Sword and hammer pt. 1 and 2

[MJS]

Oh...you mean the question I've been answering in depth and in detail since page 2?

To be honest, we're on page 10, so.....lol

Anyways....that IMO, is the point thats trying to be made.

 

[ATACX GYM]

To be honest, we're on page 10, so.....lol

Anyways....that IMO, is the point thats trying to be made.

Word I agree with you MJS. And yeah I think that you and I are essentially operating on similar principles...or at least harmonious principles. But what I'm saying is that if we're on page 10 and I've been answering that very question in depth and in detail since page 8? The questioners and readership need to take upon themselves the responsibility of comprehending the answers that they're being supplied with visavis their questions.


Oh yeah Chris Parker. When you say that there's no 1 tech that resolves every problem? Not what I said. I do, however, teach using every single tech we practice...and that includes every tech in Kenpo...against every primary range of civilian LEO and security personnel combat and self-defense in a thoroughgoing fashion. Those ranges and the mandatory requirement to be able to flow through any permutation thereof are:

360 Degree Circle of Protection in each of the following ranges: Standing Clinch Seated Kneeling Ground Armed Multifight Armed Multifight CQB armed and unarmed inclusive of firearms escape rescue and escape and rescue and we include rolls breakfalls etc

I can use 1 technique that suffices for each and every one of these ranges. The fact that you don't is indicative of the limits in your training method, not the limits of self-defense itself.

 

[Chris Parker]

Chris. I indicated that I would answer your question about Sword and Hammer after I resolved the questions that were posed prior to your asking your question. I will supply you with a comprehensive answer regarding this matter shortly. In the interim? Your rudeness is neither appreciated nor necessary. I will return later today and give a powerful reply that will directly address each and every matter that you brought up.

Thank you.

AMANI..."peace"...

HEAD COACH RAS OF THE ATACX GYM

Firstly, in discussing a 'better' version of Sword and Hammer without coming to an agreement about what criteria are required for a technique to actually be Sword and Hammer in the first place means we can't really discuss your approach... so it needs to be dealt with first. And, for the record, it's a question that has been there since my very first response to you, where I pointed out:

"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."
"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."

So from the very get-go it's been demonstrated that your understanding of what makes the technique what it is has been questionable, at least.

WHOSE Sword and Hammer are you asking about? As Doc said...THERE IS NO IDEAL TECHNIQUE. One of your gargantuan miscomprehensions is this simple fact. All of the rest of your conclusions are permanently toast due to your refusal to grasp this simple concept. The moment you accept this fact? You'll have a chance of asking one of many more correct questions, like:

Ras, what does YOUR Sword and Hammer teach? Why do you think it teaches such a thing? What qualifies YOUR Sword and Hammer as "Sword and Hammer"?

I would then answer...I already answered that. Go find the post on this thread where I went through this very question and answer session pages ago. I don't feel like reposting.

Now you get shy about reposting things? Hmm.

But to the point, the question is what do you think is required for a technique to be Sword and Hammer, Ras... irrespective of "whose" version there needs to be key indicators, or markers, that show it to be Sword and Hammer, otherwise there's no actual technique, and there isn't any need for a name for it. Your retreating behind that again shows one of two things: either you don't understand what the question is actually asking, in which case you're in no position to make other versions of it (other "answers" to similar problems, sure, but not other versions of the same solution), or you have no actual answer.

I'm not asking about an "Ideal Technique", I'm asking about a specific technique, that you may express in a "Ideal" fashion, an "Application" fashion, or a "Free" fashion. But in each case, it needs to show a range of key aspects that make it Sword and Hammer.

As far as you already having answered... uh, no, you haven't. The closest you have come is in post #16, page two, when you say:

"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."

And, frankly, that just shows a complete lack of understanding about the structure of techniques, hence my questions to you.

But I'll add a few other things for you:

There are reasons imho that the handsword and hammerfist were selected in my Gym and perhaps in others. The handsword is a weapon well fitted to striking the target of the throat and specific spots ON the throat from the initial angle traditionally taught and my subsequent experimentations very solidly showed that with proper training it can still strike the throat regardless of the position of your opponent. I can't speak for other teachers, but in my Gym there are 4 primary locations that we target with our handsword and later the hammer fist. These targets present themselves regardless of position, and they become more available for destruction as we manipulate our foe's body with our techs. Further there are specific nuerological responses that the combination of the handsword and hammerfist striking specific targets [ in my version those targets range from the throat to the groin to the kidney and liver and specific spots on the arm ] that are very important to learn and download at this rank in my Gym for further development and exploration and manipulation via technique as we progress further in my curriculum.

and there are very important ethical and Honor considerations in my Gym that we help the students to confront [ as we have already taught them this Code ] when we apply this tech. There's more...but I gtg.

None of which show what you feel are the criteria for Sword and Hammer

And...What do you think the more common expression of Sword and Hammer is?

From my first response here:

"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."

