Chow is in lineage of EPK????

[CoolKempoDude]

some people here suggest that AK begins and end with EP.

I just want to know if Prof Chow should be consider in AK's history or lineage.

thanks. Please vote

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

I think Chow deserves credit, as does Mitose, as do many other Kenpo "seniors" who developed and contributed to the art during Mr. Parker's lifetime.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I voted no. Chow and the art he practiced were great influances to the art we know as AK, but if we are going to include Mr. Chow, we should also include Mr Parker's Father, Judo instructor, and Mr. Chow's Brother. Mr.. Parker started a system based on logic. The resourses he drew from were rich, but alas, not Ed Parkers American Kenpo.
Sean

 

[Seig]

I voted yes, but not for lineage purposes. I think we have to include Mr. Chow in our history though,

 

[Thesemindz]

I think Chow should be taught as part of the family tree as Mr. Parker's teacher and as part of our history, but the poll asked if he should be considered part of the American Kenpo lineage, and I think the answer has to be no. American Kenpo is the creation of Mr. Parker and the lineage of American Kenpo should begin with him. Chow's influence is important however and should not be discarded.

-Rob

 

[Michael Billings]

He is, and was a part of Mr. Parker's lineage early on. Due to the innovations made by SGM Parker, I hear that Kenpo is 90% his, and 10% his lineage - therefore, I see Mr. Chow as part of our HISTORY, but not necessarily our lineage.

Just my opinion, and not one I feel strongly about. I see Mr. Parker as being "the source" and that has been good enough for me.

:asian:
-Michael

 

[Brian Jones]

I have to agree, I would not put him in the lineage, only because the poll said specifically, AK. Yes he is a part of our history, but let's be honest, if we were to include everyone who influenced Parker to be in our lineage then wwe include, Chow, Henry Okazaki (sp?) Mitose etc. But we can't stop there becuase logic says we need toinclude all the people who taught or influenced these teachers. Where does the lineage stop?
Not inclcuding them in the lineage, but as a part of our history would still honor their contributions to American Kenpo.

Brian Jones

 

[CoolKempoDude]

The reason why i only asked this question in AK session is people in Kajukenpo, Nick cerios, and so on point their lineage to Chow first and then their grandmaster.

AK people are the only *STAND OUT* *SPECIAL* group WHO simply want EP to be the beginning and the end of AK lineage.

i'm sure this is certainly a good question and comparison and deserve every debates.

 

[JD_Nelson]

Mr. Billings wrote:

...Due to the innovations made by SGM Parker, I hear that Kenpo is 90% his, and 10% his lineage...

To me this is the basic definition of a Grand Master. I think it states in some book that a grand master takes what he has been taught and makes it his own.

To me this is what begins a senior on his journey to tenth. Otherwise a person who is a 10 year 9th degree and is teaching the same system of a predecessor may not deserve to wear a 10th yet.


I agree with Seig, history not lineage.

And I will let the flames begin.

Salute,

JD

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by JD_Nelson
Mr. Billings wrote:



To me this is the basic definition of a Grand Master. I think it states in some book that a grand master takes what he has been taught and makes it his own.

To me this is what begins a senior on his journey to tenth. Otherwise a person who is a 10 year 9th degree and is teaching the same system of a predecessor may not deserve to wear a 10th yet.


I agree with Seig, history not lineage.

And I will let the flames begin.

Salute,

JD

I'll buy that, but that but its obviously spreading.
Sean

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I'll buy that, but that but its obviously spreading.
Sean

But on the other hand why reinvent the wheel?:asian:
Sean

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

But if you don't include Chow in the lineage...it will appear that the style came out of nowhere. I don't see how you can talk about the style without including Mr. Parker's influences.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka
But if you don't include Chow in the lineage...it will appear that the style came out of nowhere. I don't see how you can talk about the style without including Mr. Parker's influences.

But then the next logicle question would be should one seek out Chow's art for a deeper understanding, and I think the answer to that question would be "No; because, it is not the direction we wish to persue."
Sean

 

[Brian Jones]

Originally posted by CoolKempoDude
The reason why i only asked this question in AK session is people in Kajukenpo, Nick cerios, and so on point their lineage to Chow first and then their grandmaster.

AK people are the only *STAND OUT* *SPECIAL* group WHO simply want EP to be the beginning and the end of AK lineage.

i'm sure this is certainly a good question and comparison and deserve every debates.

I don't think the idea is that we are saying Mr. Parker is the beginning and end of the AK lineage. We all rcognize that no matter how great (or poor) a martial artist is, we have all been taught by someone. My question is where does the lineage stop. Why stop with Chow? Why not Mitose, Motubu etc.?
I do think by making a difference between history and lineage we canboth acknowledge Prof. Chow's importance while recognizing that AK is a distinctive martial art of its own.

Brian Jones

 

[bdparsons]

Mr. Parker clearly gave William K.S. Chow respect for being his instructor and recognition for the influence of his training methods that helped Mr. Parker to become the martial artist he did.

