Any time someone grabs you, either by the hair, shirt, or head or arm lock, it is considered grappling....standing grappling. So, it does contain some form of grappling, just nothing on the ground.
Mike
Kenpo in the 21st Century
- Thread starter Old Fat Kenpoka
- Start date
Any time someone grabs you, either by the hair, shirt, or head or arm lock, it is considered grappling....standing grappling. So, it does contain some form of grappling, just nothing on the ground.
Mike
P
ProfessorKenpo
Guest
It was meant as a joke from some of the other threads. Locking Horns is indeed a Kenpo SD technique, we just like to cut up concerning those that deal with a grappling aspect.
Have a great Kenpo day
Clyde
Working a technique that avoids a grappling situation IS NOT GRAPPLING. Yes they can be effective against a grappler, but for the most part they teach that strikes can aid you in your grappling. Deciding that Ed Parker learned judo so you wouldn't have to is about the most rediculous thing I've heard in quite a while. Hey I got one of those philisophical questions. Would William James think you were better off doing an in depth study of grappling concepts?
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Actually, TOD, the particular approach to Locking Horns that we were discussing teaches something other than strikes. Beyond joking, I was responding to the claim that there isn't any grappling, and ground work, or even any responses to the attacks of grapplers of various sorts.
Further, what I wrote didn't have anything to do with learning or not learning judo. It had to do with the repeated claim that none of the stuff I've worked over years is in kenpo. It had to do with the repeated claim that Mr. Parker left kenpo somehow deeply flawed, incomplete, full of vulnerabilities, and that the way to handle this was to go learn all the other arts in which kenpo was deficient. I reject these claims, on grounds I've previously stated.
And none of those have to do with the assumption that I'm anything vaguely resembling god's gift to martial arts, or that my kenpo is perfect, or anything resembling such claims. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I'm not even remotely interested in becoming a "fighter," in the UFC sense, or the "streetfighter," sense, which seems to be primarily what is being advanced as the motivation behind "evolving," kenpo.
What I'd ask is this: how's your kenpo going? Are you familiar with all the sets, the forms, the extensions on the techniques? Have you extensively worked their applications? For how long? Under what teachers? And I don't mean a seminar or two or a camp, but over years? I mean, if it's reasonable to keep advancing this demand that I and others go study jiu-jitsu, or judo, or shootfighting, or whatever, on the grounds that kenpo doesn't offer any of this stuff--isn't it reasonable to ask the other side of the question?
And where does this search through 'em all end?
Now let me be clear. I've no idea what you know or don't know. I've no idea how much you've worked through. I've no idea whether it's a good idea or a bad idea for you to study whatever. I'm simply arguing that for me, it's pointless to go from style to style when I don't even really know this one, after a mere eleven or twelve years. And, to be sure, I'm arguing that in the end, if you look, you will find what you went elsewhere for right back home in kenpo.
I presume that you're simply referring to James' pragmatism. Well, my version of pragmatism is that it's better to take the time to really learn one strong system than it is to go from system to system to system. I suppose that for others, this may be a pragmatic choice--but this is not reasonably grounded on the inadequacies of kenpo. It's based on what you want, how much time and energy you have available, your ambitions as a martial artist, etc. And--for about the hundredth time!--that's fine. Great, in fact.
I do not see, however, this has to be based on the supposed inadequacies of kenpo. Why not just say, "I want to do this other stuff?"
Or if not that, then why the need to expose all these so-called blind spots, and the absolute refusal to believe those of us who keep saying, "Yeah, worked that," without--at least in my case--without claiming to be some sort of invincible ground-fighter all ready for the UFC?
Come on, guys. Those of us on these forums have about as much chance of competing on a professional level as the man in the moon. That isn't a reflection necessarily on what we study, or even how we study--it's just a recognition of reality.
In brief, this: some of the stuff that's being blamed on kenpo is the product of a) our (I repeat, OUR, not your) lack of imagination and hard work, b) the limits of what we can do as martial artists (which are never where we think they are), c) a demand that kenpo be aimed at goals (like pro fighting) that were never the point, d) lousy teaching, e) (a repeat of "a") our unwillingness to put in the sweat time.
Let me write it again. I think it's great that some folks go study all this stuff. Good for you. I just don't find the same problems in my training, and I don't care to go gadding from school to school, which is what I'd (repeat, I'd) be doing. I simply want to understand what I'm working on now.
Oh yeah...not in response to the last poster at all, but one more time: this isn't a simple matter of "tradition," vs. "evolution."
Thanks.
Further, what I wrote didn't have anything to do with learning or not learning judo. It had to do with the repeated claim that none of the stuff I've worked over years is in kenpo. It had to do with the repeated claim that Mr. Parker left kenpo somehow deeply flawed, incomplete, full of vulnerabilities, and that the way to handle this was to go learn all the other arts in which kenpo was deficient. I reject these claims, on grounds I've previously stated.
And none of those have to do with the assumption that I'm anything vaguely resembling god's gift to martial arts, or that my kenpo is perfect, or anything resembling such claims. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I'm not even remotely interested in becoming a "fighter," in the UFC sense, or the "streetfighter," sense, which seems to be primarily what is being advanced as the motivation behind "evolving," kenpo.
