Parker vs. Tracy Systems?

[jcraigking]

Can anyone tell me the differences between the Parker and Tracy systems?

Please give me real information, not the "******'s system sucks!" commentary.

Thanks!

 

[KenpoEMT]

I think that Tracy's Kenpo revolves around developing muscle memory (the system having more than 600 techniques).
EPAK revolves around exploring the concepts of motion. Each technique is an "idea" used for developing spontaneity.

Which is superior? I don't know. I like EPAK because that is what I've been exposed to. I like to think that both systems have great value.

There are Tracy people here who can expound about their side of the coin.

 

[Flying Crane]

The claim of the Tracys is that they kept everything that they learned from Mr. Parker in the early days (mid 1950s to early 1960s). Later, Mr. Parker began to change and make innovations to kenpo that the Tracys didn't agree with. They chose to not follow Mr. Parkers changes, and instead kept the older system in tact. They refer to their kenpo as "Traditional Kenpo." In making changes, Mr. Parker eliminated some things, added some things, and changed some things.

The formal curriculum of the Tracys consists of 10 Self Defense techniques for Yellow Belt; 30 each for Orange, Purple, Blue, Green, Brown 3-1, and Black 1-4; and 41 for 5th Black. Most of the techniques for 5th black are additional variations on the earlier techniques. Many of these techniques have several variations to them. The formal number of techniques is 381, but the Tracys claim with all the variations it is about 600. In my opinion, many of the techniques are repetitive. Some techniques taught at Brown Belt are very very similar to techniques taught at say, blue belt, but they are given a new name and treated like something different. In my opinion, many of the techniques are unrealistic, but there are also many solid, worthwhile techniques in the system. I do feel that the number of techniques and variations makes for a cumbersome system. It is just way too many to practice, much less be able to truly master.

Many of the kata are the same for both systems. They had already been created by the time the Tracys split, and they kept them. Each system may have some kata and sets that the other doesn't have, however.

I haven't studied EPAK, so I cannot comment on it. I have heard various sources claim that the Tracy's system produces better fighters, but I have also heard people claim the opposite.

They Tracys claim that Mr. Parker eliminated much of the "true kenpo" (whatever that means) from what became EPAK, and that EPAK is no longer really kenpo, compared to the old style. (I'm paraphrasing, so there is probably more to it than that). The Tracys seem more concerned with lineage and tradition, then Mr. Parker was. Mr. Parker was, I think, more concerned with looking for ways to improve the system. Whether or not his changes actually lead to an improved system is something I cannot judge.

If you visit the Tracys website, they list a curriculum that has clearly adopted elements from other Chinese systems. Rather than examining kenpo and looking for ways to improve it, I think they brought in elements of these other systems to perhaps broaden the system, and maybe to plug any holes that they perceived (this is my opinion and suspicion, I might be wrong about their reasons for bringing in this other material).

 

[cloak13]

Well, I'm not the most knowledgable about this topic but have had a workout session with Mr. Zach Atkins down in Lexington KY where we looked at AKKI material and Tracey material in a positive compare and contrast method not a "well my style's best so you should do my style."

First off I'd like to say that I really enjoyed working with Mr. Atkins and crew. I had never really dealt with Tracey Kenpo prior so it was a nice introduction. I found that one big difference in the Tracey material that hit me right away was the linear-ness. It reminded me a little of Shotokan in the use of straight lines and hard stances. Also, a big difference was the way they extended techniques as they progressed through the ranking system. It was like every couple of belts a technique would have a little more added to it. I like that approach because it seems to help internalize the base motion.

Again, as I've said there are better people field this question. These are just some of my observations from working out with a couple of Tracey guys. I'd say send your questions to Mr. Atkins. He usually hangs out around Kenponet. He's a really nice guy and is extremely knowledgable about his system. Also, if you get the chance, pick his brain a little about anatomy...another topic he knows pretty darn well.

Hope this helps,
Tim Kulp
Westminster, MD

 

[jdinca]

Flying Crane had an excellent post but I would guess there's going to be some disagreement.

From my experience at a school that is based in Tracy kenpo but has a number of other styles, including EPAK in it, I would say one of the main differences is the way movement is taught. Both systems are aiming for the same results, the path is somewhat different. The Tracy system uses techniques to teach the core concepts. The Tracy system does have a lot of repetetive variations, which is why we don't do all of them in our system. Even though EPAK was marketed as a business, as well as a MA, I think the Tracy system takes the business aspect a bit farther.

I'm curious to see how the EPAKers view the two systems.

 

[Flying Crane]

Flying Crane had an excellent post but I would guess there's going to be some disagreement.

From my experience at a school that is based in Tracy kenpo but has a number of other styles, including EPAK in it, I would say one of the main differences is the way movement is taught. Both systems are aiming for the same results, the path is somewhat different. The Tracy system uses techniques to teach the core concepts. The Tracy system does have a lot of repetetive variations, which is why we don't do all of them in our system. Even though EPAK was marketed as a business, as well as a MA, I think the Tracy system takes the business aspect a bit farther.

I'm curious to see how the EPAKers view the two systems.

Good points and yes, Tracys are certainly business driven. I think that was a lesson Mr. Parker learned from them, to some degree at least.

 

[evenflow1121]

I studied EPAK all my life but I know of two Tracy schools that were within the area I lived in several years back that produced very good fighters. The styles are somewhat different, and like flyingcrane said there are more techniques in the Tracy system than Parker's but the outcome is the same for both. Neither system is superior to the other, and I think that is one of the greatest misconceptions, Tracy is better or Parker is better none of that is accurate. I ve seen Tracy style students switch over to EPAK and never look back, like I ve seen EPAK students switch over to the Tracy System and never look back. A lot of it has to do with the student, his/her progression and how they grasp concepts of motion, some people like to have a little leeway or freedom to variate, others feel better if they have technique for every possible angles.

 

[Sapper6]

although i'd only studied EPAK for about a year before moving on, and never studied Tracy's, i don't know that i can offer much.

of all the EPAK vs. Tracy's stuff i've ever read, i've most often found that the EPAK people are more respectful toward the Tracy stuff. on the other hand, i see alot of ill feeling coming out of the Tracy camp aimed toward the Parker people. why? because they sought change and improvement? kinda odd. the following link i've posted to a Tracy school proves my point. why do they feel this way?

http://www.tracyskenpokarate.com/Kenpo%20vs.%20American%20Kenpo.htm

there's alot of EPAK bashing in that article. claiming Parker created AK as a religious mormon cult that hated blacks and women.

are these people on drugs?

after reading that article, i don't think i could find myself studying in a Tracy's school, ever. the amount of disrespect toward a dead human being that has no way of defending himself is absurd. it's disrespectful. and all this only after Ed Parker had already died.

it's disgraceful.

 

[jdinca]

although i'd only studied EPAK for about a year before moving on, and never studied Tracy's, i don't know that i can offer much.

of all the EPAK vs. Tracy's stuff i've ever read, i've most often found that the EPAK people are more respectful toward the Tracy stuff. on the other hand, i see alot of ill feeling coming out of the Tracy camp aimed toward the Parker people. why? because they sought change and improvement? kinda odd. the following link i've posted to a Tracy school proves my point. why do they feel this way?

http://www.tracyskenpokarate.com/Kenpo%20vs.%20American%20Kenpo.htm

there's alot of EPAK bashing in that article. claim Parker created AK as a religious mormon cult that hated blacks and women.

are these people on drugs?

Am I right that this was written by Will Tracy? Had he left out the religious/bigot stuff and toned down the obvious rancor, it would have been a much more provocative piece.

There was obviously a huge falling out between Parker and some of his top students, i.e., the Tracy brothers. I hope the members here who trained under Parker and possibly know the other side of the story will weigh in.

