Kenpo on the ground- part 2

[MJS]

I recently emailed Larry tatum and asked him if he could to a TOW with some grappling. He did. You can view it either by going to his site or its also on the kenpo net forum.

The attack is someone moutned on top and he's defending from the bottom.

I think it would be interesting to hear everyones thoughts on this. There is quite the debate on the KN about this! LOL!

Mike

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by MJS
I recently emailed Larry tatum and asked him if he could to a TOW with some grappling. He did. You can view it either by going to his site or its also on the kenpo net forum.

The attack is someone moutned on top and he's defending from the bottom.

I think it would be interesting to hear everyones thoughts on this. There is quite the debate on the KN about this! LOL!

Mike

I have yet to read the debate on the kenponet, but my first impression is not good. The guy standing over Mr. Tatum left a gap so wide a whale could swim through. I wanna see defenses against real grappling! At best this was a way to avoid being mounted by a guy that would rather punch you than acheive the mount. Your next E-mail should say, "Ok, now show us some moves against a **GRAPPLER** that is on you like white on rice."
Sean

 

[Touch Of Death]

I read the debate and of course the usual suspects were offended by the least bit of critisizm. My absolute favorite is when some guy ask the rhetoricle question "would you teach kenpo to a white belt with realistic attacks?" My answer would be, HELL YES!!! but I think he was looking for a "no".
Sean

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I have yet to read the debate on the kenponet, but my first impression is not good. The guy standing over Mr. Tatum left a gap so wide a whale could swim through. I wanna see defenses against real grappling! At best this was a way to avoid being mounted by a guy that would rather punch you than acheive the mount. Your next E-mail should say, "Ok, now show us some moves against a **GRAPPLER** that is on you like white on rice."
Sean

Right on my friend!! I agree 100% That was however my original intent when I sent the email. I was hoping to see someone on top, punching away. There was a HUGE gap with the guy on top.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I read the debate and of course the usual suspects were offended by the least bit of critisizm. My absolute favorite is when some guy ask the rhetoricle question "would you teach kenpo to a white belt with realistic attacks?" My answer would be, HELL YES!!! but I think he was looking for a "no".
Sean

Another good point!! Once the new student grasps the ideas, and they are serious about learning real SD, then yeah, start picking up the pace. You need to crawl before you walk and walk before you run, so the first day, to start beating the crap out of them...well, some of them might run for the door, but then again, everybody trains for different reasons. Myself, I want to know that what I'm doing is gonna work if I need it. I dont want to find out when its too late, that the past 17yrs of my training was a waste because I just got my a** kicked! And I would think that I'm not the only one with that mindset.

Of course, maybe that is why some people think that you need to train for 20yrs before you get the full understanding, and that the reality based or "quick" arts are no good. My question--Why the hell do you have to wait that long??? If I can learn something in a short amount of time and defend myself, well, after all, isnt that the goal????

Mike

 

[dcence]

It is very easy to pick apart a video clip because it doesn't have this or that. It really is. I think people are missing the point that the video is demonstrating A and many who might criticize were looking for B. You aren't criticizing Tatum as a martial artist; he just isn't addressing the situation some might like addressed.

If the guy was fully mounted he would probably have to alter what he was demonstrating. The attacker's center of gravity is very high and is something a good fighter wouldn't do in that situation, but that really isn't what was being demonstrated.

I am not a Tatum apologist, but make sure before criticizing a video clip, ask yourself what is he attempting to show, and then does he competently show what he is attempting to show.

I agree the attack isn't the most dangerous or difficult to deal with because of the points made already, but neither is a handshake and Kenpo has a lot of techniques for those. While there is some cross-over, there is a big practical gap between groundfighting and trying to adopt a stand up technique on your back and a guy kneeling over you.

