Weapon Techniques

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
430
Location
Cromwell,CT
A while back, I started this thread. There were a few posts where it was stated that the weapons techniques needed an overhaul. I thought I'd start this thread for the discussion of the club and knife techniques in the Kenpo system.

Looking at the blade/stick techs. that we have, what would you overhaul? What would you add in place of something that was removed?

Mike
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
I don't know enough to comment intelligently on this matter (yet), but that's never stopped me before.

The Kenpo Knife techniques are designed to present the 'Kenpo' ideas, more than they are designed to present 'Knife' ideas. Kenpo is a checking system. How many times do we 'check' the knife in Raining Lance? Over, and over, and over, and over, we check that knife. That is the Kenpo way: check a weapon, counter with other weapons.

Raining Lance is a 'Kenpo' weapon technique.

We've all heard the idea 'control - disarm - technique', but in our Kenpo techniques, we often skip the 'disarm' portion of the equation, don't we?

I think, in Form 6 perhaps (still haven't learned this form), we are presented with a bit clearer instruction on that 'control - disarm - technique' idea. I'm not certain of that, because it is still above my pay grade.

If my understanding of what Form 6 is beginning to teach, the application of weapon fighting doesn't show up to the student until after Form 6. Maybe real weapon fighting is not part of our system, at all. Maybe that's the design. "Then here are my weapons, karate, my empty hands."

I'm patient, for now. Maybe in another five years, I'll begin to figure it out.
 

Blindside

Grandmaster
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2001
Messages
5,175
Reaction score
849
Location
Kennewick, WA
Looking at the blade/stick techs. that we have, what would you overhaul? What would you add in place of something that was removed?

Whats the knife tech where you turn your back on the guy and hit him with a spinning elbow? That sounds like a great idea, just peachy.

I'd like to see techs that address slashing knife attacks, it seems like that category got misplaced somewhere. You have thrusting club attacks but no slashing knives.... that makes sense. I'd also like to see examples versus the "grab and stab" shanking type attacks. Mostly I'd like to remove the assumption of a moronic adversary.

Lamont
 

tellner

Senior Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,379
Reaction score
240
Location
Orygun
Honest opinion? If the knife and counter-knife material are designed to "feel Kenpoey" rather than specifically to help you survive an encounter with an armed assailant throw them all the hell out right away. Teach nothing or send them to people who really understand armed assaults and how to deal with them rather than teaching bad stuff. That sort of thing is way too serious for artistic flourishes, unworkable demonstrations of skill or look and feel at the expense of functionality.

If someone has a knife and doesn't know jack-all about it you are in deadly danger no matter how many black belts you have. Period. If he has some good formal or on-the-job training you wouldn't believe how bad (and probably short) your day is about to become. It's not that much better when you also have a knife. The Indonesians have a saying that "After a knife fight the loser is ashes, but the winner is charcoal." All that goes triple or quadruple for your students. They deserve better than something which gives a stylistic flavor but is less than the most effective pragmatic material you can possibly provide.

I may have given this cautionary story before. It bears repeating. One of my training brothers is a fifth degree black belt in Kajukenbo (obligatory Kenpo content). At least he was fifth dan a few years ago. He may have gotten another stripe since then. He absolutely refuses to teach any of the knife stuff from the style. Why? It's because of one of his students.

The student was a black belt. One evening he and a couple friends were attacked by a larger group. Some of them had knives. The student did one of his knife counters picture perfect. According to the people with him it was like he was going for his belt test.

The knife went under his arm and gave him a fatal wound in the side of the chest.

My friend got out the magic markers and went through every one of the knife defenses with one of his instructors full bore. None of them worked. Since then he's torn them all out of his teaching manual because stylistic purity is less important than living students. There are specialists in weapons. I beg you to learn from them if the Kenpo weapons curriculum is anything less than the absolute best you can find.
 

tellner

Senior Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,379
Reaction score
240
Location
Orygun
Whats the knife tech where you turn your back on the guy and hit him with a spinning elbow? That sounds like a great idea, just peachy.
Ye gawds and little fishes. Anyone who teaches that should be taken out and shot before one of his students takes that seriously and gets a punctured lung or bleeds out from a kidney shot. That's criminal.

Mostly I'd like to remove the assumption of a moronic adversary.

AMEN!
 

Blindside

Grandmaster
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2001
Messages
5,175
Reaction score
849
Location
Kennewick, WA
Yeah, found it:
Piercing Lance (Front- Right Knife Thrust, your Arms Up)
1. An attacker at 12 o'clock comes at you with a right knife thrust.