Originally Posted by ATACX GYM [ Uhhh...I teach my students how to defeat this kind of attack BEFORE they're a WHITE BELT. Observe:

A. Bad guy grabs your right shoulder. No pushes or pulls. Cocks back fist.

B. Pre-White Belt Level A...the newest of all new newbs...smartly executes a right upward block under the shoulder grabbing left hand of BG. This block is timed with the punch. You lift or disengage the grab and block the punch at the same time.

C. Counterattack with reverse punch.

How easy is that?"


"Honestly? I see quite a few issues there... and frankly, the regular Sword and Hammer I'd class as superior in a number of ways."<--Chris Parker

Enumerate these problems, Chris.[/QUOTE]

It's primarily in the rising block. It's a weak action using weak muscles against stronger muscles in the opponents grab, the angle is difficult (at best) the further around the opponent gets behind you, the timing can very easily miss the punch, making it a very ineffective way of dealing with that, and a reverse punch is using the furthest weapon against a far target, rather than something that's already in range. I'm not a fan of it, really.

Oh...you mean the question I've been answering in depth and in detail since page 2?

You may think you've answered "in depth and detail" but honestly Ras, you haven't. You haven't once dealt with anything I raised in my first post here, you haven't once dealt with what Sword and Hammer needs to be considered Sword and Hammer, and you've essentially just used a whole bunch of words to say that you agree with yourself over and over again. You've quoted answers to other questions, talked in circles, and failed to even seem to understand what you're being asked. I really thought I made it simple for you, but maybe it wasn't simple enough.

Oh yeah Chris Parker. When you say that there's no 1 tech that resolves every problem? Not what I said. I do, however, teach using every single tech we practice...and that includes every tech in Kenpo...against every primary range of civilian LEO and security personnel combat and self-defense in a thoroughgoing fashion. Those ranges and the mandatory requirement to be able to flow through any permutation thereof are:

Wow. Grammar, dude. And stop making up words, it really just muddies up your message.

What I was referring to was your constant reference to "it needs to work as it would in a throwdown", "I have come up with a way that teaches you how to use Sword and Hammer no matter the attack" and so on. You know, your words.

360 Degree Circle of Protection in each of the following ranges: Standing Clinch Seated Kneeling Ground Armed Multifight Armed Multifight CQB armed and unarmed inclusive of firearms escape rescue and escape and rescue and we include rolls breakfalls etc

There is nothing that is designed for all of this.... but dude, punctuation, I'm begging you. I mean, I don't know if you're saying "Firearms escapes", then "rescue", then "escape and rescue", or what.... run-on sentences don't help you much.

I can use 1 technique that suffices for each and every one of these ranges. The fact that you don't is indicative of the limits in your training method, not the limits of self-defense itself.

Son, don't even consider that you can make any reference to my training. So far, from what I've seen of yours, there are some gigantic gaps in what you've been taught. And I do mean gigantic.

 

[MJS]

Word I agree with you MJS. And yeah I think that you and I are essentially operating on similar principles...or at least harmonious principles. But what I'm saying is that if we're on page 10 and I've been answering that very question in depth and in detail since page 8? The questioners and readership need to take upon themselves the responsibility of comprehending the answers that they're being supplied with visavis their questions.

Perhaps its the way others are reading it, I dont know. Perhaps you're not addressing it. But again, while I know there is no IT, I'm still convinced, (and Chris, JKS, TF...correct me if I'm wrong here) but the main issue seems to be what everyone else calls S&H and what you're calling S&H.

Oh yeah Chris Parker. When you say that there's no 1 tech that resolves every problem? Not what I said. I do, however, teach using every single tech we practice...and that includes every tech in Kenpo...against every primary range of civilian LEO and security personnel combat and self-defense in a thoroughgoing fashion. Those ranges and the mandatory requirement to be able to flow through any permutation thereof are:

360 Degree Circle of Protection in each of the following ranges: Standing Clinch Seated Kneeling Ground Armed Multifight Armed Multifight CQB armed and unarmed inclusive of firearms escape rescue and escape and rescue and we include rolls breakfalls etc

I can use 1 technique that suffices for each and every one of these ranges. The fact that you don't is indicative of the limits in your training method, not the limits of self-defense itself.

Actually, you kinda did give that impression here:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...d-and-hammer-pt-1-and-2&p=1462091#post1462091

"So I have come up with a way that...step by step...logically and progressively teaches you how to use The Sword and Hammer no matter what your opponent does. That's the IP premise and conclusion that I use. Do tech 'x' no matter WHAT the BG does. Guess what? That includes the "best case" scenario that is part and parcel, heart and soul to "most" Kenpo schools' IP....but they don't include mine."

Sorry but that reads to me, that whether the guy punches, pushes, kicks or grabs, you could do S&H. Now, if you said that you would use 'ideas' from this tech or that tech, then I could agree with that. ie: Take 5 Swords, right round house punch. Spontaneous reaction drill, my opponent throws a right hook. I may step up and do and inital 5 swords block, but then follow up with a leg sweep. Not doing 5 swords, dont claim to be doing 5 swords...I'm using ideas from it.

