Sword and hammer pt. 1 and 2

[Twin Fist]

you are using sword and hammer, showing a blind haymaker as the real attack, and doing a push with a punch in your videos

WTF
make up yoru mind

once again that haymaker video is NOT relevant to sword and hammer, since sword and hammer is for a GRAB

NOT A BLIND HAYMAKER

there is no technique for a shot you dont see comming

10K words and you cant grasp the most basic of ideas:

use the right defense for the attack in question

go back, try again

 

[ATACX GYM]

this is 100% true, once you have mastered the concepts, those concepts will enable you to craft your own response to a given attack.

take sword and hammer. same attack

instead of the throat, you could do that outward chop to the ribs, this will (because of the bodies reaction) require a new follow-up, but the concept will still be right. And as long as it works, it is a good technique. It isnt sword and hammer, but thats ok becasue you dont need sword and hammer.

you did however need to learn sword and hammer to learn those lessons....

The first lesson that one learns using the most popular version of sword and hammer...the tech which is in essence The Ideal TECHNIQUE...is that said tech DOESN'T WORK IN A ACTUAL FIGHT ANYTHING LIKE HOW IT'S TRAINED. Therefore there are only 2 options: FIX IT OR ABANDON IT. Once it's made functional? THEN AND ONLY THEN MAY ANY OTHER BENEFITS FLOW FROM IT

Reflect upon this. Absorb this. Comprehend this. Your contention, Twin Fist, and similar contentions by many others that:

"..." the techniques are just options, metaphors to teach you lessons, once you learn the lessons, you dont need the techniques."

Is only HALF right. The techniques ARE options...but those options are grasped when the principles behind the techniques are grasped. The techniques themselves are designed by your teacher based upon the concepts and approach of the Ideal Phase and the 3 Points of View that this Ideal Phase strongly urges us to consider. THE TECHNIQUE IS SUPPOSED TO RELIABLY THWART THE ATTACK IT'S SUPPOSED TO THWART/ DEFEND AGAINST AND THE TECH YOU GUYS CHAMPION DOES NOT, HAS NOT, WON'T AND CANNOT. Even Doc has said over and over again:" the techniques as written are unworkable"...

In layman's terms? Floyd Mayweather Jr.'s jab is different than Sugar Shane Mosley's jab. They are different people with different strengths and weaknesses, different physiques, different life experiences different coaches etc. But each of their coaches grasp the benefits and whatnot of the jab very well, and each coach crafted their own methods of training the jab and both dictating the reactions of their opponent and dictating those reactions...with the jab. Each coach taught their knowledge and method to each of these fighters. Once you learn how to jab and the principles that make the jab more and more effective, YOU STILL NEED THE JAB. It's not a metaphor. It's a real world tech that works and can save your ***. You need BOTH the LESSONS aaaand the TECHNIQUES. The TECHS are proof that you know the lessons. The lessons allow you to craft more techs that prove that you understand the universal underlying principle. You don't stop learning math just cuz you now know how to add subtract multiply and divide. You learn to add subtract multiply and divide BETTER, then move on to algebra, then trigonometry, and physics etc etc...and you'll be adding multiplying subtracting and dividing throughout. Once you grasp the lessons behind Sword and Hammer? You DON'T forget Sword and Hammer. You ADD OTHER EFFECTIVE TECHS LIKE SWORD AND HAMMER to your arsenal...and you learn to do S&h better. For the rest of your Kenpo life. Doing the Sword and Hammer differently than someone else [ as long as it effectively thwarts the attack that it's supposed to thwart ] doesn't mean that it's NOT Sword and Hammer. Doesn't mean that it's NOT Kenpo.

The fact that each fighter deploys the jab differently doesn't mean that they're not jabbing or boxing. The fact that each boxer deploys the jab in different situations doesn't mean that they're not jabbing or boxing.

 

[ATACX GYM]

you are using sword and hammer, showing a blind haymaker as the real attack, and doing a push with a punch in your videos

WTF
make up yoru mind

once again that haymaker video is NOT relevant to sword and hammer, since sword and hammer is for a GRAB

NOT A BLIND HAYMAKER

there is no technique for a shot you dont see comming

10K words and you cant grasp the most basic of ideas:

use the right defense for the attack in question

go back, try again

Observe the grab in the video at 0:15 and 0:16, a split second before the punch lands. Not only are we faced with a flank grab...we have a flank grab and punch to boot. The fact that the punch catches the defender unaware is precisely what should be covered in the WHAT IF Phase and the FORMULATION PHASE...and precisely what I address over and over again in my video.

