Motion or Commercial Kenpo

OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Ah, classic responses. I behave obnoxiously, you object, therefore you have problems.

My doctorate was finished in 1987 at Brown University, in English. Title of dissertation, "The Order of Failure: Fiction in Modernism and Post-Modernism." Director, Robert Scholes. I'm proud of the work, though I don't think the writing amounted to much, really.

Oh, and my reference to Ed Thompson? That's Edward Palmer Thompson, author of, "Making of the English Working Class." Get on the website at Brown, 1980-1981: if they'll let you into the course rosters, there I am, one of his students. Can you provide similar documentation for your claims?

I invite you, I invite anybody, to check. What'd your guy write his dissertation on? Who directed it? With what accredited program--one granting the PhD--was he associated?

As for the other gibberish, well, talk fast and maybe nobody will notice you've stopped making sense. (See David Byrne) You may very well be a wonderful kenpoist. Assuming that what you're saying is true, you've more experience. than me, that's for sure. So why not just stick to that? You are the truth, the light and the way. Why be slavish?

I believe in the idea of disseminating knowledge: no secrets. I believe in the principle ( and oh yeah: it is "principle," not, "principal," that you should've used when you were attacking Mr. Lear's communication skills) of open knowledge, openly arrived at. The whole aim of your argument--including your avoidance of using your name--is that there are secrets. There ain't. And if you think that all these Big Secrets aren't "there," lying out in the open to be picked up, from Day 1 of studying kenpo...well. Hm. That is not good.
 
OP
A

amk2

Guest
Originally posted by rmcrobertson

Ah, classic responses. I behave obnoxiously, you object, therefore you have problems.

My doctorate was finished in 1987 at Brown University, in English. Title of dissertation, "The Order of Failure: Fiction in Modernism and Post-Modernism." Director, Robert Scholes. I'm proud of the work, though I don't think the writing amounted to much, really.

Oh, and my reference to Ed Thompson? That's Edward Palmer Thompson, author of, "Making of the English Working Class." Get on the website at Brown, 1980-1981: if they'll let you into the course rosters, there I am, one of his students. Can you provide similar documentation for your claims?

I invite you, I invite anybody, to check. What'd your guy write his dissertation on? Who directed it? With what accredited program--one granting the PhD--was he associated?

As for the other gibberish, well, talk fast and maybe nobody will notice you've stopped making sense. (See David Byrne) You may very well be a wonderful kenpoist. Assuming that what you're saying is true, you've more experience. than me, that's for sure. So why not just stick to that? You are the truth, the light and the way. Why be slavish?

I believe in the idea of disseminating knowledge: no secrets. I believe in the principle ( and oh yeah: it is "principle," not, "principal," that you should've used when you were attacking Mr. Lear's communication skills) of open knowledge, openly arrived at. The whole aim of your argument--including your avoidance of using your name--is that there are secrets. There ain't. And if you think that all these Big Secrets aren't "there," lying out in the open to be picked up, from Day 1 of studying kenpo...well. Hm. That is not good.

Like I said, big deal, I don't care about your Doctorate.

and the point about your behavior is that this is the last time that I am going to interact with you.

I leave my name out of it, because my name should not be used as influence, nor should I subject myself to, what you would probably turn into a stalking scenario, as now I must make infurrences into your statements that you are mentally unstable!

It doesn't matter what you post from now on, as I won't even read it, and you can trash talk me all you want, but you really don't know who I am, but the others on the forum seem to think by the private messages I have gotten that I have spoken out of respect, or at least until this point with you, as I don't have any respect for you.
 
OP
P

ProfessorKenpo

Guest
Originally posted by amk2

Like I said, big deal, I don't care about your Doctorate.

and the point about your behavior is that this is the last time that I am going to interact with you.

I leave my name out of it, because my name should not be used as influence, nor should I subject myself to, what you would probably turn into a stalking scenario, as now I must make infurrences into your statements that you are mentally unstable!

It doesn't matter what you post from now on, as I won't even read it, and you can trash talk me all you want, but you really don't know who I am, but the others on the forum seem to think by the private messages I have gotten that I have spoken out of respect, or at least until this point with you, as I don't have any respect for you.

Dude, you should really consider some remedial English classes for one.