 

[Twin Fist]

anyone that says they can use any technique to respond to any attack is full of crap.

you can use the principals from the techniques with any attack

ie marraige of gravity, you can use that with anything

but you cant use the techniques, which are designed for specific attacks to defend against every attack

more importantly, the more bragging a person does, the less seriously i take them.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Sorry but that reads to me, that whether the guy punches, pushes, kicks or grabs, you could do S&H. Now, if you said that you would use 'ideas' from this tech or that tech, then I could agree with that. ie: Take 5 Swords, right round house punch. Spontaneous reaction drill, my opponent throws a right hook. I may step up and do and inital 5 swords block, but then follow up with a leg sweep. Not doing 5 swords, dont claim to be doing 5 swords...I'm using ideas from it.

The above doesn't mean "resolving every problem". "Resolving every problem" is FAAAR beyond the scope of what this tech does. I have stated numerous times...The ATACX GYM draws our ranges of combat and methods from what most of us in civilian, security type jobs, martial arts combat and tournies and LEO type positions are likely to face. These scenarios--especially CQB firearms type scenarios--have lots of carryover to the military too, but addressing full military scenarios is beyond my focus at the moment.

My Sword and Hammer does indeed do everything that I said in that quote. Stretching it out to cover more than what's in that quote is a logical fallacy and evidence of reading miscomprehension which many of my detractors seem to specialize in.

And yes MJS what you said as the opening sentence of your last paragraph is dead on. My Sword and Hammer works whether a guy punches, pushes, kicks, grabs, stabs, etc. That's how I train it. Did you read my 15 Round training thing? Should make it crystal clear.

 

[Twin Fist]

evidence of reading miscomprehension which many of my detractors seem to specialize in.

uh, Coach?
some free advice:

when you accuse anyone that disagrees with you of having a problem comprehending english, it doesnt help your credibility. It DOES however make people that are on the fence about your characher think you just might be a douche

 

[ATACX GYM]

Firstly, in discussing a 'better' version of Sword and Hammer without coming to an agreement about what criteria are required for a technique to actually be Sword and Hammer in the first place means we can't really discuss your approach... so it needs to be dealt with first. And, for the record, it's a question that has been there since my very first response to you, where I pointed out: "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.""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."So from the very get-go it's been demonstrated that your understanding of what makes the technique what it is has been questionable, at least..

I have answered this numerous times. Your return to the more popular expression of this technique simply means that you're exercising your right to be obtuse.

However, for those of you who have PM'd me and emailed me in droves and who grasp what I'm talking about and for that part of Chris Parker which might actually grasp this explanation, here is what I offer you as a response:


I cannot speak for whoever first crafted Sword and Hammer as a so-called IP Technique [ it wasn't Mr. Parker, as he fashioned the Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS which lead to Sword and Hammer ], but MY reasoning for how I came to the use of Sword and Hammer I already explained not only on KT but linked that explanation for those onsite.

I initially stated that at first I was severely put off by the nonfunctional craptasticness of the more common expression and eschewed the handsword initially for a heel palm. I called it at first HAMMER AND SALUTE. It worked very well. For years. And then one day a female student of mine got her long hair caught in a shoulder grab while sparring in class. She responded with HAMMER AND SALUTE...which freed her from the shoulder grasp, but her sparring partner still had her hair. She lost that match as a result. Then another student of mine...a guy...had a similar experience.

I went back to the Sword and Hammer and began looking past the way it was presented to me and began thinking of ways to use the tech in an actually functional way.

The moment I started that process, everything else fell into place.

I reinserted the handsword because with functional training, and instantly it yielded all sorts of benefits that the heel palm didn't. The heel palm is an excellent tech and it has its place, but the handsword in conjunction with the hammerfist yields a specific synergistic combo that is very salient to being grabbed PERIOD, and is amplified when you're striking arms that are half to fully extended. What are these benefits and all that good stuff? Well like I said...I can't speak for anyone else but MY studies and intensive practice have yielded the following data:

1. The handsword is not only able to strike 4 primary targets on the "tripod" of head/neck/shoulders that have the immediate result of causing predictable anatomical responses that weaken or release the grip of most people while simultaneously oftentimes taking them out of the fight, the handsword is better structurally shaped for the task of doing that work.

A handsword to your Adam's apple or carotid could end the fracas right there. Same with a handsword to the space between BG's ribs. If your opponent is too tall or the circumstances of combat remove the head and neck from being viable targets, go for the deltoids or back of the neck, liver or kidneys with the handsword.

You can oftentimes reach his arm. That's especially vital for us short folks. A stank funk nasty handsword to the triceps, brachialis, traps, or even the lats will really mess up the BG's day. Not only will you ruin his day...even if you're NOT taking him out of the fight with those shots, you will cause the BG to weaken his grip dramatically on you.