What I'd ask is this: how's your kenpo going? Are you familiar with all the sets, the forms, the extensions on the techniques? Have you extensively worked their applications? For how long? Under what teachers? And I don't mean a seminar or two or a camp, but over years? I mean, if it's reasonable to keep advancing this demand that I and others go study jiu-jitsu, or judo, or shootfighting, or whatever, on the grounds that kenpo doesn't offer any of this stuff--isn't it reasonable to ask the other side of the question?
And where does this search through 'em all end?
Now let me be clear. I've no idea what you know or don't know. I've no idea how much you've worked through. I've no idea whether it's a good idea or a bad idea for you to study whatever. I'm simply arguing that for me, it's pointless to go from style to style when I don't even really know this one, after a mere eleven or twelve years. And, to be sure, I'm arguing that in the end, if you look, you will find what you went elsewhere for right back home in kenpo.
I presume that you're simply referring to James' pragmatism. Well, my version of pragmatism is that it's better to take the time to really learn one strong system than it is to go from system to system to system. I suppose that for others, this may be a pragmatic choice--but this is not reasonably grounded on the inadequacies of kenpo. It's based on what you want, how much time and energy you have available, your ambitions as a martial artist, etc. And--for about the hundredth time!--that's fine. Great, in fact.
I do not see, however, this has to be based on the supposed inadequacies of kenpo. Why not just say, "I want to do this other stuff?"
Or if not that, then why the need to expose all these so-called blind spots, and the absolute refusal to believe those of us who keep saying, "Yeah, worked that," without--at least in my case--without claiming to be some sort of invincible ground-fighter all ready for the UFC?
Come on, guys. Those of us on these forums have about as much chance of competing on a professional level as the man in the moon. That isn't a reflection necessarily on what we study, or even how we study--it's just a recognition of reality.
In brief, this: some of the stuff that's being blamed on kenpo is the product of a) our (I repeat, OUR, not your) lack of imagination and hard work, b) the limits of what we can do as martial artists (which are never where we think they are), c) a demand that kenpo be aimed at goals (like pro fighting) that were never the point, d) lousy teaching, e) (a repeat of "a") our unwillingness to put in the sweat time.
Let me write it again. I think it's great that some folks go study all this stuff. Good for you. I just don't find the same problems in my training, and I don't care to go gadding from school to school, which is what I'd (repeat, I'd) be doing. I simply want to understand what I'm working on now.
Oh yeah...not in response to the last poster at all, but one more time: this isn't a simple matter of "tradition," vs. "evolution."
Thanks.
First of all I don't suggest you should go else where. I would rather you trained these ideas in the school in which you train. grappling to me suggests that you wher not sucsessfull in staying on your feet... so now what a ya gonna do? no one is suggesting that you staert bowing to the Brazillion flag. But familiarizing yourself with what you might be up against on some dark night isn't the end of the world.
Sure you may know more set and technique endings than I do but there are people out there that can take you an d me on at the same time and they don't know a single Parker tech. I get the feeling you are a collecter of information. I noticed that Clyde believes that because your system requires more techs per belt level it places yall above those of us that try to make the first six or so technique ideas work in any situation. So i'll give you that you are responsible for more information; however, do you feel its all usefull? Outside of a good strong punch off the back hand, getting off the line of attack, proper stances with good transitions, and some good conditioning, should we really be purging our memory banks in times of crisis.
now don't get me wrong I know mor e than six techs but we pick two or three and work it for a solid month. This makes it difficult to find room foer an extra hundred technique ideas.
Robert you are actualy one of my favorite people on this forum so I really felt bad about offending you that one time and I'm sorry. I like to debate and I have definantly found a topic you I don't see eye to eye on but as we argue I see its only the tip of the iceburg. I'll shut up now.
have a great MMA day.
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Well, that was a reading of mingled joy and mild annoyance. Thanks for the compliment.
However, I must again disagree with the binary opposition you've set up between, "learning a few techniques that work," and us guys who, "learn a whole bunch that don't."
Yes, I do feel--and more than that, I know--that they are all useful. Beyond trying to point out that it's logically inconsistent to avoid learning parts of kenpo on the grounds that they aren't useful, and then turning around to argue that there are things missing from kenpo, there's these two points: a) the vocabulary helps (nobody ever said that the techs would get run precisely as written), b) the range and diversity of the system is essential to teaching martial arts.
In this context, here's what matters about kenpo: its teachibility, its transmissibility. Without all that "extra," what you end up with is a system that's accessible only to a few. Sure, there will always be a few who will excel...one of the advantages in my training at Mr. Tatum's is that I've always been around martial artists (I'll tell you right now, Juan Serrano is probably the least-known great martial artist in kenpo) who can do things I'll never touch. Which only intensifies my admiration for Mr. Parker and others having devised a martial arts system--and theory--that us ordinary mortals can do something with.
A lot of what's being argued here, in terms of "modernizing," or "evolving," kenpo," would remove everything thaat makes this true. I think.
Still and all, thanks. I appreciate your ideas.
However, I must again disagree with the binary opposition you've set up between, "learning a few techniques that work," and us guys who, "learn a whole bunch that don't."
Yes, I do feel--and more than that, I know--that they are all useful. Beyond trying to point out that it's logically inconsistent to avoid learning parts of kenpo on the grounds that they aren't useful, and then turning around to argue that there are things missing from kenpo, there's these two points: a) the vocabulary helps (nobody ever said that the techs would get run precisely as written), b) the range and diversity of the system is essential to teaching martial arts.
