Training w/Ed Parker pre 70's

M

MartialArtsGuy

Guest
Hi everyone.

I'm looking for any info regarding training with Mr. Parker during and before the 70's

Also. how does it compare to the American Kenpo systems available today? (as outlined in Infinite Insights)

Methods, evolution, quality of students or anything anyone thinks could be informative and/or of interest.

Cmon seniors this one is for you, or anyone with some good info.
 
OP
M

MartialArtsGuy

Guest
Thanks TOD now I know what you can "not" do for me.

Im just bustin ya man:D
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
Originally posted by MartialArtsGuy
Hi everyone.

I'm looking for any info regarding training with Mr. Parker during and before the 70's

Also. how does it compare to the American Kenpo systems available today? (as outlined in Infinite Insights)

Methods, evolution, quality of students or anything anyone thinks could be informative and/or of interest.

Cmon seniors this one is for you, or anyone with some good info.

Good question but be more specific.
 
OP
M

MartialArtsGuy

Guest
Man Doc you're gonna make me think here GRRRRRRRR.

I'd like to know how Ed Paker taught the current Seniors and how it compares to the system he developed for the rest of us. (whats in infinite insights)

I would also like to know how any differences have affected quality in students.

I bring this up because, I think I'm starting to really come online with my training. It's becoming really automatic. I'm prefixing, inserting, suffexing, and rearranging without having to think about it, and it is effective, fast and hard. Very spontanious too. The individual techniques are starting to blur almost. I hope I'm doing a good job explaining this. It's almost like all there really is, is movement. When someone throughs a punch I just move, I'm not worried about what technique comes out. A whole technique rarely ever comes out anyway.

I'm comparing the system that I am learning, which has enabled me to come this far, with how Mr. Parker taught his pupils who had frequent exposure to him. I guess I'm trying to understand how the system teaches what it does.
 

Les

Brown Belt
Joined
May 21, 2002
Messages
418
Reaction score
4
Location
United Kingdom, Europe
Originally posted by MartialArtsGuy
Hi everyone.

I'm looking for any info regarding training with Mr. Parker during and before the 70's

Also. how does it compare to the American Kenpo systems available today? (as outlined in Infinite Insights)

Could I suggest that the Kenpo outlined in Infinite Insights should also be compared to the Kenpo systems available today.

Mr Parker wanted Kenpo to evolve continually, and those books are 16 to 20 years old now.

Les
 
OP
M

MartialArtsGuy

Guest
Great point Les. Maybe that will generate some thought.
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
I'd like to know how Ed Parker taught the current Seniors and how it compares to the system he developed for the rest of us.

You seem to have a knack for asking multiple complex questions as well as making declarative statements. What youre asking is open ended in that you arent very specific. What seniors? Is Frank Trejo a senior? Yes and no. To some yes, to me I was his first referee in an IKC as a white belt. He made black belt at the same time as Larry Tatum in 74. What do you mean current? What is your cut off point for being a senior? What do you mean by the phrase rest of us. Who is us? There were a multitude of questions in what you wrote, all with complex answers covering many decades, so Ill just say this in general. What Ed Parker taught to whom depended on many, many factors. Pick one. There are many stories for all of them and many more variables and combinations. Make you think? Why shouldn't you? You want me to think and give you decent answers , than participate and ask A good specific question.

What arts you previously studied.
What Parker knew.
What Parker wanted you to know.
What Parker didnt want you to know.
What your occupation was.
What time period.
When Parker knew it.
When you actually studied.
When you made black.
Were you already a black belt
Were you paying him.
Were you male or female
Where you lived.
Where he met you
Was he going to see you again.
Was it in a seminar.
Your intelligence level.
Your level of education.
Your level of physicality.
Did Parker like you?
Did he charge you.
Did you work for him.
Did you run a school.
Did you run a school in the I.K.K.A.
Did you have a lot of students.
Did you host seminars.
Did Parker teach you privately.
Did Parker teach you from a white belt.
Did you have students present.
How long you were around.
How old you were.
How young you were.
Had he just finished eating.
 

