Tracy Kenpo vs. EPAK
- Thread starter shane23ss
- Start date
Tracy = Generally bigger circles, no active checking, but plenty of positional and passive checks. Biggest thing is that it is generally a technique driven system, with 600+ techniques.
EPAK = Motion or Principle driven system. It is hard to explain this without showing you. I have done both. Seven years in a Tracy derived system and 18 or so in a later SGM Parker system. Smaller circles, more "relaxed" explosive motion (generally), actively learn why you move in a certain way and don't stop at the what you do.
Someone more articulate or with more time should take a stab at this. And yes this horse has been well beaten :deadhorse
-Michael
EPAK = Motion or Principle driven system. It is hard to explain this without showing you. I have done both. Seven years in a Tracy derived system and 18 or so in a later SGM Parker system. Smaller circles, more "relaxed" explosive motion (generally), actively learn why you move in a certain way and don't stop at the what you do.
Someone more articulate or with more time should take a stab at this. And yes this horse has been well beaten :deadhorse
-Michael
Kembudo-Kai Kempoka
Senior Master
Played with some Tracy guys, and come from an older version of kenpo myself (post-Tracy/Parker split, but pre- IKKA EPAK/Motion Kenpo). Have since trained a bit with AK gents, and there are some significantly noticeable differences.
As pointed out earlier, circle size is a huge one. I still have a hard time embracing that whole "rounding off edges..." thing, because I just don't feel like I'm getting the "whack" I want with smaller circles. In support of that, I've seen too many EPAK guys go straight to shorthand without learning the block print first, and hence are unable to be efficient with their smaller circles (read: "can't hit hard"). Even as those words hit the page, though, I know I gotta cover my ****, because I've met many EPAK gentleman who were the exact opposite: teensy-weensy circles that land blows like thunder.
The check-thing is also big. In old kenpo (commercial, at least) there was more of a "more ordnance" mentality. More bullets = better chance of success. Screw controlling the oponent; just point bigger, faster guns in his direction, and start whacking. In the newer schools not reflected in Tracy cirriculum, more emphasis on containing the opponent in a controlled field of possible options until such time as you're done with him. Takes deeper understanding and more attention to detail. Unfortunately, on a recent road trip, I saw that even EPAK guys are drifting into the realm of not controlling the opponent, and just tossing multiple blows in their direction, hoping the reaction times expressed in the control mechanisms happen magically.
Best way to get a comparison is to hang out with an EPAK rep (a good one) for a couple afternoons & weekends, and compare notes. Train in the tecniques, and note how the setups, transitions, and executions differ (compare the levels of thoughtfulness necessary to make each work).
To feel is to believe. The rest is merly academic, which doesn't help. All kenpo is not created equal; explore, learn, and pass it on.
Regards,
Dave
As pointed out earlier, circle size is a huge one. I still have a hard time embracing that whole "rounding off edges..." thing, because I just don't feel like I'm getting the "whack" I want with smaller circles. In support of that, I've seen too many EPAK guys go straight to shorthand without learning the block print first, and hence are unable to be efficient with their smaller circles (read: "can't hit hard"). Even as those words hit the page, though, I know I gotta cover my ****, because I've met many EPAK gentleman who were the exact opposite: teensy-weensy circles that land blows like thunder.
The check-thing is also big. In old kenpo (commercial, at least) there was more of a "more ordnance" mentality. More bullets = better chance of success. Screw controlling the oponent; just point bigger, faster guns in his direction, and start whacking. In the newer schools not reflected in Tracy cirriculum, more emphasis on containing the opponent in a controlled field of possible options until such time as you're done with him. Takes deeper understanding and more attention to detail. Unfortunately, on a recent road trip, I saw that even EPAK guys are drifting into the realm of not controlling the opponent, and just tossing multiple blows in their direction, hoping the reaction times expressed in the control mechanisms happen magically.
Best way to get a comparison is to hang out with an EPAK rep (a good one) for a couple afternoons & weekends, and compare notes. Train in the tecniques, and note how the setups, transitions, and executions differ (compare the levels of thoughtfulness necessary to make each work).
To feel is to believe. The rest is merly academic, which doesn't help. All kenpo is not created equal; explore, learn, and pass it on.
Regards,
Dave
Going from Tracy to Ed Parker's Kenpo Karate was difficult for me. As pointed out, with smaller circles you have less distance to travel on the arc. Since power is a function of mass X velocity, you have less distance in which to generate an equivalent amount of power. This is a subtley lost on many EPAK and Tracy practitioners.
If you are a Tracy model-trained guy, then you don't know how to generate the power in other ways, as noted above. It is not that you cannot, you just have not been taught. Unfortunately the same can be said of much of the EPAK that is marketed today also.