In this context, here's what matters about kenpo: its teachibility, its transmissibility. Without all that "extra," what you end up with is a system that's accessible only to a few. Sure, there will always be a few who will excel...one of the advantages in my training at Mr. Tatum's is that I've always been around martial artists (I'll tell you right now, Juan Serrano is probably the least-known great martial artist in kenpo) who can do things I'll never touch. Which only intensifies my admiration for Mr. Parker and others having devised a martial arts system--and theory--that us ordinary mortals can do something with.
A lot of what's being argued here, in terms of "modernizing," or "evolving," kenpo," would remove everything thaat makes this true. I think.
Still and all, thanks. I appreciate your ideas.
"I should be clear about something. I suspect that behind some of these calls for, "reform," are folks who want to be "leading," the "development." I suspect it's a question of power--and that's fine, but let's call it what it is."
Robert,
1. Im not sure if you were directing any of this toward me, but let me assure you that I have no desire to "lead" anything. When I speak of evolving, I can only speak in regards to myself and those that I train with. My intent is a personal quest to grow.
2. Ed Parker did leave Kenpo incomplete. He was constantly changing, growing, learning and being enlighted. It only stands to reason that as he did so that he incorporate this new found knowledge within his system of Kenpo. I learned many different variations to many of the techniques through the years. Mr. Parker himself had a way of changing things. All that I am saying that as I grow and mature as a martial artist, I too must incorporate my new found knowledge into everything I do as well.
If personally you are fully content and happy with your course of training then I am more then happy for you. You certainly train with some of the best so a knuckle headed rebel like myself should be no threat to your ideas that keep intact the purity of Kenpo.
Take Care
John
Robert,
1. Im not sure if you were directing any of this toward me, but let me assure you that I have no desire to "lead" anything. When I speak of evolving, I can only speak in regards to myself and those that I train with. My intent is a personal quest to grow.
2. Ed Parker did leave Kenpo incomplete. He was constantly changing, growing, learning and being enlighted. It only stands to reason that as he did so that he incorporate this new found knowledge within his system of Kenpo. I learned many different variations to many of the techniques through the years. Mr. Parker himself had a way of changing things. All that I am saying that as I grow and mature as a martial artist, I too must incorporate my new found knowledge into everything I do as well.
If personally you are fully content and happy with your course of training then I am more then happy for you. You certainly train with some of the best so a knuckle headed rebel like myself should be no threat to your ideas that keep intact the purity of Kenpo.
Take Care
John
P
ProfessorKenpo
Guest
A more thorough understanding of the system may convince you otherwise, at least it did with me.
Have a great Kenpo day
Clyde
Keep in mind that we are all different, and we all perform things in our own unique way. Therefore, why compare ourselves with someone else, when chances are, we might never be like that other person. Parker taught many of his BB differently. Like I said before, you could take Palanzo, Planas, and Tatum, and I would bet that they all have their OWN way of doing a tech.
The reasoning behind the numerous amount of techs., and extensions. If you are attempting a tech. and for some reason, during the tech. the attack changes, you will be able to flow from one to the other. However, I'm a firm believer in quality over quantity. If one person can learn 25 tech and make them all work without a problem...great! Some people can and some can't. I'd rather know 5 tech excellent, and know that if I needed to use them, I could, than 25 tech, and only know them fairly well.
In regards to most people on here never competing on a professional level. Well, I disagree with that. I also belong to another forum and there are a number of people on there that do train for NHB. They are able to provide a wealth of knowledge. Now, before I ruffle any feathers, I do realize that NHB or grappling is not everyones fav. thing to do, but don't knock people who enjoy it!
As far as cross training...well, it speaks for itself. I'm not saying that after spending 10 years doing Kenpo, that anybody has to devote another 10 yrs learning BJJ, but like I have said many times before, if I can take a kick or punch or anything from any other system and make it work for me, I look at it as I'm that much better than before. I have one more trick in my bag to use, in the event that I might need it. Does it mean that if I attend a 5 hour JKD seminar that I'm an expert on the subject? NO. But if I can take 2 things or 5 things, work them every time I train, then good for me!
Mike
The reasoning behind the numerous amount of techs., and extensions. If you are attempting a tech. and for some reason, during the tech. the attack changes, you will be able to flow from one to the other. However, I'm a firm believer in quality over quantity. If one person can learn 25 tech and make them all work without a problem...great! Some people can and some can't. I'd rather know 5 tech excellent, and know that if I needed to use them, I could, than 25 tech, and only know them fairly well.
In regards to most people on here never competing on a professional level. Well, I disagree with that. I also belong to another forum and there are a number of people on there that do train for NHB. They are able to provide a wealth of knowledge. Now, before I ruffle any feathers, I do realize that NHB or grappling is not everyones fav. thing to do, but don't knock people who enjoy it!
As far as cross training...well, it speaks for itself. I'm not saying that after spending 10 years doing Kenpo, that anybody has to devote another 10 yrs learning BJJ, but like I have said many times before, if I can take a kick or punch or anything from any other system and make it work for me, I look at it as I'm that much better than before. I have one more trick in my bag to use, in the event that I might need it. Does it mean that if I attend a 5 hour JKD seminar that I'm an expert on the subject? NO. But if I can take 2 things or 5 things, work them every time I train, then good for me!