 

[Sapper6]

Am I right that this was written by Will Tracy? Had he left out the religious/bigot stuff and toned down the obvious rancor, it would have been a much more provocative piece.

There was obviously a huge falling out between Parker and some of his top students, i.e., the Tracy brothers. I hope the members here who trained under Parker and possibly know the other side of the story will weigh in.

i hope so as well.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

although i'd only studied EPAK for about a year before moving on, and never studied Tracy's, i don't know that i can offer much.

of all the EPAK vs. Tracy's stuff i've ever read, i've most often found that the EPAK people are more respectful toward the Tracy stuff. on the other hand, i see alot of ill feeling coming out of the Tracy camp aimed toward the Parker people. why? because they sought change and improvement? kinda odd. the following link i've posted to a Tracy school proves my point. why do they feel this way?

http://www.tracyskenpokarate.com/Kenpo%20vs.%20American%20Kenpo.htm

there's alot of EPAK bashing in that article. claiming Parker created AK as a religious mormon cult that hated blacks and women.

are these people on drugs?

after reading that article, i don't think i could find myself studying in a Tracy's school, ever. the amount of disrespect toward a dead human being that has no way of defending himself is absurd. it's disrespectful. and all this only after Ed Parker had already died.

it's disgraceful.

Thank you for the link. I think, though, that it would be unfair to hold every Tracy Kenpo stylist responsible for an article written by one person - even a Tracy. The article does have a lot of trash talk in it, which, IMO, is unfortunate. It would have been far better and more respectful simply to have laid down the differences between the two styles and point out why you (Wil Tracy) thought yours was better rather than trash the other.

However, regarding any question as to which is better? The better fighter is better. Both systems produce very good martial artists. Can't the MA community grow up?

For the original poster; in my experience, Tracy Kenpo is more linear than American Kenpo and Tracy Kenpo has more techniques; although whether this is better is a matter of dispute. Pick a good school and don't worry too much whether it is one system or the other.

 

[kenpo0324]

I study Tracy's and I have friends who do EPak,
(IMO) Just Pick a good school and don't worry too much whether it is one system or the other.
As long as you enjoy it, Nothing else matters.
We are all on the same Journey, Just Diffrent Paths.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I couldn't finish the article. They claim Mr. Parker didn't teach Real Kenpo yet ***** when he said the Tracy's were not versed in his style of Kenpo. Isn't that a contradiction?
Sean (Cult Member)

 

[Jonathan Randall]

Thank you for the link. I think, though, that it would be unfair to hold every Tracy Kenpo stylist responsible for an article written by one person - even a Tracy. The article does have a lot of trash talk in it, which, IMO, is unfortunate. It would have been far better and more respectful simply to have laid down the differences between the two styles and point out why you (Wil Tracy) thought yours was better rather than trash the other.

However, regarding any question as to which is better? The better fighter is better. Both systems produce very good martial artists. Can't the MA community grow up?

For the original poster; in my experience, Tracy Kenpo is more linear than American Kenpo and Tracy Kenpo has more techniques; although whether this is better is a matter of dispute. Pick a good school and don't worry too much whether it is one system or the other.

On second thought, I equivocated here. On a second reading it is clear that the article is offensive and totally unecessary. I respect the Tracy style and Tracy practioners, but the sentiments expressed in this article are unworthy of the martial arts. Without SGM Parker and his contributions, most of us would not now be practicing "Karate", Kenpo or anything else.

It is time for Martial Artists to grow up. Why quarrel over which is the "most besterest" style when a 16 year old punk with a handgun would trump an unarmed grandmaster in most situations?

 

[Seabrook]

on the other hand, i see alot of ill feeling coming out of the Tracy camp aimed toward the Parker people. why? because they sought change and improvement? kinda odd.

i don't think i could find myself studying in a Tracy's school, ever. the amount of disrespect toward a dead human being that has no way of defending himself is absurd. it's disrespectful. and all this only after Ed Parker had already died.

it's disgraceful.