EPAK - which Mr. Parker never used, but was created to distinguish another developmental level Mr. Parker took Kenpo to, also sometimes called Motion or Principle driven Kenpo. It uses many more concepts or principles from physics and kinesiology to generate the power. There is much more of a whipping action with the hips, it takes the stops and starts out, and relaxed explosive power in bursts (rather than as a steamroller going faster & harder as you progress). Musculature is also emphasized, in terms of there being a lot more tension/relaxation, allowing the limbs "weight" to be part of the natural weapon instead of being suspended (in part by our own muscular tension).
This is a poor explanation - something I can show you in 30 seconds of comparative movement is extemely hard to put into words. I am much older than when I started, less muscled, and I would venture that I am probably actually measurably slower than I was 25 years ago when I started. None-the-less, I promise I hit harder now, with much less work involved, and my instructors and students would probably say I am faster now than I was 15 years ago. Remember relaxed muscles are faster than ones under strain.
Sorry for the long winded not so good explanation. I promise you know the difference when you see it. Chinese Kenpo can be a thing of beauty, with devestating power, EPAK can be the same.
BOTH can look just horrible and the practitioner not know it ... basically because "you just don't know, what you don't know."
-Michael
If you are a Tracy model-trained guy, then you don't know how to generate the power in other ways, as noted above. It is not that you cannot, you just have not been taught. Unfortunately the same can be said of much of the EPAK that is marketed today also.
EPAK - which Mr. Parker never used, but was created to distinguish another developmental level Mr. Parker took Kenpo to, also sometimes called Motion or Principle driven Kenpo. It uses many more concepts or principles from physics and kinesiology to generate the power. There is much more of a whipping action with the hips, it takes the stops and starts out, and relaxed explosive power in bursts (rather than as a steamroller going faster & harder as you progress). Musculature is also emphasized, in terms of there being a lot more tension/relaxation, allowing the limbs "weight" to be part of the natural weapon instead of being suspended (in part by our own muscular tension).
This is a poor explanation - something I can show you in 30 seconds of comparative movement is extemely hard to put into words. I am much older than when I started, less muscled, and I would venture that I am probably actually measurably slower than I was 25 years ago when I started. None-the-less, I promise I hit harder now, with much less work involved, and my instructors and students would probably say I am faster now than I was 15 years ago. Remember relaxed muscles are faster than ones under strain.
Sorry for the long winded not so good explanation. I promise you know the difference when you see it. Chinese Kenpo can be a thing of beauty, with devestating power, EPAK can be the same.
BOTH can look just horrible and the practitioner not know it ... basically because "you just don't know, what you don't know."
-Michael
I began in a Tracy's studio, but in a program that was very heavily influenced by Mr.Parker's applications. The owner/head instructor was the catalyst that brought Mr.Parker,Mr.Wedlake, and Mr.Palanzo to the greater Cleveland area. For seminars,testing,and privates back in the mid to late 80's. I was taught to tighten up our delivery paths(i.e.smaller circles)etc.. I have witnessed a shift back to the old ways,(i.e.Lg.circles),of executing techniques. Presumably for (oh,oohh,ooohhh)MORE POWER... I witnessed this phenom at a VERY senior instructor's seminars. I wanted to ask him why the 180*, but not being a anybody. I just kept my mouth shut, and went with the program. Is this a wide spread change up, or does it pretty much depend on the instuctor?
I totally concur with Mr. Billings..
Transitioning from Tracy to EPAK is Un-learning many things for me. Not necessarily Bad habits.. but EPAK (at least in the IKKO curriculum) is very 'Basic oriented', no matter what belt level someone is. Hitting the Neutral bow dead on, not violating Point of origin, ( In Tracy Kenpo, P.O.O. is rather obscure, with the larger scope of broader, circuler movements) etc.
Tracy techniques are just fine, but again.. the shortening of movements, explosiveness of EPAK, utilizing paths of motion, marriage of gravity, the lists go on..
EPAK makes you think
:asian:
~Tess
Transitioning from Tracy to EPAK is Un-learning many things for me. Not necessarily Bad habits.. but EPAK (at least in the IKKO curriculum) is very 'Basic oriented', no matter what belt level someone is. Hitting the Neutral bow dead on, not violating Point of origin, ( In Tracy Kenpo, P.O.O. is rather obscure, with the larger scope of broader, circuler movements) etc.
Tracy techniques are just fine, but again.. the shortening of movements, explosiveness of EPAK, utilizing paths of motion, marriage of gravity, the lists go on..
EPAK makes you think
:asian:
~Tess
W
WhiteTiger
Guest
My experience is somewhat different than those expressed above. There seems to be some confussion between style and method. Every kenpoist stylises their kenpo in their own way. Large Strong people tend to shorten movements and rely on their strength, smaller people must develop technique in order to overcome the stregth disadvantage. I have seen Tracy's practitioners who round off their blocks and strikes and EPAK guys which use a more circular movement than others. Taught properly the the two systems are more alike than not, the differances are primarily centered around the method in which the system is taught rather than the application of self defense. Some would say that EPAK encourages it's practitioners to experiment more and ask "what if"; Tracy's does also but it is somewhat suppressed until Brown Belt levels, the thought being you should not experiment until you have a strong foundation to draw from.
