Kenpo Training

[HKphooey]

Looking for opinions/thoughts… (I know that can be dangerous J )

I will start out that this is for open training and self-defense, not specific curriculum material. (When I teach, I teach what is supposed to be taught.)

I have been training in the martial arts for 18+ years (mostly kenpo). I have gone to numerous seminars and have trained with some great martial artists. I have read all GM Parker’s, and in most cases numerous times. In my reading and discussions, I find many kenpo artists stating the same thing “ We are supposed to take what we learn and scientifically adapt it for ourselves and specific situations. For years I tried to go the “strict” EPAK route and found too many individuals stating I was executing a certain strike, block or technique in a different (and incorrect) manner than what was part of the EPAK curriculum. I have also trained in Tracy kenpo and have blended the two, dropped some things form one or the other. I founded great things in both. Yet, when I attend some seminars or read some posts, instructors and students seem to say “that is not the way GM Parker (or any other teacher) said it should be done”. Or “that will never work”.

At this stage in my training, I like to formulate my own ideas, thoughts and variations of techniques. Being 6’7” and 220 lbs (37” legs and monkey arms) has is advantages and disadvantages. I have made the necessary modifications to the techniques so that the material will work for me. I am always open to anyone’s critique of my performance as long as they back it with their reasons and have an open mind to why I may do what I do. I read and utilize each of your posts in my training. I enjoy hearing other martial artists opinions on why/how techniques may work or not work.

So I guess I am confused when I read or hear how GM Parker wanted his instructors and students to “think” outside box and then get told my methods are wrong – with the only reason being, “It is not how GM Parker (or another instructor) said it should be done”.

What are your thoughts?

 

[michaeledward]

I think a musician must have a thorough grasp of the scales and harmonic structures that make up a song before attempting to improvise.

Perhaps, martial artists sometimes skip the 'woodshedding' phase of training to get onstage for the first performance sooner.

Mr. Parker's words about adapting his principles to fit the practitioner become a justification for getting to the spotlight sooner.

 

[MJS]

Looking for opinions/thoughts… (I know that can be dangerous J )

I will start out that this is for open training and self-defense, not specific curriculum material. (When I teach, I teach what is supposed to be taught.)

I have been training in the martial arts for 18+ years (mostly kenpo). I have gone to numerous seminars and have trained with some great martial artists. I have read all GM Parker’s, and in most cases numerous times. In my reading and discussions, I find many kenpo artists stating the same thing “ We are supposed to take what we learn and scientifically adapt it for ourselves and specific situations. For years I tried to go the “strict” EPAK route and found too many individuals stating I was executing a certain strike, block or technique in a different (and incorrect) manner than what was part of the EPAK curriculum. I have also trained in Tracy kenpo and have blended the two, dropped some things form one or the other. I founded great things in both. Yet, when I attend some seminars or read some posts, instructors and students seem to say “that is not the way GM Parker (or any other teacher) said it should be done”. Or “that will never work”.

At this stage in my training, I like to formulate my own ideas, thoughts and variations of techniques. Being 6’7” and 220 lbs (37” legs and monkey arms) has is advantages and disadvantages. I have made the necessary modifications to the techniques so that the material will work for me. I am always open to anyone’s critique of my performance as long as they back it with their reasons and have an open mind to why I may do what I do. I read and utilize each of your posts in my training. I enjoy hearing other martial artists opinions on why/how techniques may work or not work.

So I guess I am confused when I read or hear how GM Parker wanted his instructors and students to “think” outside box and then get told my methods are wrong – with the only reason being, “It is not how GM Parker (or another instructor) said it should be done”.

What are your thoughts?

Great thread!! Upon reading your post, I found myself thinking the exact same thing! Considering GM Parker had many different students, to think that everyone is going to perform the material the same way, as if everyone was a robot, programmed to move exactly the same way, is foolish, but yet, there are some people who insist that "their" way is 'The' way to do things. Another thing that I could never understand, is why some poeple sit here and say that things will never work, but yet when they're questioned as to why, they are unable to provide an answer, and if they do provide one, it is a limited one at best.