 

[Thesemindz]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I read the debate and of course the usual suspects were offended by the least bit of critisizm. My absolute favorite is when some guy ask the rhetoricle question "would you teach kenpo to a white belt with realistic attacks?" My answer would be, HELL YES!!! but I think he was looking for a "no".
Sean

Hi Sean, I posted that. Are you saying you punch a white belt in the face as hard and fast as you can? Are you trying to argue that a step-through punch is realistic on its own merit? The attacks might be conceptually realistic and can certaintly be executed that way, but don't you teach beginners bigger, blockier attacks so that they can begin to explore basic motion? Are you saying a single step-through punch with no follow up attack is a "realistic" attack?

I didn't realize I was one of the usual suspects.


I love that movie.

-Rob

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

By now you have observed that I am the one who started the ugly debate about the TOW.

I just think it would be great to see Mr. Tatum smack and toss somebody who is properly mounted. A couple of minor modifications to the technique and I am sure we would have something that I would be proud to e-mail my BJJ pals and say "Look! That's Kenpo!"

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by Thesemindz
Hi Sean, I posted that. Are you saying you punch a white belt in the face as hard and fast as you can? Are you trying to argue that a step-through punch is realistic on its own merit? The attacks might be conceptually realistic and can certaintly be executed that way, but don't you teach beginners bigger, blockier attacks so that they can begin to explore basic motion? Are you saying a single step-through punch with no follow up attack is a "realistic" attack?

I didn't realize I was one of the usual suspects.


I love that movie.

-Rob

First of all, step through punches occur only in a karate studio, and training against them is unrealistic. Blocks can be punched through; so, we don't teach white belts that they will save them either. We teach them what will work, and offer them the chance to feel it working. Its up to the instructor to pull his punch until they got it right. And as stated above the whole lets use attacks a student will never encounter to teach basic motion is the reason its taking twenty years to learn to defend ourselves. I know, I know, you are probably wondering, "what does work against real punches?". Well I'll save you twenty years and tell you to get off the line of attack and cover. :asian:

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka
By now you have observed that I am the one who started the ugly debate about the TOW.

I just think it would be great to see Mr. Tatum smack and toss somebody who is properly mounted. A couple of minor modifications to the technique and I am sure we would have something that I would be proud to e-mail my BJJ pals and say "Look! That's Kenpo!"

OFK started the debate and I sent the email. There were no ill intentions behind this, just the fact that I felt that it would be good to see this addressed by a Kenpoist. LT is the only one doing a TOW, so I felt it would be good for everyone to see.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death

And as stated above the whole lets use attacks a student will never encounter to teach basic motion is the reason its taking twenty years to learn to defend ourselves. I know, I know, you are probably wondering, "what does work against real punches?". Well I'll save you twenty years and tell you to get off the line of attack and cover. :asian: [/B]

Very well said! I agree with that statement very much!:asian:

Mike

 

[Fastmover]

I have really enjoyed this debate on the forum. I have to agree with Mr. Ence That this attack wouldn’t be one in which a good…smart fighter would attempt in a ground situation. If anything this clip shows what not to do with your center of gravity when on top in a fight. If you carry yourself this high allowing That much space, you can and will be thrown off balance which is what the clip does show.

Being on bottom with someone mounted on you really stinks, especially if the person knows how to set up the ride correctly. To make matters even worse is the reason you ended up in this situation. For the person to be mounted, you are hurt, tired, and/ or this fighter is much better then you. All in all Id say you’ve have a bad day and its getting worse real fast.

From my experience if the fighter on top is an experience ground fighter, even the “hip Heist” or “Umpa” is going to be hard to pull off. Personally I have a lot of success with The “elbow escape” but even that opens one up to punches, chokes, and arm bars. Did I mention that being mounted really sucks!!!! So maybe the word of the day is avoidance. Even skilled fighters get the living crap beat out of them when someone mounts on them.

Still with all this in mind I think it is important to address the worst case scenario when dealing with the ideal phase of any technique. With this in mind hopefully you will not develop a false sense of security with your abilities and from this develop the skills to handle any situation……no matter how dire.

Bottom line, I would say it is better to be the “mountee” and not the “mounted.” Can I say that???

