Three phases of movement

[Michael Billings]

In the spontaineous phase, we do not even graft per se, rather we fill the dead space. It is what I do with Snapping Twig, as the head goes back following the hammerfist, the orbit of my fist may strike the solar plexus or abdomen, bringing them back for the elbow. Inevitably from the handsword or heel palm as some learn it, the head goes back, if you twist or pull they stay there.

-MB

 

[Michael Billings]

... and you can say that with a smile on your icon.

What about their interpretation of Five Swords? Outward downward diagonal handsword is one way Mr. Parker did it. I promise, it check width, depth, and height.

-MB

 

[Michael Billings]

I personally do not use 2 hands on one side, but the time interval is so small for the left one taking over the checking action as I flow to the handsword, as to be quarter-beat or so timing.

The what-if I found against the left, and by the way, their right arm is struck such that you do not provide rotational energy and accelerate the left toward you, is a right outward or upward outward elbow. You may, or may not at that point, continue with Five Swords, or graft into another technique.

Just another perspective.

-MB

 

[Seig]

I have found that if you are a bigger person, such as myself, when you are initially closing the distance (stepping in) and making your blocks, if you are moving with sufficient velocity (in other words, throw your big *** in there) and rebound to the handsword quickly maing sure to snap it back to flow into your eye gouge/heel palm (depending on which you do) then your opponent not only will not have the presence of mind to still fire that left hand, but you have cancelled him in a way that even if he is able to throw it at that point, it will be very weak and off target. Many years ago, when I was working in bars, I tried to use 5 swords and employed this stratagy, I never got to the left hand handsword, the opponent was down. Was it pretty, nope, but it worked. I think that in itself moved it into the ideal phase. He ideally threw a punch and I ideally knocked him out. I think the real point being made by all here is if you learn your bases very well, and tailor them to yourself, what these gentleman are all saying is correct.

 

[jeffkyle]

I can agree with those of you that say being on the inside of the opponent leaves you succeptable to many things, mainly the left hand.

But I do think that there is something that you guys are ignoring about what Billy and Clyde are saying when they talk about cancelling height, width, and depth. I don't know if you have thought about it, but if you could try to understand what they mean, and more importantly how it feels, you may have a better understanding of their point of view and why they are being so definitive in their statements of how they perform the first move.

I think if you move agressively enough in the first move and cancel these dimensions of the opponent, it is less likely that they will be able to use the left hand effectively...if at all.

Just my point of view...not right...not wrong.
:asian:

 

[jeffkyle]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

Why the useless extension? because the base tech didn't get it donh, and they keep fighting.

Or because now you are fired up and you aren't done with them yet...because they are still standing!

 

[jeffkyle]

Originally posted by MisterMike
The techniques were built for the what-if's, long before the extension gets there.

I totally agree with that!

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

We've always been taught(or at least should've been) the three phases of a technique, ideal, what-if, and formulation (if you don't know what that means, please, ask your instructor). At the basic level or should we say primitive and mechanical stages of movement, that's great, but what about at the advanced stages? Hopefully, at this advanced level, you've internalized or engrained the art, the techs, forms, sets, etc. and made them work for you in various situations. I've come to the conclusion that in the spontaneous phase of movement there are only two phases of a technique, Ideal, EVEN-If, and back to ideal. The what if is now formulation and it doesn't matter what you do, a technique, even if reversed, will lead back to an ideal phase when you've learned to recognize the response of your opponent and geared your training to recognize when this is happening. Not only your physical speed is tested, but more so your perceptual speed of the actions happening. The dimension of time now becomes the greatest factor, by allowing you to ARM, Adjust, Regulate, and Monitor a technique in it's flow. Just some thoughts bouncing around, what's your take?


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

Clyde argues that kenpo is a mediocre art.

NO, Kenpo is an art based on mediocrity but it is not a mediocre art. Get it right or I'll rub it in hard Wed. LOL


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by dcence
Whoever is throwing that left punch needs to punch faster. Anyone I have ever done it with has a very difficult time being able to make that decision in enough time, especially if they don't know if I am going to follow with the left or not. If they have no idea I am going to throw with the left, then they will get hit with the left.