Why is it you leave your name out of it, I'm very curious? People like Wes Idol, Billy Lear, Frank Trejo, Mike Pick, Robert Robertson, and myself all have nothing to hide or fear. If you're that sure of yourself, why would you not expose yourself the the scrutiny of live interaction instead of keyboard warrioring for your cause? Does seem a bit silly to keep pounding on the keyboard if you're never willing to back it up with a real name, or just the lack of intestinal fortitude to use it, and you can consider that a personal attack on your character if you choose to do so. I'm no philosopher or DOCTOR, but I can usually judge someones character by their writing and interaction skills via text and vocally. You've attacked our INTELLIGENCE, our methodology, and our art with your comments and I'm kinda tired of seeing the rhetoric, as I'm sure most are. Please go away.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde
 
OP
A

amk2

Guest
Originally posted by WilliamTLear

So Mr. Parker didn't think that his student's were ready for the information that resulted in this student's death, eh?

Originally written in: Ed Parker's Infinite Insight's into KENPO, Volume One, Mental Stimulation.(Chapter One, Page 3, Paragraph 4.)

"It must be emphasized that a human body can only do so much and nothing more. Stories passed down over the centuries have credited Martial Artsists with the ability to perform incredible feats. One should always analyze such stories. Use logic when studying the Martial Arts and refrain from believing hearsay. Several deaths have resulted from believing stories that hold no truth. A former student went to another instructor who bambarded him with mystical trash. He believed what he was told and attempted an experiment which caused his death. This should never have happened. If there is one thing that training in the Martial Arts should teach, it is a clear understanding of one's limitations at various levels of progress."

According to what Mr. Parker wrote he believed the information that caused that student's death was mystical trash. At what point did Mr. Parker believe a practitioner was ready to learn mystical trash? I'm curious.

Mystical Trash uhm......

Mr. Parker talked about Qi a fair amount at one point in his life, here is a quote from Mr. Parker: " Believe me I have seen Qi (or Chi) work, I don't care what you or anyone else say, I have seen it work. I have seen my father go blind because of it, and also healed because of it. " He also went on in the statement to talk about how his father died in related material. I know that you can even buy video tapes of seminars with him talking about this.

Also you are quoting from book 1, in which it is assumed and generally instructed at many American Kenpo schools to read the books in order, in a timed succession with your progress in the arts, or sciences. Just as I had said that they were not ready for the information. I invite you to look at Infinite Insights into Kenpo Vol. 4, Mental and Physical Constituents which was written further along in Mr. Parkers life than book 1. Read all of Chapter 2, but more specifically start on the bottom of page 4.
 
OP
A

amk2

Guest
Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo

Dude, you should really consider some remedial English classes for one.

Why is it you leave your name out of it, I'm very curious? People like Wes Idol, Billy Lear, Frank Trejo, Mike Pick, Robert Robertson, and myself all have nothing to hide or fear. If you're that sure of yourself, why would you not expose yourself the the scrutiny of live interaction instead of keyboard warrioring for your cause? Does seem a bit silly to keep pounding on the keyboard if you're never willing to back it up with a real name, or just the lack of intestinal fortitude to use it, and you can consider that a personal attack on your character if you choose to do so. I'm no philosopher or DOCTOR, but I can usually judge someones character by their writing and interaction skills via text and vocally. You've attacked our INTELLIGENCE, our methodology, and our art with your comments and I'm kinda tired of seeing the rhetoric, as I'm sure most are. Please go away.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

I was going to try and give you more information to conduct the experiement, but if you wish that I be done Mr. O'Brient, then fine. I don't need to post, I thought you had an open mind by your previous post. Now you attack me for a problem that I had with someone else. I never attacked your intelligence.
 
OP
P

ProfessorKenpo

Guest
Originally posted by amk2

I know many people in Amercian Kenpo, and frankly at least 3/4 of them wouldn't be interested in the material that Dr. Chap'el offers, and a lot of them, simply because they wouldn't be able to understand what is going on. The rest, just because they don't want to for what ever reason. Now I didn not imply that anyone on here or in American Kenpo is stupid, so don't imply that. Some people just don't have the patience, or willingness to explore what is going on, and a few probably do lack the intellegance, as I am sure we all know that not all people in American Kenpo understand the concepts and principals involved; correct.

