Sword and hammer pt. 1 and 2

Discussion in 'Kenpo / Kempo - Technical Discussion' started by ATACX GYM, Jan 14, 2012.

  1. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    traditional method of sword and hammer (defense vs flank shoulder grab and punch)



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts1Qgemr11M&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oXiWESS32Q&feature=related


    the actual real world attacks that the traditional method alleged IP techs like those above are supposed to defend against:








    SWORD AND HAMMER PT. 1



    SWORD AND HAMMER PT. 2

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-mmdyIHkjs&feature=related




    which is teaching method--the so-called IP or THE ATACX GYM--is more appropriate for street reality? Okay commence debate discussion commenting or rude gestures...now! Lol. Hopefully all of you enjoyed all of the previous videos.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 24, 2014
  2. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thoughts?
     
  3. Chris Parker

    Chris Parker Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6,036
    Likes Received:
    938
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Ah, Ras, you're not going to like me much, but you did ask for "debate discussion commenting or rude gestures...", so...

    The first thing I'm going to say is, if you're going to be basically just posting videos over and over again, can you learn how to embed the things? It's really not hard, you click on the video strip icon at the top of the post window (second from the right), and paste the URL of the video you want in the space provided in the pop-up box. Then click "OK". It'll make it a lot easier for people to watch your clips, it'll make them more likely to click on them to watch them, especially when you put 7 different clips in a single post, as most people just don't want to keep opening new windows over and over again, and can help you get the comments you are after, meaning you won't have to keep following up your own posts asking why no-one's commenting.... I get the feeling that a number of the "views" here just saw the URL links and didn't want to check out the clips themselves, hence no comments. Okay?

    Right, next.

    There are quite a few issues that are leaping out at me from your entire premise here. We'll begin by embedding the clips so others can more easily see what we're talking about. To begin with, your "IP" versions, which you consider flawed:







    Each of these show the same thing, with very little difference, so I'm not sure why three clips were needed... oh, well. We'll come back to these.

    Next you link a couple of clips that show "the actual real world attacks that the traditional method alleged IP techs like those above are supposed to defend against". Love the passive aggressive tone, by the way.





    The problem, of course, is that these attacks are not what is shown in the technique, nor is it what you demonstrate against in your versions. But there's a bigger problem than that, when your clips are shown. Speaking of which, here they are:





    Right, now we can play.

    To begin with, let's look back at the initial version of the technique as shown. It's a yellow belt technique, fairly early on in the syllabus, if I'm not mistaken, yeah? And it's basically dealing with a grab to your shoulder (the clips you linked show the right shoulder, you oscillate between right and left, I don't think it matters too much, provided it's the left hand grabbing the right shoulder, or the right hand grabbing the left... otherwise it changes the technique into requiring something different), which you secure/cover with your far hand, then step towards the opponent as they threaten a strike, and pre-emptively strike to their throat with a sword-hand, and "bounce" that hand down to strike with a hammer fist to an open target. I'm going to be bluntly honest, Ras, there's really little wrong with that technique. The biggest issue with it arises when the person grabbing you was just going to ask you the time, or to offer a drink, or similar, and you crush their trachea as a result... so I might not choose a potentially lethal strike as my first response against a grab. Courts here tend to look down on such things. But from a mechanical point of view, this technique is actually quite solid, taking into account a range of likely events. Not bad at all, really.

    When we get to your clips, though, I gotta say, uh, what? Neither of those clips show anything like the attack that Sword and Hammer are dealing with. Both are essentially king-hits which work by blind-siding the people being hit. There is no grab to the shoulder, which is the primary aspect of the attack in Sword and Hammer, as shown in each and every version shown, the three initial ones, both of yours, and all others I've seen from a quick search. So, uh, no. Additionally, you don't seem to have paid attention to them, based on some comments you make in your clip.

    Right, your clips.

    The first one, well, let's be frank. It's again basically overkill, which is something missing from the initial technique (other than an overly aggressive first strike). Additionally, the basic attack isn't actually that realistic (the original one is more realistic, to be honest). Let's start there, as your first point is to talk down the common version.

    You give the set-up of a grab to the shoulder, and then talk (with a degree of sarcasm, it seems...) about "feel(ing) the Kempo-ness of the situation" before turning and striking. There's a little interplay about the opponent not blocking (as your training partner does), and you finish by saying that "this doesn't happen in real life". Actually Ras, yes, it does. There are a number of set-ups that might go this way, but it's really a relatively common form of attack. The basic idea is that they grab your shoulder, and pull you into a strike with the other hand. The pull turns you towards them, as well as into the strike itself, adding to the power. It could be when one guy is yelling at you in front, his buddy comes up behind and grabs, pulls, and hits, or as you're turning and walking away from someone they grab you as you go, spin you, and hit. But it really is a common attack, you know.

    Next, the idea of "feeling the Kempo-ness" leading to the execution of the technique, really, I don't see that as necessary at all. If you're being attacked with this realistically, they'll be pulling you around and back, so the step in towards them could very easily be just a natural response to the pull (and trying to keep your balance, so dropping as you step, not mentioned, but demonstrated in the clips, is expected as well). As to the cover, that's common to regain some control, and is recommended. Your idea of the other guy blocking being possible is honestly unlikely as well, as they'll be concerned about hitting you, and won't expect a counter-strike, as a result will simply not be looking to block anything. And the initial strike, if done with the right timing, would be launched as you're turning, making it land before the opponent's strike is properly launched, as well as providing cover in case you're just a bit too slow. Really, Ras, it's not a bad technique.

    Then we get you changing the structure of the attack by keeping your opponent on your left shoulder, but having them grab with their left hand... which completely removes the attack that's actually seen in Sword and Hammer, as well as removing the targets, body positioning, and more, altering the timing and rhythm of the sequence entirely, and basically necessitating a completely different technique, which, to be blunt, is what you're doing. This is no longer the Yellow Belt Technique "Sword and Hammer" from the American Kempo system, as there are almost no aspects of it left, other than similar fists being used.