2. When you couple this knowledge with the Cover and Spin and apply it with the simultaneous deployment of the hammerfist to the outside of the forearm along the strip from wrist to the elbow, you see that the tricep is a target that is sitting wide open for you. Even if you're short like me or the woman that MJS was teaching. Well, the benefit of using the handsword over the heel palm here is that the heel palm hurts, shoots your opponent away from you and makes him turn your back to you. He's wide open for you to smash him with another attack or it can give you that extra precious second or three to get a head start running away.

The HANDSWORD applied to the triceps in this circumstance not only DRAMATICALLY weakens the grip, in combination with the hammerfist hammerblock combo it's almost certain to;

a) free you of your opponent's grasp

b) cause serious trauma to his arm in an area that is not well suited for dealing with the kind of shock that the handsword delivers.

c) increase the likelihood of 3 beneficial scenarios: taking your opponent's will to fight away, drop him and finish him, and/or the pain takes the offending grasping arm out of the fight either for the rest of the encounter or long enough for you to run or capitalize combatively on the options presented

d) Like the Heel Palm did, the handsword also propels your opponent away from you. It doesn't turn his back toward you as much as the Heel Palm does, but it delivers more trauma of a variety that isn't often doled out and which is oftentimes difficult for our opponents to deal with.

e) The handsword is more suited structurally for not only the strikes I already enumerated but for flowing smoothly into traps and pins and checks which all a continued unbroken barrage of strikes to be employed. The Heel Palm is good for that too but not as well for The Cover Out as it is for The Cover In.

There's more but I trust you get the point.

Essentially I considered the benefits of the application of the handsword, the facility that relative newbs would have in its application, and what benefits it has in conjunction with the strikes that complement it...in this case? The hammerfist.

I subjected the hammerfist to the same analysis and got similar results.

I then evaluated the same factors when selecting each step of my Sword and Hammer sequence. And I tested, am testing now, and continue to test these techs on the mat. I have made and will continue to make improvements in various areas...but the Sword and Hammer are staying in this tech in my Gym due to the mass of positive data resulting from the experience of myself, my fellow Coaches and my students and clients collective body of scrappin, research, and direct experience therewith.

 

[Twin Fist]

 

[ATACX GYM]

Originally Posted by ATACX GYM [ Uhhh...I teach my students how to defeat this kind of attack BEFORE they're a WHITE BELT. Observe:A. Bad guy grabs your right shoulder. No pushes or pulls. Cocks back fist.B. Pre-White Belt Level A...the newest of all new newbs...smartly executes a right upward block under the shoulder grabbing left hand of BG. This block is timed with the punch. You lift or disengage the grab and block the punch at the same time.C. Counterattack with reverse punch.How easy is that?""Honestly? I see quite a few issues there... and frankly, the regular Sword and Hammer I'd class as superior in a number of ways."

 

[ATACX GYM]

Simple doesn't mean short...it means SIMPLE.

 

[Twin Fist]

I cannot speak for whoever first crafted Sword and Hammer as a so-called IP Technique [ it wasn't Mr. Parker, as he fashioned the Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS which lead to Sword and Hammer ]

i am almost 100% certain that this is not true

the tracy's have this same technique, they call it pin step chop, they admit they learned it from ed parker who learned it from Chow.

the tracy's were among parkers first black belts, (preceeding Doc by about 5-10 years if i recall correctly) so it was being taught VERY early in the formulation of Ed parker's Kenpo

this is WAY before the so called "motion kenpo" or the "IP analytical process" was even in use


this is what i havnt said till know but someone needs to remind you of. the tracy's have versions of many of ed parkers techniques in their system.

this means the techniques pre-existed Doc, as he came AFTER the Tracy's left. Most of those techniques Parker learned from Chow, the Tracy's confirmed this.

so there was on at least some of the techniques, a set version before the motion kenpo thing in the late 60's and 70's

 

[ATACX GYM]

The site is too busy and keeps eating my reply...

 

[ATACX GYM]

F
Originally Posted by ATACX GYM [ Uhhh...I teach my students how to defeat this kind of attack BEFORE they're a WHITE BELT. Observe:

A. Bad guy grabs your right shoulder. No pushes or pulls. Cocks back fist.

B. Pre-White Belt Level A...the newest of all new newbs...smartly executes a right upward block under the shoulder grabbing left hand of BG. This block is timed with the punch. You lift or disengage the grab and block the punch at the same time.

C. Counterattack with reverse punch.

How easy is that?"


"Honestly? I see quite a few issues there... and frankly, the regular Sword and Hammer I'd class as superior in a number of ways."<--Chris Parker

Enumerate these problems, Chris.