(

This above quote kinda sums it up for me. I'm not sure if you've ever met me, and if you had, I'm sure I'd remember it if you had made any sort of impression on me with your skills, or lack thereof.

Why won't you do a little name dropping and tell us 1)who you are 2) who you originally started in Kenpo with,3) who you ran the school for 4)who you have trained with all these years. It would certainly clear up a few misconceptions we may be having as to your abilities and intellect. If you tell me Steve Spry or Al Farnsworth, you can take your ball and go home now, however, if it's someone much more reputeable than said, please inform us. You seem to pride yourself on your knowledge but refuse to enlighten as to how you aquired it, other than Mr. Chapel (notice the Mr. in lack of empirical evidence of Doctorate Degree from an accredited university, not San Marin). That sort of information would either fan the flame or extinguish it, your choice.

If you're going to post on the experiment, I would still like to hear about it and try it, I'm always game for something like that.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

P.S. the last name is spelled O'Briant, no E. It's on my post with the correct spelling. Should you give us your name I would attmept to spell it correctly if it was clearly visible next to the post.
 
OP
A

amk2

Guest
Sorry for misspelling your name.

I am done posting, you can private message me if you wish.
 
OP
W

WayOfTheKeyboard

Guest
Mr. AMK,

Did you miss my previous question?

Or, is this a case of "squeaky wheels getting the grease?" Do you only answer posts you find offensive?

To repeat my question:

I think your suggestion that people judge for themselves is reasonable.

Can you provide directions to the Martial Science University?

When is the next seminar?

Thanks (again),

Way
 
OP
W

WilliamTLear

Guest
Originally posted by amk2

Mystical Trash uhm......

Mr. Parker talked about Qi a fair amount at one point in his life, here is a quote from Mr. Parker: " Believe me I have seen Qi (or Chi) work, I don't care what you or anyone else say, I have seen it work. I have seen my father go blind because of it, and also healed because of it. " He also went on in the statement to talk about how his father died in related material. I know that you can even buy video tapes of seminars with him talking about this.

Also you are quoting from book 1, in which it is assumed and generally instructed at many American Kenpo schools to read the books in order, in a timed succession with your progress in the arts, or sciences. Just as I had said that they were not ready for the information. I invite you to look at Infinite Insights into Kenpo Vol. 4, Mental and Physical Constituents which was written further along in Mr. Parkers life than book 1. Read all of Chapter 2, but more specifically start on the bottom of page 4.

I asked you a specific question and you're pointing me to a chapter in Infintie Insights book 4 about supermemory and superlearning? While interesting, those topics don't constitute an answer to my question. Let me ask you again...

At what point did Mr. Parker believe a practitioner was ready to learn mystical trash? :shrug:
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
One way to respond to all this, I think, is to ask if we can construct a set of rules by which to judge when we're having---ah...how shall I put this...hot air blown at us by a martial artist. After all, there does seem to be a fair amount of fakery in the arts. Perhaps there's even something in us that brings it out--or actually, I suspect, something about the nature and the history of kenpo that encourages bull.

Here're some things I've learned to watch for.

1) Anonymity. Or more exactly, anonymity linked to various kinds of attacks on others. This is exactly the equivalent of leaving your name off your book, or off your research: in the sciences, for example, names are vital tools that a) allow readers to check up on claims about education and results, and b) keep the scientist (who knows that they are accountable) honest.

2) Various forms of evasion whenever direct questions are asked. A good academic at least pretends to welcome questions, since they a) help further your inquiries, b) help get across the point that you know what you're talking about and need not fear beeing quizzed a little.

3) Ad hominem attacks on the moral character, intelligence, education, of anybody who disagrees with you. Especially bad when accompanied by constant claims, generally unsubstantiated, that everybody else is attacking your moral character unfairly when they object to being slanged.

4) Long, tangled, pseudo-scientific and pseudo-logical sentence structures. It is difficult enough to write clearly, and to interpret fairly. Writing in ways that make the inherent ambiguity of language worse is a bad sign, and probably worst of all when it is coupled with incessant attacks on somebody else's writing.

5) Repeated citation of dictionaries/textbooks when the meaning's really fairly clear already, apparently in an effort to give one's statements a veneer of authority. It's reminiscent of hucksters selling crop circle photos and perpetual motion machines--always the fake science.