Oh well back to reading..........

Take Care

John

 

[Thesemindz]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
First of all, step through punches occur only in a karate studio, and training against them is unrealistic. Blocks can be punched through; so, we don't teach white belts that they will save them either. We teach them what will work, and offer them the chance to feel it working. Its up to the instructor to pull his punch until they got it right. And as stated above the whole lets use attacks a student will never encounter to teach basic motion is the reason its taking twenty years to learn to defend ourselves. I know, I know, you are probably wondering, "what does work against real punches?". Well I'll save you twenty years and tell you to get off the line of attack and cover. :asian:

Wow. Actually I was wondering. Get off the line of attack and cover. That's good advice. Reminds me of Checking the Storm, Thrusting Salute, Repeating Mace, Reversing Mace, Leaping Crane, Evading the Storm, Charging Ram, Shield and Sword, Gathering Clouds, Circling the Horizon, Detour from Doom, Protecting Fans, and Prance of the Tiger. Of course, those are all unrealistic attacks, so those examples probably don't count. And obviously some of those aren't punch techniques, so I'd have to adapt what I'd learned in, for instance, Charging Ram, to defend against a real punch.

Kenpo works, and it doesn't take twenty years. All it takes is a good instructor and a student.

-Rob

 

[Thesemindz]

Originally posted by Thesemindz
Hi Sean, I posted that. Are you saying you punch a white belt in the face as hard and fast as you can? Are you trying to argue that a step-through punch is realistic on its own merit? The attacks might be conceptually realistic and can certaintly be executed that way, but don't you teach beginners bigger, blockier attacks so that they can begin to explore basic motion? Are you saying a single step-through punch with no follow up attack is a "realistic" attack?

I didn't realize I was one of the usual suspects.


I love that movie.

-Rob

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
First of all, step through punches occur only in a karate studio, and training against them is unrealistic. Blocks can be punched through; so, we don't teach white belts that they will save them either. We teach them what will work, and offer them the chance to feel it working. Its up to the instructor to pull his punch until they got it right. And as stated above the whole lets use attacks a student will never encounter to teach basic motion is the reason its taking twenty years to learn to defend ourselves. I know, I know, you are probably wondering, "what does work against real punches?". Well I'll save you twenty years and tell you to get off the line of attack and cover. :asian:

I wanted to address this seperately. It seems as though I said that you attack beginners in an unrealistic way to let them learn, and you implied that that was not only a waste of time, but also detrimental to their training. You then went on to say that "Its up to the instructor to pull his punch until they got it right." To me that seems to be saying the same thing I said. A punch thrown without deadly intent and at only half speed isn't anymore "realistic" than a step through punch. They are merely examples for the student to work around.

I do agree with you about blocks though. We teach students that on their own, blocks do not work as defensive maneuvers, do to action being faster than reaction. Instead, stance changes to get out of the way of attacks is a better decision and then the block can be used offensively as a strike against the attackers natural weapons rather than defensively.

-Rob

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by Thesemindz
Wow. Actually I was wondering. Get off the line of attack and cover. That's good advice. Reminds me of Checking the Storm, Thrusting Salute, Repeating Mace, Reversing Mace, Leaping Crane, Evading the Storm, Charging Ram, Shield and Sword, Gathering Clouds, Circling the Horizon, Detour from Doom, Protecting Fans, and Prance of the Tiger. Of course, those are all unrealistic attacks, so those examples probably don't count. And obviously some of those aren't punch techniques, so I'd have to adapt what I'd learned in, for instance, Charging Ram, to defend against a real punch.

Kenpo works, and it doesn't take twenty years. All it takes is a good instructor and a student.

-Rob

I dont think it was meant as those techs. being poor, I think that he was referring to the way that the attack is delivered. By stopping the punch short...of course like I said you dont want to KO the new student on the 1st day....but by stopping short, they are getting a flase sence of security. If you are always stopping short, whats gonna happen when the attacker doesnt stop short? The student will most likely get hit.