    You also start to talk about the fact that, from here, as it's a surprise attack, you'll be hit first, probably a few times, and have to respond from there. The problem, of course, is you've just shown us what happens when you get blindsided and hit hard in a surprise attack. In most cases, you get knocked to the ground, hard. So you're not really able to continue with the technique as you show it (which is your partner slapping your back, let's be honest, hardly a committed strike to the back of the head, which is what would be likely (not too difficult to knock someone out that way, or give them a concussion, at the very least rattle them enough to continue to do some pretty major damage). So your plan of "get hit first" isn't what I'd recommend.... and, again, it goes against what Sword and Hammer actually teaches. The technique advocates a pre-emptive strike, in order to avoid such an eventuality. Deciding you don't think it's realistic (it certainly can be, for the record) doesn't make your technique better or more realistic, it means you've missed the point of the technique in the first place.

    When it comes to the rest of the technique you show (the punch to the body, the strike to the face with the knee, the hand to the back of the neck, another fist to the back of the neck, and then another hand sword to the back of the neck again), honestly, I'm seeing a lot of mechanical problems, as well as some potential charges (based on the assault laws here) with the multiple strikes to the back of his head when it's clear he's no longer in a position to continue to assault you. But mainly the mechanical and structural issues, a range of things you do rob you of potential power, making a lot of this a lot weaker and less effective than it could be.

    Your second version. Well, you start off saying it's nothing like what others would have been taught, and, well, yeah. Because you have barely included anything from the original, other than the name and certain fists. Other than that, tactically it's a completely different technique, rythmically it's a completely different technique, strategically it's a completely different technique, mechanically it's a completely different technique, philosophically it's a completely different technique... really, it's just a completely different technique.

    You then denigrate the original form, including the sarcastic comment "and, he's just amazed by your skill". Really? I'd say more that he's dropped to the ground finding it hard to breathe, as you've just attacked his airways, then his groin, and gotten distance. Clearing his arm shouldn't be necessary, or difficult, and the idea of the attacker being "amazed at your skill" shows a gap in understanding what would have actually happened, don't you think? You then make some comments about the technique not working against a real, dynamic attack... gotta say, Ras, this one I think really would. It's kinda built into the technique, and I'm a little surprised you can't see it, given the amount of "real life experience" you claim. But let's see what that "real life experience" has taught you....

    You have your opponent pushing you forward while hitting you? Really? And you think that's the more common attack? Gotta say, it's one of the most ineffectual attacks I can think of, as you'd be constantly pushing your victim out of the range of your fist, making your attacks not much more than useless.... Most of your following response suffers from much of the same issues as the previous one (punch to the temple? Good chance of breaking your own hand, particularly with the weak structure you're using, but hey, go for it!).

    At the four minute mark you finally get closer to the way it's supposed to be, but still miss the basic tactic of a pre-emptive strike. And, to be honest, the attack was unrealistic in it's rhythm and distancing, so it wasn't really a realistic portrayal either. And I'm really not fond of that "secure" and choke at the end... there's just too many openings and issues going on there.

    Honestly, if I was to offer you some advice, it would be to not automatically take the tact that every single technique is supposed to be an exact representation of violence, and to look for what it's teaching you. It seems to me that you tend to want to go to something you feel is more "realistic" without really looking at what is there in the first place... and that leads to some big gaps in what you're presenting.

    Well, I said you wouldn't like it...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 24, 2014
  4. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    for some reason I wasn't getting any prompts via email regarding responses to my threads so I missed this. I ACTUALLY LIKE THIS RESPONSE, CHRIS. Soon as I get a minute I will respond in depth for ya man...there's a number of easily correctible mistakes and just differences of opinions that I note in your post there. I also got to learn what I suppose is a Aussie phrase..."king-hit". Never heard it before, or if I did? I forgot about it. Waaaiiit...I remember an announcer using that phrase when I once watched a rugby game years ago.

    Anyway yeah I'll definitely get back to your thorough post with a thorough response, and you'll be pleased to know that I learned to embed stuff.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 24, 2014
  5. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Okay Chris, pressed for time but I write fast so I should still get a fairly voluminous response in. Here we go:

    First off, almost everything you said is incorrect. A good half of your incorrect assumptions comes from the probability that you're not a Kenpo man, so you misunderstand things as presented in the system. Hell, that's fine...because most of Ed Parker's first generation Black Belts can't seem to agree on jack and they were there with Mr. Parker during the formative years of what has been called Motion Kenpo.

    In Infinite Insights Into Kenpo, Mr. Parker talked about taking the IP and training it in a 360 degree circle. With the Tracy Brothers, Mr. Parker frequently repeated a lesson he was taught by a female Japanese Sensei who I believe is named Sensei Tanaka. This concept he referred to as "50 Ways To Sunday". You train a tech every whichaway against multiple kinds of resistance and that is a major way of actually acquiring functionality with it.

    Moving on to the videos, you see me showing different groups showing essentially and fundamentally the exact same or incredibly similar expressions of Sword and Hammer...when that was never to be the case. The IP as defined by Mister Parker was supposed to be created from sensei to student on a case by case basis. The sensei was to take a common street attack, encapsulate it, use a combo of his/her/their training experience and Kenpo karate's techs concepts etc as the medium to FUNCTIONALLY resolve the attack. This means that each IP should differ from dojo to dojo, yet still have the concrete similarity of Kenpo techs and concepts to bind them. What happened instead was that too many teachers merely copied what they were shown and mistook the techs for the Way. The result is nonfunctional craptacularity, diluting the practicing methodology and functional training of a system [ Kenpo in this case but pretty much any martial art will do ] which is devastatingly effective when trained functionally.

    You are massively incorrect too when it comes to the correlation between my videos and real world attacks. Some of this you have no excuse for...there is a direct empirical correlation between the responses that I've shown on my videos and the attacks shown in real world scenarios. If you can't see this, I feel sorry for you...but I could spell it out for you using the video evidence if you need me to. Furthermore, there are a many maaaaannnny instances during which a flank or rear attack results in the attacker basically displacing the defender with his grab and reaching around in front of him to bang him in the face or straight up blasting him in the back of his head or ribs or whatever. Imo far and away the most common expression of this is an attack without any form of grab; the BG just comes up from behind you or the side and straight whallops you and that's that. Either you're done or you're now scrappin after you got clocked and perhaps got dazed to boot. I specifically address that in my video...the fact that you are likely to be cracked and staggered prior to your being aware that an attack is launched or at least prior to your being able to respond to the attack.