6) An insistence upon secrets at various levels, most obviously the assertion (sometimes explicit, sometimes implicit) that one was taught something about martial arts that no one else, ever, could figure out on their own.

I think--well, OK, I'd argue--that everybody can pretty much agree that this sorts of stuff and guff ain't good. Why's there so much of it in American kenpo? I have to say, too, that the sad thing is, it's so completely unnecesssary. I certainly suspect that many of the folks I've quarrelled with, or quarrelled about, have a great deal to be proud of: why isn't the truth enough? Why isn't it enough to be a good martial artist, without one form or another of chest-thumping?

By the way, I mean these as serious questions. So fortunately, I'll now shut up on the subject. I hope.
 
OP
M

Michael_Browne

Guest
Wow, this thread is amazing. I just read most of the posts and my head is spinning. Exactly what was the topic to begin with again? I would definitely agree with Clyde and the gang that begin forth coming with ones name when posting is appropriate, not to mention courteous. It always seems that we get off topic rather quickly. Not only here, but on most of the forums and bulletin boards. I really have difficulty figuring that out. So many people get so offended by every thing.

To poorly quote Mr. Parker "feeling is believing". I've only been at Kenpo & Martial Arts for a short 12 years. I've seen some cool stuff & I've seen some cheesy stuff. However, Mr. Parker's statement really holds true with me. I don't automatically disregard anything, but if you are going to make statements you had better be able to beck up your position either with a physical demonstration, or documentation. This holds true in every aspect of life, not just Kenpo.

If you told a prospective employer that you had a Masters Degree from NYU, you would be expected to be to prove that information is correct. Even if it is as simple as your prospective employer making a phone call. If the information isn't verifiable, would you really expect to get the job? Further more, could you blame them for not hiring you?

I'm not a guru, or master, or even a PhD, but if I'm going to put anything up I need to know that what I'm getting in return is the real deal. I'm not big on going on faith.

All the backlash on the boards really gets old. Rather than brooding about who's trying to insult who, back up your post. Provide some evidence that proves your point. Unfortunately, "you had to be there" doesn't usually cut it. If you provide actual proof that what you are saying is true, if someone chooses to disagree or disbelieve, its their tough luck. Beyond that let it go.

Sometimes it feels like the crusades. There are more different stlyes of martial arts in the world than there are religions.


My 2 cents for whatever its worth.

Michael Browne
 

Michael Billings

Senior Master
MTS Alumni
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Messages
3,962
Reaction score
31
Location
Austin, Texas USA-Terra
Gone for the weekend and look what happens!! It took me forever to catch up on the Kenpo threads.

Back to the eternal SL-4 vs "Motion" Kenpo arguement.

Clyde and Robert, your sentiments and obervations, along with Wes Idol's (other threads & forums) are apparent. Unfortuanatly what gets confusing is that the bias you appear to have, is not against SL-4 exactly, but rather the manner in which the presentors alienate others in their arguements. The bias is against the judgmental and condescending manner that arguements are presented. It does not do justice the the proponents of SL-4 or ourselves. I would be angry with anyone who came across as negatively and judgmentally as was done here. I see it on other Kenpo forums all the time .... and it is not about SL-4. The old "Mine is better that yours is."

amk2, I have read and seen demonstrated some of the SL-4 material and liked it, primarily because it worked. It is not the paridigm I choose to work in, but interesting and effective none-the-less. So why the anonymity, why the negativity towards none SL-4 practitioners? I know you say more power to them, but this is definitly in a condesending way. If you have something that works, why hide it? I may not buy all the concepts or precepts inherent in SL-4, but why alienate and be demeaning in your presentation?

Are you going on the addage that there is no such thing as 'Bad Publicity' (note: obviously I think there is)? Or are you challenging people to step outside the box and look at something new? If the latter is the case, you are not succeeding. Are you hoping that some Kenpoist will "Identify with the aggressor" and pursue a relationship with Ron Chapel? If so, the arguments do nothing but put me off. I hope to see some basic shift or change in the tone of the posts, here or on KenpoNet. But that does not happen. Episodic battles between basically the same players. There is no agreement to disagree.

