technique forms

[kevin kilroe]

When creating the technique forms, what was the reason Mr. Parker chose THOSE PARTICULAR TECHNIQUES to put in the forms? I know each form is for a particular type of attack, but why those techniques? Any thoughts?

Kevin Kilroe

 

[Seabrook]

When creating the technique forms, what was the reason Mr. Parker chose THOSE PARTICULAR TECHNIQUES to put in the forms? I know each form is for a particular type of attack, but why those techniques? Any thoughts?

Kevin Kilroe

Given the themes of the forms, particularly in terms of the nature of the attacks, the list of techniques to be used in each form was dependent upon what the form was trying to show. You are right that not every technique for a grab, punch, kick, or weapon attack was incorporated into the various forms. Could other techniques have been chosen? Sure. But do note that some techniques naturally flow better in terms of footwork, direction, angles, and so forth. If you have ever tried to create a personal Kenpo form with various self-defense techniques (whether right out of the EPAK system or your own techniques), you will know what I mean.

In any case, Short Form 3 and Long Form 3 were designed to show how grab self defense techniques can be incorporated into continuous flowing forms.

Long Form 4 was Ed Parker’s signature form and is the longest of all Kenpo forms. It teaches self-defense techniques for punches (mostly outside of your arm), as well as kick and punch combinations. Long Form 4 gets students to move between the attackers when executing their strikes and is a form of continuous motion.

Long form 5 also teaches techniques for punches but incorporates self-defenses that involve taking one’s opponent to the ground. It is often referred to as the takedown form, the parallel form, and/or the point of origin form.

Long Form 6 involves self-defenses against weapon attacks, specifically the knife, club, and gun. It is known both as the weapons form and the figure eight form.

Long Form 7​

is a form done with two sticks, and the movements replicate self-defense techniques that are done empty-handed earlier on in the American Kenpo belt system. Stepping off the line of attack is a continuous theme throughout the form. It is the 4th Degree Black Belt form.

Long Form 8 also replicates open-handed techniques done at earlier belt ranks but is performed with two knives. It is typically required for promotion to 5th Degree Black Belt.


Good post.


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com
​

 

[michaeledward]

Kenpo forms do not represent a fight. They teach rules and principles, that everything has an opposite and reverse, and gives an example.

Learning to see and understand why the techniques were selected, and placed where they are within the forms, is learning American Kenpo.

One example to consider.

Form 4 - Five Swords & Twirling Hammers

Five Swords does a PUSH PUSH
Twirling Hammers does a PULL PULL
Both techniques do a Neutral-Forward-Neutral stance

​

Looking forward to others' insights.

 

[Michael Billings]

Kenpo forms do not represent a fight. They teach rules and principles, that everything has an opposite and reverse, and gives an example.

Learning to see and understand why the techniques were selected, and placed where they are within the forms, is learning American Kenpo.

One example to consider.

Form 4 - Five Swords & Twirling Hammers

Five Swords does a PUSH PUSH
Twirling Hammers does a PULL PULL
Both techniques do a Neutral-Forward-Neutral stance

​

Looking forward to others' insights.

While your statement is accurate, it is not sufficient. Catagory completion, and principles were the primary focus of the Parker/Palanas lineage, but not other Senior's necessarily. Self-defense application happened to be my instructor's focus, but we continued to go to Huk seminars throughout the 80's, where we ALSO added another layer of sophistication to our forms. That is still not my focus. What it contains, what it teaches, then the synthysis of application within the form and execution of the form may be important, but what about the guys who walk through them without power, without realistic application, but can talk the talk about PULL PULL, PUSH PUSH, and opposites and reverses? I have a problem with a lack of application in forms, a lack of power, of focus, of awareness of multiple opponents, etc, ... but that is my pet peeve.

-Michael

 

[michaeledward]

While your statement is accurate, it is not sufficient. Catagory completion, and principles were the primary focus of the Parker/Palanas lineage, but not other Senior's necessarily. Self-defense application happened to be my instructor's focus, but we continued to go to Huk seminars throughout the 80's, where we ALSO added another layer of sophistication to our forms. That is still not my focus. What it contains, what it teaches, then the synthysis of application within the form and execution of the form may be important, but what about the guys who walk through them without power, without realistic application, but can talk the talk about PULL PULL, PUSH PUSH, and opposites and reverses? I have a problem with a lack of application in forms, a lack of power, of focus, of awareness of multiple opponents, etc, ... but that is my pet peeve.