In other words? This scenario is precisely one of several that Sword and Hammer is supposed to thwart and defend against. The difference between the real world attack and the antiseptic dysfunctional solution that too many people champion is the fact that the so-called solution doesn't work. At all. As Doc said, "the techniques as written are unworkable...". The first thing you must learn in self defense is to learn techniques that succeed in defending your self. The common tech fails to do this. Mine succeeds admirably at this endeavor.

My variant is also much more multifaceted than the one most others champion. My variant addresses the reality of the "cock and pose,never throw a punch" attacker that almost never happens in real life but which is the mainstay of the more popular dysfunctional Sword and Hammer, and a host of others besides...AND the scenarios that I show in my video. My variant satisfies every requirement of The Ideal Phase. So whether or not you like it or would employ it...one thing it definitely IS without a doubt? Is it's an Sword and Hammer Ideal Technique. May not be YOURS [that's why I call it THE ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER ]...but it IS an IDEAL Technique.

And it's infinitely, perpetually more functional than that other variant.

 

[Twin Fist]

Therefore there are only 2 options: FIX IT OR ABANDON IT.

you forgot: Learn from it

you were prob too busy to actually.....learn the technique and what it is supposed to teach you............

 

[Twin Fist]

are you HIGH??
all 3 of your examples of real attacks are blind haymakers

not a grab in sight

example video 1: fat black guy blind sides other black guy
example video 2: fat white guy blind sides other white guy
example video 3: not fat white guy blind sides black guy

no grabs in any of your real attack examples. So not relevant to sword and hammer

now YOUR *chuckle* teaching videos show you getting pushed then punched, pushed then punched, so also, not relevant to sword and hammer.

basically, your entire thread is irrelevant because you are making **** up.

Observe the grab in the video at 0:15 and 0:16, a split second before the punch lands. Marinate in the wrongness of your contention...and the rightness [ as usual of ] of mine. Next.

 

[jks9199]

I'm going to try one more time...

Sword & Hammer is a defined technique, right? It's on the syllabi of multiple schools and programs of Kenpo. There are some variants (stepping to 3:00 or 4:30, for example), but they are all recognizable as the same technique. Your version isn't. So... since you keep bringing this definition up, let's look at it.

IDEAL PHASE- This is Phase I of the analytical process of dissecting a technique.
It requires structuring an IDEAL technique by selecting a combat situation that you wish to analyze. Contained within the technique should be fixed moves of defense,offense, and the anticipated reactions that can stem from them. This PHASE strongly urges the need to analyze techniques from THREE POINTS OF VIEW."

"...structuring an IDEAL technique by selecting a combat situation" (emphasis added) OK, so what's the combat situation in the classic version? An aggressive grab from the flank. It may be setting up a punch, it may stopping your motion, or pulling you around to face in a "don't you walk away when I'm talking to you" situation. It certainly doesn't seem to be a push, looking at any of the versions, including Parker's notes, which read "your opponent (standing between 3 and 4 o’clock) grabs your right shoulder with his left hand".

This is where we're tripping on your version. Your combat situation isn't a grab; it's push. It may or may not be more realistic; that's irrelevant to the discussion. Have you fulfilled the analytical process for your combat situation? Sure. You've developed "fixed moves of defense, offense, and anticipated reactions." They seem sound. But you've started from a different premise, so you, of course, have reached a different conclusion. It's a sound conclusion, and works within the premise of the four stages... but it's simply not the same combat situation or premise as the classical Sword & Hammer, so the argument that it's a "more functional" version is already doomed.

 

[Twin Fist]

hey, i told him on page ONE his his response worked, and was fine, he told me i was wrong.....like...a LOT

 

[ATACX GYM]

I'm going to try one more time...

Sword & Hammer is a defined technique, right? It's on the syllabi of multiple schools and programs of Kenpo. There are some variants (stepping to 3:00 or 4:30, for example), but they are all recognizable as the same technique. Your version isn't. So... since you keep bringing this definition up, let's look at it.



"...structuring an IDEAL technique by selecting a combat situation" (emphasis added) OK, so what's the combat situation in the classic version? An aggressive grab from the flank. It may be setting up a punch, it may stopping your motion, or pulling you around to face in a "don't you walk away when I'm talking to you" situation. It certainly doesn't seem to be a push, looking at any of the versions, including Parker's notes, which read "your opponent (standing between 3 and 4 o’clock) grabs your right shoulder with his left hand".

