Second only to God?

[arnisador]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Well, one way of understanding the relationship is this: krav maga, "looks like kenpo," because kenpo offers a general theory of martial arts, so that styles such as km are special solutions (and I mean this in the sense of "general," vs. "special," relativity) of the larger system.

One take gravity into account and the other doesn't?

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

"Pros--no katas," eh? I wrote it before and I'll write it again: martial arts like this work only for a) people who already have training; b) people who are big, strong and aggressive; c) people who like to hit first.

Thats right. Like I have also said before, they do have their place, but not everybody needs them to learn to fight. I disagree about your statement "Martial arts like this, etc." A friend of mine not too long ago just gave a KM course, and it included people that have never had training and they had no problem picking it up. Big and strong and aggressive?? Thats not the case. Due to the fact that it is such an aggressive art, it is prefect for a smaller person. It'll give them the extra confidence that they need. For people that like to hit first?? Dude, are you telling me that you're going to wait until the other person hits you before you hit back?? If I saw someone getting ready to hit me, I'm not waiting around, I"m going to be all over them.

The flip side of "it's the man, not the art," (please note--not my sexist language) is this: don't get the man's success confused with the art's value.

The art does have much value.

Oh--yes--the question isn't, and for me never has been, which art is superior. The question is, whether or not "krav maga," fits in as a subset of contemporary kenpo.

Wait a minute. Rob, if I"m reading this right, you're making it sound like crosstraining here. You are the person who has made negative comments to me about this very thing, and now YOU are asking if it will blend. Does grappling blend? How about boxing? What about KM? The answer----- YES, they all blend. Again, nobody is saying to stop Kenpo and start doing KM, but if you can take an idea, then why not??

Mike

 

[Brother John]

OK Guys...
Don't make me unleash the Bunny.

Your Brother
Tim the Enchanter

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by John Bishop
There is no relationship between Kenpo and Krav Maga. I wrote the first, or one of the first magazine articles on Krav Maga. This was for "Inside Kung Fu's, Martial Arts Legend's" June 1995 issue.
If I remember correctly the founder of Krav Maga Imi Lichtennfeld, had a background in judo, wrestling, and boxing.

At the risk of offending the bunny, It seems both systems have similar roots. Why are we saying one is derived from another? Kenpo has other goals and puposes that Krav is not bound too.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Oh fer...OK, I'll try again.

First. Kenpo simply offers a higher-order level of understanding. This does not mean that a system like krav maga, which from all accounts is more-restricted, will not work. Not at all. It means that kenpo explains why what works in KM works, and the opposite won't be true. It's set and subset, NOT because the two arts evolved together, but because kenpo is a more-sophisticated way of understanding what martial arts are about. Do you necessarily need that understanding to make things work? Not in the least.

Second. Sorry, and I know I wasn't there. But I don't believe for a minute that effective martial arts can be learned by ordinary men and women in the fashion KM is supposed to teach them. Do I believe that KM can help formalize what a trained fighter, or a professional already knows? Absolutely.

Third, this has zip to do with cross-training. Why would I go study a different arts whose concepts, principles and moves are already contained within the art I currently study? I understand folks don't believe that--but I suspect you're going to be hard-pressed to come up with stuiff in KM that isn't included in kenpo. Would this be true of all other arts? Don't know.

Fourth: again, I strongly suspect that people who don't believe in forms simply aren't interested in martial arts. They're interested in fighting, which is something altogether different. For about the nineteenth time: why do you think it was that somebody like Frank Trejo used to go out at the Internationals and sweep the forms and the sparring? I understand that lots of great fighters don't believe in forms. That's fine. I'm not interested in becoming a great fighter, never was. I'm interested in self-defense, and some other things.

Just to be a bit provocative, here's another way to see the matter: forms allow one to understand martial arts in ways that, "just fighting," never will. Is sparring essential? Yep. Should one get hit? Yep. Is Gene LeBell tougher than me and thee? Yep.

Is sparring in a class the real thing? Nope.

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Oh fer...OK, I'll try again.

First. Kenpo simply offers a higher-order level of understanding. This does not mean that a system like krav maga, which from all accounts is more-restricted, will not work. Not at all. It means that kenpo explains why what works in KM works, and the opposite won't be true. It's set and subset, NOT because the two arts evolved together, but because kenpo is a more-sophisticated way of understanding what martial arts are about. Do you necessarily need that understanding to make things work? Not in the least.

Good point. Question- How is KM more restricted?

Second. Sorry, and I know I wasn't there. But I don't believe for a minute that effective martial arts can be learned by ordinary men and women in the fashion KM is supposed to teach them. Do I believe that KM can help formalize what a trained fighter, or a professional already knows? Absolutely.

Ok, let me give you an example. In both arts, you have defense against a front and rear choke. In Kenpo, you're going to have certain defense against each, with each tech. being different. IN KM, they use what they call a "pluck" to remove the hands from the throat. This pluck can be used for an attack from the front, rear, and side. By having the same defense for all 3 variations of the attack, there is less to remember. Are you going to start each Kenpo tech. off the same way? Nope.