If you do the double blocks to the one arm, just make sure you don't go chasing the right punch past your centerline. It is so funny to fake that right roundhouse and see how far out people go to chase it. People really want to make contact, but the farther they chase it, the more exposed they are.

I do this sparring. Throw a couple of roundhouse punches really hard with no intention of landing, just to get them conditioned and see what their reaction is. Then fake it and as they are still chasing the right or making sure they will be able to absorb the impact that is never going to happen, come in with the left and hit them where they have already shown me they will be open. (But don't try it on me).

Fatal Deviation comes to mind for some reason, wonder why.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[rmcrobertson]

Ectually, what Clyde is arguing for (and I can cheat: got laughed at for not getting this last night) is simply using the ideal phases of the techniques to fill up the gaps in execution.

So last night, I'm doing Snapping Twig. The dummy quite properly gets bounced back with the left heel palm; to keep within the ideal technique, I go ahead and throw the elbow sandwich, then move into the formal ending...

Clyde's point was that the dummy was out of range--which I knew. But what I did not think of at the time--though in the moment, I had time--was filling in the gap with an "ideal," bit from another technique, then resuming the "ideal," Snapping Twig, once I'd closed up with the dummy...

We'd been running Part. Wings; so, after sticking that left heel palm into the dummy's chest again, on Snap. Twig, I spliced in the left scoop/right kick, right hammer section from parting Twigs, closed the gap, went ahead with the elbow once it made sense, and finished the ending to Snap. Twigs where I'd left off.

Other splices are to be sure possible. But I think Clyde's point boils down to this: why reinvent the wheel? If there's a frame or two or three from other, "ideal," phases of techniques, why bother taking the time to make something, "new," up?

Implications: 1) what does, "spontaneous," really mean in kenpo? 2) just to salt old wounds, is there an "outside," kenpo?

 

[rmcrobertson]

First off and speaking as a critic--it's a long way from what Clyde wrote to, "it's my way, or you're wrong."

Second off, as a theoretican--there are wrong ways to do things, MJS. If memory serves, you've spent a good deal of time on MartialTalk telling me and others that we're training wrong, that we're trapped in useless tradition, that kenpo is wrong not to have more-explicit grappling, yes? Are you now recanting, and arguing that all that was just a different way to see things, no better or worse than any other way?

And apropos of 5 Swords--uh...um...you might want to spend some time with that technique. In its ideal phase. Why the blocks/the knee check? because the opponent is attenting to hit you in the heads with a right roundhouse punch, and so you want to check their body as well as block that punch.

You are omitting the purpose of the particular strikes, which is to forestall action as much as it is to strike.

Why the right hand-sword? Because (again, I am speaking of the ideal phase here) the opponent is attempting to swing with their free left hand, so you need immediately to check their width and therefore that punch. Why the following right heel-palm? To reinforce that line, and to add a stronger depth check. Why the upper-cut in the ideal version? Because after the heel-palm, the opponent is trying to drop beneath your hands. Why the step off and hand-sword? To get off their center line, to open up their center line, to check their depth. Why the right hand-sword to the back of their neck? Because they attempted to stand up; you check their height.

Why the useless extension? because the base tech didn't get it donh, and they keep fighting. The left heel-palm stands them up (height and width and depth check); the right hand drops under to check, then goes to the throat; the side-kick stops the further attacks, and starts your escape.

In other words, MisterMike's last post is quite correct. Shoulda typed faster, or been less long-winded.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Oh for cryin' out loud. Just argue the issues, eh, and skip the, "it's getting windy," nonsense, eh? Otherwise, the impression will be created that the issues cannot be argued.

Now, MJS. My point is that when Clyde says, "Nope, that's wrong," him bad to judge. When you say, "Nope, that's wrong," him good to judge. It seems quite possible to me that you both know what you're talking about.

