Let the Questions Begin.......

[Goldendragon7]

I look forward to this ~Senior~ discussion forum

Dennis Conatser
:ultracool

 

[mj-hi-yah]

Ed Parker used lots of analogies in his teaching, such as in drawing the correlation between playing pool and karate. What is your favorite analogy of Ed Parker's and why?


"When you play pool, what are the basic principles involved? You hit the cue ball, which hits the ball of your choice into the pocket," he says. "You must have proper alignment to do so. But what must you do besides that? Position yourself for your next shot. So you not only hit the ball of your choice into a pocket, you reposition the cue ball so you can hopefully hit the next ball and run the table. So there are two principles: proper alignment and positioning. A third principle is, once you're in a precarious position and you can't hit the ball of your choice the way you'd like, what do you do? You put the ball in an even worse position to make it that much harder for your opponent.
"Does this apply to the martial arts? It does. When a guy punches you, according to the Japanese system, you block and then punch. You draw your non-punching hand back, because according to Newton's law, to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. What does your action (punch) do when it hits the opponent? It causes a reaction. If it causes a reaction, can you be defeated by an unintentional action which stems from the reaction? You can. If I'm punching a guy and he goes off to the side, hits me in the ribcage with his fist and draws his left hand back, I might move my hand upward and take his eye out. I didn't intend to do that, but he, not foreseeing that action, causes his own demise. In kenpo we prepare for such unintended action."

 

[jfarnsworth]

With all of the hub bub of short 4 in the section above
Where did it come from?
Why was it introduced to only certain people?
Why are only certain people teaching it, if any at all?
Are there any historical reasons to learn this form?
Is the form only yet another exercise or does it have value?
Why introduce it and yet not teach it?
This is all I can think of for now. :asian:

 

[Goldendragon7]

mj-hi-yah, who would you like to answer, and I am confused.... is this a question or statement...:idunno:

 

[Goldendragon7]

We ask everyone to please address exactly which of the Seniors listed you wish to hear from.. (please review the rules), but I will go ahead an give my perspective on this one for now.....

Where did Short 4 come from?

Short Form 4 came about through a question to Mr. Parker by a student that was clever enough to realize that there were no Short Forms after Short Form # 3. When asked why, he explained his logic in development but then also exposed what "could be done with it" and proceeded to teach the "option" we now call Short Form 4.

The question also had roots for competition. Many like the 4 but for tournaments felt that it was a bit too long. So Mr. Parker then revealed the "SF4" as an option to use for this purpose.

Why was it introduced to only certain people?

Good things come to those who ask and dig.

Why are only certain people teaching it, if any at all?

As stated.... it is an option, some choose to use it... some don't, still others have no knowledge that it exists.

Are there any historical reasons to learn this form?

This does help to understand the architecture of "Forms Development" and system variables.

Is the form only yet another exercise or does it have value?

All drills are exercises and as such do have some value (after all, you are training Kenpo in some fashion... right?!) But not necessarily a requirement.

Why introduce it and yet not teach it?

It was NOT "officially" introduced into the curriculum as a requirement.... only an option.

This is all I can think of for now.

Well then you better go get your thinkin' cap on ... Mister!:uhyeah:

 

[mj-hi-yah]

mj-hi-yah, who would you like to answer, and I am confused.... is this a question or statement...:idunno:

Sorry to confuse (new forum and a late night post) :lookie: Goldendragon...it was a two part question for any/all of the seniors to answer, but now I see we are to address specific seniors hmmm, I would like to hear from any of you on this, but I will go and read the rules and in the meantime here's the first two part question again:

What is your favorite Ed Parker analogy, and why do you like it?

Now to add to that:

Did he use analogies when teaching all of you, or was that something created specifically for Infinite Insights?

Thanks,

MJ :asian:

 

[mj-hi-yah]

Hey - ya! LOL :rofl: I swear those rules were not here last night! Where'd they come from?:uhohh:


OK I'm still within the rules though so the questions are addressed to all.

MJ :asian:

 

[Goldendragon7]

Sorry to confuse (new forum and a late night post) :lookie: Goldendragon...it was a two part question for any/all of the seniors to answer, but now I see we are to address specific seniors hmmm, I would like to hear from any of you on this, but I will go and read the rules and in the meantime here's the first two part question again:

No problem, it is a new idea and we hopefully will be adding a few new Seniors to the list in the near future. Be patient with us.... we are tweaking as we go...... lol....

What is your favorite Ed Parker analogy, and why do you like it?

Now, that is really a hard one....... there are so many and for different purposes. It all depends on what I am teaching or discussing. These "analogies" are to drive points home in a colorful fashion so as to relate to the individual/s we are teaching. All have (IMHO) benefits to reveal.