Mike
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Hm. OK, two basic points. First of all, who's defending, "the purity of kenpo?" As far as I can tell, this was never a pure system on any level; its origins aren't "pure," its inspiration isn't, "pure," etc., etc.
What might be "pure," is the consistency of approach to self-defense. I suppose that what I'm arguing for isn't this technique or that technique, but the coherence of the system as a whole. tear out bits and pieces on the grounds they're "outdated," or, "unnecessary," lose the coherence of the system as a whole.
I also find its a bit odd that in paragraph 2, Mike, you're arguing that you'd rather have a few techniques that work than a bunch that don't, while in paragraph four you're arguing for going to other martial arts in order to acquire technical knowledge that isn't in kenpo...looks contradictory. Either a) you're piling on more techniques of one sort or another, or b) you're adding bits and pieces that have no underlying links, no connecting theoretical basis...unless, of course, you take kenpo as what makes these other arts coherent, which is kinda what I was saying in the first place.
Part of this disagreement, too, is coming out of basic goals. It now looks like the, "modernizing," folks are indeed pushing the UFC-style events...which is fine (though I do stand behind my point that very, very few have the slightest chance of doing well in "NHB," rings, for reasons that have nothing to do with whether kenpo does or doesn't work...for example, basic kenpo theory says, why the hell are you getting into a cage with these monsters?), but not what kenpo was designed for. And us wacky "traditionalists," (still an an inaccurate way to describe matters, and a loaded one) are primarily pushing self-defense, a very different proposition.
But I should note, clearly, that unlike Clyde and many of the folks I train with, I do think there's something wrong with these so-called NHB events. And I'm traditional in this regard: I don't like the glorification of violence (sorry, apologies all around) that I see there, and I suspect that there are all sorts of extraordinary martial artists who could, if need arose, destroy these guys--even if I don't think I'm one of them, and I agree in advance that this may just be a dream on my part.
I'd be interested, still, to see responses to the questions I asked about teachability. Again, it strikes me that a lot of the disagreements have to do with basic goals...
Anyway, thanks.
What might be "pure," is the consistency of approach to self-defense. I suppose that what I'm arguing for isn't this technique or that technique, but the coherence of the system as a whole. tear out bits and pieces on the grounds they're "outdated," or, "unnecessary," lose the coherence of the system as a whole.
I also find its a bit odd that in paragraph 2, Mike, you're arguing that you'd rather have a few techniques that work than a bunch that don't, while in paragraph four you're arguing for going to other martial arts in order to acquire technical knowledge that isn't in kenpo...looks contradictory. Either a) you're piling on more techniques of one sort or another, or b) you're adding bits and pieces that have no underlying links, no connecting theoretical basis...unless, of course, you take kenpo as what makes these other arts coherent, which is kinda what I was saying in the first place.
Part of this disagreement, too, is coming out of basic goals. It now looks like the, "modernizing," folks are indeed pushing the UFC-style events...which is fine (though I do stand behind my point that very, very few have the slightest chance of doing well in "NHB," rings, for reasons that have nothing to do with whether kenpo does or doesn't work...for example, basic kenpo theory says, why the hell are you getting into a cage with these monsters?), but not what kenpo was designed for. And us wacky "traditionalists," (still an an inaccurate way to describe matters, and a loaded one) are primarily pushing self-defense, a very different proposition.
But I should note, clearly, that unlike Clyde and many of the folks I train with, I do think there's something wrong with these so-called NHB events. And I'm traditional in this regard: I don't like the glorification of violence (sorry, apologies all around) that I see there, and I suspect that there are all sorts of extraordinary martial artists who could, if need arose, destroy these guys--even if I don't think I'm one of them, and I agree in advance that this may just be a dream on my part.
I'd be interested, still, to see responses to the questions I asked about teachability. Again, it strikes me that a lot of the disagreements have to do with basic goals...
Anyway, thanks.
I have been training in Kenpo for 17 yrs. It however is not the only art I study. I go to the other arts to fill a void that Kenpo has. If you want to learn other things, you must go to other people to get them. I train with one guy who has experience in JKD, Judo, BJJ, Silat, and Arnis. I train with another that did Kenpo, Arnis, Kun Tao, and Aiki-jujitsu. If I want to understand weapons better, I'm going to go and study a weapon based art. Kenpo can't teach you about a knife the way the Filipino arts can. It can't teach you about grappling the way BJJ can. I do see what you're saying and yes, after reading it again, it does sound like I'm contradicting myself. Is it adding tech. of some sort? Yes. Don't get me wrong, I am happy with Kenpo, but I enjoy training outside of it too. Maybe I'm at the point, where after 17 yrs., I'd like to experience different things. There are so many different things out there to expereince, why limit myself to one thing?
Mike
OP
Old Fat Kenpoka
Master Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #72
Wow! This is getting really fun to watch! Better jump back in!
Robert: I don't think that proponents of change or of ground grappling are trying to recruit Kenpoists to become NHB fighters. If that thought is annoying you, let it go...
The point of all this discussion is that some new attack methods have become prominent since Mr. Parker "finalized" the 250 techniques and Katas that are currently EPAK. These attacks occur three ways:
1) Takedown attempts from striking distance. Kenpo has many techniques and basics that are effective against these. But do we really train against the double-leg takedown? Against other wrestling style takedowns? Do we know how to sprawl? Some of us do, some of us don't. All of us should.