    By the way, the entry into the far wrist tie and standing D'arce was a spontaneous response. Kai--my friend helping me in the video, the buff guy in the black tank top--is untrained and never did this kind of video before. He reacted naturally after I launched my variant of Sword and Hammer and he still got choked. The reason I was able to apply one of the main chokes that I feature in my variant of Sword and Hammer is because we actually practice Sword and Hammer vs escalating noncooperative resistance by skilled and unorthodox people. In the same vein that a boxer feels that he/she can pull off a jab against most boxers and virtually all untrained boxers? That's how I feel about my techs; pretty much whatever you do? If you're in range of Sword and Hammer I will pull that tech off or pretty much any other Kenpo tech I feel like, because I trained it too often against too high of a caliber of resistance to fail with any sort of regularity. This isn't tooting my own horn; zillions of martial artists can do the same thing. A wrestler will double leg you, even if you know it's coming ahead of time. A bjj man will pull guard, a judoka will throw you, a kali man will knife you...or at least you will be endangered by the attempts of all of the above to do whatever they're good at. So will I. And that's what I mean by my confidence in my use of my Kenpo. Nothing that a functional martial artist should look at as remarkably out of the ordinary.

    The other part of your massive incorrectness I don't blame you for at all...because it's a relatively reasonable assumption for a [ presumably ] non-Kenpo man to assume that there is a mandatory uniform rigidity in the execution of Sword and Hammer and going with the dominant expression seems alot more sensible than going with the expression of renegade [ that's me ] who you already disagreed with in other areas. But that's the core and crux of the differences in the video...the dominant expression is dysfunctional. Training Sword and Hammer with different grips and such does NOT change the tech Sword and Hammer. See, WE'RE DOING SWORD AND HAMMER NOT THE BAD GUY...and we should be able to reliably pull it off against any unarmed bad guy h2h in arm's reach as reliably as a boxer is able to jab someone, a wrestler double legs some untrained guy or a Muay Thai guy leg kicks or clinches and knees some untrained BG. If you can't do Sword and Hammer to a BG pretty much whenever under these circumstances? Imo you can't do Sword and Hammer period.

    I realize I differ sharply with most of Kenpodom when I say what I have said...but that's okay. The bottom line is that the way Sword and Hammer is taught is exactly how it should work in a throwdown. When you bridge and roll or slap on a armbar in bjj, you don't "ideally" do it in some nonfunctional way and magically be able to do it functionally in a throwdown. No. You train it how you will actually use it. Same with the MT clinch, the wrestler ties and tackles, judo throws, boxing's punches, Olympic TKD kicks, SWAT CQB tactics, etc etc. It should be no different for Kenpoists or Capoeiristas...but sadly it is for far too many of them. Not for me. Every single facet and aspect of every single tech that I use and teach is rigorously and constantly tested. I'm open to new approaches and entries and stuff and we revise stuff all the time. We just revised some aspects of Thrusting Wedge 2 days ago, for instance. Now it's even better than before. Too many 'so-called IP' adherents are utterly inflexible in this area, to the detriment of Kenpo as a whole.
     
  6. Twin Fist

    Twin Fist Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Nacogdoches, Tx
    lets assume for a second that every single thing you have said is correct.

    change the name of the techniques, call yourself a 10th dan and start your own kenpo.

    seriously.

    as long as you take existing EPAK techniques, do them 100% differently than EVERYONE ELSE IN THE HISTORY OF EPAK KENPO has ever done them, and as long as you continue this "everyone but me is stupid and does it wrong" line of thinking, you will catch hell. Even if you are right

    seriously, start your own thing. Nothing wrong with that at all.

    dont call it american kenpo, cuz what you are doing isnt EPAK at all.

    dont call it BKF, you aint doing thier stuff either. you have added to it, clearly

    make it your own, then all you have to say is "this is MINE, thats why"

    you are , in effect half way doing that already, go all the way. Create a curriculum that includes what you want to teach, or feel is important, do them the way you want them done, come up with new names so the EPAK guys cant tell you you are doing them wrong, and POOF

    you are the final say in YOUR system.

    seriously, you should do it.
     
  7. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    This is quite a common response that I get, and actually it's pretty reasonable...especially when your other posts toward me and their tenor is taken into account. I appreciate your greater cordiality. I refer you and all others who doubt my reasoning to Doc Chapel's posts on the matter. There is nobody with greater seniority or even equal seniority that I know of on this site or Kenpotalk.com either. Insofar as the "idea not Ideal Phase" is concerned, Doc and I are in almost 100% lockstep...and Doc has Mr.Parker's direct notes and the treasures of direct conversation with Mr. Parker FOR DECADES about this subject. That's one of the best responses that I can think of off top on this subject. Gtg everyone...bizness to handle.

    AMANI..."peace"...
     
  8. Twin Fist

    Twin Fist Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Nacogdoches, Tx
    I am being totally serious. You have your own vision, that is pretty unique, best way to avoid any heat from any quarter and i might add the best way to give yourself room to grow into your vision of a fighting system is to start your own.

    I tried to create an art LIKE kajukembo, because i knew that was my ideal, and i didnt think i would ever find a kajukembo instructor. So i took base from TKD and added in all the kenpo I knew, and lua, and other things i picked up over the last 25+ years training.

    but then i found a kajukembo, so i didnt have to. I will still keep some of the training exercises i came up with, but i dont NEED to create something to fit my vision anymore.

    it seems like you need to.

    but dont half *** it, re-name the techniques, that keeps everyone off your ***. set a belt structure, and set requirements for each level.

    do it.
     
  9. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I believe you are serious and again I thank you for the suggestion...but the whole premise is flawed. Top to bottom, the premise of your suggestion is flawed. The fact is irrefutable...I do indeed do Sword and Hammer. I train it and execute it different and faaaarrr more functionally, far more reliably...but without a doubt? That's a handsword and a hammerfist in there used against a flank attack and every position from one flank to the other flank. What I have done is literally in complete agreement with what the IP is as defined by Mr. Parker and Doc Chapel...the twist is? The dysfunctional IP that has become te most dominant expression wherein ever school is doing exactly the same thing exactly the same way? THAT'S NOT THE I.P. THAT'S THE SAD RESULT OF ROTE MINDLESSLY REPETITION OF A PART OF "BIG RED". It's one of the great tragedies of Kenpo.