It's primarily in the rising block. It's a weak action using weak muscles against stronger muscles in the opponents grab, the angle is difficult (at best) the further around the opponent gets behind you, the timing can very easily miss the punch, making it a very ineffective way of dealing with that, and a reverse punch is using the furthest weapon against a far target, rather than something that's already in range. I'm not a fan of it, really.
[/QUOTE]



The upward block is a full body technique requiring the coordination of breath with the legs drawing power from the ground or whatever stabilizing surface, shooting this power through the hips and upper torso, adding to this power with the rotation of the torso as the nonblocking hand draws up to a defensive position similar to that of a boxer's hands guarding his/her face, and the use of essentially the forearm shiver upon the forearm of the BG's grabbing arm.

You're not flapping your arm up like you're about to put deodorant on.

This tech has lots of power. It frequently disengages a grab all by itself [ it will definitely disengage the 'dead starfish hand' shown in most videos of the more common version of Sword and Hammer ] and even when it doesn't? The forearm shiver's impact delivered by the full body's power causes pain, disturbs our opponent's balance, causes a momentarily delay in the brain's processing of other data due to its distraction by the unexpected pain, and opens the BG up to a solid hit from the reverse punch. Its a high percentage, powerful tech.

Son, don't even consider that you can make any reference to my training. So far, from what I've seen of yours, there are some gigantic gaps in what you've been taught. And I do mean gigantic.

I don't need to say anything...you said all that needs to be said when you demonstrated a complete miscomprehension of a crucial basic fundamental tech like the upward block. That is one of many times you have shown from your own mouth which of us has gigantic gaps in our training...and it's not me.

 

[ATACX GYM]

i am almost 100% certain that this is not true

the tracy's have this same technique, they call it pin step chop, they admit they learned it from ed parker who learned it from Chow.

the tracy's were among parkers first black belts, (preceeding Doc by about 5-10 years if i recall correctly) so it was being taught VERY early in the formulation of Ed parker's Kenpo

this is WAY before the so called "motion kenpo" or the "IP analytical process" was even in use


this is what i havnt said till know but someone needs to remind you of. the tracy's have versions of many of ed parkers techniques in their system.

this means the techniques pre-existed Doc, as he came AFTER the Tracy's left. Most of those techniques Parker learned from Chow, the Tracy's confirmed this.

so there was on at least some of the techniques, a set version before the motion kenpo thing in the late 60's and 70's

I learned this tech as Pin Step Chop too. Didn't like it then, either.

Mr. Parker did NOT invent any IP Techs instead he created the Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS. I'm convinced that this is Kenpo's Scientific Method [ Observation, Hypothesis, Experimentation, Conclusion]. Scientists the world over use The Scientific Method, but at no time does any of them mistake the result from their experiment for the actual Scientific Method itself.

Don't mistake Sword and Hammer for the REAL Ideal Phase...which like The Scientific Method is a PROCESS.

My Atacx Gym Sword and Hammer is A KENPO IDEA for people not in my Gym, it's a Ideal Technique ONLY IN my Gym.

Mr. Parker wrote this definition in his book. You don't need to ask Doc to read Mr. Parker's book. But if you doubt Doc's word? Take it up with him. Doc trained with Mr. Parker exclusive for about 3 decades. Longer than the Tracy's did. And he was with Mr. Parker throughout Mr.Parker's evolution til the day Mr. Parker died. I think that this experience gives Doc and ONLY Doc a special perspective that no other human being on Earth may have.

anywho...

There are people who disagree with my ATACX GYM KENPO KARATE SWORD AND HAMMER as AN Ideal and champion the other more popular expression. Fine.

Like good scientists do, the first thing I looked for in their discussion is whether or not the method they championed met the requirements for even being called an Ideal Technique. It doesn't. The more common expression for the Sword and Hammer fails in the What If and Formulation Phases for sure and a powerful argument can be made that it fails in The Equation Formula as well.

 

[Chris Parker]

I have answered this numerous times. Your return to the more popular expression of this technique simply means that you're exercising your right to be obtuse.

However, for those of you who have PM'd me and emailed me in droves and who grasp what I'm talking about and for that part of Chris Parker which might actually grasp this explanation, here is what I offer you as a response:


I cannot speak for whoever first crafted Sword and Hammer as a so-called IP Technique [ it wasn't Mr. Parker, as he fashioned the Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS which lead to Sword and Hammer ], but MY reasoning for how I came to the use of Sword and Hammer I already explained not only on KT but linked that explanation for those onsite.

I initially stated that at first I was severely put off by the nonfunctional craptasticness of the more common expression and eschewed the handsword initially for a heel palm. I called it at first HAMMER AND SALUTE. It worked very well. For years. And then one day a female student of mine got her long hair caught in a shoulder grab while sparring in class. She responded with HAMMER AND SALUTE...which freed her from the shoulder grasp, but her sparring partner still had her hair. She lost that match as a result. Then another student of mine...a guy...had a similar experience.

I went back to the Sword and Hammer and began looking past the way it was presented to me and began thinking of ways to use the tech in an actually functional way.