Pete: one reason to use both hands is that elbows bend. Good committed roundhouse, relaxed arm, block only bicep, attacker says,"ow," fist comes around corner, hits face. This is bad. (The reason for not simply checking the "center," is similar: you're creating a pivot point. Look at Snapping Twig, for the results of shoving the center.)

Another reason: so that you don't have to add in an "and," before slipping the hand-sword to the neck.

Another reason: to maintain consistency with other techniques for relative novices--forward with both hands up, 5 Swords; backwards, Delayed Sword.

Another reason: to teach us to, as I read in "Black Belt," as though it were a big discovery," "use both hands."

Another reason: who said you've got to fully block? step in, slip the handsword from bicep to neck, keep the left up as a check.

Another reason: who said you have to block out? Block DOWN on the arm with both hands.

Another reason: to teach the basic checking system, in which the left is the first, most obvious, check. My favorite version of 5 Swords: both hands up to check their right, ball kick to the gut or groin.

Another reason: to introduce the possibility articulated more-completely in Defying the Storm--lock up the arm/shoulder.

Can all this be countered? Sure, you can stay home and never have some slob throw a punch at you. You can arrange to have your brother drop a Steinway Concert Grand on them, when they appear. All you have to do is to read their mind.

But I will tell y'all right now--I'm not bad at this stuff (tho' assuredly not god's gift to kenpo...that'd be Juan Serrano, the best kenpoist you never heard of in the country...ask Clyde, he hadda spar the monster for Juan's fourth test...ever see anybody do full-out spinning butterfly kicks in sparring, spontaneously, land a couple, keep on going? After getting decked by a much bigger opponent?)--I'm not bad at all, I've had the benefit of wonderful teachers, I'm smart as hell, and Clyde ties me in knots all the time with counters to techniques.

So I don't know what to tell ya...

 

[rmcrobertson]

Dear bawb or whoever:

Did you read what the hell I wrote? With the extensive list of reasons?

And Sean--can we please cut it with the silly noms de plume?--if you're reading what I'm writing, the last thing I'm arguing is godlike invincibility.

What I'm arguing is that the techniques are the way they are for reasons. I mean really-with all the stuff posted on these forums about how if we just learn grappling...or iron palm...or escrima...or whatever the hell it is, we'll have achieved perfection, you're yelling at ME about my sense of invincibility?

I tend to agree that, "the only thing," we should be thinking about in a fight--targets, and keeping the damage to oneself down. OK, fine. But while I completely reject the idea that kenpo is about fighting except on a very general sense, this just shows me that you and I are on about the same level...there are all sorts of other concerns.

Clyde argues that kenpo is a mediocre art. I agree. What he seems to me is that kenpo is designed for all the times that things are NOT executed perfectly...to give ordinary people a reasonable shot at self-defense.

Again--so how'd you like my analysiss of the reason to use both hands in Five Swords?

 

[Kenpo Yahoo]

The further that one of your weapons moves across your center line the more checked-out you are. Also If you throw both of your weapons to any one side, then you are not only checking yourself out but leaving open a huge area to attack. To me these two reasons are enough to justify the split actions of the left and right hands.

Essentially the argument comes down to one of two things:
1) Do you use both arms to block to one side? Effectively blocking the attack at the cost of delaying any strikes that are to be made while creating a huge open area. By doing so you also run the risk of propeling the left hand towards you, or having your weapons checked if the opponent baits you with a right and smacks you with a left.

2) Using the left outward block and right chop to the neck, which responds to the attack with an immediate strike, and allows for quick manueverability should the left be coming in behind the first punch. It isn't as strong as the two handed block and may get you knicked if you aren't careful how you block.

To me the second choice gives you a far greater list of options in a more maneuverable position than the first choice. Also the longer you wait to hit an opponent, the higher the probability is that they will be out of position before you get in the shot. Remember a majority of fights are won by the guy who lands the first shot.

 

[ArnoldLee]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

Another reason: who said you've got to fully block? step in, slip the handsword from bicep to neck, keep the left up as a check.

