.