The moment I started that process, everything else fell into place.

I reinserted the handsword because with functional training, and instantly it yielded all sorts of benefits that the heel palm didn't. The heel palm is an excellent tech and it has its place, but the handsword in conjunction with the hammerfist yields a specific synergistic combo that is very salient to being grabbed PERIOD, and is amplified when you're striking arms that are half to fully extended. What are these benefits and all that good stuff? Well like I said...I can't speak for anyone else but MY studies and intensive practice have yielded the following data:

1. The handsword is not only able to strike 4 primary targets on the "tripod" of head/neck/shoulders that have the immediate result of causing predictable anatomical responses that weaken or release the grip of most people while simultaneously oftentimes taking them out of the fight, the handsword is better structurally shaped for the task of doing that work.

A handsword to your Adam's apple or carotid could end the fracas right there. Same with a handsword to the space between BG's ribs. If your opponent is too tall or the circumstances of combat remove the head and neck from being viable targets, go for the deltoids or back of the neck, liver or kidneys with the handsword.

You can oftentimes reach his arm. That's especially vital for us short folks. A stank funk nasty handsword to the triceps, brachialis, traps, or even the lats will really mess up the BG's day. Not only will you ruin his day...even if you're NOT taking him out of the fight with those shots, you will cause the BG to weaken his grip dramatically on you.

2. When you couple this knowledge with the Cover and Spin and apply it with the simultaneous deployment of the hammerfist to the outside of the forearm along the strip from wrist to the elbow, you see that the tricep is a target that is sitting wide open for you. Even if you're short like me or the woman that MJS was teaching. Well, the benefit of using the handsword over the heel palm here is that the heel palm hurts, shoots your opponent away from you and makes him turn your back to you. He's wide open for you to smash him with another attack or it can give you that extra precious second or three to get a head start running away.

The HANDSWORD applied to the triceps in this circumstance not only DRAMATICALLY weakens the grip, in combination with the hammerfist hammerblock combo it's almost certain to;

a) free you of your opponent's grasp

b) cause serious trauma to his arm in an area that is not well suited for dealing with the kind of shock that the handsword delivers.

c) increase the likelihood of 3 beneficial scenarios: taking your opponent's will to fight away, drop him and finish him, and/or the pain takes the offending grasping arm out of the fight either for the rest of the encounter or long enough for you to run or capitalize combatively on the options presented

d) Like the Heel Palm did, the handsword also propels your opponent away from you. It doesn't turn his back toward you as much as the Heel Palm does, but it delivers more trauma of a variety that isn't often doled out and which is oftentimes difficult for our opponents to deal with.

e) The handsword is more suited structurally for not only the strikes I already enumerated but for flowing smoothly into traps and pins and checks which all a continued unbroken barrage of strikes to be employed. The Heel Palm is good for that too but not as well for The Cover Out as it is for The Cover In.

There's more but I trust you get the point.

Essentially I considered the benefits of the application of the handsword, the facility that relative newbs would have in its application, and what benefits it has in conjunction with the strikes that complement it...in this case? The hammerfist.

I subjected the hammerfist to the same analysis and got similar results.

I then evaluated the same factors when selecting each step of my Sword and Hammer sequence. And I tested, am testing now, and continue to test these techs on the mat. I have made and will continue to make improvements in various areas...but the Sword and Hammer are staying in this tech in my Gym due to the mass of positive data resulting from the experience of myself, my fellow Coaches and my students and clients collective body of scrappin, research, and direct experience therewith.

Ras, none of the above actually answers the question. It is a description of how you apply a couple of fists/weapons. It shows no understanding of the structure of techniques, nor does it answer what you feel is the required criteria for Sword and Hammer. So, again, complete failure.

Speaking of which....

I reinserted the handsword because with functional training, and instantly it yielded all sorts of benefits that the heel palm didn't.

When you post things like the above, the reading comprehension on the part of the readers isn't the issue....

The upward block is a full body technique requiring the coordination of breath with the legs drawing power from the ground or whatever stabilizing surface, shooting this power through the hips and upper torso, adding to this power with the rotation of the torso as the nonblocking hand draws up to a defensive position similar to that of a boxer's hands guarding his/her face, and the use of essentially the forearm shiver upon the forearm of the BG's grabbing arm.

You're not flapping your arm up like you're about to put deodorant on.

This tech has lots of power. It frequently disengages a grab all by itself [ it will definitely disengage the 'dead starfish hand' shown in most videos of the more common version of Sword and Hammer ] and even when it doesn't? The forearm shiver's impact delivered by the full body's power causes pain, disturbs our opponent's balance, causes a momentarily delay in the brain's processing of other data due to its distraction by the unexpected pain, and opens the BG up to a solid hit from the reverse punch. Its a high percentage, powerful tech.