Dan Anderson

Master of Arts
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
1,846
Reaction score
58
Location
Bridal Veil, Oregon
Geez Doc,

Don't scare the guy off. This line up sounds like a reason for me to come to LA just to sit and chat for a few hours.

Yours,
Dan Anderson
 

cdhall

Master Black Belt
Joined
Mar 17, 2002
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
6
Location
Texas
Originally posted by Dan Anderson
Geez Doc,

Don't scare the guy off. This line up sounds like a reason for me to come to LA just to sit and chat for a few hours.

Yours,
Dan Anderson

Amen to that. It is on my list of things to do as soon as I can manage it. Next Spring will be my first window of opportunity.

I'm off topic but Doc highlights several issues and makes good points. So did Les.
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
Originally posted by Dan Anderson
Geez Doc,

Don't scare the guy off. This line up sounds like a reason for me to come to LA just to sit and chat for a few hours.

Yours,
Dan Anderson
Naw, Ben and I have been e-mailing each other for years. I always put the pressure on him and make him think. That's why we get along so well. It would be really cool if you came to LA but you know you don't need an excuse. By the way, an old friend is sending you something. I'm sworn to secrecy so that's all I can say.
 
OP
M

MartialArtsGuy

Guest
Ok Doc, let's rock baby :D

Seriously though, I see what you mean. I'll rephrase my question like this.

Considering the many variables that impacted how Mr. Parker taught. (the ones you listed). Why did Mr. Parker design the system the way he did as outlined in The Infinite Insights books? I'm sure there were many things he had to take into consideration that went into that design. I'm sure two of them were its ability to be functional yet marketable. What are the others?


"Us" can be defind as the millions of people who want to learn, or are learning "American Kenpo" and who want to benefit from Ed Parker's teachings.

Seniors can be defind as, all the old fat guys who could mop the floor with the rest of us. :eek: no I did not say that out loud, please don't kill me, it was the rum. Kaith you'll protect me right?

Seriously though, I think the best way to define seniors is to list some. You, Joe Palanzo, Larry Tatum, Frank Trejo, Huk Planas, Skip Hancock and too many to list. The people that most kenpoists would consider "seniors" Ok that definition was bad but it will have to do.

He made the system for a reason, I want to understand the method behind the madnessssssss better than I currently do. Hopefully something I leanr will increase my knowlege or skills.

Thanks Doc
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
Originally posted by MartialArtsGuy
Considering the many variables that impacted how Mr. Parker taught. (the ones you listed). Why did Mr. Parker design the system the way he did as outlined in The Infinite Insights books?


Well to speak about the infinite insights is a different story. The "Kenpo System" is NOT in Infinite Insights . The book is a conceptual overview of Martial Ideas that CAN be used in some versions of Kenpo as well as other arts.

It was designed for all martial artist but used the commercial kenpo perspective to present itself for obvious reasons. The vast majority of American kenpo students are from that perspective.

Although the volumes contain a tremendous amount of information, it was presented by Parker as a "gift" to all martial artist to "make them think." There are very few specific applications, and even quite a few abstract contridictions. When you speak "conceptually," of course, sometimes "ideas" can and do clash with each other. It is all about about ideas, much like Bruce Lee's JKD, although Parker was much more detailed. If you want the "system," than I suggest you understand it resides in the intelligent interpretation and credentials of whomever you choose as your teacher.

I was represented in every volume, was there, and that is how Mr. Parker explained it to me.

I'm sure there were many things he had to take into consideration that went into that design. I'm sure two of them were its ability to be functional yet marketable. What are the others?

Functionality was, and still is the responsibility of the teacher and the student in the interpretation. Marketability was why it was conceptual and therefore allowed freedom of expression over more traditional arts. That is what attracted so many to American Kenpo beginning in the seventies.