2. Standing in a left neutral bow, with your hands raised, step your right foot to 7:30 as you simultaneously execute a right hooking outward downward parry to the outside of your attacker's right wrist, redirecting the weapon to 4:30. As your parry makes contact, execute a left palm parry to the outside of your attacker's right elbow. Slide your left hand to your attacker's right wrist and grab it.

3. Slide your right foot clockwise towards 1 o'clock into a left neutral bow to buckle your attacker's right leg with your right leg. (Your left hand is still grabbing your attacker's right.) Simultaneously execute a right back elbow strike to your attacker's right or left ribcage, depending upon how you line up to your attacker and what is available.
4+ armbreak, yada yada yada
------------------
Between 2 and 3. Opponent's left hand checks your left elbow while pulling back on the knife, free his arm and back-cutting you on the innter upper arm in the process. You hit him with your elbow, congratulations.
He loops his left arm over your left shoulder and around your neck, his right repeatedly pistons his knife in and out of your right kidney while your right hand tries ineffectively to provide a shield for said kidney.

Lamont
 

teej

Blue Belt
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Messages
209
Reaction score
4
You are thinking in a way that has crippled American Kenpo and that is that we are a "technique based system". Meaning if someone does this, you have to do this tecnique or that technique. If someone has a knife and attacks me this way the student is suppose to do raining lance, if the attack is this way, I am supposed to do thrusting lance... etc.

The techniques we learn are "NOT THE ANSWER". Mr. Parker designed the "techniques" as desquised repitition. The techniques are a PUZZLE teaching MANY thing, not that you are supposed to do them completely if someone attacks you in a certain way.

Yes, the techniques can possibly work step for step under the correct circumstances. Step for step the knife techniques are not the best to do in all situations but remember this- ALL of the EP techniques should be over in the first couple of moves. Take scrapping hoof for example. Do you think you are honsestly supposed to do the entire technique using both legs??

No, you practice both legs so you learn how to do the technique with both legs. Now take that principle and apply it to all of your techniques. Discect each technique. What are the legs and feet doing? Look at the foot work. Examine all of the stirkes envolved. What type of blocks, parries, checks are there? Examine the disarms. Is there an arm bar or arm break? Compare the arm break to other breaks in other techniques and see how they relate. Is there a take down? If so, how and why does it work? Compare it to other take downs or examine all the take downs in form 5.

That is another good point, form 5 our take down form. The entire form has take downs. Lets forget the techniques and look at all the various takedowns. Take downs from the front, from the back, from the side, pulling the bottom of the opponent out or the opposite taking the top of the opponent over. ALL of our techniques are like that, they are a puzzle to be taken appart and examined. Look at each piece to see what it is teaching you if you practice the technique.

Look at the knife techniques at each individual piece to see what it is teaching you, not that you have to do the technique step per step as taught. Disguised repetition. If you practice the technique as taught, your body is learning to move in certian ways instead of the constant line drills over and over again. Techniques are a way for you to practice.

No, we should not change the knife techniques as they are designed to teach us different principles. You can change your knife approach to how you would deal with a knife attack and use that in spontaneous drills if you apply the kenpo mechanics but over haul the techniques? No way! You would be taking out what GM Ed Parker was trying to teach you in that technique. Your job is to take the technique appart and find out what he was trying to teach you.

Yours in kenpo, Teej
 

Kenpojujitsu3

Master Black Belt
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
1,221
Reaction score
9
Yeah, found it:
Piercing Lance (Front- Right Knife Thrust, your Arms Up)
1. An attacker at 12 o'clock comes at you with a right knife thrust.

2. Standing in a left neutral bow, with your hands raised, step your right foot to 7:30 as you simultaneously execute a right hooking outward downward parry to the outside of your attacker's right wrist, redirecting the weapon to 4:30. As your parry makes contact, execute a left palm parry to the outside of your attacker's right elbow. Slide your left hand to your attacker's right wrist and grab it.

3. Slide your right foot clockwise towards 1 o'clock into a left neutral bow to buckle your attacker's right leg with your right leg. (Your left hand is still grabbing your attacker's right.) Simultaneously execute a right back elbow strike to your attacker's right or left ribcage, depending upon how you line up to your attacker and what is available.
4+ armbreak, yada yada yada
------------------
Between 2 and 3. Opponent's left hand checks your left elbow while pulling back on the knife, free his arm and back-cutting you on the innter upper arm in the process. You hit him with your elbow, congratulations.
He loops his left arm over your left shoulder and around your neck, his right repeatedly pistons his knife in and out of your right kidney while your right hand tries ineffectively to provide a shield for said kidney.

