Oh, there's a number of drills we use, a fair amount of scenario training, random set-ups, and more. Same with weapon attacks, and so on. But yeah, awareness can be rather lacking in the public gentry, can it not?
Agreed.
The attack took place at about 6am as the two men were leaving a, ahem, "gentlemens establishment..." With the smile on the face of the guy that gets hit, I'd suggest that he perhaps made a joke that the other guy didn't think was funny. Assuming that a reasonable amount of alcohol had been imbibed, the resulting muscle relaxant effect would actually have made it worse, as there would be less muscular tension holding the neck straight, meaning that as he hit the ground, there was nothing softening the impact of his head on the concrete. But the way the attacker hit and turned away, completely cold was what gets me.
Yeah, that guy didn't seem a bit concerned about the guy he just elbowed. Of course, this is why I tend to stay away from bars, clubs, gentlemens clubs, etc, but if/when I do go, I usually like to make sure that a) I'm not alone and b) that at least a few that I'm with, are 'with it' enough that we look out for each other, aren't drinking, etc. Places like this tend to breed nothing but trouble.
Ha, glad I didn't cost you a new keyboard! But really, there's a few things to clarify here. Yes, you can remove these techniques from the syllabus and replace them with more "street effective" ones, but I'd only suggest doing that if you feel that the reasons that the techniques exist are understood, and either are sufficently covered by other areas, or not deemed necessary to be kept. As to martial arts being about the "during" phase, that's correct, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are supposed to be about combative effectiveness. I understand that one of the cornerstones of the value structure of Kenpo is the history of Ed Parker and others going out in Hawaii and being involved in fights, then taking back what they found worked and using it to create the art, but that may also be misunderstood.
If we look at other martial arts whose technical curriculum is said to have come from direct experience, the techniques are rarely like those used by the developer. What gets brought back may be some technical aspect, but it is more often the principles and realisations of what the person thought was most important. So realism can be there, but it's not essential in martial arts. And when looking at the techniques of Kenpo (from an outsider perspective), that's certainly what it appears to be to me. And that's probably the source of the skepticism you feel about them, honestly. It just comes down to looking at each technique (or set of techniques) and asking yourself "What is this trying to teach me?"
To give you an idea of what I am talking about, there is a thread on MAP where I was basically trying to explain to a Bujinkan Judan (of all things....) how martial arts actually work, as he was seeming to expect that the traditional kata would just be about a realistic fight, which is far from the truth. From post 428 (page 29) through to page 30, then again (for a bit) on page 35:
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1074367073#post1074367073
Essentially, martial arts (techniques) are lessons, not applications.
So if you want to seriously prepare someone for a group assault, look to the drills listed above, work a lot on pre-emptive striking, and have a great focus on awareness. And don't worry about the Kenpo techniques. But if you want to get the lessons that the group scenarios in Kenpo teach, then you'll need to keep them. It's really up to the individual what is more important, street self defence or the martial art and it's lessons. And if the answer is both, then you'll need to recognise where they overlap, and where they don't.
I'll take a look at that other thread when I have a bit more time.
As for the other stuff...interesting that you mention making sure that its understood. I often think that many of the changes that I see with certain things, came about, because people didn't understand it to begin with, so they changed it, yet the change was no better than the original. My Arnis inst. is also a Kenpo BB. Lately, during our lessons, we've been going over some Kenpo material. He trained at the same school as I currently do, and its interesting, as there're a few things that he does, and I do, and there are obvious differences. Not many, but a few, here and there.
As for the techs...well, for myself, I like to view all the techs, not just the mult attacker ones, as building blocks. It gives 1 possible example of many. So, I work on that, and then using basics, am able to come up with numerous other examples of a tech. There are 154 Kenpo techs, plus some extensions. IMO, I dont think that we need hundreds upon hundreds of techs for a punch. I dont think that we need countless set techs to address a punch if the badguy has his left foot forward, and punching with the right, BG has left foot forward, but we're standing with our right foot forward, and so forth.
Instead, as I said, I like to use a handful of techs as a base, and from there, rely on the basics, ie: the punches, kicks, footwork, blocks, etc. that we know, to form a spontaneous response to whats being presented to us. After all, I'm not going to be sifting thru hundreds of preset moves, when that punch is heading to my face, I'm going to react accordingly.
How does this relate to the multi man stuff? I think that if someone wants to use one of those techs as a base, fine. But, ya gotta expand from there, thus not falling back on another preset tech, but on your basics, and reacting to whats happening. I think that alot of the time, people tend to rely too much on the techs instead of the basics.