This is where we're tripping on your version. Your combat situation isn't a grab; it's push. It may or may not be more realistic; that's irrelevant to the discussion. Have you fulfilled the analytical process for your combat situation? Sure. You've developed "fixed moves of defense, offense, and anticipated reactions." They seem sound. But you've started from a different premise, so you, of course, have reached a different conclusion. It's a sound conclusion, and works within the premise of the four stages... but it's simply not the same combat situation or premise as the classical Sword & Hammer, so the argument that it's a "more functional" version is already doomed.

This is more sensible, so allow me to respond:

First and foremost...the entirety of the previous post takes as a given that the variants that are shown most popularly of Sword and Hammer are correct because they more closely mirror one variant of the tech as written in Big Red [ there are different variants written by Mr. Parker, one of which is called the 1987 version, and Doc said he was STILL changing things up to his dying day because Mr. Parker was a constantly evolving martial artist ]. However, the very definition of The Ideal Phase disputes that. The descriptions of Mr. Parker on this tech also changed with time. So there IS NO "classical" Sword and Hammer...there's just an EXAMPLE of it. We're supposed to craft our own individual Sword and Hammer I.P. Right off top, you're crediting the "classical" Sword and Hammer as THEE Sword and Hammer. Not only does the definition of The Ideal Phase dispute such an assertion, Doc Chapel directly refutes this notion in no uncertain terms. Did you miss the quotes of his that I put up? So the first misunderstanding of gigantic proportions which has devastated so much of Kenpo is this one. We need to actually understand what the IP is before we begin discussion of it.

My combat situation isn't JUST a grab it's ALSO a push...similar to a Judo tech. The grab happens in much the way that you see it happens in the videos that I cited...a grab with a turning or pushing motion that sets you directly into the punch. In the real world...such a manuever is a surprise. If they're grabbing you even to say "don't walk away while I'm talking to you" you DIDN'T ANTICIPATE THE GRAB...thus there is a surprise thing going on.

The start from the different premise you're talking about is true...but not in the sense that you conclude. The "different premise" is a FUNCTIONAL ATTACK. That's the key. If it's merely a grab with no carryover bodily follow through and the guy cocks his fist back and poses? That's the LEAST LIKELY scenario and generally a LOWER ORDER of threat. The MORE LIKELY scenario...the MORE FUNCTIONAL ATTACK...are the ones that I specified, to wit:

1) The BG will grab, push/pull and strike at the same time

2) The BG will simply strike with no push/pull


This is quite simple, quite evident, and I'm sure that you have enough experience to know that the two variants that I mentioned are much more prevalent than the static 'stand touch your shoulder cock my fist and pose' variant flung about as some form of realistic or wonderful model when it's not.

The best thing is...the variant that I propose neatly resolves every scenario involving the "static stand touch your shoulder cock my fist never throw a punch and pose" scenario...as well as the more frequent, more realistic,potentially more dangerous scenarios that I seek to engage from the gate. The converse isn't remotely true...in fact? Not only does the "static stand and touch your shoulder cock my fist never throw a punch pose" prep you to fail to the tune of hospital level stupid or at least youtube level embarassment, it doesn't even properly thwart the scenario it created for itself.

 

[ATACX GYM]

you forgot: Learn from it

you were prob too busy to actually.....learn the technique and what it is supposed to teach you............

You forgot to read my very first sentence...

"The first lesson that one learns using the most popular version of sword and hammer...the tech which is in essence The Ideal TECHNIQUE...is that said tech DOESN'T WORK IN A ACTUAL FIGHT ANYTHING LIKE HOW IT'S TRAINED. Therefore there are only 2 options: FIX IT OR ABANDON IT. Once it's made functional? THEN AND ONLY THEN MAY ANY OTHER BENEFITS FLOW FROM IT"

 

[Twin Fist]

 

[ATACX GYM]

Geeze...how the hell did I miss this thread? LOL! Anyways, I'll toss my .02 into the mix. So, if I'm reading right, the main issue is that S&H (Sword and Hammer) is no longer S&H mainly due to it not being the way that we'd typically see it taught in Kenpo schools. Ras made drastic changes, thus why call is S&H? So...that being said....rather than change the technique altogether, why not just do the base technique. If something were to change, ie: the badguy pushes, pulls, changes his attack, goes to punch, etc, just simply adapt to the new situation, and go from there? That way, you're technically still doing S&H, because thats what you started off with, but if/when the BG did something other than simply grab, you adapted.

I say this because this is what I do. Actually, thats not 100% correct. What I do is simply respond to whats happening. I'm not setting out to do S&H or any other tech., in its entirety. Maybe I'd just knock the guys hand off, if possible. Maybe I'd kick him. Honestly, who knows what I'd do...lol.

Thoughts?

Okay first...about the shorter folks [ which I am at 5'7" ] and shorter women thing? I addressed that issue specifically with this tech months ago and left that answer on this thread. Observe:


from page 5 of this thread, a quote that I put up months ago on KT:

Here is a significant part of the reasoning and personal experiences that informed my personal expression of THE ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER, taken from my post on KenpoTalk.com a long time ago.



"

Re: Atacx gym sword and hammer pt. 2 w/choke (r.d.l.)

Originally Posted by jdinca
It looked like you were stretching to make sure you had a hammer and sword in there.

I like the escape though.




That's a reasonable supposition right there,man.But I wasn't stretching to keep the S&H in there.When I first started testing this against escalating resistance? I first looked to see if a S&H was needed,and what benefits arose from using specifically the handsword and hammerfist in that tech.I wasn't keeping the tech in there just to keep it.The first logical place for the insertion of the S&H came in the transition escape from the tie up (in this case,it started with a shoulder grab but I had the grip migrate all over the place and tested it against taller people,shorter folks,strikers,grapplers,armed folks,etc etc.Taller guys grabbed me by the nape of the neck and other "anatomical handles" that were more presentable to them due to their height; wrestlers and football players would hammer then shoot and/or tie up and shoot,judoka would add judo throws and locks to what the wrestlers did,streetfighters would punch punch and then tie up for street fighters/untrained folks the grip leading to the classical S&H counter would happen in the midst of a flurry Hockey punch style,strikers would strike no matter what,etc etc etc).No matter who the attacker was,after you pivoted to the outside of his gripping arm,a hammerfist to the outside of the forearm of their gripping hand produced the best chance of making him release...whether you're a short girl or studly lion...and secondarily? The hammerfist action had the best results regarding compounding a painful strike with a disarm and displacement of the opponent.I married the hammerfist with the motion of our outward block,and deliberately slammed my forearm as hard as I could into the area between the backside of my opponent's abductor pollicis longus and his flexor pollicis longus (been YEEEAAARRRSS since I wrote that word down and it wasn't in my college papers or my old skool martial arts training and idea notebooks) which is a fancy way of saying a specific strip of area between his wrist and elbow.I found that not only did this work well even against quite strong taller athletic people like my friend Khai when they grabbed me full force,but I also found that my shorter students and especially my female students tended to strike higher up on the limb grasping them--closer to the wrist with the hammerfist+outside whipping forearm shiver of a block,lower on the tricep muscle group due to their shorter limbs and stature--so they could access these points between wrist and elbow better than pretty much any other targeted spot that one can easily counterattack under those circumstances.

At first I almost eliminated the handsword from this tech.I almost called it THE HAMMER AND SALUTE,because at first I was using the palm strike against the area between the elbow and the tricep.It did a good job of propelling the offending grasping limb away from me and my students,plus I noted that it had the added advantage of turning our opponent's back more toward us.Which I loved.Thought airythang was gravy...until I noted that the body alignment necessary to put real juice in a palm heel strike took away from the body alignment needed to put real juice in a forearm shiver of a outside block.At first I was letting that ride too...until one day in class,Sheree got her hair caught while she was turning and whipping out the block+palm heel.Her sparring partner released his grip on her shoulder,but NOT her hair.He wound up yanking her noggin,her neck and the rest of her body followed,and she got whooped on.Then something similar happened to DeMarcus.So I really sat down and went over the specific options available; with my first action being to go right back to the source material.I immediately applied the handsword to the tricep region,and I discovered that when you put actual stank funk on that handsword along with the forearm shiver of a outside block? Not only did the body mechanics align themselves in such a way so that each tech synergistically amped the power of the other, the handsword to the tricep really weakens the grip ( even if you do the tech wrong ) and more likely than not the handsword to the tricep MAKES THE GRIPPING HAND SPASM OPEN. You WILL escape almost anyone's grip. Not even kidding. Try it out yourself. Extend your left arm straight out from your shoulder like you're punching the wall or the air or about to make the universal stiff arm+open palm sign for "STOP". Then form a tight fist...in fact? You can squeeze a tennis ball or racquetball as hard as you can to make the point crystal clear. Then take your right hand and pop your lower tricep with a half power ridgehand. IMMEDIATELY you'll feel the power of your grip on the ball or your tight fist weaken,and you'll feel that tingle run down from your tricep to your left pinkie. And you did allat with just a wakk ridgehand from absolutely super wakk body alignment,no torque,no breath,no follow through,no Directional Harmony. If you threw a genuine stank funk nasty handsword in conjunction with the whipping outside block of a forearm shiver with proper body alignment which also capitalized upon the kinetic energy of both you AND your opponent? THE HAMMER AND SWORD WILL END THE THROWDOWN 90% OF THE TIME. It not only propels the BG away and takes his grabbing arm away from him, not only does his brain recognize that shock and responds to the trauma in a specific predictable way which always delays your opponent's response, guys....since his grabbing arm is now toast...there is an open lane to handswording or backfisting his throat if he's still within arm reach. And you will note that I do exactly that along with applying the hammerfist. The placement of the hammerfist in my varinat is ALSO VERY DELIBERATE in every regard, with knowledge of the human anatomy dictating tech placement. I'm hitting specific targets which my studies,my experience and my student's studies and experience shows has been most sanguine to the execution of this tech in the various situations that we apply it and test it in.

