OP
Doc
Senior Master
- Thread Starter
- #61
We actually have more techniques. For most, American kenpo began with the 32 technique charts, that was changed to 24 and then 16. But historically, all of the techniques didnt survive the commercial evolutions, and many more were created. This is the most obvious in the yellow belt that was created after the original 32 charts were in place, and underwent subsequent changes and revisions over the years.
Back in the day, techniques didnt even have names and were simply numbered. Then slowly they were given loose recognition names. A good example is what is now called Five Swords was called the Five Count which is not executed the way it originally was. So not only did the names undergo revision and change, but the techniques as well so none of the information has ever been cast in stone.
So when you talk about standard curriculum you are speaking from the perspective of whatever youve been taught from when you began, which can be entirely different for someone else.
I began before the 32 charts was solidified, and evolved with the process in never never land. That is, when he created the commercial model, some things taught were just impractical and didnt translate into a more realistic scenario. Many techniques were created to flesh out the model or as Huk would say category completion. On the face it was not a bad idea, because it forced you to consider a lot of options, but all of them didnt necessarily translate well to practicality.
When I went into the law enforcement academy in 69, it changed my and his perspective of what I was taught and would teach. It gave him an opportunity to get back into his law enforcement teaching, which he absolutely loved.
So I guess the answer is its the same but different in places that violated his overall philosophy and direction of my teachings. So youll notice some new techniques (like for rifles and shotguns), as well as some familiar ones missing. But its been my experience the ones we removed are ones nobody liked anyway. Im sure youve heard people say, Id never use that technique in the street. I know I have. To be honest some of those techniques are just bad ideas that violate anatomical constraints. Some are simply obsolete, and need to be replaced. Some techniques had to be created to fill gaps in our curriculum. Slashing blades, autoloader guns held high and sideways, rifles and shotguns, knife-edge held against the throat while braced against a wall, knives in the back, etc.
We have some pure grappling techniques, but all of our techniques have anti-grappling components as a part of their default execution. But understand something. There are no extra techniques, they are our curriculum that should not be compared but simply examined. Even those who have learned the motion based commercial interpretation, are held together only by tailored conceptual constraints, not specific technique application execution.
Yes thats correct. In the Delayed Sword example you used, the hand sword is not used, and is replaced by a heel palm PMD Stunner prelude to a nose fulcrum takedown, pin, and hanging lock.
I understand what you mean and the answer is no. I began using A 16- technique model in the late seventies and the techniques extend all the way to black. The next level begins after black and starts over again at what was previously yellow, and each subsequent level does the same. There are no busy-work extensions as most understand them.
Although many are not aware, when Parker made the decision to lower the number of techniques per chart, he wanted to go directly to 16, but decided that would be too much to quick. He decided to go to 24 as an intermediate model for about 5 years, before finally going to 16. Some never got to 24, many never got to 16, but it didnt change the ideas, only when they were taught.
Many of the forms and sets are taught, but with completely different interpretations and mechanisms. The busy-work twos, as you probably know them, are non-existent. The multiple numbered sets like kick 3, Finger 2, coordination 2 dont exist. Of course these were created later anyway, once again, to flesh out the model. I never did any of that. But then our Kick 1 is different, and most of our 10 stance sets are different, etc.
I must correct your use of words. (The Old Man really emphasized this with me and said to always be clear with words). It is not a variation but how it is executed. From your perspective it is probably a variation from what you do. I only say this as a reminder. There is no universal kenpo model or ideal with different variations, there is only what you were taught and how you execute. In our curriculum everyone does the default technique the same. Different school, or a different teacher, it really doesnt matter.
The shoulders are not square but you cant see that in a picture. How you get into that twist stance is important. We teach a component called Surviving The Initial Assault that emphasizes in each technique what you have to do to survive that first contact. That is one of the things that makes the difference.
The reason you cant just unwind is because your hips will be out of alignment and you need to explode forward with a PAM to realign and create power.
Correct. Once I show you how you would never do it another way. Thats Kenpos weakness. The written material doesnt show you how to do anything, but only tells you what you could possibly do as an idea. Only a good teacher brings out the how, and relatively speaking, there are not a lot of good teachers. There are some people who for some reason feel what's written in those manuals tell you how, but if that's the case, why are there so many questions about "how?" The truth is simple for any rational minded person to see. Because the manual says, "..hand sword to the neck." doesn't tell you how, where, angle, mechanism, set up, hand formation, etc. It just tells you what.
Dont know, I havent examined the magazine that close, and I dont have one handy. We take usually forty/fifty pictures, and they put them together.
I do not emphasize points. I concentrate on the proper body mechanics and the students pick it up as they progress. The lower divisions students never ask, What point is this? because its not really important. Learning to execute the technique properly is paramount, and the better you get the more specific your touches become. Youll still hear my students naming cavities and meridians, but not because I said learn this. As Ed Parker told me tongue in-cheek, If you spend your time learning points and meridian cavities, you might end up being an acupuncturist, but you wont learn to fight.
Because there isnt as most understand it. Understand this. Tailoring as Ed Parker meant it for his commercial model was necessary to allow that conceptual vehicle to work. Every art tailors, but Ed Parker took the concept to another level and said something no one had ever said before. It doesnt matter how you do it as long as it works. Great and ingenious for a quick elf defense course, which is what it is, but bad for good basics and long term skill development and reaching the higher levels of any art. It also meant that from a business perspective, nobody was turned away.
This is one reason why you find an abundance of women and children in Kenpo now, relative to some other traditional and more physically demanding disciplines. When I started there were no women or children because classes were just too physical. Schools were full of ex-military, athletes, and tough guys who could fight before they started taking classes. Now you have people that have no concept of a real fight coming into schools, going through the material, making black, and now teaching.
Tailoring had to be taken to another level or what has become the bigger part of the business would have to be turned away. One thing for sure, the commercial TKD schools figured that out a long time ago as well. Thats just honest.
That model was never destined to get you to high levels. There is no art or discipline where you can do things the way you want and somehow that will translate into some relative high level of efficiency beyond the personal. Anyone at a high level in any physical activity has someone to force him or her to do things correctly, based on knowledge they dont have. Young warriors and athletes simply dont have the knowledge, and must be taught specifically by a teacher or coach. There is no such thing as exploring. Only teachers and coaches explore, students and players learn.
My 155 lb people will execute, perform well and will put you away efficiently as anyone else. Mr. Parker used to say, If I shoot a guy between the eyes with a 22, or 357, which one killed him the best? Its all in the execution My Brudda.