-Michael

Michael, I'm not sure I can understand what you are describing as 'added' to the forms.

You have 'self defense application' as a term to describe what your instructor focused on, and I can certainly see that in the techniques. And while I haven't examined it, I suppose I could see how the form might be able to teach multiple attacker self-defense concepts.

But then you say, that the 'self defense application' was still not your focus. And then you start using the pronoun 'it' .. "What it contains, what it teaches". Am I missing the anticedent of that pronoun? What is the 'other layer of sophistication' you mention? Is that the anticedent of the pronoun?

And of course, I think the forms should be run with the assumption of attackers on the other side of the techniques, which would require focus and force.

Any how, It seems you are saying that something is missing from my description ... (which may very well be true, either intentionally or unintentionally) ... but I'm not real clear on what you think that missing piece might be. Can you offer any help?

Mike

 

[Rob Broad]

While your statement is accurate, it is not sufficient. Catagory completion, and principles were the primary focus of the Parker/Palanas lineage, but not other Senior's necessarily. Self-defense application happened to be my instructor's focus, but we continued to go to Huk seminars throughout the 80's, where we ALSO added another layer of sophistication to our forms. That is still not my focus. What it contains, what it teaches, then the synthysis of application within the form and execution of the form may be important, but what about the guys who walk through them without power, without realistic application, but can talk the talk about PULL PULL, PUSH PUSH, and opposites and reverses? I have a problem with a lack of application in forms, a lack of power, of focus, of awareness of multiple opponents, etc, ... but that is my pet peeve.

-Michael

Good points.

 

[Seabrook]

While your statement is accurate, it is not sufficient. Catagory completion, and principles were the primary focus of the Parker/Palanas lineage, but not other Senior's necessarily. Self-defense application happened to be my instructor's focus, but we continued to go to Huk seminars throughout the 80's, where we ALSO added another layer of sophistication to our forms. That is still not my focus. What it contains, what it teaches, then the synthysis of application within the form and execution of the form may be important, but what about the guys who walk through them without power, without realistic application, but can talk the talk about PULL PULL, PUSH PUSH, and opposites and reverses? I have a problem with a lack of application in forms, a lack of power, of focus, of awareness of multiple opponents, etc, ... but that is my pet peeve.

-Michael

I hear ya Michael, and agree 100%.


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com

 

[Kenpodoc]

While your statement is accurate, it is not sufficient. Catagory completion, and principles were the primary focus of the Parker/Palanas lineage, but not other Senior's necessarily. Self-defense application happened to be my instructor's focus, but we continued to go to Huk seminars throughout the 80's, where we ALSO added another layer of sophistication to our forms. That is still not my focus. What it contains, what it teaches, then the synthysis of application within the form and execution of the form may be important, but what about the guys who walk through them without power, without realistic application, but can talk the talk about PULL PULL, PUSH PUSH, and opposites and reverses? I have a problem with a lack of application in forms, a lack of power, of focus, of awareness of multiple opponents, etc, ... but that is my pet peeve.

-Michael

Oddly enough I've heard Huk Planas express the same peeve. I believe that he has explained the category completion and opposites and reverses as the WHY in why were these techniques placed in the form and in that particular order. I believe that he still feels the forms should be done with good timing, power, accuracy and speed.

Respectfully,

Jeff

 

[teej]

Mr. Kilroe asked if anyone knew Mr. Parkers reasons for choosing the techniques that he used in the technique forms which start with short form 3.

Mr. Seabrook responded with a good answer as to the themes of the particular forms. However; Mr. Seabrook included forms 7 & 8 in his answer.

Mr. Kilroe, if you are searching specifically for Mr. Parkers reasoning, keep in mind that Mr. Parker did not create forms 7 & 8. Like the staff set, forms 7 & 8 were created by Kenpo students, not Mr. Parker, so you will not find Mr. Parkers reasons within these other forms.

FYI Teej
[great question Mr. Kilroe]

 

[Atlanta-Kenpo]

I beleave that you guys are not truely listening to what Kevin Kilroe is asking so I will try to explain it differently.

In trying to figure out the hows and whys of EPAK and get a grasp on truely understand the entire system you need to look at the forms (1 - 6 specificaly).

I have heard on several different occasions by top level seniors that if you want to really understand the system look at the forms and specificaly look at the techniques that Mr Parker choose for thise forms. Of all the techniques that are in the system why did he choose thise to put into the forms?