IMO, the art should be tailored to the person, not the person to the art. I've had the pleasure of seeing your material and working out with you, and it is apparent to me, that you're making the art work for you, and that is all that should matter.

Many times, when people hear someone say something negative about a technique, they usually reply with, "Well, thats because you don't have a good understanding of it." or "Your teacher does not understand the technique, so that is why you don't understand it." As I said above, everyone is going to have a different understanding, so it does not always mean that a different interpretation is wrong. I for one, have to go with the cards that were dealt to me. I live in CT, not CA, so while I may not be privy to the 'top guys' out on the west, I have had the pleasure of training with many wonderful people here. If it wasn't for those people, I probably would never had been exposed to the art of Kenpo.

I've taken many ideas from the various arts I've trained in, as well as the people who I've trained with. I've listened to many different views, thoughts, etc., and have taken that, and have made 'my' interpretation of Kenpo. Over the years that I've taught, I've received many compliments on my teaching, so obviously I'm doing something right. Is my way the best way? Nope, but what I do works for me, so IMHO, that is all that matters.

Mike

 

[stickarts]

Looking for opinions/thoughts… (I know that can be dangerous J )

I will start out that this is for open training and self-defense, not specific curriculum material. (When I teach, I teach what is supposed to be taught.)

I have been training in the martial arts for 18+ years (mostly kenpo). I have gone to numerous seminars and have trained with some great martial artists. I have read all GM Parker’s, and in most cases numerous times. In my reading and discussions, I find many kenpo artists stating the same thing “ We are supposed to take what we learn and scientifically adapt it for ourselves and specific situations. For years I tried to go the “strict” EPAK route and found too many individuals stating I was executing a certain strike, block or technique in a different (and incorrect) manner than what was part of the EPAK curriculum. I have also trained in Tracy kenpo and have blended the two, dropped some things form one or the other. I founded great things in both. Yet, when I attend some seminars or read some posts, instructors and students seem to say “that is not the way GM Parker (or any other teacher) said it should be done”. Or “that will never work”.

At this stage in my training, I like to formulate my own ideas, thoughts and variations of techniques. Being 6’7” and 220 lbs (37” legs and monkey arms) has is advantages and disadvantages. I have made the necessary modifications to the techniques so that the material will work for me. I am always open to anyone’s critique of my performance as long as they back it with their reasons and have an open mind to why I may do what I do. I read and utilize each of your posts in my training. I enjoy hearing other martial artists opinions on why/how techniques may work or not work.

So I guess I am confused when I read or hear how GM Parker wanted his instructors and students to “think” outside box and then get told my methods are wrong – with the only reason being, “It is not how GM Parker (or another instructor) said it should be done”.

What are your thoughts?

The art was constantly evolving and who knows exactly what direction the art would be taking today if GM Parker was still with us? The more that you achieve, criticism from others is unavoidable. Take the criticism that you think is valid and disregard the rest.
Also, in the end, it is YOU that has to make the technique work for YOU and no one, even a GM, can really be a final judge on that. It all ends with you and what you believe and can make work from your own experience.
Also, I don't really think that there are many that really are qualified to appoint themselves as a spokesperson for any GM.
As has been pointed out in other threads, the art was changing so rapidly that GM Parker himself might make one statement in one class, and say something different a short time later.
If it works for you it's right.

 

[kamishinkan]

I do not train in Parker related Kempo but the Kempo form (Kamishin Ryu) I train in expects the practitioner to COMPLETELY learn the given waza to understand the principles that make the technique work. After that, adapting the PRINCIPLES to work better under a given situation is not only reasonable but a must for individual martial ability. BUT, I find far too often, that a student gets an understanding of techniques (usually Shodan/Nidan) and all of a sudden begins to develop "new ways" according to their limited knowledge (no offense to anyone, I think I did it myself at that level). Usually, the more we learn the principles that make the techniques what they are, we begin to see a whole playing field of possibilities that fit in with the principles learned. This is the way we do it and probably is not the way for others. No offense to anyone intended.