"Us" can be defind as the millions of people who want to learn, or are learning "American Kenpo" and who want to benefit from Ed Parker's teachings.

What you mean is - Learning the interpretation of whomever is teaching you, which of course covers everyone in Mr. Parker's Lineage.

We must be care ful to not think of, or refer to American kenpo as a single entity that is the same for everyone. It is not even the same for some within the same school. It was not that way when Parker was alive, nor is it like that now. Never has been , never will be.

Think of it as "modes of transportation" and consider how many different methodologies that encompasses. Whenever people get together for an intelligent discussion about "what they drive," you must communiicate "what you drive personally" and not assume everyone else is driving the same vehicle as you, and in the same manner.

Seniors can be defind as, all the old fat guys who could mop the floor with the rest of us.

Hey, I ain't old!!

Seriously though, I think the best way to define seniors is to list some. You, Joe Palanzo, Larry Tatum, Frank Trejo, Huk Planas, Skip Hancock and too many to list.

My point in bringing that up is, none of the names that you used are my seniors. If you direct a question to me personally than you should consider that. My seniors are people like The Great Dave Hebler, and Chuck Sullivan. "Your" seniors are not "my" seniors. Others are seniors in their own right, but those who came later have a completely different perspective of kenpo from those who are "pre-motion."

Great martial artists like Steve LaBounty, or Steve Hearring, Dave German, Danny Inosanto, etc, never learned "motion-kenpo," and seem to be doing quite well.
 
OP
M

MartialArtsGuy

Guest
Doc

"If you want the "system," than I suggest you understand it resides in the intelligent interpretation and credentials of whomever you choose as your teacher."


Could you please list some examples of what an "intelligent interpretation" of the system could be? Maybe examples from techniques?

Also, could you give me your opinion on what you consider good credentials to be?


Another question (kinda related to above) Excluding SL-4 what are the differences between the AK system outlined in Infinite Insights and the one that you teach?

I'm asking about the system you use to teach students principles of motion that are tailorable to themselves. I exclude SL-4 because as I understand, it is not flexible for good reasons, and is reserved for advanced students.

If I misunderstood something about your last post or your training system. I apologize.

Like I said, I'm trying to grasp the "why's" behind the system and I ask you about your system because I'm looking for parallels between the two.

I'm not sure if I'm saying what I'm trying to say but this is mind boggling. I almost feel like I'm fishing in a pond that MIGHT have no fish.

If it helps you to get were I'm coming from, I'll state the following.
I have always seen the system as a conceptual base of ideas. I dont take it literally. With the guidance of my teacher, I see which ideas physically work with me and I strive to develope my own physical interpretation of Kenpo. ok my head hurts I'm done for now.
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
Originally posted by MartialArtsGuy
Doc
"If you want the "system," than I suggest you understand it resides in the intelligent interpretation and credentials of whomever you choose as your teacher."

Could you please list some examples of what an "intelligent interpretation" of the system could be? Maybe examples from techniques? Also, could you give me your opinion on what you consider good credentials to be?

That would be what YOU think not me. What I think only matters if you're my student. I sat with a high ranking well known kenpo teacher in Europe who thougt he saw a kenpoist perform a great Form 5. When he asked my opinion I schrugged my shoulders. I told him I thought it was awful from MY perspective. I also told him when he wanted me to break it down to reality of what does and doesn't work, I'd be more than happy to share what I meant. He took several lessons and discovered almost nothing he did beyond blunt force trauma actually worked as advertised. Now he dislikes me because of what he doesn't know, like it's my fault. Eye of the beholder and to each his own.

Another question (kinda related to above) Excluding SL-4 what are the differences between the AK system outlined in Infinite Insights and the one that you teach?

I teach SubLevel Four kenpo therefore if you exclude it from the conversation, we have none.

I'm asking about the system you use to teach students principles of motion that are tailorable to themselves.

I don't.

I exclude SL-4 because as I understand, it is not flexible for good reasons, and is reserved for advanced students.