Third, this has zip to do with cross-training. Why would I go study a different arts whose concepts, principles and moves are already contained within the art I currently study? I understand folks don't believe that--but I suspect you're going to be hard-pressed to come up with stuiff in KM that isn't included in kenpo. Would this be true of all other arts? Don't know.

I havent seen the plucking movement in Kenpo.

Fourth: again, I strongly suspect that people who don't believe in forms simply aren't interested in martial arts. They're interested in fighting, which is something altogether different. For about the nineteenth time: why do you think it was that somebody like Frank Trejo used to go out at the Internationals and sweep the forms and the sparring? I understand that lots of great fighters don't believe in forms. That's fine. I'm not interested in becoming a great fighter, never was. I'm interested in self-defense, and some other things.

So, you're telling me that by doing forms, that is going to help you fight better? I would think that getting into the ring, and working with someone that is moving around, throwing things at you will help you get better. SD vs. fighting---- Can you please share with us your defination of the 2, cuz IMO, they are the same thing....If you need to defend yourself, you are going to be fighting. I dont think that this has anything to do with entering NHB. Maybe thats what you mean when you're referring to fighting and being a fighter. Enlighten us.

Just to be a bit provocative, here's another way to see the matter: forms allow one to understand martial arts in ways that, "just fighting," never will. Is sparring essential? Yep. Should one get hit? Yep. Is Gene LeBell tougher than me and thee? Yep.

Is sparring in a class the real thing? Nope.

Sparring can be as real or as fake as one wants it to be. Granted, you wont be able to do your eye pokes like you would on the street, but why cant you put on eye protection and do the eye strikes? Why cant you make some contact to the head, legs, etc.? Question for you. If you took 2 students. Student "A" trains for 3 months working on kata. Student "B" does 3 months of sparring with some aliveness and realism added to it. Now, after the 3 months, put both "A" and "B" in the ring and let them spar. Who do you think is gonna win? I have my money on "B"

Mike

 

[Rich Parsons]

I would never wish to speak for Robert, yet what I See is that he is trying to define what he sees from other arts with the language and termonolgy he already knows. Therefore this other art or language that he is looking at, he is trying to define the words and terms and techniques from his own vocabular.

Just a thought!

Regards everyone
:asian:

 

[Touch Of Death]

Robert,
Oh my god! I cant believe you just said that if you don't train in forms you are not a martial artist. You asked and now I will tell you. This is one of those instances where you are wrong. Forms are but one method of training your body and mind to become better. This can occur without forms. Also it can occur without learning a single pre-arranged tech. The methods varry and the results may be different but they are every bit as much of a martial artist as you are.
Sean

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by Tch'O'Deth
Forms are but one method of training your body and mind to become better, however this can occur without forms, also it can occur without learning a single pre-arranged tech. The methods varry and the results may be different but they are every bit as much of a martial artist as anyone else.

Yep, all the curriculum is, is a set of drills.... grant you I enjoy the current "exercises", drills or curriculum that I follow however it is not the end all to what could be.........

:asian:

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7
Yep, all the curriculum is, is a set of drills.... grant you I enjoy the current "exercises", drills or curriculum that I follow however it is not the end all to what could be.........

Sounds like how I view the FMA! The drills teach certain things, but they are meant to be used as a base for durther exploration.

 

[rmcrobertson]

To take things in reverse order.

First, sorry, yes, I think the kata are essential to teaching martial arts in the sense I have in mind. However, your problem may be that we don't define, "martial arts," in the same fashion.

Second. The flaw in the logic is that training people to fight in a ring, and then testing to see whether they fight in a ring better, has nothing to do with reality "on the street." Again, I have no interest in learning to fight in a ring, a good thing considering my talents. However, I also don't believe that ring success necessarily means jack "on the street" (one of the most overused phrases in martial arts), except that--and as I've previously remarked about nineteen times--a professional fighter is very likely to kick the *** of me and thee.

Third. The flaw in the logic here has to do with teaching. OF COURSE, ultimately, all the bits and piece of the systems are meant to drop away--for the same reason that Rembrandt quit thinking about brushstrokes after awhile. Then, you really do have what APPEARS to be, "the system of no system." FINE. OK. GOT THAT. However, nearly always us humans need the forms, sets, techs, etc, to get anywhere near that point. When you jump the gun, you most always get mush. Or occasionally, you get someone who has become such a lethal weapon that, as Mr. Parker suggested, they might as well have gone out and bought a gun. I've no idea whether Joe Lewis is a good guy or not. I'm talking about us mere mortals. Is Gene LeBell a martial artist? Oh, hell yes. Hint: you could've blown up my arguments a lot easier, had you mentioned judo--which mostly doesn't have kata?

Fourth. There is an explicit, "plucking," applied in the extension to Raining Claw. However, it is applied to an arm, and I don't know if this is the same action mentioned as part of KM.

Fifth: as far as I can see, the "martial arts," being discussed are ring arts. I do not believe that that is the be-all and end-all of martial arts.