 

[stickarts]

I do not train in Parker related Kempo but the Kempo form (Kamishin Ryu) I train in expects the practitioner to COMPLETELY learn the given waza to understand the principles that make the technique work. After that, adapting the PRINCIPLES to work better under a given situation is not only reasonable but a must for individual martial ability. BUT, I find far too often, that a student gets an understanding of techniques (usually Shodan/Nidan) and all of a sudden begins to develop "new ways" according to their limited knowledge (no offense to anyone, I think I did it myself at that level). Usually, the more we learn the principles that make the techniques what they are, we begin to see a whole playing field of possibilities that fit in with the principles learned. This is the way we do it and probably is not the way for others. No offense to anyone intended.

That makes perfect sense that a level of proficiency and understanding needs to be developed before a student starts to do their own thing. Hopefully even that can be turned into a learning experience if you try something new and find out it doesn't work! :0) I have especially seen that in sparring when you learn the hard way! :0)

 

[Flying Crane]

If you have been training seriously for 18 years, you should certainly feel free to do things however they make sense to you. Keep an open mind, consider what others might say, but ultimately call the shots for yourself. When you are ready to start asking questions like this, you are ready to make your own decisions about it. There is no one right way or one wrong way to do things. This stuff is just a bunch of tools in your tool box. Use the right tools for the job, in the way that makes the most sense to you.

I have made significant changes in the Tracy kenpo that I learned, but didn't start doing this until I had been training martial arts (not just kenpo, but other arts offering other perspectives as well) for about 20 years. I think perhaps it takes about that long to digest what you have learned and start to realize that it really is OK to make changes. The things we practice were created by a man, not a god. This stuff is not sacred, and it can be changed, when it makes sense to change it.

 

[Carol]

Depends on the changes though, doesn't it?

HKPhooey is nearly a foot and a half taller than I am. It seems logical that his techniques would need to be a little different than mine.

Is a target truly a worthy target if one has to overreach in order to connect with it?

 

[michaeledward]

We learn the system through prescribed attacks and prescribed responses. In actual execution, we may need to modify weapons and targets. But without the prescribed foundation, those modifications may weaken the system.

I was taught that Kenpo forms, while not representing an actual fight, are implied to have an invisible attacker of similar size and build; when doing eye slices, don't put the invisible opponents eye 2 feet apart.

It would seem to me that when learning the system, it is most effective to work with partners of similar size. As we advance, it is important to work material on different size and shape bodies (at my school, there is a student to whom, I am unable to apply a bear hug .... his circumference is too great).

As we advance, we learn ways in which we can tailor the system to the specific circumstance. But those times should not dictate an alteration of the system, itself.

 

[Flying Crane]

Depends on the changes though, doesn't it?

HKPhooey is nearly a foot and a half taller than I am. It seems logical that his techniques would need to be a little different than mine.

Is a target truly a worthy target if one has to overreach in order to connect with it?

Of course. The changes I made for myself might not work on him, since I am a mere 5'10" and 155 pounds. With his size difference, he is going to be able to do things that I would never get away with, and vice versa. he needs to answer the questions, and make the changes for himself.

 

[lenatoi]

"Many times, when people hear someone say something negative about a technique, they usually reply with, "Well, thats because you don't have a good understanding of it." or "Your teacher does not understand the technique, so that is why you don't understand it."

I agree that that is a copout answer, But I don't think that means it's not true.
I agree with a few others here that changes should not be made without an understanding of basic principals. If you have been training for 18+ years, you may or may not have that, but at that point I think it's got to be up to you to see that.
I also say that because of size differences, adaptions must be made, while at the same time executing them "properly." Now I know there has been some debate about what "proper" is, but I say what's proper is what gets the best result consistantly, and most effeciantly.

 

[MJS]

"Many times, when people hear someone say something negative about a technique, they usually reply with, "Well, thats because you don't have a good understanding of it." or "Your teacher does not understand the technique, so that is why you don't understand it."

I agree that that is a copout answer, But I don't think that means it's not true.
I agree with a few others here that changes should not be made without an understanding of basic principals. If you have been training for 18+ years, you may or may not have that, but at that point I think it's got to be up to you to see that.
I also say that because of size differences, adaptions must be made, while at the same time executing them "properly." Now I know there has been some debate about what "proper" is, but I say what's proper is what gets the best result consistantly, and most effeciantly.

Yes, you bring up some good points. Let me clarify a little more. As I said in my first post, there are many teachers out there. Of course, students of those teachers are going to think that what their teacher is teaching them is 'The' way of doing it. Thats not the case, as there are going to be many variations, interpretations, etc.

Do I think that someone should totally alter a technique because they don't understand it? Of course not. When I said this:

I've taken many ideas from the various arts I've trained in, as well as the people who I've trained with. I've listened to many different views, thoughts, etc., and have taken that, and have made 'my' interpretation of Kenpo. Over the years that I've taught, I've received many compliments on my teaching, so obviously I'm doing something right. Is my way the best way? Nope, but what I do works for me, so IMHO, that is all that matters.

In no way was I encouraging people to go out and do their own thing. Basically, I'm saying get input from many different people. I've talked to Parker guys as well as Tracy guys, discussed techniques, applications, etc., took all of what was said, found the things that *I* wanted to apply to *my* Kenpo, and added them in. By training in Arnis, I've had the chance to get a much better view of the knife. Ive taken concepts and ideas from Arnis, and mixed them in with the Kenpo way of doing knife work. When I teach, I teach the material the way it was taught to me. I do not include any of *my* ideas in the beginning. I show the base technique, and let the student work it. Later on, I may go back and show other variations.

Mike

 

[Flying Crane]

Many times, when people hear someone say something negative about a technique, they usually reply with, "Well, thats because you don't have a good understanding of it." or "Your teacher does not understand the technique, so that is why you don't understand it." As I said above, everyone is going to have a different understanding, so it does not always mean that a different interpretation is wrong. I for one, have to go with the cards that were dealt to me.

I've taken many ideas from the various arts I've trained in, as well as the people who I've trained with. I've listened to many different views, thoughts, etc., and have taken that, and have made 'my' interpretation of Kenpo. Over the years that I've taught, I've received many compliments on my teaching, so obviously I'm doing something right. Is my way the best way? Nope, but what I do works for me, so IMHO, that is all that matters.

Mike

I think Mike is making some comments here that sort of fall into line with some thoughts that I have had.

Even if my inability to successfully work a technique is in fact due to the fact that I don't properly understand it, or my instructor did not understand it and therefor could not teach it to me poperly, the bottom line remains that if it doesn't work for me, for whatever reason, it is no good for me. Unless I can figure out a way to make it work, it is useless FOR ME. But this can be different from the next guy who might have no problem getting it to work. Good for him, he can keep it.

Other reasons might make a technique unworkable for me, even if I fully understand it properly. Maybe my body type, size, old injuries, temperament, and interests could all have an affect on my inability to use a technique. Once again, perfectly good technique, but doesn't work for me so it's no good FOR ME.

One might argue that the system should remain whole, to be passed on in tact to the next generation, even if you yourself cannot utilize everything. I do see validity in that idea. However, how well would I be able to teach a technique that I myself cannot use? Something to think about.

Now from my perspective, and I have commented on this in other threads so I apologize to those who have already read my thoughts on this, I come from the Tracy lineage, and we have a truckload of techniques, far more than the EPAK people. In my opinion, this is very cumbersome, there are far too many, and many of them don't work not because I don't understand them, but because they are truly bad ideas. Even if all the techniques were sound in principle and useable, there are simply too many to practice them all to a useable level. You end up spreading yourself too thin an nothing is any good. Time to pull out the machete and start hacking out the dead wood.