2) Clinching and takedowns from the clinch. Again, Kenpo has many effective techniques for these situations. But do we really train against an over-under clinch or an attempted throw from a seat-belt clinch? Do we know how to break from all of the popular wrestling clinches? Some of us do, some of us don't. Again, all of us should -- especially since we have so many techniques for this.
3) Ground grappling. This has been talked to death. Again, if Kenpoists go down, can we maintain and improve position so that we can execute strikes, gouges, etc.? Some of us train for this, most of us don't. All of us should at least be acquainted with the positions and key escapes.
When Mr. Parker learned Kenpo in the 50's, few people knew Karate, few people knew Judo, nobody knew BJJ. There were boxers, wrestlers, and brawlers. Kenpo is effective against these types of attackers. Since Mr. Parker learned Kenpo, Karate, Kung Fu, TKD, Kick-boxing and JKD grew rapidly. Mr. Parker added to and refined Kenpo in the 60's, 70's, and 80's until his death. Since his death, BJJ techniques have been combined with wrestling and kickboxing to create a new style of fighting usually known as MMA.
A large portion of this debate can be boiled down to these questions: Does Kenpo adequately address the new positions, attacks and fighting styles that have emerged since Mr. Parker's death? Does it do so effectively? Does it do so in a superior way? Should it?
Robert: I don't think that proponents of change or of ground grappling are trying to recruit Kenpoists to become NHB fighters. If that thought is annoying you, let it go...
The point of all this discussion is that some new attack methods have become prominent since Mr. Parker "finalized" the 250 techniques and Katas that are currently EPAK. These attacks occur three ways:
1) Takedown attempts from striking distance. Kenpo has many techniques and basics that are effective against these. But do we really train against the double-leg takedown? Against other wrestling style takedowns? Do we know how to sprawl? Some of us do, some of us don't. All of us should.
2) Clinching and takedowns from the clinch. Again, Kenpo has many effective techniques for these situations. But do we really train against an over-under clinch or an attempted throw from a seat-belt clinch? Do we know how to break from all of the popular wrestling clinches? Some of us do, some of us don't. Again, all of us should -- especially since we have so many techniques for this.
3) Ground grappling. This has been talked to death. Again, if Kenpoists go down, can we maintain and improve position so that we can execute strikes, gouges, etc.? Some of us train for this, most of us don't. All of us should at least be acquainted with the positions and key escapes.
When Mr. Parker learned Kenpo in the 50's, few people knew Karate, few people knew Judo, nobody knew BJJ. There were boxers, wrestlers, and brawlers. Kenpo is effective against these types of attackers. Since Mr. Parker learned Kenpo, Karate, Kung Fu, TKD, Kick-boxing and JKD grew rapidly. Mr. Parker added to and refined Kenpo in the 60's, 70's, and 80's until his death. Since his death, BJJ techniques have been combined with wrestling and kickboxing to create a new style of fighting usually known as MMA.
A large portion of this debate can be boiled down to these questions: Does Kenpo adequately address the new positions, attacks and fighting styles that have emerged since Mr. Parker's death? Does it do so effectively? Does it do so in a superior way? Should it?
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Ok, sure, fine, I guess so.
I'd still like to see some of the questions I asked about a) the nature of kenpo as an art, b) teachability, c) what links all the stuff gleaned from all these other systems, d) whether the fascination with "NHB," events has skewed martial arts thinking.
And no, I don't agree that the discussion can be, "boiled down," in some of these ways...particularly this artificial division between "traditional, " and, "evolutionary," kenpo.
Thanks.
I'd still like to see some of the questions I asked about a) the nature of kenpo as an art, b) teachability, c) what links all the stuff gleaned from all these other systems, d) whether the fascination with "NHB," events has skewed martial arts thinking.
And no, I don't agree that the discussion can be, "boiled down," in some of these ways...particularly this artificial division between "traditional, " and, "evolutionary," kenpo.
Thanks.
OP
Old Fat Kenpoka
Master Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #74
Robert:
First, let me congratulate you on your MartialTalk Brown Belt. You have made many strong points in this and other threads.
a) Nature of Kenpo as an Art: This is an excellent question. I think it may be unanswerable and that is why there is more debate about Kenpo on this and other forums than any other forum. Is Kenpo "complete"? Is Kenpo a "Do" or a "Jutsu"? That is one reason why we are having this discussion. That is why there are so many Kenpo associations (well one reason anyway). That is why so many are trying to bridge Kenpo with other arts. That is why you and so many others are looking deeper into Kenpo.
b) Teachability: Another excellent question. No easy answers, but if Kenpo can be taught, and these other arts can be taught, then why not Kenpo with other techniques?
c) Linking it all together: That hasn't happened yet. It may not happen without a genious as great as mr. Parker's.
d) NHB skewing Martial Artists thinking: Yes! It has skewed our thinking. It has been a big wakeup call to many that some traditional techniques and training methods are not as unassailable as previously believed. It has been a wakeup call that kata and point-sparring victories may not make us as hot as we thought we were.