Lamont

This sounds good, but no. If we are to assume that a technique is bogus because it can be countered then no technique of any martial system works. Yes, moves can be countered....often in a simple fashion. This is or should be obvious. The defense is usually simpler than the offense. That is the nature of martial arts.

Show me a move that cannot be countered of any system....

Piercing Lance is a variation of the 'Kote Gaeshi' and 'Irimi Nage' taught in Ju Jitsu and Aikido systems as a basic counter to a mid-to-low line thrust attack. It's also taught in many Military, local law enforcement and CQC courses in various variations.... I'd say it may be worth a closer look than the old "that move won't work, all you have to do is this!"....well....in that case no move works and we should all quit martial arts now.

1) The punch will never work...all you have to is parry
2) The shoot doesn't work...all you have to do is sprawl
3) The leg kick doesn't work..all you have to do is lift your shin
4) The rear naked choke doesn't work....all you have to do is tuck your chin
5) The armbar doesn't work....all you have to do is keep the elbows in
6) Piercing Lance doesn't work..all you have to do is....

See what I mean?
 

Kenpojujitsu3

Master Black Belt
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
1,221
Reaction score
9
You are thinking in a way that has crippled American Kenpo and that is that we are a "technique based system". Meaning if someone does this, you have to do this tecnique or that technique. If someone has a knife and attacks me this way the student is suppose to do raining lance, if the attack is this way, I am supposed to do thrusting lance... etc.

The techniques we learn are "NOT THE ANSWER". Mr. Parker designed the "techniques" as desquised repitition. The techniques are a PUZZLE teaching MANY thing, not that you are supposed to do them completely if someone attacks you in a certain way.

Yes, the techniques can possibly work step for step under the correct circumstances. Step for step the knife techniques are not the best to do in all situations but remember this- ALL of the EP techniques should be over in the first couple of moves. Take scrapping hoof for example. Do you think you are honsestly supposed to do the entire technique using both legs??

No, you practice both legs so you learn how to do the technique with both legs. Now take that principle and apply it to all of your techniques. Discect each technique. What are the legs and feet doing? Look at the foot work. Examine all of the stirkes envolved. What type of blocks, parries, checks are there? Examine the disarms. Is there an arm bar or arm break? Compare the arm break to other breaks in other techniques and see how they relate. Is there a take down? If so, how and why does it work? Compare it to other take downs or examine all the take downs in form 5.

That is another good point, form 5 our take down form. The entire form has take downs. Lets forget the techniques and look at all the various takedowns. Take downs from the front, from the back, from the side, pulling the bottom of the opponent out or the opposite taking the top of the opponent over. ALL of our techniques are like that, they are a puzzle to be taken appart and examined. Look at each piece to see what it is teaching you if you practice the technique.

Look at the knife techniques at each individual piece to see what it is teaching you, not that you have to do the technique step per step as taught. Disguised repetition. If you practice the technique as taught, your body is learning to move in certian ways instead of the constant line drills over and over again. Techniques are a way for you to practice.

No, we should not change the knife techniques as they are designed to teach us different principles. You can change your knife approach to how you would deal with a knife attack and use that in spontaneous drills if you apply the kenpo mechanics but over haul the techniques? No way! You would be taking out what GM Ed Parker was trying to teach you in that technique. Your job is to take the technique appart and find out what he was trying to teach you.

Yours in kenpo, Teej

I agree with some of this and disagree with some of this. I'll keep it short.....Has it ever crossed anyone's mind that Ed Parker did not have the best ideas about everything? I know, I know...heresy.
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,573
Reaction score
456
Location
Terre Haute, IN
Mr. Parker designed the "techniques" as desquised repitition. The techniques are a PUZZLE

Wow, this is very different from what I've usually heard about Kenpo.

The spinning defense against the knife would have to be an absolute last resort, for the knife-in-the-kidney reason given above most notably.
 

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka

Senior Master
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
2,228
Reaction score
113
Location
Dana Point, CA
Teej & James; Good posts.