What is the importance of those techniques and why put those in instead of some others?

Any ideas?

Any ideas

 

[teej]

Lee Wedlake as well as Huk will tell you that the forms were put together in order of danger or threat levels. You can debate these levels, but that is not the issue. The question was why Mr. Parker used the techniques that he used? He chose the techniques that deal with these threat levels when putting the forms together in the order that he did.

The 3's deal with grab attacks [dead attacks] We then progress to form 4 which deals with punches and kicks. [live attacks] Form 5 is our take down form. The techniques used study various ways to take an opponent down to the ground.

The study of our highest danger or threat level is form 6 which is our weapons defense form. According to Huk, if you mess any of these up, you are dead.

I hope that helps Mr. Kilroe
Yours in Kenpo, Teej

 

[Flying Crane]

Lee Wedlake as well as Huk will tell you that the forms were put together in order of danger or threat levels. You can debate these levels, but that is not the issue. The question was why Mr. Parker used the techniques that he used? He chose the techniques that deal with these threat levels when putting the forms together in the order that he did.

The 3's deal with grab attacks [dead attacks] We then progress to form 4 which deals with punches and kicks. [live attacks] Form 5 is our take down form. The techniques used study various ways to take an opponent down to the ground.

The study of our highest danger or threat level is form 6 which is our weapons defense form. According to Huk, if you mess any of these up, you are dead.

I hope that helps Mr. Kilroe
Yours in Kenpo, Teej

OK, But let's look at Long 4 for example. Like you said, this form contains defenses against punches and kicks. Ok, but there are many defenses against punches and kicks that are not in this form. So why is that? Why specifically these punch and kick defenses, and not others?

 

[THUNDERING MANTIS]

Hello everyone,

I have seen allot of kenpo and had friend and family in the schools. Now there are lot of smarter writers present here, but I think I have something to add (-regardless of weather I know the complete long 7 8th degree blk stick set or not ).

-it's been about 10 over years, and they’re 'lineages'... seems a bit odd topic.
Is the question purely seen as from 'Palana's' views on the matter? i.e. - levels of 'danger' -

As for why techniques are in any form, the simplest explanation is best.
Parker created a brilliant system of martial art with the theory rich from development and objectiveness retains that which makes his system an art.
-Every person who has a name in the system usually has a series of specialty or favored techniques (short sequences) -each having 'extensions' added latter on. Also, individual creativity plays a role.

Look at your crest, mine is colorless. but if the opening techniques is flailing mace or thundering hammers it has a direction it can go- or circumstance leaves me a 'thinker' -not 'dead.' (Sorry if I misread post regarding one being 'dead' if they 'screwed' up the knivesives form).

This is the same business that left weirdo's doing the universal pattern, and 25 or so yr. veterans juniors are going 'I don't see any kenpo there' -what is that (as they judge the performer).

Look at the crest, look at the pieces- what do you like? If you don't have a number of preferred movements for attackers, or can't conceive of a realistic situation where it may happen, - then how does one try to comprehend thinking on their feet?

I hope you don't chew gum at the same time, but there a relative position reference you learn early on. If you've seen the 'universal pattern' it is something of debate and conjecture by Parker thinking. The process is a 2'd (beginning to a 3-d) way to 'perceive' the threat. Shrink it, do whatever - but do.

Only then can one grasp a fundamental concept that is understood in eastern ma's of the 8 trigrams, and responding to each direction thread in turn or by tactical evasion in a progression. If you follow this line of thought the shape of the crest as an ax as the 'executioner' style parker meant it to be when needed is the reward kenpo can give you.

Parker was an individual very misunderstood, he was very objective- deliberate in his actions (well at a time) and did his best work in the form of creating his mind's eye of what we call 'kenpo' in 4 paperback books.

The fixed idea of the deliberate use, and that of 'creative' are two forces that need work in tandem in martial arts to be best. In CMA’s the are: 'ch'ien' and 'k'un' respectively.

K'un -being the attribute of yielding 'reception', and Ch'ien -that of strong 'creative' aspects. If you're inclined to be more 'receptive' to ideas and patterns of attack you can amply use the 'ch'ien' attribute on your own.

It’s not rocket science, it's just kenpo. :whip:

 

[teej]

An interesting perspective. But do you know this to be true of Mr. Parker on a personal basis? Did you personally hear Mr. Parker ever state why he chose what he did?