First, let me congratulate you on your MartialTalk Brown Belt. You have made many strong points in this and other threads.
a) Nature of Kenpo as an Art: This is an excellent question. I think it may be unanswerable and that is why there is more debate about Kenpo on this and other forums than any other forum. Is Kenpo "complete"? Is Kenpo a "Do" or a "Jutsu"? That is one reason why we are having this discussion. That is why there are so many Kenpo associations (well one reason anyway). That is why so many are trying to bridge Kenpo with other arts. That is why you and so many others are looking deeper into Kenpo.
b) Teachability: Another excellent question. No easy answers, but if Kenpo can be taught, and these other arts can be taught, then why not Kenpo with other techniques?
c) Linking it all together: That hasn't happened yet. It may not happen without a genious as great as mr. Parker's.
d) NHB skewing Martial Artists thinking: Yes! It has skewed our thinking. It has been a big wakeup call to many that some traditional techniques and training methods are not as unassailable as previously believed. It has been a wakeup call that kata and point-sparring victories may not make us as hot as we thought we were.
"A more thorough understanding of the system may convince you otherwise, at least it did with me."
Clyde,
With all due respect this is a pretty bold statement on your part. I do not post very often on the forums and you know nothing of me and my history. Because you may not agree with with my approach is no reason to question my understanding of the system.
If you would like a detailed discussion on how Kenpo changed through the years while Mr. Parker was alive Id be happy to do this with you. Mr Parker NEVER declared his system complete. The Tracy's to this day attack EPAK for not being pure because through the years Parker adjusted and modified the system. I would have to assume that if he were still alive he would still be modifying in search of the best method to teach his underlying principles.
Specifically Mr Parker has dropped and added many techniques through the years and he had many things in the works at the time of his death. Intellectual Departure is not in many of the IKKA yellow belt manuals. Mr. Parker was also working on knife and club material which he did not have a chance to complete. I have seen part of the notes to "Speak with a Knife" and it is mostly just a basic outline, in other words it is incomplete.
If I am understanding you correctly, you are trying to say is within the concepts, principles, and theories of Kenpo, someone can extract and interpurt a solution to any problem by discovering the benefits of variable expansion within Kenpo, rest assured Im right there with you. Inspiration can be found in many places. In my case I have had many break throughs in discovery by investigating other methods. I have been enlightened greatly by the BJJ folks in how to use many of the principles of Kenpo on the ground, Angle of Cancellation and Angle of Disturbance being two. I have no doubt that you can be inspired within the confines of Kenpo; however, sometimes approaching problems at a different angle with a different perspective is very rewarding.
Take Care
John
Clyde,
With all due respect this is a pretty bold statement on your part. I do not post very often on the forums and you know nothing of me and my history. Because you may not agree with with my approach is no reason to question my understanding of the system.
If you would like a detailed discussion on how Kenpo changed through the years while Mr. Parker was alive Id be happy to do this with you. Mr Parker NEVER declared his system complete. The Tracy's to this day attack EPAK for not being pure because through the years Parker adjusted and modified the system. I would have to assume that if he were still alive he would still be modifying in search of the best method to teach his underlying principles.
Specifically Mr Parker has dropped and added many techniques through the years and he had many things in the works at the time of his death. Intellectual Departure is not in many of the IKKA yellow belt manuals. Mr. Parker was also working on knife and club material which he did not have a chance to complete. I have seen part of the notes to "Speak with a Knife" and it is mostly just a basic outline, in other words it is incomplete.
If I am understanding you correctly, you are trying to say is within the concepts, principles, and theories of Kenpo, someone can extract and interpurt a solution to any problem by discovering the benefits of variable expansion within Kenpo, rest assured Im right there with you. Inspiration can be found in many places. In my case I have had many break throughs in discovery by investigating other methods. I have been enlightened greatly by the BJJ folks in how to use many of the principles of Kenpo on the ground, Angle of Cancellation and Angle of Disturbance being two. I have no doubt that you can be inspired within the confines of Kenpo; however, sometimes approaching problems at a different angle with a different perspective is very rewarding.
Take Care
John
You're right OFK, this is interesting! I'd like to start by rephrasing my last post. I realize that by studing 2 or 3 different arts, you are in a sense adding more tech. Why add other arts, when you can just add more Kenpo?? OFK said it best. There are many things that were not covered in the art. Every day, new things come up. Don't you think that if some criminal has 5 yrs to sit in jail and think of nothing excpet new ways to break into someones house, steal a car, etc.
Unfortuantely, when Parked died, the Kenpo world exploded. What I mean by this, is that, Parker was able to keep order and decide what and how the material was to be taught. Now look at it. Everybody has their own way of teaching, doing things, etc. Will there ever be one person to take control? Probably not.
Kenpo as an art. It is an excellent art, but it lacks certain things, which have been made apparent. As far as NHB goes. It was the intention of the Gracie family to pit one art against another to see the weaknesses. Does everybody have to turn into a grappler? NO. Do we all have to enter NHB events? NO. OFK made many good points in his post. In order to be 100% complete, you need to address each and every one of those points. Walking around thinking you will never get taken down is crazy! A fight is more than just punching. There is grappling. Only difference is that you are standing.
Tradition?? Kenpo is not a traditional art. If it was, Parker never would have made the changes that he did from when he learned it. There will always be a situation in which we are not prepared. But, we can try to do what we can to better prepare ourselves.
