Locking and Controlling

[Doc]

Originally posted by twinkletoes
Thanks for the reply.

As a followup:

Do you think the Chin Na methodology integrates best with the Sublevel 4 because it already incorporates an understanding of coupling joint manipulation and control with nerves/Pressure points/meridians? I have yet to see a JJ or Aiki based style that has the same....holistic approach to touch manipulation and anatomical cause-effect that Chin Na seems to incorporate. Is that what makes it a "better" match for the parameters you are using, or is it something else?

Best,

~TT

It seems to be the best as far as the foundation Mr. Parker chose. He had a background in manipulation arts and he found the Chinese methodology superior.

But in the old Chinese Arts, everything is intergrated and components are only methods of training. As Jimmy W. Woo said, "it's all the same." But you are correct their methodology is much more holistic above and beyond, "twist this until he hollers" as other arts seem to emphasize. Because it wasn't purely manipulation skills he relied on, removing the "pain reliance" was a stroke of genius that changed the parameters significantly. Part of that came from Ark Wong who said the same thing about pain. In broken English he would say, "It no hurt, it no work." SubLevel Four Kenpo uses those parameters.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by sumdumguy
Yes, but who teaches these parameters as taught by Mr. Parker?

Besides me, I have no idea. There are so many people in kenpo who are not "public" it would be hard to say. I simply suggest I personally don't know of anyone.

And when they are taught, are they taught as derivatives of the kenpo system ...

No, for me they are the system. What I teach is as I have always taught. The only exception is after Mr. Parker passed I could teach more of the information that he previously had said not to.

....or as something that somehow was never taught to anyone but you by Mr. Parker?

Who am I to comment on what other people were taught? I can only speak for myself and my own lessons. I would love to compare notes with anyone who might say they were taught similar material. Perhaps they received elements I didn't. I am always looking to continue my education, and I listen and evaluate everything from everybody. I do remember at in Baltimore being approached by Lee Wedlake who told me Ed Parker had shared some of "ideas" of SubLevel Four with him. He also told me that Ed Parker told him to keep it to himself.

As an interested investigator of this area of kenpo I am genuinely curious?
:asian:

Let me know what you find.