Have you tried to execute Sword and Hammer AFTER you've been smacked face first into a wall and WHILE the BG is STILL PINNING YOU THERE? I have...it's part of our training process. I'd been doing it for YEARS before the ONE TIME I ever had to do it live in the field (working a special security detail at the Queen Mary circa 2006). But because I knew how to do it and insisted that my students do it too and get good at it? DeRon used it to stop himself from getting knifed after he was mugged,and L.T. taught her daughter after I taught her and that knowledge prevented her daughter from being kidnapped by some sicko who'd grabbed her backpack during an attempt to kidnap her. I've done my variant of Sword and Hammer in many situations during practice and have tested it even from The Rubber Guard and even after having to come up from the ground during multifight training (and a live multifight with weapons during the same Queen Mary incident previously referred to) entering and exiting rolls/falls,etc.

So yeah it MIGHT appear that I'm forcing the S&H,but I'm not. Thanks for the comment!!​

Last edited by ATACX GYM; 4 Weeks Ago at 06:30 PM.​

http://www.youtube.com/user/ATACXGYM?feature=mhum

IT'S NOT JUST WHAT YOU KNOW,IT'S HOW YOU TRAIN

THE FIGHT YOU ALWAYS WIN IS THE FIGHT YOU'RE NOT IN

AVOID TROUBLE;BUT IF TROUBLE IS UNAVOIDABLE? PUT TROUBLE IN TROUBLE"
​

That is a thorough and hefty response months prior to you actually bringing the concern up to your issue. Not surprised that you and I and other functional martial artists had the same question and similar responses...


Regarding the Sword and Hammer Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept? As I stated before...there are several issues of note in this response:


1) When you refer to Sword and Hammer...WHOSE Sword and Hammer do you refer to? The Sword and Hammer Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept is crafted on a case by case basis. By teacher to and for students. Did you craft your own Sword and Hammer which fit all 4 mandatory facets of The Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept? If not...you need to craft that first. You're not supposed to borrow someone else's IP although you can do so...but even if you do so? You still have to test it vs resistance for yourself first and then in class next.

2) The process of crafting your own Sword and Hammer tech will lead you to a tech that is different than the tech that all of my detractors have been cosigning to death. Why? Because you're supposed to use The Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept to craft your OWN Sword and Hammer. Being a kali guy, I can see you crafting a Sword and Hammer that works well with and without weapons, and AGAINST people with weapons...in addition to wiping out people WITHOUT weapons. My Sword and Hammer does exactly that as well. But just because it's NOT the "default EXAMPLE" of Sword and Hammer written decades ago...you will have detractors who are insufficiently versed in The Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept state that your Sword and Hammer is NOT Sword and Hammer. No matter how functional and capable and "Sword and Hammer" it actually is.

3) Since I am the only person to follow The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Concept all the way through, I am so far literally the only person to properly discusses and apply the actual IP as defined by Mr. Parker and Doc Chapel on this thread. This is also why my application and understanding is correct, and all others which don't comply with the correct definition are wrong.