Did he use analogies when teaching all of you, or was that something created specifically for Infinite Insights?
Thanks, MJ

Noooooooo they most certainly were NOT created just for the Infinite Insights!! They were an intriguel part of Ed Parker's clever methodology of teaching.

:asian:

 

[mj-hi-yah]

No problem, it is a new idea and we hopefully will be adding a few new Seniors to the list in the near future. Be patient with us.... we are tweaking as we go...... lol....

This is a great idea! Tweak away lol...

Now, that is really a hard one....... there are so many and for different purposes. It all depends on what I am teaching or discussing. These "analogies" are to drive points home in a colorful fashion so as to relate to the individual/s we are teaching. All have (IMHO) benefits to reveal.

It must be a hard one yes hmmm where's my thinking cap? hee hee. How about... is there one you find you use a lot? Also, if it's ok to say so, do you ever remember any that didn't make sense to you?

Noooooooo they most certainly were NOT created just for the Infinite Insights!! They were an intriguel part of Ed Parker's clever methodology of teaching.

That's sort of why I was asking, I wanted to know more about how he related to his early students.

Thanks,

MJ :asian:

 

[Goldendragon7]

Hey - ya! LOL :rofl: I swear those rules were not here last night! Where'd they come from?:uhohh:


OK I'm still within the rules though so the questions are addressed to all.

MJ :asian:

LOL, Yes you are right. They were just tweaked today.

:ultracool

 

[Goldendragon7]

Is there one you find you use a lot?

I use several all the time....... the Q-Ball analogy is good for positioning, the tea kettle is good for breathing power, the story of Lincoln and Sam Brown is good for logic and thinking, the marksman and his wife on conditioning, etc, etc. so many they are all important.

Also, if it's ok to say so, do you ever remember any that didn't make sense to you?

No not really, but some I related to better than others.

I wanted to know more about how he related to his early students.

Well, his thought was to mirror the methods of Jesus...... who spoke in parables and stories. This often times helped to "drive home" a particular point. An example Jesus used when talking to a group of fisherman that he wanted to attract as disciples was..... "I want to make you fisherman of MEN" see he explained to them in terms that they would understand.......
Not only did Ed Parker use this to his early students but throughout his career and in seminars as well.

:asian:

 

[mj-hi-yah]

Excellent Goldendragon...last thought...have you ever made up any of your own?

 

[Goldendragon7]

Goldendragon...last thought...have you ever made up any of your own?

LOL, not that I can remember off hand..... there are too damn many good ones out there already.....LOL I have a hard enought time with all of them.



but you do know what I always say........

You can lead a horse to water...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
But you can't smear cake on his lips.....

:asian:

 

[mj-hi-yah]

LOL, not that I can remember off hand..... there are too damn many good ones out there already.....LOL I have a hard enought time with all of them.



but you do know what I always say........

You can lead a horse to water...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
But you can't smear cake on his lips.....

:asian:

:boing2: Very funny (almost as good as a sneak attack )!!! Thanks for all of your answers, and btw the best part about this forum may just be that there's no looking over your shoulder :uhohh: because there's no riff raff lol!

 

[Goldendragon7]

btw the best part about this forum may just be that there's no looking over your shoulder :uhohh: because there's no riff raff lol!

That's the idea! Straight Q & A

:asian:

 

[Doc]

Ed Parker Sr. used to talk about training being as realistic as possible without losing sight of the primary directive of a self-defense art - that is to prepare you for everyday self-defense possibilities. To that end he always spoke of going "overboard" and drew an analogy between "boxing," and other training methods. He would always say, "Boxing is over-daring and is not about who's the best fighter, but who's the toughest. The one who can take the most punishment is usually the winner because he outlasts the other guy.

Therefore for the average guy, boxing is not a realistic training martial art for self-defense on that fact alone. Boxing training is so rigorous that most boxers are injured in training and not in bouts. "But," he continued, "other arts are not daring enough because they are completely unrealistic." So Kenpo is in the middle. Realistic as it can be without becoming a combat sport, and abandoning anything that could cause permanent injury in the long run while training. If your training inflicts more punishment on your body than what you might receive in a real fight, than just have the fight and forget the training and you'll still be better off than beating yourself up for years in case you MIGHT have a fight one day." Makes sense to me. Uuumm, so much for the knives, sticks, nunchauku, and bo. Maybe people should just admit they like them and stop pretending its about self-defense.

And then there was Dennis with the 50 cents fan and the 5 dollar fan ......... and it turned out the 50 cents fan was better for self-defense training. whowoodathukit.

 

[mj-hi-yah]

Thanks Doc! That is a perfect analogy! It interesting to hear his take on the injuries/training and weapons!

MJ :asian:

 

[Doc]

Thanks Doc! That is a perfect analogy! It interesting to hear his take on the injuries/training and weapons!