Incorrect. SubLevel Four Kenpo is taught from the beginning to beginners. Some have described it as "advanced." For me it's just "kenpo" as I know it. All my students regardless of level have good basics, move well, and are effective with what they do. It is required. No exception, no kids, and no crying. There's no crying in Kenpo! (With respects to Tom Hanks)

If I misunderstood something about your last post or your training system. I apologize. Like I said, I'm trying to grasp the "why's" behind the system and I ask you about your system because I'm looking for parallels between the two.

Lineage, taught by Parker. Most of the techniques, sets, forms, and uniforms. Philosophically different and not based on motion.

I'm not sure if I'm saying what I'm trying to say but this is mind boggling. I almost feel like I'm fishing in a pond that MIGHT have no fish.

You could be right.

If it helps you to get were I'm coming from, I'll state the following.
I have always seen the system as a conceptual base of ideas. I dont take it literally. With the guidance of my teacher, I see which ideas physically work with me and I strive to develope my own physical interpretation of Kenpo. ok my head hurts I'm done for now.

If you are referring to the motion based interpretation of American kenpo alluded to in Infinite Insights, than you understand it better than many, and you are doing just as Ed Parker wanted and encouraged students to do. Good for you.


On another note over on the KenpoBash forum (where I no longer post for several reasons), an individual has stated I have said some things that are blatantly not true. I have NEVER said I was taught "secret" information. I have NEVER said I was the only one that learned what I know. Everything he has stated as what I said were really HIS words, interpreting what he THINKS I mean. Yes I have used the term "motion Kenpo" and the first time I heard it was from Ed Parker. Many seniors did not learn this approach which is relatively new from the seventies. Frank Trejo's original Kenpo Instructor is Mr. Steve Hearring (still in Pasadena), and he doesn't teach moton-Kenpo. Neither does LaBounty, Sullivan, German, Hebler, Ibrao, and a whole bunch of other real (pre-motion) seniors. There is no animosity between me and Labounty, Kelly, Hearring, Hebler, Planas, etc. Others attempt to stir the post for their own reasons.

Others who came later in the motion era are seniors in their own right, but have nothing to do with what I was taught or where I come from or understand what I was taught and teach.

(with the possible exception of Dennis Conatser who is so damn smart, and we talk all the time so he does understands where I'm coming from even though that is not how Parker taught him.)

Funny how Dennis and I have two completely different perspectives on Kenpo, but still have so much mutual respect for each other as kenpoists. I suspect that is mostly because of his intelligence and his grasp of his kenpo knowledge therefore, how could he be threatened by another view, nor I by his.

The individual could have easily e-mailed me personally and expressed his concerns, yet he chose not to. Instead he goes to a public forum with a history of "bashing" and "bashing" me in particular to air "his" complaints about what HE says I said, and I suppose to sollicit support for his blue belt point of view. He didn't even come to this forum whre he knows I post regularly. (Pehaps because they don't put up with this, "Let's see how long we can keep this bash session going" metality.)

My martial arts background is very diverse, and included the traditional Chinese Arts at the time I met Ed Parker in 63.

If others spent as much time perfecting and studying as they do being "insulted" because someone else has a different view, we would all be better off. Those who have trashed SubLevel Four, me, or my statements haven't deterred, changed, or affected anything but their own narrow view - and my students still look good and laugh at the whole thing. I am not going away until the Lord sends for me. Until then I will continue to do what I have always done and keep my promise to my departed best friend.

I'm willing to answer questions and explain my point of view and help others as much as I can. This is what I get for being one of the few really oldtimers who reads AND posts regularly and will respond to most as time permits.

As my Black Belt who runs the basics program "Doc" Murdock would say, "No good deed goes unpunished."
 

Michael Billings

Senior Master
MTS Alumni
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Messages
3,962
Reaction score
31
Location
Austin, Texas USA-Terra
:asian: Doc,

I missed the "bashin", darn. Much as I personally like some of the posters and owner of the site over there, that is why I moved primarily over here.