 

[Twin Fist]

there you have it, everyone else in the world of kenpo is wrong, but ras is right. according to ras. and if you dont believe it, he's got 10K words by ras to prove that ras is right, and he isnt afraid to use them..........

keep blowing your own horn, you are the only one listening anyway

 

[Aiki Lee]

that contention, sir, is incorrect and directly contradicted by the definition of The Ideal Phase itself. You are conflating a major failure in Kenpo--the default creation of an Ideal TECHNIQUE that has been universally passed off as The Ideal Phase--with the ACTUAL Ideal Phase ITSELF. The Ideal Phase...by definition...has to be made by the head of whatever group that is training Kenpo. That person or persons responsible for crafting The Ideal Phase must not only satisfy the definition of The Ideal Phase...that person or persons is also strongly urged to ensure that they consider the other three points of view that rounds out and manifestly completes The Ideal Phase PROCESS.

...OK. I've read and re-read what you've been putting down and read the posts after to see if I could understand what you are saying, but I really don't think what you've come up with is meant to instill the same lessons that are taught in the more mainstream Sword and Hammer. I think your response was decent, for the attack that your partner gave you whihc was a push and hit from behind.

I feel that the original technique (without having any experience with Kenpo ever) resembles a grab meant to either yank you back into the attack and hold you still to prvent you from fleeing. This type of attack would allow one to respond this way. Pushing energy would make these strikes less effective as there is less damage done as you are being moved away from the target. I look at sword and hammer and see lessons like targeting, rebounding strikes off of targets into new strikes, pinnning the attacking hand to gain control and tactile vision, and taking the initiative through a pre-emptive strike.

Your technique does not allow for these lessons to be aplied because the attack is different. Your attack is realistic but no more realistic than the other attack. It is just different. Therefore the lessons are different. That is what I see.

 

[Chris Parker]

Ras. You have completely failed to demonstrate anything other than the fact that you don't listen to anyone who doesn't automatically praise your genius. You are mistaken in the applicability of the "original" technique, mainly as you don't understand the attack or defence in real world terms. Your arguments that you have a better version of the technique are completely irrelevant as you have a completely different technique, with completely different tactics, against a completely different attack, supported by videos of attacks that your own technique doesn't actually deal with.

I'm going to be blunt here.

Grow up.
Get over yourself.
Recognize that you really, really, really don't know anywhere near as much as you think you do.

And learn to make your point far more concisely.

For the record, I'd suggest going back to the first page and re-reading my post and appraisal of the videos in question, as they still stand, and have not been countered by anything you've posted in the last 7 pages.

And if you can't counter any of it, as you haven't been able to so far, realise that that probably means something.

 

[ATACX GYM]

...OK. I've read and re-read what you've been putting down and read the posts after to see if I could understand what you are saying, but I really don't think what you've come up with is meant to instill the same lessons that are taught in the more mainstream Sword and Hammer. I think your response was decent, for the attack that your partner gave you whihc was a push and hit from behind.

I feel that the original technique (without having any experience with Kenpo ever) resembles a grab meant to either yank you back into the attack and hold you still to prvent you from fleeing. This type of attack would allow one to respond this way. Pushing energy would make these strikes less effective as there is less damage done as you are being moved away from the target. I look at sword and hammer and see lessons like targeting, rebounding strikes off of targets into new strikes, pinnning the attacking hand to gain control and tactile vision, and taking the initiative through a pre-emptive strike.

Your technique does not allow for these lessons to be aplied because the attack is different. Your attack is realistic but no more realistic than the other attack. It is just different. Therefore the lessons are different. That is what I see.

---Quote (Originally by ATACX GYM)---
that contention, sir, is incorrect and directly contradicted by the definition of The Ideal Phase itself. You are conflating a major failure in Kenpo--the default creation of an Ideal TECHNIQUE that has been universally passed off as The Ideal Phase--with the ACTUAL Ideal Phase ITSELF. The Ideal Phase...by definition...has to be made by the head of whatever group that is training Kenpo. That person or persons responsible for crafting The Ideal Phase must not only satisfy the definition of The Ideal Phase...that person or persons is also strongly urged to ensure that they consider the other three points of view that rounds out and manifestly completes The Ideal Phase PROCESS.
---End Quote---
...OK. I've read and re-read what you've been putting down and read the posts after to see if I could understand what you are saying, but I really don't think what you've come up with is meant to instill the same lessons that are taught in the more mainstream Sword and Hammer. I think your response was decent, for the attack that your partner gave you whihc was a push and hit from behind.
I feel that the original technique (without having any experience with Kenpo ever) resembles a grab meant to either yank you back into the attack and hold you still to prvent you from fleeing. This type of attack would allow one to respond this way. Pushing energy would make these strikes less effective as there is less damage done as you are being moved away from the target. I look at sword and hammer and see lessons like targeting, rebounding strikes off of targets into new strikes, pinnning the attacking hand to gain control and tactile vision, and taking the initiative through a pre-emptive strike.
Your technique does not allow for these lessons to be aplied because the attack is different. Your attack is realistic but no more realistic than the other attack. It is just different. Therefore the lessons are different. That is what I see.


Thank you for taking the time to read the posts on this thread, watch the videos and post your response...and thank you for saying that my response was decent.

Now on to your post...

"...OK. I've read and re-read what you've been putting down and read the posts after to see if I could understand what you are saying, but I really don't think what you've come up with is meant to instill the same lessons that are taught in the more mainstream Sword and Hammer. I think your response was decent, for the attack that your partner gave you whihc was a push and hit from behind.

"I feel that the original technique (without having any experience with Kenpo ever) resembles a grab meant to either yank you back into the attack and hold you still to prvent you from fleeing. This type of attack would allow one to respond this way..." KENSHIN

Actually I cover every more than a push and hit from behind. I cover every primary area from the left flank to the right flank, and include push pulls and punches. Which is more than what the "more mainstream Sword and Hammer" does. And did you say "either yank you back into the attack and hold you still to prvent you from fleeing..."?

[ ATACX GYM SWORD AND HAMMER PT. 1A, SHOT IN DECEMBER 2011 ]:


[video=youtube_share;AuvuhW1u2WE]http://youtu.be/AuvuhW1u2WE[/video]

by the way? This video is done by EPAKSorg video. EPAK stands for Ed Parker's American Kenpo.

[video=youtube_share;YGDc1oOFDcI]http://youtu.be/YGDc1oOFDcI[/video]


looks remarkably like my video visavis positioning doesn't it? Go to 0:36

[video=youtube_share;R-mmdyIHkjs]http://youtu.be/R-mmdyIHkjs[/video]


So anybody screeching about my positioning? There's no case to be made there either. I include all the primary standing functional positioning in this video [ I have others whre I do the same with clinch, ground, weapons, multifights, etc ] and NONE of my positions are wrong. In fact, including ALL of the positions that you can actually do Sword and Hammer from...makes you have a definitely more versatile and oftentimes BETTER sword and hammer visavis guys who DON'T do this.


"Pushing energy would make these strikes less effective as there is less damage done as you are being moved away from the target. I look at sword and hammer and see lessons like targeting, rebounding strikes off of targets into new strikes, pinnning the attacking hand to gain control and tactile vision, and taking the initiative through a pre-emptive strike..."--KENSHIN

If your training is dysfunctional...which the "more mainstream Sword and Hammer" is in huge amounts...your "lessons like targeting, rebounding strikes off of targets into new strikes, pinnning the attacking hand to gain control and tactile vision, and taking the initiative..." will also be dysfunctional. That means it won't work reliably under combat conditions. Which means that the tech fails miserably at the number one requirement of self defense: defending your self.

Regarding pushing? Well, to quote Doc..."it depends". I would tend to agree that the strikes would be less effective as there is less damage done [generally speaking ] unless the opponent is armed. Furthermore, you're not acknowledging that the push in conjunction with the strikes cause more problems and can be much more dangerous than the push [ or pull] or strike alone. You could be pushed INTO someone or an oncoming blow...while being hit from behind too [ multifight scenario]. You could be pushed down onto the ground and the strikes blast away your ability ti right yourself and regain balance. You could be pushed over something like a chair or table or another person. You could be pushed INTO something like a wall or car or bike or...like what happens out here in the neighborhood...you could get pushed into oncoming traffic while being belabored by blows.

The absolute killer to any argument about pushing, pulling or adding weapons to the situation is that...the tech that allows you to defeat a armed person who pushes and/or pulls you from the flank is the same tech that allows you to defeat the UNARMED person who does the same thing. And both of those versions also properly give you the time and space to assess whether or not you should annihilate the guy who just puts his hand on your shoulder and cocks his fist or wait, or a guy who grabs you by the shoulder and spins you about like..."you're not walking away from me".

The tech recommended in "the more mainstream Sword and Hammer" absolutely lacks these critical facets. Therefore it's less realistic, less capable, will get you hurt, and even if you COULD pull it off? You'll prolly by an excessive force or assault charge in the process. This is a point that I and another consistent critic of mine...Chris Parker...actually agree upon.

As for your comment about preemptive strikes? Doc, Clyde and Larry Tatum...three Kenpo Elders with whom I've disagreed with [ and agreed with ] from time to time...all flatly state that preemptive strikes under these scenarios are highly unlikely if not flat out impossible. It's a doofus idea to think that Kenpoists or most anyone else will always or even usually preempt attacks.I mean that with no disrespect.