MJ :asian:

Let me articulate my take on Ed Parker’s position on weapons. Ed Parker believed in weapons but not how many think. Weapons of all kind fascinated him, but his favorite weapon that dominated his huge collection was the firearm.

I personally acquired many of his guns that included sniper rifles, Uzi machine guns, shotguns, and many different types of revolvers and semi-auto handguns. He literally had guns everywhere in the house. There was a painting that hung over his desk in his home office that featured a functional clock. If you knew the secret latch (as I did), it actually opened into a large safe full of guns.

He also had a huge knife collection of all types as well, beginning his fascination I believe with Gil Hibben’s black belt thesis creation of the “Parker Knife.” He had Bowies, folders, stilettos, and covert blades created for him from his ideas. He had a throwing star that consisted of four blades in a crossed pattern. He had a blade that was hidden inside of a belt buckle so that when you removed your belt you could swing the blade at your attacker and around corners. (He used that one in “The Perfect Weapon.”) He also had an unobtrusive belt buckle that when rotated the correct way, a blade was revealed and could be used independently of the belt. (His son gave that one to me after he passed, and I was blessed to receive it.)

He also had an assortment of crossbows and regular bows with “killer” arrows, pistol crossbows that shot small metal projectiles, blowguns with darts three inches long, slingshots that fired ball bearings, etc. He was indeed fascinated by weapons of all type. Although the firearms were given away by Mrs. Parker, his son maintains most of the other weapons.

But when it came to his kenpo, he had a different philosophy. He believed that if a person were improperly trained, a weapon would only exacerbate already poor training of body mechanics. He would simply be a guy holding a weapon, and wholly dependent physically and psychologically on it.

But students, who were properly trained, would themselves be a weapon. Thus anything they chose to place in their hands would be a weapon. He demonstrated this in “Kill the Golden Goose” by breaking a plate over a guy’s head and then killing him with the sharp edges by slashing his jugulars. “Anything is a weapon,” he said as we watched the film. “It doesn’t matter when you have good body mechanics and know what to do with them.” So how did all these knives, sticks, and stuff end up becoming so popular with Kenpo students of his lineage?

Back in the day, Ed Parker created the International Karate Championships. The first few didn’t have forms competition and were primarily sparring and a host of demonstrations by various masters but were quite successful. The first was held in the Long Beach Auditorium and only later did it move to the Long Beach Arena as the crowds grew.

In the beginning the forms competition was fairly straightforward and dominated by the traditionalist. Later the forms divisions were divided into “hard,” and “soft.” The kenpo students competed in the soft division performing forms like “The Tiger and Crane” that was actually a Hung Gar form that was a part of Ed Parker’s “Chinese Kenpo” era of curriculum. Than “medium” was added for Kenpo and Kajukenbo and finally an actual “kenpo” division was created. Later on when I became executive director, I created and wrote the rules for the “self defense” division specifically with Kenpo in mind.

Anyway when the traditionalist began bringing weapons into their forms, Parker had to create a “weapons” division. When the Kenpo division was created, Kenpo students began asking for “weapons” so they could compete in weapons forms. Up to that point all they had was the one “staff form.” This prompted Parker to create the knife set and later the club set.

Although Parker was actually working on a series of club forms, he never finished them and settled on the simple “Club Set” that was made up of known techniques adapted to a two-handed stick execution, and simply changed it to a form and gave it the designation of “Form Seven” and bumped the “Knife Set” to Form Eight.

So you see Parker gave students what they asked for. Later on he even created a Nunchauku form and wrote a book when its popularity warranted it even though in his home state of California, they became illegal to possess. Parker believed in weapons but not how most perceived it. He kept his students happy and gave them what they wanted. Those that wanted weapons got them but his personal belief was much different. This should not surprise those who ran Kenpo businesses. After all any good businessman always gives his customers what they want. They wanted weapons, he gave them weapons.

 

[Dr. Kenpo]

To Prof. Conatser,

Does the American Kenpo Senior Council work to help those seeking rank/helping them, even though they are not American Kenpo? For example, they left the group that they were with, and now need an umbrella.(Of sorts) This way they can maintain the system they do, so as not to have to relearn a whole new one. At least, an affiliation would be a good thing, would it not?:asian:

 

[Goldendragon7]

To Prof. Conatser,

Does the American Kenpo Senior Council work to help those seeking rank/helping them, even though they are not American Kenpo? For example, they left the group that they were with, and now need an umbrella.(Of sorts) This way they can maintain the system they do, so as not to have to relearn a whole new one. At least, an affiliation would be a good thing, would it not?:asian:

The AKSC at this time has been somewhat dormant of late, but the group is still together. Yes, it is there to aid those that seek greater knowledge on the EPAK System. There has not been a lot of discussions on other "Kenpo" systems due to the fact that most that inquire or show interest want to learn more about Ed Parker's system and are put in touch with someone that can help them to that end, including affiliations or promotions.

:asian: