Overkill

[Sigung86]

That could come back to haunt you in court. But understand, no one is suggesting you shouldn't do absolutely everything available to protect you or your loved ones. However if you call yourself a martial artist instead of someone who has taken a quickie self defense course, and you have actually learned something well, than much of what you suggest should not be necessary. When actually training these elongated sequences, they are out of context. Truth is, if you are so inept that your first 4 or 5 offensive move don't work, you're not likely to gain additional ability or skill on the next 5 to 10 after dealing with the failure of the first 5. You've already lost. Too many are playing 'movie fantasy fights' out in their mind, when they should be working on making sure their blocks work.

So, and consequently, the presumption is that techniques are built on the assumption of failure? Fie! Fie! That would be the only reason I could see to have techniques built that last that long. You ought to see some of the schtick I am still "unlearning"!

And just for "S and G"s, the knight in the Monty Python Schtick is very much the fantasy fighter, and a comedy routine to boot.

 

[Seig]

While watching a tape of Mr. Parker, I heard him say that the techniques were the way they were in case something goes wrong. As I tell my students, if you are in a fight, something went wrong. I believe and teach that you do not want to be in a prolonged altercation. If you must use your Kenpo to defend yourself, rely on the good solid basics.

 

[Michael Billings]

While watching a tape of Mr. Parker, I heard him say that the techniques were the way they were in case something goes wrong. As I tell my students, if you are in a fight, something went wrong. I believe and teach that you do not want to be in a prolonged altercation. If you must use your Kenpo to defend yourself, rely on the good solid basics.

Good lesson Mike. I think I will borrow it, or a slight alteration if you don't mind.

-Michael

 

[Seig]

Good lesson Mike. I think I will borrow it, or a slight alteration if you don't mind.

-Michael

Feel free, I'm glad you like it.
M

 

[jazkiljok]

While watching a tape of Mr. Parker, I heard him say that the techniques were the way they were in case something goes wrong. As I tell my students, if you are in a fight, something went wrong. I believe and teach that you do not want to be in a prolonged altercation. If you must use your Kenpo to defend yourself, rely on the good solid basics.

not wanting to start anything up with the man himself... especially since he's not here to explain the thought process behind is comments but--- how does that make any sense? if a technique is a set of prescribed movements to counter and repell an attack-- then one would think the logic behind them is that they go from working well-- to working realllllly well.

in the context of continuosly moving through a technique, the suggestion that your opponent has not been effected enough to warrant you stopping doesn't seem to take into account that he might have gotten a little pissed at your first two not so effective moves. at this point you are probably in an exchange style fight with him throwing back at you circumventing the prearranged scenario. so logic would dictate that you do not get to pass go or collect your 200 bucks when things go wrong.

which is of course the reason behind solid basics.

overskilled would be to me as Doc posits-- that i don't have to break your face against pavement cause my "over"skills have ended this encounter on a more efficient, less messy note.

 

[Ginsu]

Jaz,
I believe the point here is "What if"? You can have a great technique and it can go from working well to working great. Even along the lines of what Seig and Mr. Billings were saying about simply having more options as you learn more.

Which I believe is what you are saying and to that point you never know the answer to "What if". So you train to have the chance to answer that quesiton in an effective manner if it should ever arise in an encounter.

My thoughts anyway.

Ginsu

 

[HKphooey]

The best analogy I can give is the difference between a revolver handgun and an automatic rifle. Sure you can inflict damage with one accurate/targeted shot from a .45 Magnum, but when caught off guard you have a better chance of hitting a target with the automatic rifle.

Condition your mind to all the possibilities and you will train yourself not to hesitate when the attacker counters or an initial block or strike misses its intended target.

 

[jazkiljok]

The best analogy I can give is the difference between a revolver handgun and an automatic rifle. Sure you can inflict damage with one accurate/targeted shot from a .45 Magnum, but when caught off guard you have a better chance of hitting a target with the automatic rifle.