If Mr. Parker recognized him and included him in his lineage, then it's not up to me to recognize him or not. Kinda like removing that grandfather you never really cared for from your family tree. Might make you feel better, but it's just not the truth.

Get a grip, people.

Respects,
Bill Parsons

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I voted no. Chow and the art he practiced were great influances to the art we know as AK, but if we are going to include Mr. Chow, we should also include Mr Parker's Father, Judo instructor, and Mr. Chow's Brother. Mr.. Parker started a system based on logic. The resourses he drew from were rich, but alas, not Ed Parkers American Kenpo.
Sean

I agree sir. Lineage is a Japanese concept that has no meaning in a results driven American activity. Lineage is moot without the capability to produce results through skill and knowledge. Not all of the people who received Mr. Parker's name on a certificate were "good." Many were plain lousy for many reasons.

Chow is in Mr. Parker's Lineage but not mine anymore than any of the many other Chinese Grandmasters that Parker learned more from than he ever got from Chow. Parker gave him (Chow) the recognition for being the inspiration for what he developed, nothing more. Lineage, in my opinion, begins and ends with the two individuals involved, and additionally they both must agree to that lineage, or once again it is moot.

 

[teej]

Well now for my two cents. There is a distinction between Kenpo and American Kenpo. American Kenpo did start with and is SGM Ed Parkers' system. Professor Chow is part of our "Kenpo" lineage, but not our "American Kenpo" lineage.

He was "one" of Mr. Parkers instructors. Mr Parker gave Professor Chow a lot of respect. Mr. Chow had at one point early on, planned to come to the states to open a chain of kenpo schools, (this was well before American Kenpo was formed) and he later changed his mind. But if you research Professor Chow and SGM Ed Parker, you will find out that Chow frequently told Mr. Parker that Kenpo had to evolve with the times and that SGM Parker credits Profess Chow with motivating him to adapt Kenpo to the times.

After SGM Ed Parker researched enough, formulated enough, tried and tested material enough, had made enough very distinct changes, modifications and additions, he put his name to the system and called it American Kenpo Karate.

They are several systems of Kenpo or Kempo that have been developed and have roots traced back to Professor Chow. My view is that he, Professor Chow, was very instrumental to Kenpo. He was instrumental to SGM's Kenpo background and you can trace Kenpo lineage through Ed Parker to Professor Chow, but not Amercian Kenpo. American Kenpo is not the Kenpo that Professor Chow taught. It was a new system formulated well after training with Professor Chow stopped. American Kenpo starts with SGM Ed Parker.

I acknowledge Professor Chow as part of my Kenpo lineage, but not my "American Kenpo" lineage. Amercian Kenpo started with SGM Ed Parker and that is where MY Amercian Kenpo lineage ends. (or started, depending how you look at it.)

Your in Kenpo,
Teej

 

[Brother John]

Seems to me that Mr. Parker credited Mr. Chow with both history and inspiration and a solid foundation in the basics...
Mr. Parker included him in his history section in "Infinite Insights".
It'd seem a little silly to go leaving him out now.

Your Brother
John

 

[teej]

Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. Professor Chow is not left out. He is part of SGM Parkers "Kenpo" lineage. Yes, he is mentioned in "Infinite Insights", but as Mr. Parkers "Kenpo" instructor.

Professor Chow is not in the American Kenpo lineage.
Chow was Mr. Parkers instructor long before American Kenpo's inception. Professor Chow had not been Mr. Parkers instructor for many years.

Mr. Parker made, constructed, formed, institued, (however you want to put it) American Kenpo Karate. Professor Chow has no part in the formation of material, or the system. He was not around and had no active part in Ed Parkes life at this time, nor any part in his life after American Kenpo Karate was formed.

Mr. Parker started American Kenpo Karate. That is where the lineage of American Kenpo Karate starts. With Ed Parker, there was no one before him on the tree, because he, SGM Parker, started it.

So lets take any student studying Ed Parkers American Kenpo Karate. This student wants to trace his or her "American Kenpo Karate" lineage. The lineage would trace through the instructors, instructor, instructor all the way back to SGM Ed Parker, and it would stop there.

Now this same student wants to trace his or her "Kenpo" lineage. (just plain Kenpo) Now the lineage will go back through his or her instructors, instructors, instructor, eventually getting to Ed Parker, then Professor Chow, then however far back they can trace it.

So again I say, Professor Chow is in Ed Parkers "Kenpo" lineage, but he, Professor Chow, is not on the "American Kenpo Karate" tree.

Yours in Kenpo,
Teej

 

[Kenpomachine]

I agree with Teej.

For American Kenpo, it should begin with Ed Parker, for Kenpo, with Chow's instrucotr and before.

And I also agree with Doc Chapél in that if we have to put Chow in the lineage, we should also acknowledge all the chinese masters that helped Mr. Parker defined EPAK as we know it. It's not enough to put the hard style lineage.