You knew that would happen with the schism created when you differentiated (and I use this word on purpose) the Kenpo most of us do as "Motion" Kenpo. Although you have gone over it enough times, a "Motion" based system as v. a "Technique" defined system - and how Mr. Parker was responsible for changing the learning paradigm that the vast majority of martial arts used. SL-4, as you and I discussed on line, has never been mainstream, but Mr. Parker did use other language in his exploration of pieces of what you have continued to develop as SL-4.

I have heard you slammed by people, and others say damn, you can "thump." Whether it is SL-4 or Motion Kenpo (which term I do not use) Although I acknowledge your creation or expansion of something other than the 50's and 60's Kenpo (ala Tracy, Traco, Chinese Kenpo, etc.) and the 70's Kenpo (Big Red Book-what you call "Motion") and the evolution of Kenpo of the 80's (new manuals-unpublished, 16 technique charts, and enormous conceptual work) ... it definitly ruffles some feathers when you say "Motion Kenpo" and somehow other's feel threatened. There is nothing to be threatened by. This is your word, and if it upsets them, it is because obviously your opinion somehow matters to them ... or they would let it go, instead of the huge furor I have seen in the past, and you allude to now. Take it as a compliment that you cause "thought", whether they agree with you or not.

Keep on keepin' on & maybe some of it will rub off on us. Then again, feeling is believing and I just cannot get out to LA very often at all these days, and I miss that. There are pieces of what you do that I am sure I would love, there are others I am sure I would hate, but unless you get to Texas, or nearby, it does not look like I will get to evaluate it myself ... which really is the only opinion, in the final analysis that I will take. I have just heard so much contradictory stuff from people I admire and respect.

Once again I find myself thinking "I may not like what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." That is twice this week I have said that, hmmm....? Guess I don't like censorship .... so I guess Moderating is just that - "moderating", not censoring. :idea:

At least this got me thinking.

Oss
 
OP
M

MartialArtsGuy

Guest
Uh thanks Doc

I have my questions answered now, but what did I miss?
What do you mean by kenpobash forum? I did not see any bad posts toward you. You're not leaving martial talk are you. Damn it I value your perspective:) I wont let you go, do you hear me man, i wont let................. anyway.

Are you ok Doc you seem a little ticked. I don't think I said anything wrong.

My opinion on what makes good kenpo revolves around what is effective. Not what looks good or any other superfilous idea of what kenpo "should look like or be". I believe in strong basics in all ranges long before a technique is even taught.
My primary focus is effectiveness when interpreting Kenpo. Testable effectiveness. When I watch someone do kenpo, this mentality is what helps me determine what is good and what is not.

Take care Doc I hope everything is well.



:asian:
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
Originally posted by Michael Billings
:asian: Doc,

I missed the "bashin", darn. Much as I personally like some of the posters and owner of the site over there, that is why I moved primarily over here.

You knew that would happen with the schism created when you differentiated (and I use this word on purpose) the Kenpo most of us do as "Motion" Kenpo. Although you have gone over it enough times, a "Motion" based system as v. a "Technique" defined system - and how Mr. Parker was responsible for changing the learning paradigm that the vast majority of martial arts used. SL-4, as you and I discussed on line, has never been mainstream, but Mr. Parker did use other language in his exploration of pieces of what you have continued to develop as SL-4.

I have heard you slammed by people, and others say damn, you can "thump." Whether it is SL-4 or Motion Kenpo (which term I do not use) Although I acknowledge your creation or expansion of something other than the 50's and 60's Kenpo (ala Tracy, Traco, Chinese Kenpo, etc.) and the 70's Kenpo (Big Red Book-what you call "Motion") and the evolution of Kenpo of the 80's (new manuals-unpublished, 16 technique charts, and enormous conceptual work) ... it definitly ruffles some feathers when you say "Motion Kenpo" and somehow other's feel threatened. There is nothing to be threatened by. This is your word, and if it upsets them, it is because obviously your opinion somehow matters to them ... or they would let it go, instead of the huge furor I have seen in the past, and you allude to now. Take it as a compliment that you cause "thought", whether they agree with you or not.