I would love to attend a SL-4 seminar to see what is "different". I also continue to work on my art and focus on contact manipulations, controls, and nerve damage, but within the context of the Kenpo I learned from Mr. Parker, Sigung Steven LaBounty, Sibok Tom Kelly, Brian Duffy, Tommy Burks, Howard Silva, Bryan Hawkins, Bob Liles, John Sepulveda etc. I would really, really not want Frank Trejo mad at me. The man is intense in his Kenpo and devestating in his application.

Anyhow, I ramble too long.

Peace (really!!!!!),
-Michael
UKS-Texas
 

Brother John

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
2,530
Reaction score
59
Location
Wichita Kansas, USA
Thanks for being respectful in return.

You said:
You I believe are missing the premise on Sub-Level-4, as in Sub Level 4 you are always doing "Control Manipulation", and really removing the ability for one to change the situation to grappling, or some other attack. I will address this further in the post as well.

Are you saying that the use of control manipulation removes the attackers ability to alter/change or otherwise deviate from the initial attack? I do not believe that this is possible. I dont believe that any amount of proper angle and alignment gives us the ability to TRULY control the attacker with 100% accuracy. Not even 70%. That kind of control is an illusion. That, I believe, is why SGM Parker emphasized time and again the skill of adaptation through tailoring, rearrangement, formulation, graftingetc. I know you arent saying that these are bad, but I think you are stating that these are being removed (in SL4) in favor of other things that provide for more control (control manipulation). I dont think that more control is possible, but adaptation is paramount. There are thousands of variables in any given combat situation, to get stuck in ONE mode of thought or action is to severely limit the number of options severely.

You said:
You are referencing Dr. Chap'el and how he will tell you that different people will react differently to nerve strikes. That statement is in a given set of peramiters, as some people don't react from the pain, but in Sub Level 4, you are not dealing with pain compliance to make your techniques work. You are dealing with neurological reactions, and anatomical body movements that would fall into Kinesiology (being the study of muscles and movement, not the other variations that use the name). Yes their are nerve strikes in some other American Kenpo Schools, but unless they have persued the knowledge, the full capabilities of those nerve strikes are not being met.

The different reaction from different nerves in different people (wordy? Yes.) isnt dependant upon pain. Neurological reactions vary from person to person, especially in regards to intensity. Sometimes a neurological reaction doesnt occur at a particular site at all for a particular person. This would make it a requirement to do something else, yet the techniques in SL4 are set to be done a certain way without deviation.

Also, I gave that statement with no parameters. Its just true. Nerve activations are reacted to differently by different people for a number of reasons, pain is only one of many.

You said:
As far as me being thrown out of alignment, from missing a strike to a nerve, that won't happen, and the only way that you will understand that is to train with Dr. Chap'el or some of his students, as a don't expect you to just take my word for it. But I will try to explain one small aspect of it. here.

Im sorry to be so very contradictory but that is impossibility. Even SGM Parker couldnt have said that he wouldnt miss a shot. Thats why he talked about changing angle in mid-motion or re-orbiting to a new target to change a miss into a strike. I know that no one can claim to never miss a shot, or that missing a shot wont happen, I dont care who they are. There are way too many variables to any situation. What if the person is wearing a leather jacket over the area that your technique dictates must be struck next? As the techniques cannot deviate, youd be stuck poking leather. Let alone the fact that a certain nerve that you may predict would bend someone down and to the left, might bend them down and to the right shutting down other/next nerve locations. What then?

You said:
1st off the nerve strikes are an advantage, not a necessity. The blocks in Sub Level 4, really fit into Black Dot Focus, as I have not seen any other American Kenpo people apply this principal in the blocks. I would say that most (note that I didn't say all) will adjust the height of their block to the weapon, and focus on blocking that target, which would be White Dot Focus. Dr. Chap'el teaches people to block the zone, and you use a different block to block a different zone, these blocks are done in a specific anatomical way, that makes them very strong, and takes away from the ability to manipulate your extended arm and turn the situation into a grappling scenario.

But if the techniques are to be performed verbatim, and the nerve activations are a set part of the techniques, then they are a necessity.

I do not understand your reference to the black dot concept as applied to SL4 blocking. Not because I dont understand the theory, but because blocking zones is principally the way I was taught to block. I do understand what you are saying, but fail to see how it is specific to SL4 as its a way that I was taught early on in non-SL4 material.