    I have my own unique belt system which uses belts, sashes and corded sashes. I have my own interpretation of Kenpo and other techs...that's why I preface my techs with the name ATACX GYM. It's ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER. Just like say...GM Sullivan and Vic have their own organization with their own interpretation of techs, but they're not seen as not doing Kenpo because they clearly are. The BKF isn't seen as doing Kenpo because they clearly do...and ATACX GYM does Motion Kenpo too, just our own interpretation of it. This is exactly as Mr. Parker expressly wished us to do. He didn't want us to slavishly copy him or each other, but he was in many ways vastly disappointed by his business partners and fellow BB whom he trained...and that leads directly to the ridiculous morass and sad state of affairs that we see today.
     
  10. Twin Fist

    Twin Fist Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Nacogdoches, Tx
    no, you are not. I think you know it

    You are doing something, and it is kenpo, but it isnt sword and hammer anymore when you have changed the attack and the response. I have seen several people tell you this so this isnt news....

    you are doing your thing, it isnt the EPAK thing and thats ok.

    Doc doesnt do EPAK, he does SL4
    GM Sullivan doesnt claim to do EPAK, just kenpo
    the BKF guys dont claim to do EPAK, just kenpo

    you are not doing EPAK either. but it is kenpo

    you and I both know it. if you really are the visionary you claim to be, then DO IT.

    Create RAS FLETCHER's KENPO

    own it.

    or are you more interested in just telling kenpo people they are wrong and you are right?

    do your own thing, and everyone wins, insist on doing what you are now, and you are just annoying people and blowing your own horn. You like doing that too. And no one cares.

    Bruce lee didnt claim he was still doing wing chun, just doing it RIGHT and Yip Man and wrong

    he called it something else and made it his own. Cuz it was. sure, what you do is a kenpo art but it isnt EPAK and using the EPAK names will just cause an endless river of ****.
     
  11. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    It is Sword and Hammer...it's The ATACX GYM's Sword and Hammer. It's not what many other Motion Kenpoist's call their Sword and Hammer, and that is as it should be.That's why I said:



    The issue isn't so much just who's Sword and Hammer it is because anyone doing Sword and Hammer will do their own Sword and Hammer no matter how faithfully they try to emulate another person.Insofar as the Ideal Phase is concerned, and I quote:

    "According to Ed Parker,after the base technique method (Ideal Phase) is learned, the student should then progressively continue to refine the techniques to individualize the Kenpo System. This 'tailored' system is to be individually practiced..."

    That should put an end, once and for all, about this silly idea that Sword and Hammer has to look exactly like and be done exactly alike across the entire spectrum. Such an idea and such an approach runs directly contrary to Mr. Parker's stated desires. If we disagree here? Then we just disagree, Twin Fist. Let's just let it ride at that point. If the label I put on it is that problematic for you? Ignore the label. Look at the tech and determine if it works [ which is one set of analysis] and secondly if it's the kind of thing that you or anyone else reading this post might draw something beneficial from and have it work FOR YOU [which is a substantially different thing].

    Okay...back to training. Have a nice one, everyone.
     
  12. Twin Fist

    Twin Fist Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Nacogdoches, Tx
    Bruce lee didnt claim he was still doing wing chun, just doing it RIGHT and Yip Man and wrong

    he called it something else and made it his own. Cuz it was. sure, what you do is a kenpo art but it isnt EPAK and using the EPAK names will just cause an endless river of ****.

    unless thats what you want.
     
  13. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Getting passed the now farcical debate about nomenclature, let us focus on what is most important...performance. Does it work? Which variant works best... the so-called "traditional IP" [ which isn't the traditional IP but that's another story] or THE ATACX GYM variant?

    If you were attacked like THIS







    or some punk fool who needs to go to jail attacked you like THIS:

    [can't embed this but it's on Metacafe so I left this link]


    http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2011/12/dolphins_fan_knocked_out_by_su.php



    or like THIS







    would training like THIS be a better way to deal with the matter:









    or would THE ATACX GYM variants seem more functional?



    ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER PT. 1





    SWORD AND HAMMER PT. 2


     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2012
  14. Twin Fist

    Twin Fist Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Nacogdoches, Tx
    sword and hammer is for a grab, followed by a punch

    all three of the attacks you posted are irellevant, since they dont have a grab followed by a punch.

    irellevant

    they are real attacks sure, but they have nothing to do with sword and hammer.

    Al three of those attacks are blind (the victim didnt see it comming) haymakers

    in any of those attacks, you will get hit since the attackers were (as attackers usually are) cowardly pieces of crap hitting people from the sides and almost from behind

    no training will allow you to defend yourself from that unless you think you can train someone to read minds and determine intent.

    next, you are not doing sword and hammer.

    ***** all you want to about it not mattering what you call it, it does matter. names matter, and names fit certain things, you use a KNOWN name, people expect to see the KNOWN version of that name.

    you are in essence saying "have a coke" and giving me a glass of sweet tea. its good, it does the job of quinching my thirst, but it isnt a coke. you can call it a coke till you go blue in the face, but it aint a coke.

    Now then, to the meat if it.

    the reason your defense fits is because you changed the attack

    sword and hammer in EPAK (it is called Pin Step Chop in Tracey's and Grab Art 9 in my KSDS version of Kajukembo all basically the same technique. Kenpo is kenpo after all.) isnt for a push

    you are starting out with a push, but if the attack is a push, sword and hammer isnt the correct technique to use......

    you are square peg round holing it again.

    but lets look at what you do for the attack you selected. They push your shoulder and (presumably) start punching.

    the spin outside is a decent move to gain positional advantage, you could make that better IMO by augmenting your right hand inward hammering block with a left hand on thier wrist pulling it into you, ala snapping twig. it is a free elbow hyperextension at no risk to you.

    the double hit you follow up with is ok, not what i would pick, but not bad

    the downward check is a logical next move. You then throw an inward circular or corkscrew punch to the face/upper chest WITH a knee to i assume the groin

    then chop to the back of the neck, a hammer to the kidney and another back of the neck shot.

    the technique you are doing isnt bad, but it isnt perfect

    1)you are taking a yellow belt technique and trying to turn it into a brownbelt or blackbelt technique, common mistake, i do it myself all the time.

    crawl before you can walk, walk before you can run.

    you cant take a beginner and show them this, they dont have the foundation of skills to pull it off. so unless you are teaching this at brown, you are putting the cart before the horse. a teacher has to think about that. Unless that is, there is a basic version of the technique you teach but didnt include

    2) the angle on the knee to the groin is low percentage, and if the knee doesnt connect, you are left very exposed and you wont get to do the back of the neck, or the kidney follow up

    Also, your videos are next to worthless because you talk too much and do too little. What I mean is, you are trying to put out soo much information, you dont spend enough time on the demonstration.

    and stop with the batmanish sound effects while you are demonstrating. I do it too, but it is distracting and unprofessional.

    your chosen reaction to the attack isnt bad.