One of my ongoing soapbox issues is the linear thinking used by kenpoka around the use of self-defense techniques. Skills and abilities are taught and developed through study of the techniques. They are not meant to be single-solutions to specific attacks. They ARE designed to teach you how to think and use your body. Breaking down the specifics to learn how to hit what parts of him from what relative positions and angles are available or made, and how to generate destructive force while CYOA are all part of what we're supposed to get from practice.

The linear thinking (1 to 1...this kenpo technique for that attack) reminds me of lower developmental thinking stages in psych...as when a kid judges that the tall skinny 12 oz. glass holds more water than the short one, simply because it looks bigger/taller. As we age, and our brain develops, we start to realize the effect of dimension on volume...a concept ungraspable at earlier stages of development. Unfortunately, we now have these same kids teaching geometry & trig/kenpo, while lacking the understanding that's yet to come.

Kenpo techs are learning opportunities; mini labs to explore your bod in motion, in relationship to the specific objectives of self defense, and to your opponent's actions/reactions. Five Swords doesn't teach a defense against a punch; if that's all you want, simply lean or step away, or get your hands up for him to run into. It provides you an opportunity to explore the application of your strategies and basics and from various relative positions to your opponent, and how your basics can be applied to manage that positioning.

Attempting the Lance techniques in response to the live action of an attacker with bad intent is gonna land you in the hospital or morgue. Train the hell out of them, but NOT for skill against a knife. For other reasons, related to developing your basics. Since you can't always run, learn some Shuai Chiao, Japanese Jujutsu, Silat, and Kali; train the hell outta them. Then still try to run, using your now-stellar knepo basics to check off the attacks while yo feets do their stuff.

Best Regards,

Dave Crouch
 

Blindside

Grandmaster
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2001
Messages
5,175
Reaction score
849
Location
Kennewick, WA
No, we should not change the knife techniques as they are designed to teach us different principles. You can change your knife approach to how you would deal with a knife attack and use that in spontaneous drills if you apply the kenpo mechanics but over haul the techniques? No way! You would be taking out what GM Ed Parker was trying to teach you in that technique. Your job is to take the technique appart and find out what he was trying to teach you.

Yours in kenpo, Teej

I understand this about kenpo, really I do. But do you think it is possible to teach such lessons in the form of high percentage SD techniques?

I don't think I could face a student and say "this is the technique, but don't actually do it, it will get you killed, instead look at the motion it could teach you...." That teaching method makes absolutely no sense to me.

Lamont
 

Blindside

Grandmaster
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2001
Messages
5,175
Reaction score
849
Location
Kennewick, WA
This sounds good, but no. If we are to assume that a technique is bogus because it can be countered then no technique of any martial system works. Yes, moves can be countered....often in a simple fashion. This is or should be obvious. The defense is usually simpler than the offense. That is the nature of martial arts.

Show me a move that cannot be countered of any system....

I agree, but I don't try to kick a knife out of someones hand ala Chuck Norris/Lorenzo Lamas because its a low percentage move. I also consider this tech a low percentage move because it is so easily countered for so little gain (elbow to the ribs?) A movement like this isn't even in my top 10 for what I'd recommend someone to do, I can't in good faith even suggest this to a student.

Lamont
 

teej

Blue Belt
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Messages
209
Reaction score
4
Teej & James; Good posts.

One of my ongoing soapbox issues is the linear thinking used by kenpoka around the use of self-defense techniques. Skills and abilities are taught and developed through study of the techniques. They are not meant to be single-solutions to specific attacks. They ARE designed to teach you how to think and use your body. Breaking down the specifics to learn how to hit what parts of him from what relative positions and angles are available or made, and how to generate destructive force while CYOA are all part of what we're supposed to get from practice.

The linear thinking (1 to 1...this kenpo technique for that attack) reminds me of lower developmental thinking stages in psych...as when a kid judges that the tall skinny 12 oz. glass holds more water than the short one, simply because it looks bigger/taller. As we age, and our brain develops, we start to realize the effect of dimension on volume...a concept ungraspable at earlier stages of development. Unfortunately, we now have these same kids teaching geometry & trig/kenpo, while lacking the understanding that's yet to come.

Kenpo techs are learning opportunities; mini labs to explore your bod in motion, in relationship to the specific objectives of self defense, and to your opponent's actions/reactions. Five Swords doesn't teach a defense against a punch; if that's all you want, simply lean or step away, or get your hands up for him to run into. It provides you an opportunity to explore the application of your strategies and basics and from various relative positions to your opponent, and how your basics can be applied to manage that positioning.