In regards to the tech. Let me clarify what I mean. There are 24 tech. per belt. Like I said, some people can make all 24 work and some can't. It all depends on how much effort you put into realisticly training them. Why have a hard time with 24 and then learn JKD and BJJ and Boxing? Isnt that making it harder on yourself? It all depends on the person. In my opinion, some of the tech. would probably get you killed if you tried them on the street. Nothing wrong with crosstraining. This is 2003, not 1940. Things change and we need to change with the times as well.
Mike
Unfortuantely, when Parked died, the Kenpo world exploded. What I mean by this, is that, Parker was able to keep order and decide what and how the material was to be taught. Now look at it. Everybody has their own way of teaching, doing things, etc. Will there ever be one person to take control? Probably not.
Kenpo as an art. It is an excellent art, but it lacks certain things, which have been made apparent. As far as NHB goes. It was the intention of the Gracie family to pit one art against another to see the weaknesses. Does everybody have to turn into a grappler? NO. Do we all have to enter NHB events? NO. OFK made many good points in his post. In order to be 100% complete, you need to address each and every one of those points. Walking around thinking you will never get taken down is crazy! A fight is more than just punching. There is grappling. Only difference is that you are standing.
Tradition?? Kenpo is not a traditional art. If it was, Parker never would have made the changes that he did from when he learned it. There will always be a situation in which we are not prepared. But, we can try to do what we can to better prepare ourselves.
In regards to the tech. Let me clarify what I mean. There are 24 tech. per belt. Like I said, some people can make all 24 work and some can't. It all depends on how much effort you put into realisticly training them. Why have a hard time with 24 and then learn JKD and BJJ and Boxing? Isnt that making it harder on yourself? It all depends on the person. In my opinion, some of the tech. would probably get you killed if you tried them on the street. Nothing wrong with crosstraining. This is 2003, not 1940. Things change and we need to change with the times as well.
Mike
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Look, I may just be repeating myself, but I still don't see answers. I see the repetition of shibboleths.
For example, I still want to know where it all ends. After BJJ, what? Apparently, Modern Arnis and Phillippine knives. Then what? An infinity of things can happen, "on the street," sure--are we supposed to endlessly prepare for all of them? And why the concept of endless threat?
I still want a specific example of a "tech..that will probably get you killed on the street."
I have trouble with the notion that NHB events were some big wake-up call. In the first place, judo and Gene LeBell were around long before...in the second, guess what I learned from the so-called NHB events? Don't get in a cage with some big guy who likes to fight, is in better shape than you can ever be (unless you drop everything else in your life), and is almost certainly more physically-talented than you are. (And just incidentally--everybody knows that professional fighters almost always pay a horrific physical price later in life, right?)
I still want to know how you go about teaching students. Just tell them, well, go here, go here and go here?
I still want to understand the logic of eliminating all sorts of stuff from kenpo, then saying that there's stuff missing from kenpo.
I also still find it interesting that some posters write that they learned more about Angles of Cancellation on the ground, for example, then turn about and say that groundwork isn't anywhere in kenpo. I find it even more interesting that, despite my several mentions of grappling techniques, there's still an insistence that some of us "purists," won't realize that a fight involves grappling.
And just to open up a real can of worms--sometimes techniques aren't getting taught "differently," which is not what "tailoring," meant anyway. Sometimes, they're getting taught wrong.
Sorry, guys. Maybe I'm just thick today.
For example, I still want to know where it all ends. After BJJ, what? Apparently, Modern Arnis and Phillippine knives. Then what? An infinity of things can happen, "on the street," sure--are we supposed to endlessly prepare for all of them? And why the concept of endless threat?
I still want a specific example of a "tech..that will probably get you killed on the street."
I have trouble with the notion that NHB events were some big wake-up call. In the first place, judo and Gene LeBell were around long before...in the second, guess what I learned from the so-called NHB events? Don't get in a cage with some big guy who likes to fight, is in better shape than you can ever be (unless you drop everything else in your life), and is almost certainly more physically-talented than you are. (And just incidentally--everybody knows that professional fighters almost always pay a horrific physical price later in life, right?)
I still want to know how you go about teaching students. Just tell them, well, go here, go here and go here?
I still want to understand the logic of eliminating all sorts of stuff from kenpo, then saying that there's stuff missing from kenpo.
I also still find it interesting that some posters write that they learned more about Angles of Cancellation on the ground, for example, then turn about and say that groundwork isn't anywhere in kenpo. I find it even more interesting that, despite my several mentions of grappling techniques, there's still an insistence that some of us "purists," won't realize that a fight involves grappling.
And just to open up a real can of worms--sometimes techniques aren't getting taught "differently," which is not what "tailoring," meant anyway. Sometimes, they're getting taught wrong.
Sorry, guys. Maybe I'm just thick today.
K
Kenpo Yahoo
Guest
Some of the Concepts that should be avoided:
-maneuvering through a twist stance at any point during your self defense (culprit- several of the brown belt techniques).
-the idea of leaping to one leg while blocking an attack and performing an inward strike to whatever target you so chose ( don't want to alienate anyone now..) (take a guess)
-the idea of doing an overhead cross block against an incoming club.
-Triggered salute (the way that most people do it.)
-almost all of the two man defenses (there is no way that a prescribed technique will work against multiple attackers). Everyone argues the point that BJJ doesn't work against multiple attackers, well I'm not too sure that kenpo will PREPARE you to fight multiple attackers either.