As Mr. Parker is not longer with us, Mr. Kilroe to find your answer I suggest you research and e-mail some of the seniors of MT. Start with Doc as he was with Mr. Parker the longest. Contact as many seniors as you can. Some of them should have an accurate account of how and why Mr. Parker chose what he did. Otherwisw what you are going to get here for an answer is educated opinions. They may be good, logical opinions, but may not be the answer you are looking for.

Please post your findings. Again, this is an excellent question.

all the best, Teej

Look at your crest, mine is colorless. but if the opening techniques is flailing mace or thundering hammers it has a direction it can go- or circumstance leaves me a 'thinker' -not 'dead.' (Sorry if I misread post regarding one being 'dead' if they 'screwed' up the knivesives form).

The "leave you dead" remark meant this. Form 6 is our AK Kenpo weapon defense form. The techniques used in the form are all for various weapon attacks; knife, club, & gun. The form techniques are all defenses against these attacks. This is the highest threat form study because if you make a mistake when defending against a weapon, you may very well end up dead. Granted a grappling attack, punch or kick attack may leave you dead also, but when a weapon is involved there is a higher threat level. When someone attacks you with a weapon, they are trying to kill you. That is why form 6 is the weapons form and it is last, #6 and not #5 or #4.

 

[THUNDERING MANTIS]

teej,

I could argue 7 over the 6, because sticks can be anything- then making that Parkers last rabbit in the hat. 7 is the form -to make that judgement by -arnis/escrima/kali -if you're worth your weight- you'd know 7 would technically be the most lethal in terms/techs/usage in any medium of hand... and last (not that it's worth arguing) I've said my 'peace'.

***Am in total agreement with what you suggest, contact as many top guys there are.

*Question is, know who they (seniors of the old assoc.) are?

Note -'official' organization's decision that -whomever, had 'the most knowledg' on the board of American Kenpo-
*be promoted to 10th degree GM for kenpo.
-this would be a person to ask, certainly?:idunno:
(hint- state of MD)



-imo the 'best' qualified- was he who didn't make waves:

always a soft spot for dennisartyon:

 

[teej]

I could argue 7 over the 6, because sticks can be anything- then making that Parkers last rabbit in the hat. 7 is the form -to make that judgement by -arnis/escrima/kali -if you're worth your weight- you'd know 7 would technically be the most lethal in terms/techs/usage in any medium of hand... and last (not that it's worth arguing) I've said my 'peace'

.

Very true, but Mr. Parker did not create 7, so it can't figure into Kilroes' question. He wants to know why "Mr. Parker" chose the techniques he did to put in the forms while others [techniqes] are not in the forms. So his answer needs to come from someone that was there when the forms were created. Had Mr. Parker created 7, then I would agree with you, but not for the original question.

Teej

 

[THUNDERING MANTIS]

who did create 7?
Parker played 7 like it was his own ... (this is interesting)

-relatevant somewhat to Kilroes' question - 7 runs on the theme series of progression:
*5 storms,
reversing storms,
repeating storms,
clashing storms,
gathering storm,
flashing storm,
and whirling storm -for 1st half.

 

[Rich_Hale]

My quick, and easy, answer to your question is Mr. Parker did not choose from among his self defense techniques to create the forms, rather he drew from his forms to create the self defense techniques.

To say that our forms were created from techniques would be akin to saying the English alphabet was created from an authors favorite sentences, instead of an authors favorite sentences being created from the English alphabet.

As is true for many of us who have been in the Ed Parker Kenpo system for a long time, I have learned my forms over and over again, from many different instructors. Primarily, Rich Callahan, AC Rainey, Dale Eberwein, Huk Planas, Larry Tatum, and Ed Parker. Each taught the forms a little differently but overall, they all expressed a similar view on the techniques within the forms. That view being: The techniques in the forms are not the same techniques required for the various belt levels, but are instead similar to them.

Now, before anyone points out that "some" of the self defense techniques were around before the forms and not vise versa, I agree, and I will address this in a moment, but first . . .

I offer a friendly challenge to anyone who can show me where Mr. Parker ever referred to his forms as a place to store, catalog, index, or showcase his favorite self defense techniques.

Until then I offer-up Infinite Insights into Kenpo Volume 1, page 44 where Mr. Parker told us: "A form is a number of defensive and offensive basic movements incorporated into a dance-like routine . . . an encyclopedia of movements which can be used in a variety of situations. In short it is a system of indexing basic movements as workable prearranged self defense combinations that may otherwise have been forgotten."