Keep in mind that Kenpo is somewhat unique compared to other arts. This notion of Self Defense Techniques, consisting of a set series of moves designed to defend against a set attack, is an approach to learning that many arts either do in a much more reduced fashion, or not at all. Many other arts teach the basics, meaning stances, striking techniques, blocking techniques, footwork, Kata or forms, and useage drills, and develop more spontaneous responses based on that, rather than by having a list of "Attacking Mace" and "Lone Kimono" type SD techniques.

By way of example, I asked a friend who had earned his blackbelt in Tae Kwon Do about 25 or 30 years ago, how many of these SD type techniques they had up thru first black belt. He told me, about 45 or so. In Tracy's, we have 30 per belt, plus ten at Yellow, for a total of 250 to First Black, plus variations. In my opinion, way way to many.

I have been studying with a kung fu sifu for about 8 years, learning Tibetan White Crane, some Shaolin stuff, and tai chi. He has never taught SD type techniques, but rather shows how the movement from the forms gives ideas on how to fight. I discussed this with him, and his opinion is that having a bunch of SD techniques is a poor way to structure and teach an art. None of his teachers, and he has had several, ever taught him that way.

Just wanted to give a little perspective on how other arts do things.

Personally, I think a balanced combination of the two approaches makes the most sense. A series of SD techniques is a good way to begin to learn applications, and develop useage. The problem is, it can become a crutch and it can be difficult to think beyond those little SD boxes. So I think the number should be kept as small as possible, while still being reasonably thorough. I think then that spontaneous applications should be developed thru use of creative drills, and perhaps studying forms from some of the older traditional systems, either Japanese or Chinese, whatever is available for you to study under a competent teacher.

Just my thoughts. thanks.

Michael

 

[MJS]

Very well said! :asian:

Mike

 

[HKphooey]

I really appreciate all the feedabck. I agree with a lot that was said. I know I do not fully understand every technique, but my goal is to protect myself and teach others to do so. I do not want to make a name for myself, create my own style or organization. Many of my students do not have the luxury or desire to become the next EP, they just want to feel safe and healthy.

Once again, thanks for your positive feedback!

 

[bushidomartialarts]

kenpo isn't about rote memorization. it's about the intelligent application of principals. your willingness and ability to modify techniques to suit the situation is simply evidence of your skill.

 

[Doc]

Looking for opinions/thoughts… (I know that can be dangerous J )

I will start out that this is for open training and self-defense, not specific curriculum material. (When I teach, I teach what is supposed to be taught.)

I have been training in the martial arts for 18+ years (mostly kenpo). I have gone to numerous seminars and have trained with some great martial artists. I have read all GM Parker’s, and in most cases numerous times. In my reading and discussions, I find many kenpo artists stating the same thing “ We are supposed to take what we learn and scientifically adapt it for ourselves and specific situations. For years I tried to go the “strict” EPAK route and found too many individuals stating I was executing a certain strike, block or technique in a different (and incorrect) manner than what was part of the EPAK curriculum. I have also trained in Tracy kenpo and have blended the two, dropped some things form one or the other. I founded great things in both. Yet, when I attend some seminars or read some posts, instructors and students seem to say “that is not the way GM Parker (or any other teacher) said it should be done”. Or “that will never work”.

At this stage in my training, I like to formulate my own ideas, thoughts and variations of techniques. Being 6’7” and 220 lbs (37” legs and monkey arms) has is advantages and disadvantages. I have made the necessary modifications to the techniques so that the material will work for me. I am always open to anyone’s critique of my performance as long as they back it with their reasons and have an open mind to why I may do what I do. I read and utilize each of your posts in my training. I enjoy hearing other martial artists opinions on why/how techniques may work or not work.

So I guess I am confused when I read or hear how GM Parker wanted his instructors and students to “think” outside box and then get told my methods are wrong – with the only reason being, “It is not how GM Parker (or another instructor) said it should be done”.

What are your thoughts?

Your confusion is driven by two diametrically opposed principles of learning the arts. The first is the modern eclectic perspective of kenpo created by Ed Parker Sr. (or perhaps other arts driven by Bruce Lee), which requires degrees of tailoring to be commercially successful. This interpretation has little or no defined physical basics, and is a conceptually driven vehicle. It promotes the ideas that you articulated.