-most of the gun techniques, for the simple reason that guns have changed over the last several years. You use to be able grab the cylinder, or stop the firing pin by obstructing the hammer, or even grabbing the slide. None of that will work on a Glock, unless you can jam your finger through the ejection port in the fraction of a second that it's open. Besides this, the barrel tends to fly all around the clock face before the final disarm (not good for any of us)
-How many of the knife defenses take into account the idea of backcutting (using a reverse path of motion)?
-With EP's background in Judo I'm surprised that no one ever questioned the purpose or intent of a grab or hold? Surely the intent of an attacker is not to simply grab you and hold on but to disrupt and control your balance either by maneuvering and striking (very cool drill Capt...) or simply throwing you. Especially the techniques from behind. Odds are if they are going to tackle, throw, or lift you off the ground from behind, you're going to be toast before you realize what's happening. Another good point about take downs did anyone see the M.L. baseball game where the pitcher did a double leg takedown on a charging batter (ok..... slightly charging batter) followed by a punch to the face. I'm pretty sure he's never had bjj training.
Am I trying to say that these are all my thoughts and ideas? No. In most cases I was shown why this wouldn't work, but in some cases I was able to figure things out for myself using simple logic and physics. I don't have all the answers, but before there are answers there are always questions.
Looking forward to everyone's thoughts, even if you don't agree.
-maneuvering through a twist stance at any point during your self defense (culprit- several of the brown belt techniques).
-the idea of leaping to one leg while blocking an attack and performing an inward strike to whatever target you so chose ( don't want to alienate anyone now..) (take a guess)
-the idea of doing an overhead cross block against an incoming club.
-Triggered salute (the way that most people do it.)
-almost all of the two man defenses (there is no way that a prescribed technique will work against multiple attackers). Everyone argues the point that BJJ doesn't work against multiple attackers, well I'm not too sure that kenpo will PREPARE you to fight multiple attackers either.
-most of the gun techniques, for the simple reason that guns have changed over the last several years. You use to be able grab the cylinder, or stop the firing pin by obstructing the hammer, or even grabbing the slide. None of that will work on a Glock, unless you can jam your finger through the ejection port in the fraction of a second that it's open. Besides this, the barrel tends to fly all around the clock face before the final disarm (not good for any of us)
-How many of the knife defenses take into account the idea of backcutting (using a reverse path of motion)?
-With EP's background in Judo I'm surprised that no one ever questioned the purpose or intent of a grab or hold? Surely the intent of an attacker is not to simply grab you and hold on but to disrupt and control your balance either by maneuvering and striking (very cool drill Capt...) or simply throwing you. Especially the techniques from behind. Odds are if they are going to tackle, throw, or lift you off the ground from behind, you're going to be toast before you realize what's happening. Another good point about take downs did anyone see the M.L. baseball game where the pitcher did a double leg takedown on a charging batter (ok..... slightly charging batter) followed by a punch to the face. I'm pretty sure he's never had bjj training.
Am I trying to say that these are all my thoughts and ideas? No. In most cases I was shown why this wouldn't work, but in some cases I was able to figure things out for myself using simple logic and physics. I don't have all the answers, but before there are answers there are always questions.
Looking forward to everyone's thoughts, even if you don't agree.
P
ProfessorKenpo
Guest
Hmm, I'm glad I don't train with your instructor, I'm more inclined to teach people how the technique will work instead of how it won't. I've addressed all these issues at one time or another in the past 3 months and how to deal with them, in fact, I addressed alot of them last Saturday.
Have a great Kenpo day
Clyde
K
kkbb
Guest
IMHO...
To prepare one's self for every single possible threat is foolish. You cannot possibly practice and train for "all" threats. Those who go outside their art "looking to fill holes" in my mind are doing just that.
Looking to "add" to your art or "round out your training" from outside scources, to solve percieved deficiencies, is like adding a shovel of dirt to the Grand Canyon. You just keep throwing more in and it is never full. It will never be full.
The BJJ guys are probabley sitting around saying to themselves (or outloud) " Man we have these kenpo guys running scared"
Instead of vast amounts of time learning BJJ, we should be learining and using Kenpo techniques to negate and counter these attatcks, not add them to our artillary.
Most if not all arts have everything that is needed to fill voids. Kenpo is no exception.
EPAK should evolve.... it is meant to evolve.... but not "dissolve"
In my opinion, the changes that are needed (if any) will only come when one strong leader emerges.
Maybe closer study into what Mr. Parker was going to do with the system may be needed.
To prepare one's self for every single possible threat is foolish. You cannot possibly practice and train for "all" threats. Those who go outside their art "looking to fill holes" in my mind are doing just that.
Looking to "add" to your art or "round out your training" from outside scources, to solve percieved deficiencies, is like adding a shovel of dirt to the Grand Canyon. You just keep throwing more in and it is never full. It will never be full.
The BJJ guys are probabley sitting around saying to themselves (or outloud) " Man we have these kenpo guys running scared"
Instead of vast amounts of time learning BJJ, we should be learining and using Kenpo techniques to negate and counter these attatcks, not add them to our artillary.
Most if not all arts have everything that is needed to fill voids. Kenpo is no exception.
EPAK should evolve.... it is meant to evolve.... but not "dissolve"
In my opinion, the changes that are needed (if any) will only come when one strong leader emerges.
Maybe closer study into what Mr. Parker was going to do with the system may be needed.