There is NO way to extend the arm and prevent a person from grappling it, no matter the angle or position. If it is there, it can be grabbed. There is no way to prevent a grappling situation. The interchange between grappling and pugilism is fluid and can happen in the blink of an eye especially in a trained fighter. Its another variable to adapt to.

I hope you dont see my disagreement as being rude, because I dont want to be. I just want to present the other side of this coin the view from the side the Mr. Chapel would probably call motion based, which I pose is nothing more than Kenpo based as I disagree with the supposed difference between motion and non-motion or advanced Kenpo and feel that the differences are supposed and not real.
Thanks for hearing me out.

Your Brother
John
 
OP
J

jeffkyle

Guest
Originally posted by Brother John

Thanks for being respectful in return.

You said:
You I believe are missing the premise on Sub-Level-4, as in Sub Level 4 you are always doing "Control Manipulation", and really removing the ability for one to change the situation to grappling, or some other attack. I will address this further in the post as well.

Are you saying that the use of control manipulation removes the attackers ability to alter/change or otherwise deviate from the initial attack? I do not believe that this is possible. I dont believe that any amount of proper angle and alignment gives us the ability to TRULY control the attacker with 100% accuracy. Not even 70%. That kind of control is an illusion. That, I believe, is why SGM Parker emphasized time and again the skill of adaptation through tailoring, rearrangement, formulation, graftingetc. I know you arent saying that these are bad, but I think you are stating that these are being removed (in SL4) in favor of other things that provide for more control (control manipulation). I dont think that more control is possible, but adaptation is paramount. There are thousands of variables in any given combat situation, to get stuck in ONE mode of thought or action is to severely limit the number of options severely.

You said:
You are referencing Dr. Chap'el and how he will tell you that different people will react differently to nerve strikes. That statement is in a given set of peramiters, as some people don't react from the pain, but in Sub Level 4, you are not dealing with pain compliance to make your techniques work. You are dealing with neurological reactions, and anatomical body movements that would fall into Kinesiology (being the study of muscles and movement, not the other variations that use the name). Yes their are nerve strikes in some other American Kenpo Schools, but unless they have persued the knowledge, the full capabilities of those nerve strikes are not being met.

The different reaction from different nerves in different people (wordy? Yes.) isnt dependant upon pain. Neurological reactions vary from person to person, especially in regards to intensity. Sometimes a neurological reaction doesnt occur at a particular site at all for a particular person. This would make it a requirement to do something else, yet the techniques in SL4 are set to be done a certain way without deviation.

Also, I gave that statement with no parameters. Its just true. Nerve activations are reacted to differently by different people for a number of reasons, pain is only one of many.

You said:
As far as me being thrown out of alignment, from missing a strike to a nerve, that won't happen, and the only way that you will understand that is to train with Dr. Chap'el or some of his students, as a don't expect you to just take my word for it. But I will try to explain one small aspect of it. here.

Im sorry to be so very contradictory but that is impossibility. Even SGM Parker couldnt have said that he wouldnt miss a shot. Thats why he talked about changing angle in mid-motion or re-orbiting to a new target to change a miss into a strike. I know that no one can claim to never miss a shot, or that missing a shot wont happen, I dont care who they are. There are way too many variables to any situation. What if the person is wearing a leather jacket over the area that your technique dictates must be struck next? As the techniques cannot deviate, youd be stuck poking leather. Let alone the fact that a certain nerve that you may predict would bend someone down and to the left, might bend them down and to the right shutting down other/next nerve locations. What then?

You said:
1st off the nerve strikes are an advantage, not a necessity. The blocks in Sub Level 4, really fit into Black Dot Focus, as I have not seen any other American Kenpo people apply this principal in the blocks. I would say that most (note that I didn't say all) will adjust the height of their block to the weapon, and focus on blocking that target, which would be White Dot Focus. Dr. Chap'el teaches people to block the zone, and you use a different block to block a different zone, these blocks are done in a specific anatomical way, that makes them very strong, and takes away from the ability to manipulate your extended arm and turn the situation into a grappling scenario.

But if the techniques are to be performed verbatim, and the nerve activations are a set part of the techniques, then they are a necessity.