Mike

 

[Thesemindz]

Originally posted by MJS
I dont think it was meant as those techs. being poor, I think that he was referring to the way that the attack is delivered. By stopping the punch short...of course like I said you dont want to KO the new student on the 1st day....but by stopping short, they are getting a flase sence of security. If you are always stopping short, whats gonna happen when the attacker doesnt stop short? The student will most likely get hit.

Mike

That's why you don't always stop short. You throw attacks that the students can work around, and as they become more proficient the attack becomes more aggressive. I don't attack a white belt for delayed sword the same way I attack a black belt. The white belt needs to learn about distance and timing, the black belt just better get outta the way. Otherwise he's going to get clocked by a very real punch.

-Rob

 

[MJS]

The below interview was done with the late John McSweeney. It is basically an interview that I got emailed to me from a friend. I copied it EXACTLY the way it was in the interview. I found this VERY interesting. There are some things in this interview that I have said to some of the die hard Kenpo guys. Again, funny how I'm not the only one who says stuff like this.

Question twelve: We know that Kenpo is very good for hand technique but, there is a lot of talk today about grappling technique and on-the-ground moves. Does Kenpo emphasize that? If so, why don't people know about it and if not, did you add it to the style?

"I added ground grappling to my style years ago because I had a heavy background in Judo. It is my opinion that you need defense against grapplers especially if you're thrown to the ground. In Kenpo which is an in-fighting art, if you miss with a strike, or if you're not powerful enough to stop something, they can grab you and immobilize you and throw you to the ground. Then you have a major problem.

"My theory is to learn enough about ground fighting, for instance bridging and escapes. If you're not a grappler don't try to become one. Stay with the art you learned but, learn enough ground fighting to enable you to escape and get back to your feet. I don't train people to be wrestlers because that's a whole separate art, and to be a good wrestler takes years, just as it is to be a good boxer or Kung Fu man. You don't do it overnight, it takes years of training. It's also a whole different philosophy. The wrestler wants to grab and hold you and choke you out or lock you into a submission hold. Kenpo people e are taught to knock people out quickly.

"So to answer your question, Kenpo does not teach anything about grappling, and it is a shortcoming of the art. But this is true of many of the hand arts. Grapping is just not part of the systems. But, just as a good grappler would want to learn a few good hand strikes, so too would a hand man want to learn a few tricks from the ground. My students are taught ground work but that is because of my background. I teach them enough to get a person off them. A well-rounded instructor should be able to give you some instruction in basic ground work. However, if your teacher is not a grappler, then I suggest find a good teacher in Judo and learn the basics. This knowledge can serve you well.

 

[Thesemindz]

I totally agree man. I think it is necessary to learn alot about grappling. I don't completely agree that it is absent from the system, I just think you have to really, really look for it. As I learn more about grappling, I see that most of the motion was contained within things I've already learned in kenpo, I'd just never practiced that application before. Training in grappling makes us better fighters and better martial artists.

Yep. Grappling sure is a good thing. And



-Rob

 

[Rick Wade]

I would say that Kenpo is a thinking man's art.

The grappling is built in you just have to be smart enough to see it. Some schools teach it and some not so much. I agree there isn't any techniques that I know of that start out on the ground already wraped up if that is what you are talking about. However there are some that end up in a chock hold (the sleeper). There are some that show how to get out of a chock (Thundering Hammer). There are several others for ankle and leg locks.

Thanks
Rick

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by Rick Wade
I would say that Kenpo is a thinking man's art.

The grappling is built in you just have to be smart enough to see it. Some schools teach it and some not so much. I agree there isn't any techniques that I know of that start out on the ground already wraped up if that is what you are talking about. However there are some that end up in a chock hold (the sleeper). There are some that show how to get out of a chock (Thundering Hammer). There are several others for ankle and leg locks.

Thanks
Rick

Or rather I would say the instructor has to be smart enough to teach it. Why is it hidden within the system again?
Sean