    It is kenpo
     
  15. Twin Fist

    Twin Fist Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Nacogdoches, Tx
    I have been trying to tell you this.

    the techniques are in some cases not supposed to be realistic, they are...physical metaphors designed to teach you a specific lesson

    it seems like you missed that part (possibly you were never taught it, my original kenpo teacher Randy Edwardson of tiger crane kenpo in Long Beach didnt teach the concepts either i had to learn that later from Steve Spry) and you just look at the technique, and evaluate it based on pure realism.

    you are actually missing a lot of the science of kenpo that way.

    the "why"
     
  16. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I think this is the best response you have ever made visavis technical technique assessment to me. For that, I thank you. Of course, I sharply disagree and I think that's good. Vigorous debate and mentally stimulating discussion that results in improvements all around is a good thing imo. It's part of what I've been constantly referring to as THE KENPO LAB. And for the record? I was taught this tech by Chicken Gabrielle as Pin Step Chop. My initial martial history in Kenpo started in 2 dojos that taught me a hybrid of Tracy Kenpo, EPAK, tang soo do, bareknuckle boxing, and other stuff merged into a single system by a collection of renegades inclusive of both of my uncles. I didn't know that when I was a child of 8 years when I first started Kenpo [ I actually started boxing at age 6 ]...I was just being taught Kenpo karate that worked. That was good enough for me.


    Now to the meat of your critique and criticisms


    I didn't say that the name doesn't matter, I said that the debate regarding nomenclature is farcical. The tech I showed is THE ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER...says so on the video itself. It clearly uses the handsword...that's where the SWORD in the tech "Sword and Hammer" comes from...and the hammerfits...that's the "HAMMER" in "Sword and Hammer"...in the tech. Without even a single doubt, therefore, it's Sword and Hammer.

    Next, your understanding of Sword and Hammer is flawed. Very much so. You're conflating a common dysfunctional expression drawn from rote memorization and presentation without the requisite understanding of Big Red with the actual functional expression that The Ideal Phase specifically states is required to perform. Very very important difference that to my knowledge Doc Ron Chapel has wrote the most about on sites like KenpoTalk.com. I said it before and I said it again...I refer you to his writings on this matter. What he says is incredibly detailed knowledgeable and in depth, and in essence I am in lockstep with what he presents. Once again...what you are referring to is NOT the Ideal Phase. The Ideal Phase Sword and Hammer [ and any Ideal Phase tech] by definition is NOT a monolothic expression...it is a response to a specific street attack [ a shoulder grab and punch in this case ] that is to be crafted on a case by case basis by each instructor for his/her/their students and that expression is to be functional. Mr. Parker was well known, in his own words, to train each tech "50 Ways to Sunday" as the female Sensei Tanaka taught him to do. the "50 Ways to Sunday" idea is a central tenet in the Tracy system, and you can see the influence of that early teaching in my current expressions as I apply The ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER to multiple scenarios. I do with and without weapons, I do it on the ground, I do it in multifights and I do it in this video vs the 2 primary standing positions you will be in and the 180 degrees of attacks spanning from left shoulder to right shoulder and everywhere in between that you can deploy the Sword and Hammer from.

    Because of your misunderstanding of The Ideal Phase and what it entails, everything that follows from it is also invalid logically. In my expression, I go beyond the concept that Sword and Hammer is only applicable to "this" scenario and not "that" scenario. I advance the concept that if you know the tech, you can and should be able to use it pretty much regardless of your opponent's attack or defense, and this is inclusive of the original position and scenario that spawned the idea and concept of Sword and Hammer as we know it; but only when that idea and position [ flank grab and punch attack ] has been functionalized by actually having the attack come for real. The standard "touch, cock the fist and pose" method that is shown universally and which you [ and far too many others] champion as "thee" Sword and Hammer tech is abysmally, amazingly dysfunctional...and stupid to boot. That approach doesn't in any way actually do what we are tasked to do as martial arts instructors, i.e.: teach effective self defense in the real world attack vs the relevant attack at least. When you're taught in bjj to Pass the Guard? You Pass the Guard exactly as shown...in the dojo or on the streets. When you're taught to "cut the pie" and use "dynamic entry" techniques in SWAT and other units in the killhouse? That's what you do in real life. Just like that or close to it. Well...when you're defending the grab and punch in a 180 degree arc from the left shoulder flank back to the right shoulder flank or vice versa? Guess what? Yep...the defenses you craft can only work reliably and consistently under pressure if the attacks are live fire attacks of escalating resistance until you functionally address all of those attacks and their variants using---wait for it--yep, Sword and Hammer. Exactly as you were taught...if you trained in a functional environment by an honest, functional Kenpo instructor. It's a devastatingly depressing indicator as to how low much of Kenpo has sunk when I have to explain such a obvious concept. In order to make your tech work? You gotta work your tech vs the real world attack it's supposed to thwart.That's...mindblowingly simple common sense and elementary, my Dear Watson. In the real world? The Bad Guy is NOT gonna select an attack then attack in a way that maximizes your chance of winning and his/her/their chance of losing...so all that "barely touch your sholder cock the fist and pose" stuff is 100% useless in ANY regard. It's not even good to INTRODUCE the tech to a COMPLETE NOOBIE. I guarantee you that if you use that method and I use mine? My students will mop the floor with yours and anyone else's because my students are functional and yours aren't. The moment you or anyone else makes functional performance central to their practice? That's the moment that the advantages that my students have over yours begin to fade away until they've been equalized.