I agree 100% brother.


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com

 

[jdinca]

Thank you for the link. I think, though, that it would be unfair to hold every Tracy Kenpo stylist responsible for an article written by one person - even a Tracy. The article does have a lot of trash talk in it, which, IMO, is unfortunate. It would have been far better and more respectful simply to have laid down the differences between the two styles and point out why you (Wil Tracy) thought yours was better rather than trash the other.

However, regarding any question as to which is better? The better fighter is better. Both systems produce very good martial artists. Can't the MA community grow up?

For the original poster; in my experience, Tracy Kenpo is more linear than American Kenpo and Tracy Kenpo has more techniques; although whether this is better is a matter of dispute. Pick a good school and don't worry too much whether it is one system or the other.

I really don't think either one is better, they're just different. The school and the instructor is what matters.

As for the article, it was written in '94, yet it was posted in '05 on this school's website. Personally, I would avoid the school just because of this article.

That said, there are a number of "factual" claims about the early days of kenpo in the article. Bad blood and derogatory comments aside, it would be nice to have the definitive facts, not to determine who's better, who did what, etc., but for the historical perspective.

 

[Flying Crane]

On second thought, I equivocated here. On a second reading it is clear that the article is offensive and totally unecessary. I respect the Tracy style and Tracy practioners, but the sentiments expressed in this article are unworthy of the martial arts. Without SGM Parker and his contributions, most of us would not now be practicing "Karate", Kenpo or anything else.

It is time for Martial Artists to grow up. Why quarrel over which is the "most besterest" style when a 16 year old punk with a handgun would trump an unarmed grandmaster in most situations?

It is very unfortunate the path this article took. There may or may not be some truth in the historical events as stated in the article, but I suspect we will never know for sure. Everyone has their side of the story and few people are still around who were there to witness the events. Nevertheless, even if there is some truth to it, what does it even matter today? Some people get really bogged down in what happened years or decades or centuries ago. While those events may have shaped what we do now, at the same time they are now irrelevant. Unless you were personally present and personally insulted or wronged by what happened in the 1950s and 1960s, why would you care one way or the other? When a student splits from a teacher, it can be an ugly scene and often neither side behaves in a clear-headed and reasonable manner. There were probably slights delivered on both sides. Lets accept that as history and move forward.

There are many people who practice the Tracy material but have never been directly associated with their organization. There are probably also many people who are involved with their organization who are good martial artists, and good people who don't concern themselves with history or politics. Lets not judge a whole group of people by the number and names of the techniques they practice.

Bok Mei is still a popular style of kung fu, even tho legends say the White Eyebrow Monk was the one who betrayed the Shaolin Temple and caused its burning. That doesn't mean someone who practices Bok Mei today somehow shares guilt for what happened a few centuries ago.

 

[hongkongfooey]

I really don't think either one is better, they're just different. The school and the instructor is what matters.

As for the article, it was written in '94, yet it was posted in '05 on this school's website. Personally, I would avoid the school just because of this article.

That said, there are a number of "factual" claims about the early days of kenpo in the article. Bad blood and derogatory comments aside, it would be nice to have the definitive facts, not to determine who's better, who did what, etc., but for the historical perspective.

The articles were also posted on the main Tracy's site a few years ago.
Apparently, there wasn't enough courage from the Tracy's camp to trash Ed Parker when he was alive.

 

[jdinca]

The articles were also posted on the main Tracy's site a few years ago.
Apparently, there wasn't enough courage from the Tracy's camp to trash Ed Parker when he was alive.

Don't be so sure. It wouldn't surprise me if it went both ways. This however, is a written document that shows an insight into some sort of animosity on one side of the equation.

What bothers me about it the most is it puts Tracy Kenpo in a bad light. It's actually a very good system.

 

[Flying Crane]

Let's be a little bit careful about where we are going with this. Interesting discussion, but we might be drifting a little close to "my style is great and yours sucks", which is exactly what the originator of this thread asked us all to avoid.