--

 

[MJS]

Okay first...about the shorter folks [ which I am at 5'7" ] and shorter women thing? I addressed that issue specifically with this tech months ago and left that answer on this thread. Observe:


from page 5 of this thread, a quote that I put up months ago on KT:




That is a thorough and hefty response months prior to you actually bringing the concern up to your issue. Not surprised that you and I and other functional martial artists had the same question and similar responses...


Regarding the Sword and Hammer Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept? As I stated before...there are several issues of note in this response:


1) When you refer to Sword and Hammer...WHOSE Sword and Hammer do you refer to? The Sword and Hammer Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept is crafted on a case by case basis. By teacher to and for students. Did you craft your own Sword and Hammer which fit all 4 mandatory facets of The Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept? If not...you need to craft that first. You're not supposed to borrow someone else's IP although you can do so...but even if you do so? You still have to test it vs resistance for yourself first and then in class next.

2) The process of crafting your own Sword and Hammer tech will lead you to a tech that is different than the tech that all of my detractors have been cosigning to death. Why? Because you're supposed to use The Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept to craft your OWN Sword and Hammer. Being a kali guy, I can see you crafting a Sword and Hammer that works well with and without weapons, and AGAINST people with weapons...in addition to wiping out people WITHOUT weapons. My Sword and Hammer does exactly that as well. But just because it's NOT the "default EXAMPLE" of Sword and Hammer written decades ago...you will have detractors who are insufficiently versed in The Ideal Phase Analytical Process Concept state that your Sword and Hammer is NOT Sword and Hammer. No matter how functional and capable and "Sword and Hammer" it actually is.

3) Since I am the only person to follow The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Concept all the way through, I am so far literally the only person to properly discusses and apply the actual IP as defined by Mr. Parker and Doc Chapel on this thread. This is also why my application and understanding is correct, and all others which don't comply with the correct definition are wrong.

Well, I didn't mention height in this post, perhaps another....and you're quoting jdinca from KT....but anywho....even when I learned the techniques, I still had to adapt due to body differences. Like I've said....I use the base IP techs as a guide. Unlike some other Kenpoists, who eat, breath, sleep and **** the IP techs, claiming that they have to be done as is....I adjust accordingly. Works for me, and IMO, thats what matters.

I did the same when I'd teach. I'd constantly stress to my students not to be bound by what they're seeing.

 

[Twin Fist]

the IP is the "best case"

not the "every time no matter what"

 

[ATACX GYM]

Well, I didn't mention height in this post, perhaps another....and you're quoting jdinca from KT....but anywho....even when I learned the techniques, I still had to adapt due to body differences. Like I've said....I use the base IP techs as a guide. Unlike some other Kenpoists, who eat, breath, sleep and **** the IP techs, claiming that they have to be done as is....I adjust accordingly. Works for me, and IMO, thats what matters.

I did the same when I'd teach. I'd constantly stress to my students not to be bound by what they're seeing.

Just tuh letcha know MJS...I'm not quoting jdinca. I can give you the link to the thread. The hefty response I authored is my RESPONSE to jdinca. Lol. Maybe it didn't transfer well on my copy and paste thingy...

 

[ATACX GYM]

the IP is the "best case"

not the "every time no matter what"

True. The IP is without a doubt the "best case" scenario, or more accurately it's essentially the best hoped for case once combat is entered [ the best case period is not to be in a fight at all, I would think ].

But we all know that the "best case" or the "best hoped for case" is NOT the REAL case. The oftentimes sloppy reality is the REAL case...not the best case. So I recommend restructuring the IP accordingly...as I have done. If yuo handle the REAL case? You always always always automatically handle the BEST case. The converse is absolutely nowhere near as rigorously true.

If other people don't want to conform to what current scientific collective combat studies collectively indicate is a more realistic scenario? They don't have to...but the difference between their tech and other people like mine will be the difference between the BEST HOPED FOR case and THE REAL CASE

 

[Twin Fist]

Ras, do you teach the IP "best case" of the EPAK techniques you tech?

if not ,then you are hurting them just as much as the teachers that ONLY teach the IP "best case"

the IP "Best case" teaches us lessons, without it, you are missing the point.

certainly you are not restricted to ONLY teaching that, (hell, i dont ever do JUST the IP) but it is a valuable part of kenpo training.

at least for EPAK techniques.