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death

Well, I would agree that the hand should be able to shoot the chop to the neck once the hand has reached a point of proper neutrality(kind of like the cat stance) but the reason for the technique is because timing and environment states that you cannot launch back nor did you have time to duck and get on the outside. As in any tech your hand shoulds automaticly attemts to strike or return to proper points of reference(decsision points).
Sean

I agree with and teach what rmcrobertson and TOD explain here. Which is namely not to stop and dwell on the two hands on one arm but to graft the motion of the right arm to the whip to the neck, this takes out the "and". Done with the structure that I believe that Touch o death is referring to this will instantly check ANY motion of the left hand. The stronger the person is throwing the attack the more injury they will incur most likely dropping on the spot.

 

[Kenpomachine]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
But I think Clyde's point boils down to this: why reinvent the wheel? If there's a frame or two or three from other, "ideal," phases of techniques, why bother taking the time to make something, "new," up?

Implications: 1) what does, "spontaneous," really mean in kenpo? 2) just to salt old wounds, is there an "outside," kenpo?

I would have said that in the spontaneous phase one is able to work always in the ideal phase because you are certain of the subsequent moves you can do after hitting somebody a certain way. That is, you go like chess players, "thinking" some moves ahead of the actual one, but in a lesser lapse of time.

Do I make sense?

 

[Kenpomachine]

Why not
3.- Blocking with two hands the punch, and if there's a left punch coming afterwards, transform the handsword to the neck into another block/handsword to the incoming arm.

We did a modification last Saturday with Sergio Contreras, but instead of there being a left punch, there was a second opponent, and it worked just fine

 

[Kenpomachine]

Originally posted by dcence
A good way to determine where you are is have a guy really throw the following without knowing which is coming;
(1) right punch -- straight or roundhouse
(2) left punch -- straight or roundhouose
(3) right/left -- real or fake first punch, straight or round
(4) left/right -- real or fake first punch,straight or round

This is a great drill for spontaneity and is a good indicator of your theoretical vs. real abilities. Lots of people can rip the tehcniques when they know what punch is coming, but stumble all over themselves when you introduce just these few reasonable variables. Perhaps you are really good at it, perhaps not. I don't know. What I do know is that both hands coming up the centerline will give you more options than both hands moving right to left.

But your point about reading body language is good as long as you are a speed reader.

Taking a tennis analogy, reading body language and faking is only good against adversaries who have fast reactions, otherwise they won't be moving the way you want them to
Now, it all boils down to know your adversary and use the appropiate tactic with him.

Yesterday we were working it
1.- Straight punch: right or left
2.- Roundhouse kicks: right or left
3.- Two handed grabs: the ones the attacker wanted.
4.- Etc.
And I can assure you that, at least in my case, in those spontaneous drills I am able to block, but I usually follow with whatever feels right in the moment. And that is seldom a program tech...
And the fakes worked only with nervous people and fast reacting people.

And one last fact. With committed heavy attackers, you sometimes have to commit all you have to block the strike if you're not able to evade it. You can have the luxury to block with one arm if you weight a ton, but no so if you weight only 55 Kg. And yes, you're right in that you'd better not cross the centerline when blocking

 

[Touch Of Death]

I'll chime in here as well. I feel as if Clydes concept fits with the family related moves chart(concept). If you are used to moving from point of origin and are trained in the myriad of techs that can occur from what ever point of origin you find yourself in, you are never stuck. I both agree and disagree with Clyde as far as the ideal goes. For instance there is nothing ideal about five swords. you are on the inside dealing with one hand of an opponent with two hands, and while yes you may end up in that situation and be in need of just that vocabulary, chances are its never gonna happen like in the technique line. The techs are just like basic algebra equations that your math teacher would give you in highschool. The students will plod through them until profficient but once you are in a real working environment, the unknown forces you to think outside the box ,as a rule. Clyde is absolutly right an ideal phase of one tech flows right into the ideal phase of another; however, at some point you need to realize that labling and recalling which tech you are flowing into at any given moment sort of defeats the purpose of being extemparanious.
sean