Condition your mind to all the possibilities and you will train yourself not to hesitate when the attacker counters or an initial block or strike misses its intended target.

hitting someone 3-4 times is certainly not looking to take a guy out with one shot. it's the 5-15 predicated on the effectiveness of those first 3-4 that is not working in concept for me (if no one else..) we're speaking of course in generalities about the conditioning of the mind and not hesitating when you find your technique countered or ineffective. it's not a state of mind that need be determined by learning to extend an imaginary confrontation-- contrast with other arts for example-- you'll see very few really arguing for one punch one kill-- not even the japanese arts with its embrace of sport full contact believes that much anymore-- yet, none of this attacking some one you've already floored and testicle-mashed is seen in those arts.

the fall down on extension is the logic-- it's not there for me at least- it becomes as Mr. Steve LaBounty once noted "a mini form"-- what, not enough forms already? a couple of dozen more mini ones needed?

not saying you shouldn't learn what you feel is necessary for you to develop your skills- just examing the logic behind it and finding it wanting.

peace.

 

[Touch Of Death]

The word 'overkill' implies unusefull motion. This is relative to personal experience and security. While a severe stare may cease a threat for some, others may have a real fight on their hands. We have a saying... there is always one more person in the fight than you anticipated. In other words the third point of view makes this topic irrelavant.
Sean

 

[HKphooey]

hitting someone 3-4 times is certainly not looking to take a guy out with one shot. it's the 5-15 predicated on the effectiveness of those first 3-4 that is not working in concept for me (if no one else..) we're speaking of course in generalities about the conditioning of the mind and not hesitating when you find your technique countered or ineffective. it's not a state of mind that need be determined by learning to extend an imaginary confrontation-- contrast with other arts for example-- you'll see very few really arguing for one punch one kill-- not even the japanese arts with its embrace of sport full contact believes that much anymore-- yet, none of this attacking some one you've already floored and testicle-mashed is seen in those arts.

the fall down on extension is the logic-- it's not there for me at least- it becomes as Mr. Steve LaBounty once noted "a mini form"-- what, not enough forms already? a couple of dozen more mini ones needed?

not saying you shouldn't learn what you feel is necessary for you to develop your skills- just examing the logic behind it and finding it wanting.

peace.

I think I know where you are coming from... To clarify, I am not supporting the use of 50 strikes in a technique, just saying one benefits by having all those tools in their arsenel. I personally like to get in, get out.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Further more... One mans five Swords can be about six simple strikes but If I utilize my whole body as a weapon, make use of my return motion then Im hiting you about sixteen times with the same basic motion and concievably doing a level of damge that a six shotter may call overkill but is nothing more than a simple indication of their lack of skill... sisies!
Sean

 

[HKphooey]

Further more... One mans five Swords can be about six simple strikes but If I utilize my whole body as a weapon, make use of my return motion then Im hiting you about sixteen times with the same basic motion and concievably doing a level of damge that a six shotter may call overkill but is nothing more than a simple indication of their lack of skill... sisies!
Sean

One of my favorite techniques...

MJS,

That would make a good technique post!

 

[Michael Billings]

I like Five Swords with the extension (short as it is, bringing it up to Seven Swords). But you know when they fall down after the inward block, it is a waste to have learned the rest of it? I don't think so. It may take you two or three shots. How about all of them to put him away. How do you know what drugs he is on? Is he drunk, changes responses to knockout points. Has adrineline made you miss targets in your "pump me up" state?

Numerous extensions lend themselves to being a separate technique, if you find an attacker in a position from which you have never executed a technique.

Just some ideas.

What is USEFUL?
What is NOT USEFUL?
And what is USELESS?

Very little is truely useless. Remember the mind only works when it is open "like a parachute." I would posit that it may be your understanding of the application that may be lacking, if in fact you cannot FIND A USE for the material Mr. Parker taught. And yes, I am part of the Sigung LaBounty lineage also.

-Michael