    So:


    My version of SWORD AND HAMMER revolves around the idea that the initial grab and punch [or just straight up punch attack, as that is also highly functional and realistic] attack is a surprise attack that succeeded but didn't take you out of the fight...now you must respond to that attack using Sword and Hammer. Therefore every single video that I showed is highly applicable and very valid. The model I use is immediately obvious and wholly acceptable to functional martial artists [ regardless of style ], even if they don't use that model themselves.

    Why teach the ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER this way? Because you should have learned and sparred with both the handsword and hammerfist as a White Belt. You should have learned to fire off your handsword and your hammerfist to cardinal directions...AS A WHITE BELT. IN REGULAR KENPO SCHOOLS. Maybe a White Belt with stripes at the most. You can and should be taught to fire your front snap kicks to the cardinal directions etc. Same with your handswords and hammerfists,and your blocks, etc. In my system, all of these techs are actually taught in the pre-White level B range [ literally before White Belt] and all of my techs come with a 8 Hour Guarantee. Train with me with this tech or any other tech that I teach and in 8 hours or less you WILL be fighting ready with it; guaranteed or your money back. When trained functionally? This guarantee of mine is too easy to maintain. In the nearly 2 decades that I've taught, I have never failed with this guarantee I offer. When trained functionally? The Sword and Hammer tech is quite simple to learn and is very much a beginner tech. Even the response after being cracked by a punch isn't a stretch, because if you train functionally? You've already sparred, so getting hit when you're not expecting to be hit isn't a big deal.

    The biggest difference in the way that I teach the tech is the mental aspect of having to respond to an attack without all of your mental faculties in tip top fighting form.


    Now on to the techs as I display them:

    The push while being rained on from behind with blows is VERY COMMON in streetfights when the BG is charging you from behind and elects to grab you prior to striking you. While just blasting you in the back of the head with a bottle or reaching around from the back with a haymaker to your face is the most common response? The grab that pushes you away while you're getting lit up with shots and the grab, that turns pulls or spins you into the oncoming blow is by far the most common expression of the "grab and punch" attack scenarios. The videos that I shared show this reality. We also see it hundreds of times in Hockey games [ thus the name Hockey Punch; the Sword and Hammer is in essence a defense from flank and rear Hockey Punch attacks]. My version works in all main scenarios because you're taught to deal with the surprise blast punch [ you're dazed but still have to do Sword and Hammer] and you're taught to deal with all grab scenarios too. I didn't even show the Sword and Hammer vs the punch and tackle or vs the armed attack, but we do that too with little problem...and it's still a relatively newbie tech. I teach this allll the time...and people have been training with me from 2-3 months by the time I teach it. I've taught the tech to a brace of students as soon as 4 weeks into training with me too. It's really not at all hard to do and teach if you teach with an eye toward maximum performance and functionality.

    The cover up I employ is natural functional and normal and is also part of Kenpo: it's called Collapsible Deflection. The outside pivot I use is also a sensible move that frees me from the grab. I don't use the Snapping Twig approach because I'm trying to be as universally applicable as possible. I made the change in my particular expression years ago when a student of mine named Sheree had her hair caught from a lateral grab while we practiced in class. She managed to free her shoulder from the grab, was able to deal with the stunning punch...but her sparring partner siezed her HAIR as well as her shoulder [wit hthe same grab that siezed her shoulder] so a Snapping Twig response won't work. The version I recommend and showed on this video worked perfectly under those and all the subsequent circumstances.



    When I read that you and Chris Parker say stuff like THIS:

    *************************************************************************************************************************************************************
    "Originally Posted by Chris Parker[​IMG]Honestly, if I was to offer you some advice, it would be to not automatically take the tact that every single technique is supposed to be an exact representation of violence, and to look for what it's teaching you. It seems to me that you tend to want to go to something you feel is more "realistic" without really looking at what is there in the first place... and that leads to some big gaps in what you're presenting.

    Well, I said you wouldn't like it...

    TWIN FIST SAYS---


    I have been trying to tell you this.

    the techniques are in some cases not supposed to be realistic, they are...physical metaphors designed to teach you a specific lesson

    it seems like you missed that part (possibly you were never taught it, my original kenpo teacher Randy Edwardson of tiger crane kenpo in Long Beach didnt teach the concepts either i had to learn that later from Steve Spry) and you just look at the technique, and evaluate it based on pure realism.

    you are actually missing a lot of the science of kenpo that way.

    the "why" ..."<--TWIN FIST

    ****************************************************************************************************************************************************************

    You guys further underscore my point and prove the exact opposite of your contentions. I mean...I couldn't've torpedoed your collective arguments as well all by myself without help from you guys in this regard.

    The science, the knowledge, the metaphor, the truth...lie in the actual realism and doing. There is literally no other measuring stick that applies. Literally zero. Are you being metaphorically attacked or are you being REALLY attacked? Can you even grasp the underlying meaning of a metaphor without knowing in the real world that the words that comprise the metaphor aren't referring to the actual literal meaning of those words but instead are juxtaposing two things that aren't really related such as:"My faith is a rock!" or some such? See...the reality includes knowing the definition of and being able to aptly use metaphor. And the inferred reality by both the posts of you and Chris Parker seems to be that neither one of you are practicing functionality enough to grasp the fact that functionality mandates science and includes and transcends metaphor, whereas lack of direct real world empirical training imparts no science, no metaphor...but instead builds illusion and dysfunction. It gives rise to Kenpo guys who can spout all kinds of esorteric Kenpo jargon but stay as far away from the mat as possible and neither they nor nearly all of their students can do what really counts: defend themselves using Kenpo.

    Let me put it another way: Mr. Parker, Doc Chapel, and their ilk are more than adept with the use of metaphor. They got there because they can fight. They will tell you that it is IMPOSSIBLE to take the opposite approach and arrive at the same end. Now...take a forms practitioner. Somebody who's the living emodiment of the art and metaphor of martial art. Ask them to fight. See what you get. Now, ask Mr. Parker, Jeff Speakman, Doc Chapel, or me to do a form. We'll KILL that form. I've won form trophies up the yin yang and out the wazoo.

    Now ask yourself which is more complete. Ask yourself which you would rather have in a scrap. The guy who can fight or the guy who's basically Kenpo's version of demonstration wushu.