The more important factor is the instructor, can the instructor teach you to make all of the self defense techniques work. Note: I did not say can your instructor make all the techniques work. But can he/she teach you, to do so. Is it explained clearly can they answer the tough questions. In my experience big guys who teach little guys are rarely able to do so.
Just my personal observation....
The more important factor is the instructor, can the instructor teach you to make all of the self defense techniques work. Note: I did not say can your instructor make all the techniques work. But can he/she teach you, to do so. Is it explained clearly can they answer the tough questions. In my experience big guys who teach little guys are rarely able to do so.
Just my personal observation....
Sorry I have to disagree a bit here, but they just are not the same. I never said I could not make the Chinese Kenpo work. It was great and after 7-8 years I was fairly proficient for someone with that little time in the art. It is a different way of moving. Once again (and I hate to sound like Doc), but you just don't know the difference if you have never seen it. I saw someone like Sigung LaBounty, or Gary Swan (a strong part of my lineage) doing an older version of Kenpo, then saw Sibok Tom Kelly, Dennis Conatser, Howard Silva, or Ed Parker doing a more recent version. The gross technique is/was the same ... but the method of execution was like night and day.WhiteTiger said:
That is my personal experience in both versions.
-Michael
Kembudo-Kai Kempoka
Senior Master
Or kept up with advances in technology, and avoided bringing a knife to a laser satellite fight?Fastmover said:
One of the things that's missing in PUBLIC EPAK is the establishment of solid basics, prior to shortening circles & rounding edges. Lotsa guys see the smaller circles of the oldsters, and mimic it without recognition of the process engaged in to reach that point. First we learn to print, then handwrite, then shorthand. The lack of power I see in the EPAK folk that can't hit worth a dang comes from jumping straight to shorthand, because their upline seniors are doing it, ..."so I should do it to". Newbies on this route never develop the muscle memory necesary for effective motion. You gotta have a move, before you can economize it.
Walking your own kenpo journey still starts at a beginning. The newer conceptual/motion kenpo works best for those who start slow, and pay attention to quality and detail. Print first. The guys who jump to shorthand to look quick & snappy, but can't break through wet toilet paper with their hits, are the ones who bring the quality of the ART into question. So, what is the difference between ART, and PRACTICE?
D.
Old Fat Kenpoka
Master Black Belt
EPAK = 1980's = yesterday
Tracy's = 1960's = day before yesterday
Yesterday was a good day. So was the day before yesterday.
Tracy's = 1960's = day before yesterday
Yesterday was a good day. So was the day before yesterday.
K
Karazenpo
Guest
Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
Dr. Dave, you said it all. We do the exact same in our system. As a matter of fact, in reference to the 'can't break through toilet paper' saying, we say, 'their hands are going 100 mph but they're not going anywhere'. I always stress that you learn the big circular movements first for two reasons: 1) it's easier to learn that way 2) you'll be more efficient when you make them smaller, same with short power in linear motion, we teach the full range motion first to develop maximum power in a punch/strike then once the student establishes a pretty good foundation with that, they adapt it to short power. I stress to them that they can't learn short first before developing the full range of motion, otherwise they will fail to generate maximum power. I also stress that in one's lust for speed don't let your hands get ahead of your hips or you lose that important connection at the waist of bringing power from the lower body up into the upper body. This also occurs when the basics aren't fully developed and the student prematurely begins rapid fire techniques. We call this the third eye concept, third eye being the hips. Problem is, as you stated, too many are quick to jump over the basics and as you are well aware of, fighting is all about the basics, black belt is 'mastery' of the basics but there are so called 'masters' out there who have never mastered the #1 priority of the martial arts-BASICS!!! Some are just in too much of a hurry to 'look the look', problem is, 'they can't walk the walk'. Prof. Joe
Kembudo-Kai Kempoka
Senior Master
Ayup. Lets hope tomorrow is also a good day. I worry that the presence of so much degree-by-mail stuff in kenpo is progressively peeing away the integrity of the art, in all its various manifestations. Very few Seniors more interested in quality, than a buck. We should seek, as a consumer public, to reniforce the actions of those representing quality by participating in their presentations of knowledge.Old Fat Kenpoka said:
D.
Kembudo-Kai Kempoka
Senior Master
Excellent point(s). And I can think of many people it would be worse to sound like than Doc. Although abrasive to those without an ear to hear, he'll be the first to tell you that you gotta have wings before you can fly; basics, in strength, are the oft-missing diety of our avocation.Michael Billings said:
Dave
Similar threads
- superdave
- Kenpo / Kempo - General
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
The "Look! Look at my cool workout!" thread
- Latest: Prince_Alarming