The second is the reality seen in the traditional arts that says you must learn proper physical basics and be taught by a highly skilled and knowledgeable teacher. This requires consistent, corrected, and focused learning not generally available in the ‘motion based’ vehicle. It does not allow variations based on personal preferences until such time you have mastered basic skills, and core principles of execution. Therefore, it is not generally suitable for a commercial business, but in fact does contain the information needed to make the intelligent decisions to begin the true tailoring process promoted in the first.

These are obviously major contradictions. One designed for commercial success, and supply a reasonable level of martial skills but only commensurate with the knowledge, skill, and commitment level of the teacher. The other is designed to take you to higher levels of skill and knowledge, but is initially restrictive in the learning process. The average person does not have the commitment for the second, nor is it especially suitable intellectually for the children that drive the commercial market.

Thus, you like many others are caught in a dichotomy of philosophies. Those reared in the commercial market of the arts are often led to believe the commercial philosophy is the prevailing and best methodology, and in fact commercially, it is and it’s popularity confirms that.

Nevertheless, the personal preferences of tailoring lead to a functional ceiling of skill and knowledge that is born and bred into its teachers. We all laugh at the old Chinese movies where the teacher corrects the smallest of details over, and over again. However this is actually how you must be taught if you wish to have the foundation that will allow you one day to make those tailoring decisions from a perspective of real knowledge and not ‘concepts.’

So tailoring is good and in abundance in the traditional Chinese Arts, and that is where all the different ‘family styles’ come from. However tailoring is an old concept better left to those who know what they are doing after years of proper training under a keen knowledgeable teacher. Parker simply allowed everyone in his commercial arts to do whatever they wanted, as long as they were satisfied with the results. This is pure genius. If you didn’t like the results, you can only blame yourself. He only gave you ‘guidelines.’

Bottom line, you can’t have it both ways. The commercial arts, (especially kenpo), is full of martial scholars who don’t have the knowledge or the skill to back up or even understand what they do yet. However, because of the lack of truly qualified teachers, most have no choice. It is essential under these circumstances to lower expectations of what the vehicle you have chosen is capable of delivering, and ignore the criticism of all but the most qualified of teachers. Even then, ask for ‘physical’ verification of any idea or concepts.

Most will more likely look to other more traditional arts to fill in the holes, however this method too is flawed. “Grafting’ various arts brings it’s positives and negatives. Unfortunately, it takes a knowledgeable teacher again to know the difference.

 

[donald]

HK Phooey(luv the handle by the by),

I thought your post was worthy of a kudos. So, KUDOS...

 

[lenatoi]

"tailoring is an old concept better left to those who know what they are doing after years of proper training under a keen knowledgeable teacher"

How does one know if they have had the proper training neccessary to tailor? Surely every person beleives they are being trained by a keen and knowledgabe teacher. Under the assumtion that everyone beleives thus, no one has the ability to know wether they are eligable to make the decision to tailor.
I hope that one day I will have the knowledge and ability to tailor. I think I have great instructors. I beleive that in time, I will reach that level of proficiency.

 

[Doc]

"tailoring is an old concept better left to those who know what they are doing after years of proper training under a keen knowledgeable teacher"

How does one know if they have had the proper training neccessary to tailor? Surely every person beleives they are being trained by a keen and knowledgabe teacher. Under the assumtion that everyone beleives thus, no one has the ability to know wether they are eligable to make the decision to tailor.
I hope that one day I will have the knowledge and ability to tailor. I think I have great instructors. I beleive that in time, I will reach that level of proficiency.

Hi sweetie. That is one of the great problems since the commercialization of the arts. The layperson doesn't know, and most instructors believe they have actually learned something. People must do what they have to do, but when a real instructor comes along and can show them their deficiencies, they shouldn't get upset because they thought they knew what they were doing and are vested in a belt. Be good.