    Me? We at THE ATACX GYM don't see why it has to be an either/or situation. We do both and more...because that's functional. Who can write more beautifully compelling and movingly of the sea than a sailor...who is ALSO a poet? Who can write more compellingly of SpecOps for the general readership and audience than a SpecOps warrior...who is ALSO a talented writer? You get the point. We encompass both because doing so is what makes us complete. Training realisitically isn't the only way to grasp martial metaphor, but far and away the real world martial artist who is the one who both has the superior comprehension of martial metaphor in every way and gives rise to the superior martial scientist-artist in every way possible. Literally. We see that fact proven from Hotep to Sun Tzu, from Fudo to Ed Parker, from Touissaint Louverture to Bruce Lee, from Napolean to Richard Marcinko, from Gengis Khan to Col. John Boyd.

    That's the real world martial artist. The guy who trains his fighting techs vs empirical real world fighting because...you know...he'll be fighting in the empirical real world. Anyone...and I mean ANY PERSON OR GROUP...who recommends otherwise is literally by definition UNDERPREPARING their students for real world self defense. It can be argued very forcefully and accurately that said underpreparation [ if deliberate] amounts to purposeful sabotage. With the explosion of and accessibility to the internet? With the history of TMA and the popularity of MMA? Ignorance is no longer an acceptable excuse. As a martial arts instructor, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW BETTER THAN THAT. Championing or practicing martial underperformance in the post-nuclear hyperdigital age is...a jaw-droppingly stupid thing to do.

    The martial instructors who do anything approaching what you and Chris Parker recommended in your own words and your own posts betray the most important responsibility that a martial arts instructor has to his/her/their students: the capacity to swifty comprehensively and realisitically defend themselves vs real world attacks using the techs they're taught to thwart said real world attacks exactly as shown to them by their instructor...along with the intrinsic discipline to know when to use them and why and the injunction not to abuse such knowledge. This combination has been championed for centuries as the primary way we develope our inner selves via practice of the martial arts and use the martial arts as a vehicle to become better overall human beings.

    The method you recommend would fail to do all of that. Every bit of it. Mine succeeds not only resoundingly but with a ironclad guarantee. You WILL do as I promise literally in 8 hour increments...if you train with me and train the way that I recommend. This is not a condemnation of you, John aka Twin Fist or Chris Parker. I think differing opinions on this subject matter provides crucially needed context and mental stimulus, as I have stated many a time before. But oftentimes we can resolve much of this via objective reality, via science, via empirical testing...and that right there is the clincher for truly honest objective non-overly egotistically invested martial artists who value performance above all other aspects because performance is the key. Combat performance. Personal development performance. Perpetual technical improvement via improvements in performance enchancing methods and training methods.

    That's the difference between my philosophy and what the quote of yours and Chris Parker's above encapsulates. You guys' approach reliably fails and promotes ignorance to boot. Mine reliably succeeds and perforce requires probing questioning developing excellence and intelligence. And I mean that without any insult, just as I don't mean to insult the kenpoists who perform Sword and Hammer in a way that can be proven to be wholly unreliable visavis consistently successful self-defense techs are concerned. Every one of those guys in the Kenpo videos are sincere martial artists and I like their techs...I decry their training model and the results therefrom.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2012
  17. Twin Fist

    Twin Fist Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Nacogdoches, Tx
    you should avoid 10K word essays because, quite simply, your writing is poor. It is hard to read

    And I remind you of a bit of old wisdom:

    "if you cant explain it simply, you dont understand it well enough." -Albert Einstien

    if it takes you 10K words to say it, you are either:
    1) out of your depth
    2) trying to say too much

    the latter is more likely than the former.

    I had a long, detailed point by point response typed out, then i realized it was a waste of time.

    It took me two read throughs to realize that your entire post is one long "i am bad *** and you are stupid" diatribe....

    you are not looking for other opinions, you are looking for fans, or people you can try to intimidate and degrade

    It is a waste of time for anyone to deal with you unless they agree totally with you, your only method of response to disagreement is 10K long "i am badd *** and you are stupid" essays.

    Frankly, you dont have enough to offer to make it worth dealing with your egotistical self masturbatory wordgasms.

    i AGREED WITH your technique.

    and you still feel the need to tell me i am wrong no less than 6 times.

    when i agreed with you.

    you clearly just want approval and to tell people how bad *** you think you are and how much smarter you think you are than anyone else.

    whatever talent you have is wasted under the weight of your ego.

    This was my final attempt to gt through to you. You have failed my test.

    good day.
     
  18. Chris Parker

    Chris Parker Grandmaster

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6,036
    Likes Received:
    938
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Er... right. Gotta say, you don't actually seem to have any correction for me, though.... And, for the record, I'm not incorrect. So you know.

    Hardly a Kempo-particular training method, Ras. We have the same idea in a range of our methods. Catch is, though, that's not what you're doing. Additionally, the very premise of the technique kinda denies performing it in multiple directions, as it'd designed against an attack from a particular direction/side to begin with.

    Hang on, are you saying that each instructor and student is supposed to make up what they feel "works" for them, rather than follow what the techniques actually are? Really? Then what makes it that art itself? This is the thing, Ras, there are established techniques, which may have some variation from instructor to instructor, but are fundamentally the same. That is demonstrated with your clips of other instructors showing basically the same thing. It makes it possible for the art to be taught reliably, as well as for intra-organisational and inter-organisational discussion to occur.

    As far as the last comments there, frankly Ras, that shows me a fair amount of problems with your approach...

    Are you kidding? The technique deals with a grab and attempted punch, and you show blind-siding king-hits (sucker punches), and you think they're the same thing? Then, when both John and I point out the lack of relationship, you say that I'm "massively incorrect"? Ras, I have eyes, you know....

    As to the idea of getting hit and not dropped straight away, it's not that I'm saying that doesn't happen, it's that each example you gave showed people being knocked down, and said your technique deals with it. And, for the record, getting knocked around a bit would make it harder for you to perform what you're showing. Not impossible, but a much lower chance of success.

    Please. You got the choke on because you were demonstrating, and he was going along with it. The rest of this shows a lot of fundamental gaps in reality, by the way.