Sixth: should I do more sparring? Sure. Shoul you do more forms? Probably.

 

[arnisador]

Could someone explain "plucking" for me?

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by arnisador
Could someone explain "plucking" for me?

If I did....... I'd have to kill ya!

:rofl:

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7
If I did....... I'd have to kill ya!

Not by plucking me, I hope!

 

[Touch Of Death]

My fovorte Plucking scene in a movie is when Bruce lee Ripped Chuck Norris's chest hairs In return of the Dragon.

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
My fovorte Plucking scene in a movie is when Bruce lee Ripped Chuck Norris's chest hairs In return of the Dragon.

Yes, he was a Hairy Bugger wasn't he! :rofl:

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by arnisador
Could someone explain "plucking" for me?

LOL! I guess you could call it pulling--as for where the plucking term came from, you got me??

With the hands around the neck from the rear, you would be grabbing the opps. hands around the thumb area, pulling down and slightly to the side. Think about your hands returning to the side of your body, in a chambered type of position. The same can be applied to an attack from the side. In this case, you're only pulling the front hand. Think of it as if you were putting on a seatbelt. You're reaching across your body. Front the front its pretty much the same as the one from behind.


That is the basic idea. Of course, like anything, its easier to show rather than type it. I hope this helped.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
To take things in reverse order.

First, sorry, yes, I think the kata are essential to teaching martial arts in the sense I have in mind. However, your problem may be that we don't define, "martial arts," in the same fashion.

Probably.

Second. The flaw in the logic is that training people to fight in a ring, and then testing to see whether they fight in a ring better, has nothing to do with reality "on the street." Again, I have no interest in learning to fight in a ring, a good thing considering my talents. However, I also don't believe that ring success necessarily means jack "on the street" (one of the most overused phrases in martial arts), except that--and as I've previously remarked about nineteen times--a professional fighter is very likely to kick the *** of me and thee.

Ok. So fighting in the ring is different from the street? So are you telling me that Mike Tyson would not be able to fight in the street?? Keep in mind that he came from the street and then made his way to the ring. Do you practice your Kenpo tech. in the dojo? Yes. So is that same tech. gonna work on the street? With the way you're talking, it wont, cuz you dont do it in the street with the same realism that you'd get attacked out there.

Third. The flaw in the logic here has to do with teaching. OF COURSE, ultimately, all the bits and piece of the systems are meant to drop away--for the same reason that Rembrandt quit thinking about brushstrokes after awhile. Then, you really do have what APPEARS to be, "the system of no system." FINE. OK. GOT THAT. However, nearly always us humans need the forms, sets, techs, etc, to get anywhere near that point. When you jump the gun, you most always get mush. Or occasionally, you get someone who has become such a lethal weapon that, as Mr. Parker suggested, they might as well have gone out and bought a gun. I've no idea whether Joe Lewis is a good guy or not. I'm talking about us mere mortals. Is Gene LeBell a martial artist? Oh, hell yes. Hint: you could've blown up my arguments a lot easier, had you mentioned judo--which mostly doesn't have kata?

So if I mentioned Judo that would have blown uo up huh? Well the proof is right there. Obviously Gene Lebell, Rickson Gracie or Mike Tyson dont do kata, and they do pretty darn well IMO. So, depending on what art you're doing, you really dont need it then.

Fourth. There is an explicit, "plucking," applied in the extension to Raining Claw. However, it is applied to an arm, and I don't know if this is the same action mentioned as part of KM.

Sorry Rob. For a minute there I forgot that you were talking about Kenpo---the art of arts--the jack of all trades--the complete package! LOL!!

Fifth: as far as I can see, the "martial arts," being discussed are ring arts. I do not believe that that is the be-all and end-all of martial arts.

KM is a ring art??? Dont think so.

Sixth: should I do more sparring? Sure. Shoul you do more forms? Probably.

Maybe/maybe not

Mike

 

[rmcrobertson]

Well, MJS, that certainly avoided the issues.

I'm going to skip over the issues about "the ring," and about "plucking," except to briefly note that a) I've repeatedly posted on this and other threads concerning the clear fact that the likes of me and thee would do well to avoid, "on the street," fights with the likes of Bart Vale or Joe Lewis, and b) for all the irrelevant comments, plucking as described is indeed included in the kenpo curriculum I learned.

I notice that neither a) the comments I made about kenpo as a teaching system, or b) a method of understanding other arts seem to've gotten addressed. I also note that none of the comments seem to address the issue I addressed, the one of how students actually learn.

All the name-calling (traditionalist! kata-doer! slavish disciple of dead kenpo god!) still won't change what I take to be the facts: a) very few people will learn self-defense without extended, and complex, training; b) big, aggressive guys and smaller, athletic and aggressive guys will have a lot of success in fighting and this does not necessarily mean that they know jack about martial arts; c) kenpo, as far as I can see, offers a more-complex and comprehensive understanding of martial arts principles and concepts.

 

[Michael Billings]

I gotta love it you "slavish disciple of dead kenpo god!", you.

-MB