Twice in the above statement Mr. Parker refers to forms as being a series of basic movements. He then refers to them being put into self defense combinations as a method of indexing them and making them easier to remember. He does not refer to the forms as a place to store his favorite, or most effective self defense techniques.

I will agree that many of the form techniques did exist before the forms as stand-alone self defense techniques, but Mr. Parker didn't pick them because they were his favorite techniques, or because they were the most effective techniques. Instead he chose them for the combination of basics, maneuvers, principals, angles, etc. that they contained. He then created the forms as a place to store his alphabet of motion.

The last person to instruct me in Kenpo forms was Mr. Parker, and to my surprise he added very little to my forms, instead he mostly took little things away. I would demonstrate a form and even though he never seemed upset with how I did them, he slowly modified my forms to how he wanted me to do them. Sometimes he would take something away and sometimes he would put a little something in, but mostly (as I said) he took little things away.

Mr. Parker may have taught different things to different people, but he clearly taught me that the forms were a series of basic movements arranged in such a way as to make those movements memorable.

In case you're wondering who taught forms that were the most similar to how Mr. Parker taught them (to me), it would be Huk Planas. Huks teachings are so similar to Mr. Parkers that I can't always remember if I learned something from Huk, or Mr. Parker. I take this to be a good thing.

A typical lesson, or conversation, with Huk, could go like this:
Me: What am I defending against in Protecting Fans?
Huk: That depends.
Me: On what?
Huk: What do you think it depends on?
Me: I don't know, you're the teacher, you tell me.
Huk: As a teacher it's not my job to "tell" you anything. It's your job to figure it out. My job is only to tell you if you have figured it out correctly.

But on a day that Huk, was feeling more generous the conversation may go like this:
Me: What am I defending against in when I'm doing Protecting Fans in Form 4?
Huk: Nothing.
Me: Nothing?
Huk: Nothing.
Me: Okay, so what am I doing when I do Protecting Fans?
Huk: Which Protecting Fans, the self defense technique, or the technique in Form 4, that is similar to self defense technique?
Me: Okay, the self defense technique.
Huk: You're learning how to defend against a left-right punch combination.
Me: And what about the technique in Form 4, that is similar to the self defense technique?
Huk: Well in the first series of movements you're learning how to properly execute an left inward - right outward parry combination.
Me: Against a left-right punch combination . . . right?
Huk: Wrong.
Me: So what am I defending against in the form?
Huk: That depends.
Me: On what?
Huk: What works on the inside of a left can also work on the outside of a right, and vise versa, so you could be defending against either a left-right combination or a right-left combination. That is assuming your imaginary opponent is attacking you with a punching combination instead of a kicking combination, or a punch-kick combination, or maybe a kick-punch combination . . .

A lesson with Larry could be ever worse . . . or better, depending on how you look at it. Larry was also very straight forward with the explanation of self defense techniques, but ask Larry what you're doing in a form and he may ask how many opponents are you defending against, are they empty handed, or do they have weapons, if so how many weapons do they have, in what hands are are the weapons, how tall are your opponents, and how are they dressed . . .

Mr. Parker, on the other hand, is more like to start his answer with: Originally . . .

This may, or may not, shed some light on your question - I hope it does. But if it doesn't, or you don't agree with me, what the heck it's just my opinion anyway, so the only person really I expect to agree with me is . . . me.

 

[Michael Billings]

Rich,

That cracks me up ... I can almost hear it.

-Michael

 

[Ceicei]

A typical lesson, or conversation, with Huk, could go like this:
Me: What am I defending against in Protecting Fans?
Huk: That depends.
Me: On what?
Huk: What do you think it depends on?
Me: I don't know, you're the teacher, you tell me.
Huk: As a teacher it's not my job to "tell" you anything. It's your job to figure it out. My job is only to tell you if you have figured it out correctly.

Sigh....

That's almost identical to the conversations I have with my instructor. I had a similar one recently regarding Long 3 (asking about the attack/defense for the isolations part), and his answer was "You think about it. I do not need to give you the answers. You've been in Kenpo long enough with understanding the concepts and principles. When you've come up with answers to your questions, we can talk more about it."

Doesn't this drive you nuts??? Kenpo is definitely a "hands-on" thinking and analyzing style.

- Ceicei