    But what you're doing only has three things that connect it with Sword and Hammer, and only superficially at that. Namely the angle the attacker approaches from, the use of a sword-hand and hammer-fist (which, by themselves, does not make the technique itself "Sword and Hammer"), and the name. What I was looking for is that you follow what the technique itself follows the strategies and tactics of Sword and Hammer, which it doesn't. As a result, it's not Sword and Hammer. And no, I don't expect the exact same performance, I expect it to be the same method, though.

    Wow, this shows a lot of issues in understanding the training methods of many different arts, Ras.

    Based on every single other example of the technique, no, it's not. You choose to use the same name due purely to the same fists being used, but that's it. It's not the same technique, which has been our point.

    Uh, you may be reading a bit too much into the words there.... I wouldn't say that Ed Parker was suggesting that you initially take a technique (teaching a particular form of response against a particular form of attack), then basically throw out almost everything, change the technique to something unrecognizable from the original, miss the point of the technique in the first place, go against the very lessons it's teaching, in order to make up what you want and call it the same thing. Cause Ras? That's what you've done here.

    In terms of telling John to "ignore the label and look at the tech", when you put it up as a version of the initial one and ask for a comparison to be made, to ascertain which one is "better", or "works", but your version isn't anything like the original, the attacks you use to make your point aren't the ones that the technique is designed against, it changes what we look at when we see the technique. If you just put up the videos as a response against a rear grab and punch, fine. But you proffered it as a version of Sword and Hammer, giving the other forms as contrasts. Therefore ignoring the label and just looking at the technique really doesn't work. At all.

    Isn't that just the same damn thing you posted in the first place? Seriously, Ras, the answer is the same. As far as "which is better", honestly, I'd prefer the "IP" version, it's a damn solid technique. Yours is too messy, too complicated, too reliant on too many issues, has legal issues (here, at least), and just doesn't come across as anywhere near as reliable.

    Really? You talk a lot about being able to "torpedo" others arguments, but I note that you have yet to ever actually do that... or have anything more to say other than "I could prove you wrong, but I'm not going to". I'm far from convinced, Ras. About quite a lot.

    And, again, this shows a large gap in your understanding of quite a range of martial training methods, Ras.

    Ras, you frankly have no idea whatsoever of what I do. If you can't see the huge issues with the above from my posts, you really don't have the insight you think you do.

    No, Ras, it shows a highly limited understanding of martial arts and training. That's blunt, but there it is.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Regarding Albert Einstein's quote? I answered simply enough: "This is THE ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER. This tech like all my techs have came into existence because the so-called IP Sword and Hammer fails to reliably thwart the attack it claims to thwart, so [very scientifically, I might add ] I faced the attack myself and revised the response using Sword and Hammer to functionally reliably thwart the attack. This new expression is my own variant of Sword and Hammer [ or whatever Kenpo tech I teach ] and it works very well and simply. Lemme show you what I mean..." I was and am curious and I shared scientifically the results of my research and curiosity.

    "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing."--Albert Einstein.


    Don't mistake having alot to say for verbosity. Albert Einstein had ALOT OF QUOTES. According to what your post implies? He should've had a sparse few quotes and that's that. Wrong. The Bible, The Quran, The Torah, The Illiad, The Odyssey, The Art of War, Infinite Insights, Stephen King, Isaac Asimov, Stephen Hawking, Gene Roddenbery, Bruce Lee, Col. John Boyd, Richard Marcinko, Doc Chapel, Tom Clancy, erica hooks, Susan B. Anthony, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Mestre Bimba etc etc etc had alot more than 10k words to say. They frequently found themselves saying more because some members of their audience were comprehending less or disputing their positions more. That's what happened with you and I, John. And you know it.

    I wasn't disagreeing with you regarding the areas that we agree in. To wit:

    You said my techs isn't Sword and Hammer. I said it is...observe the hammerfist and the handsword being applied scientifically simply and successfully to the flank and rear grabs merged with simultaneous pushes and punches. You said that I should call my tech something different...I said I already do: it's called ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER...it's on the video. You constantly say that I haven't called my tech something different. We disagree there too. You said I'm teaching a brown or black belt level tech and I can't get beginners to do this tech. I said I've taught this tech with EASE to beginners for decades and I can do it again. Within 8 hours they'll be able to fight with it. Guaranteed. Because I'm functional? I can usually have them able to pull it off against nonoverwhelming attacks [ little woman attacked by surprise by some huge armed guy or something ] in literally 1 hour of training the tech. Been doing it for decades. It doesn't take a brown or black belt to learn to jab. I can teach you the jab in under an hour. You'll refine the jab for the rest of your life...but you'll be doing it with basic proper mechanics within 12 minutes of meeting me. You'll spend the next 45 minutes repping it out in drills and vs resistance. That's how you know you can jab. That is exactly what I do with every tech that I teach and know. I even pointed out that there's at least one person on this site who's seen me do this very thing within 8 minutes of laying eyes for the first time on his 17 year old white belt SKK student. You said that I'm constantly saying what a badass I am. I disagreed and asked you to point out where I said that. You never produced a single quote because it doesn't exist.

    You are attempting to slide in aspects of your criticisms which you know I disagree with, opinions of yours that you're attempting to not get me to call you out on every time you say something that's empirically false [ like how I don't do Sword and Hammer and like how I don't call my tech something else ] and which are the results of your own opinions which until this very thread have been largely bombastically and rudely cast about as fact [ thank you very much for the change in tone and your more civil posts ]. You seem to look at the way the so-called IP does Sword and Hammer and not question it; accept it as truth. Or you're not questioning your own martial education deeply enough and testing it objectively and empirically enough to perceive the simple obviousness of the fact that what I recommend is indeed Sword and Hammer; just my own variant of it. Exactly as Mr. Parker would have us do in Motion Kenpo.

    However, I am doing things the way I do because I'm minutely questioning and testing my martial education, and from that experience I'm actually learning...

    "The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education."--Albert Einstein
     
  20. ATACX GYM

    ATACX GYM 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    893
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I saw your response, Chris. I appreciate the depth and the detail of your responses in all honesty I do...but it will be even easier than I thought it would be to respond to all of your positions. And truth be told? I knew it would be easy simply based upon your previous posts on this thread. Be back for ya in a minute...
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

kempo-sword and hammer images