Ah, now I wouldn't really compare it with Sword and Hammer, as it demonstrates a completely separate tactic... but that just brings us back to the initial question of what makes Sword and Hammer the technique of Sword and Hammer? As far as power, the further back the bad guy is, the less power. That's just simple biomechanics, Ras. Even at 3 o clock (as you guys term things...), it's rather limited, even when done as a "full body action" (which is the way we do everything, so was already taken into account).

I don't need to say anything...you said all that needs to be said when you demonstrated a complete miscomprehension of a crucial basic fundamental tech like the upward block. That is one of many times you have shown from your own mouth which of us has gigantic gaps in our training...and it's not me.

You're kidding, right? You can't grasp the idea of a technique being a tactical approach to a problem, nor be able to indentify those tactics, yet you're saying that I have gaps in my training.... seriously, Ras, in all the time I've been reading your posts, you have been lacking. You have an idea, you have an approach, but it's built on rather false beliefs and incorrect, or incomplete understanding. I've given you a number of opportunities to prove me wrong, but you have completely failed to do so. Constantly and consistently.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Ras, none of the above actually answers the question. It is a description of how you apply a couple of fists/weapons. It shows no understanding of the structure of techniques, nor does it answer what you feel is the required criteria for Sword and Hammer. So, again, complete failure.

Speaking of which....



When you post things like the above, the reading comprehension on the part of the readers isn't the issue....



Ah, now I wouldn't really compare it with Sword and Hammer, as it demonstrates a completely separate tactic... but that just brings us back to the initial question of what makes Sword and Hammer the technique of Sword and Hammer? As far as power, the further back the bad guy is, the less power. That's just simple biomechanics, Ras. Even at 3 o clock (as you guys term things...), it's rather limited, even when done as a "full body action" (which is the way we do everything, so was already taken into account).



You're kidding, right? You can't grasp the idea of a technique being a tactical approach to a problem, nor be able to indentify those tactics, yet you're saying that I have gaps in my training.... seriously, Ras, in all the time I've been reading your posts, you have been lacking. You have an idea, you have an approach, but it's built on rather false beliefs and incorrect, or incomplete understanding. I've given you a number of opportunities to prove me wrong, but you have completely failed to do so. Constantly and consistently.

chris. connect the dots man. There is no extra mystical reason behind the implementation of techniques other than their utility for certain kinds of situations and whether or not they can be applied effectively in other situations as well. Remember my Sword and Hammer videos? The flank attacks ranging from my right shoulder to my left and every area in between? I deployed my techs against Hockey Punch attacks from those areas because those attacks are common...especially around my way. I used to resolve the quandary that Hockey Punch attacks posed using HAMMER AND SALUTE. Snag. Hair pulling problems started bedeviling my students. Solution: apply Sword and Hammer functionally.

The process of doing so shows everything you asked about. It goes to the structure of the techniques in the literal sense. It goes into the WHYs of technique selection and application. It points out the synergistic benefits of applying these two specific techs in this way...biomechanics and stuff. Like I said, I don't feel like getting into another comprehensive answer of a question I already answered both on this site and when I supplied a link with a more comprehensive answer on KenpoTalk.com.

There are other ways to address this attack, and my students and clients have already learned ways of getting this attack prior to their receiving their White Belts. Like I told you already. But this tech...which is called more formally ATACX GYM KENPO KARATE'S SWORD AND HAMMER RADIUS...works like a charm in real world situations and I like it. So do my students. It also has the added advantage of applying unusual attacks using unusual body weaponry coming at unusual angles while applying unusual tactics and striking anatomical targets correctly...something else that is unusual. The BG would have a heck of a time defending this barrage because it's unusual, adroitly applied, and devastatingly effective.

 

[Chris Parker]

chris. connect the dots man. There is no extra mystical reason behind the implementation of techniques other than their utility for certain kinds of situations and whether or not they can be applied effectively in other situations as well. Remember my Sword and Hammer videos? The flank attacks ranging from my right shoulder to my left and every area in between? I deployed my techs against Hockey Punch attacks from those areas because those attacks are common...especially around my way. I used to resolve the quandary that Hockey Punch attacks posed using HAMMER AND SALUTE. Snag. Hair pulling problems started bedeviling my students. Solution: apply Sword and Hammer functionally.

Stopping just shy of what I really want to say here, this shows you are absolutely clueless.

Sword and Hammer is, tactically, a technique of pre-emptive striking. By deciding that you want it to work against punching attacks you have missed the point of Sword and Hammer, and show no understanding of the structure of techniques. There is nothing "mystical" in anything I've been asking or saying.

You're attempting to solve problems that aren't present because you don't understand the initial technique. This is the problem. Your technique is not Sword and Hammer. It is not a "better version" of Sword and Hammer. It is something completely separate and removed with some superficial similarities, which are there primarily as you aren't as creative or insightful as you think you are.

Really, you're quite clueless in this regard.