I do not understand your reference to the black dot concept as applied to SL4 blocking. Not because I dont understand the theory, but because blocking zones is principally the way I was taught to block. I do understand what you are saying, but fail to see how it is specific to SL4 as its a way that I was taught early on in non-SL4 material.

There is NO way to extend the arm and prevent a person from grappling it, no matter the angle or position. If it is there, it can be grabbed. There is no way to prevent a grappling situation. The interchange between grappling and pugilism is fluid and can happen in the blink of an eye especially in a trained fighter. Its another variable to adapt to.

I hope you dont see my disagreement as being rude, because I dont want to be. I just want to present the other side of this coin the view from the side the Mr. Chapel would probably call motion based, which I pose is nothing more than Kenpo based as I disagree with the supposed difference between motion and non-motion or advanced Kenpo and feel that the differences are supposed and not real.
Thanks for hearing me out.

Your Brother
John


A very well stated response, John! I couldn't have stated it any better myself.
 
OP
G

GouRonin

Guest
Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
I'm no philosopher

Actually, and people can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that I am the only person on this board with the academic credentials of a university honours degree to qualify as a "Philosopher."

Well...y'all were talking with the big words so I thought I'd jump in.
:rolleyes:
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Michael:

Thank you for your words, which I thought extremely rational and fair.

I do want to take minor issue with one thing: the idea of, "bias," though not because I think you're simply wrong. It's that I suppose in a general sense, it's quite true: science, and skepticism, are "biases." They're loaded towards a materialist understanding (claims must have tangible support that can be independently verified by anyone), a rationalist viewpoint (it's important to doubt claims, and one's own views: see Michael Schirmer, "extraordinary claims require extraordinaary proofs"), a humanist ideology (in principle, the universe and the people in it are knowable). So to that extent, and as I tell my English students, science amounts to a particular sort of game--a bias, if you like. Still, though, I'm not sure that this is a bias in any of the usual senses of the word, since it is--and very differently from biases, blind religious beliefs, unthinking faith, etc,--capable of being disproved.

Despite my occasional stupidity, all I'm really asking for is discussion without personal attacks on anybody, without bluster, without constant invocations of authorities that can't be checked, without fake science.

But again, I basically agree with you. And I'd even agree that theoretically speaking, scientific and academic discussions are themselves biased towards particular rules. But that's the sort of relativism that guys like me get accused of all the time...

Thanks again.
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
On the topic that Jeff Kyle raised, it seems to me that it's inherent in the structure of kenpo at every level--from the idea that beginners are taught the ideal first, to the nature of the checking system, to the idea of zones of sanctuary and angles of deviation that constantly undergo change, to the reason for extensions, to the idea of sequential opportunity ("to the mountains! to the prairies, to the oceans...")--that nothing in kenpo lasts forever or promises invulnerability.

I can certainly say that Clyde's forever whacking me, or some other semi-helpless victim, and pointing out that even the very best move can at least in principle be beat...

Thanks.
 
OP
B

brianhunter

Guest
Originally posted by rmcrobertson

On the topic that Jeff Kyle raised, it seems to me that it's inherent in the structure of kenpo at every level--from the idea that beginners are taught the ideal first, to the nature of the checking system, to the idea of zones of sanctuary and angles of deviation that constantly undergo change, to the reason for extensions, to the idea of sequential opportunity ("to the mountains! to the prairies, to the oceans...")--that nothing in kenpo lasts forever or promises invulnerability.

I can certainly say that Clyde's forever whacking me, or some other semi-helpless victim, and pointing out that even the very best move can at least in principle be beat...

Thanks.

So basically your saying there is no super secret death touch that only Ed Parker taught you that can be used only on the pinky toe of my attacker in sequence starting with the big toe and activating them in order only while quoting the super secret ancient chinese tome of "this little piggie"?? Damn years of training down the drain...thanks alot for suckering me back into kenpo Clyde!!! Guess Ill start working on my itsy bitsy spider rib striking sequence!! it only works if I hit the 5th or 6th intercoastal space of my 6 year old!
 
OP
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Yep.

And did you know that we could all just be riding these little atoms in the toenail of some gigantic being?

Wow.
 

Latest Discussions

Top