Keep on keepin' on & maybe some of it will rub off on us. Then again, feeling is believing and I just cannot get out to LA very often at all these days, and I miss that. There are pieces of what you do that I am sure I would love, there are others I am sure I would hate, but unless you get to Texas, or nearby, it does not look like I will get to evaluate it myself ... which really is the only opinion, in the final analysis that I will take. I have just heard so much contradictory stuff from people I admire and respect.

Once again I find myself thinking "I may not like what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." That is twice this week I have said that, hmmm....? Guess I don't like censorship .... so I guess Moderating is just that - "moderating", not censoring. :idea:

At least this got me thinking.

Oss
Thanks much. I really do appreciate it. I just never thought I would live in a world where the phrase "common sense," would end up being an oxymoron. Hell I only use the term when I converse with those who basically come from that perspective. When I talk to someone like Steve Hearring, it doesn't come up because there is no need. Somehow you have to make the differences a part of communications. Oh well, but then all you truly smart guys who really know your stuff, are never threatened by what I have to say anyway. One day we'll get together. I'll make a point of it. Thanks again for humoring an old man. I guess I'm a bit cranky from "thumping" with one of my young brown belts Thursday night who kicked me in the knee. I hate when that happens.

Much respect :asian:
 

Bill Lear

Brown Belt
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
406
Reaction score
10
Location
Upland, California
Originally posted by Doc
Thanks much. I really do appreciate it. I just never thought I would live in a world where the phrase "common sense," would end up being an oxymoron. Hell I only use the term when I converse with those who basically come from that perspective. When I talk to someone like Steve Hearring, it doesn't come up because there is no need. Somehow you have to make the differences a part of communications. Oh well, but then all you truly smart guys who really know your stuff, are never threatened by what I have to say anyway. One day we'll get together. I'll make a point of it. Thanks again for humoring an old man. I guess I'm a bit cranky from "thumping" with one of my young brown belts Thursday night who kicked me in the knee. I hate when that happens.

Much respect :asian:

No more Doc bashing from here... Although, I did send you a private message the other day, and would really like to take you up on your offer to sit and talk sometime. :(

Did you get my message? I'll try and send you an e-mail instead.

I ain't haten' (honest),
Billy :)
 

Doc

Senior Master
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
180
Location
Southern California
Originally posted by MartialArtsGuy
Uh thanks Doc

I have my questions answered now, but what did I miss?
What do you mean by kenpobash forum? I did not see any bad posts toward you. You're not leaving martial talk are you. Damn it I value your perspective:) I wont let you go, do you hear me man, i wont let................. anyway.

Are you ok Doc you seem a little ticked. I don't think I said anything wrong.

My opinion on what makes good kenpo revolves around what is effective. Not what looks good or any other superfilous idea of what kenpo "should look like or be". I believe in strong basics in all ranges long before a technique is even taught.
My primary focus is effectiveness when interpreting Kenpo. Testable effectiveness. When I watch someone do kenpo, this mentality is what helps me determine what is good and what is not.

Take care Doc I hope everything is well.
:asian:
Hey Ben. Naw, you didn't say anything wrong. I do get ticked when people lie about what I have and have not said on other forums. They also let the bashing go on forever but say the slightest thing about some other people and they cut it off and delete all the posts quickly.

Man we all just do Kenpo, but if we don't understand where we are and what we do, and our place in the art, how can we talk? How can we improve or even understand each other?

I stay at MartialTalk because it consistently has intelligent conversation and none of the put downs. Disagreements are a part of discussions and exchanges. Nobody agrees with anybody all the time. That reminds me, I have to call one of my daughters.

Thanks Ben.
 
Top