The process of doing so shows everything you asked about. It goes to the structure of the techniques in the literal sense. It goes into the WHYs of technique selection and application. It points out the synergistic benefits of applying these two specific techs in this way...biomechanics and stuff. Like I said, I don't feel like getting into another comprehensive answer of a question I already answered both on this site and when I supplied a link with a more comprehensive answer on KenpoTalk.com.

No, it didn't. It was a series of anecdotal occasions that lead to a development of what you are currently showing, but in no way was "comprehensive", nor did it answer the single, fundamental question of what makes Sword and Hammer what it is... what lessons does it impart, and what is it designed to teach. You've created a "better" fishing lure and called it a better mousetrap.

There are other ways to address this attack, and my students and clients have already learned ways of getting this attack prior to their receiving their White Belts. Like I told you already. But this tech...which is called more formally ATACX GYM KENPO KARATE'S SWORD AND HAMMER RADIUS...works like a charm in real world situations and I like it. So do my students. It also has the added advantage of applying unusual attacks using unusual body weaponry coming at unusual angles while applying unusual tactics and striking anatomical targets correctly...something else that is unusual. The BG would have a heck of a time defending this barrage because it's unusual, adroitly applied, and devastatingly effective.

Wow, you think that "unusual attacks and angles" is something you'd need to talk to me about, son? You do know what I do, yeah? But the question here would be "what attack are you talking about?"... and if it involves a punch, what's the point of it being in a discussion of Sword and Hammer?

But really, all this is is a collection of you saying that what you do is "devastating, powerful, effective" and so on... with no actual evidence beyond your words. The fact that you go against what is known by everyone else could be an indication that you may have missed the point of a range of aspects.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Ras, none of the above actually answers the question. It is a description of how you apply a couple of fists/weapons. It shows no understanding of the structure of techniques, nor does it answer what you feel is the required criteria for Sword and Hammer. So, again, complete failure.

Ah, now I wouldn't really compare it with Sword and Hammer, as it demonstrates a completely separate tactic... but that just brings us back to the initial question of what makes Sword and Hammer the technique of Sword and Hammer? As far as power, the further back the bad guy is, the less power. That's just simple biomechanics, Ras. Even at 3 o clock (as you guys term things...), it's rather limited, even when done as a "full body action" (which is the way we do everything, so was already taken into account).

My post is beyond a description of how to apply fists/weapons. It specifically answered structural technique questions. I specified that the handsword did a better job than other weapons when applied to the triceps and other areas in the upper arm, especially at this belt rank. There IS a "complete failure" as you put it...but it's on your part regarding the comprehension of simple explanations.

You refer to the more common Sword and Hammer in your second paragraph. I agree that it demo's a completely separate tactic...because it fails to address the likelihood of a real world attack. The BG is NOT gonna pose, and the Kenpoists are NOT going to reliably preempt a flank attack. Like I said, Kenpo Elders like Mr. Tatum and Doc Chapel have proffered the same opinion as I have and they did it first [ regarding the sillyness of perpetual preemption ]. I left a link to those posts too.

If you felt that an upward block was a "full body action", you should not have described a single limb multijoint action...then called it weak. Clearly you are contradicting yourself. Either it's a full body action and strong or a single limb movement and comparatively weak.

If the BG is at 3pm? I already answered that...via video. Now lemme clarify on this post: if we are talking about the more common Sword and Hammer dysfunctional expression? The BG being@3pm is not a concern nor is it addressed. If we're talking about mine? I already addressed that. On video. If we're talking about applying the upward block to the BG at 3pm? Again, that's not hard. Turn toward the BG. Execute upward block with snappiness while drawing your other hand up to protect your face, your hand positioning similar to that of a boxer or bareknuckle MT or Muay Boran fighter. You'll either block the punch with your blocking hand or your rear hand will be in position to intercept the blow if it slips passed your upward block. You then either upward block again [ if the BG's limb doesn't retract fast enough ] and then fire a reverse punch or you simply ride the retracting hand back in and hit the body.

Doesn't matter where he is. If he can reach you with a grab? You'll be able to reach him with your reverse punch to his body...even if you have to take a step to do so.

 

[Twin Fist]

you are not ****ing listening as usual. The tracy's have this same technique. They learned it from Parker in the late 50's

they were there BEFORE doc

this means this technique was there before Doc

that means the techniques, at least some of them were set in stone in the late 50's WAY BEFORE the "process" you are referring to was implemented.


I trained with Ed Parker until the March 1959 and having access to Ed Parker's Kenpo techniques he kept on 3x5 index cards in his desk my brothers and I copied them by hand because there were no copy machines back then.

http://kenpokarate.com/1956-1959.html


are you getting that?

this technique existed AS IS in the late 50's

the process didnt

so, yes, Parker DID invent some techniques and created set versions of them. or was at least teaching set versions of over 400 techniques in the 50's, 20 years before this "process" was even put into play,

so, YES there are set versions of each technique

yes you are supposed to learn the set version

yes there is a reason for it

yes you are supposed to move on from the set version

yes you are wrong.