YES!!! you understand.......Thank you
 

teej

Blue Belt
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Messages
209
Reaction score
4
I understand this about kenpo, really I do. But do you think it is possible to teach such lessons in the form of high percentage SD techniques?

I don't think I could face a student and say "this is the technique, but don't actually do it, it will get you killed, instead look at the motion it could teach you...." That teaching method makes absolutely no sense to me.

Lamont

You are not supposed to face a student and tell them they are supposed to do a certain technique if someone does a certain thing. As an instructor you provide options for each individual student. The EP kenpo technique is strictly a teaching tool. Too many instructors out there do not understand why Mr. Parker designed them. I suggest contacting Huk Planas and ask him what the techniques are for and how the instructor is supposed to use them in teaching? More specifically why?

The kenpo technique training HAS to be combined with class spontaneous reaction drills and a lot of them! EP American Kenpo is an art of body mechanics. How the students body moves and responds, not which technique is used.

It is hard to explain typing on a computer. I suggest asking at a camp or lesson where an experienced senior is instructing. Why do you teach short form 1 over and over again? Why do you have your students perform it for every test? Because of everything shrt 1 teaches the student, ie. various ways to face an opponent while stepping away from him [retreating] or teaching the body how to generate proper torque both direct rotational and counter rotational torque, right???

Would you tell a student to defend himself using short form one? No, but practicing the form teaches the body important principles and mechanics. The techniques as the same thing. You practice the techniques and the students body learns certain things. You have to break down the technique to find out what it is teaching you or as an instructor, what you are teaching the student with the technique.

Did that help? Yours in kenpo, Teej
 

Blindside

Grandmaster
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2001
Messages
5,175
Reaction score
849
Location
Kennewick, WA
The kenpo technique training HAS to be combined with class spontaneous reaction drills and a lot of them! EP American Kenpo is an art of body mechanics. How the students body moves and responds, not which technique is used.

Yes, I absolutely agree.

But I'm not going to drill something into muscle memory that I think is crap, particularly entry lines on a weapon, to get the theoretical benefit of motion contained within the tech. You react the way you train.

I guess I just disagree with this teaching model. Some answers are more right than others.

Lamont
 

teej

Blue Belt
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Messages
209
Reaction score
4
Yes, I absolutely agree.

But I'm not going to drill something into muscle memory that I think is crap, particularly entry lines on a weapon, to get the theoretical benefit of motion contained within the tech. You react the way you train.

I guess I just disagree with this teaching model. Some answers are more right than others.

Lamont

Although "crap" is a tad harsh, I honestly agree with your thinking but as I progressed in rank and was taught by better instructors I was made to understand the system more. This "technique teaching method" of EP kenpo is the "commercialized" version and it has caused a lot of misunderstanding over the years.

That is why I suggest to you to search out Huk Planas and direct this question to him because you study the Filipino arts and Huk is Filipino. Huks' brother is very good in the Filipino arts and Mr. Planas teaches Filipino methods for dealing with knives.

He is the one I feel can better explain this concept to you. You are a smart guy, search out this answer better. Knife defenses should never be about a "technique". Knife defenses are concepts that have to be practiced in flow type drills.

As for piercing lance, something doesn't seem correct with what you posted. The knife should be disarmed before you spin with the elbow.
I'll check my manual and notes later today.

Thanks for the thought provoking exchange, yours in kenpo, Teej
 

Kenpojujitsu3

Master Black Belt
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
1,221
Reaction score
9
I agree, but I don't try to kick a knife out of someones hand ala Chuck Norris/Lorenzo Lamas because its a low percentage move. I also consider this tech a low percentage move because it is so easily countered for so little gain (elbow to the ribs?) A movement like this isn't even in my top 10 for what I'd recommend someone to do, I can't in good faith even suggest this to a student.

Lamont

I guess I'm not seeing the low percentage part of this move given the attack that it is for, a fully committed practically lunging stab(although I may be biased having been taught this move seperately in different systems..gotta have some merit if different systems and different people with different philosophies on combat agree on a common movement) . You get out of the way ala a bullfighter and proceed to break the guys arm and/or wrist....and all of this occurs in the first beat. What I see is guys turning the first part of the move into 89 steps and the attackers doing stabs that aren't fully committed (the other knife techniques already address this). Then people say "this move sucks". Well if you change the attack I guess so. And I still have yet to see a move that cannot be countered easily. The defnse is always easy if you know what is coming...at least it should be for the semi-skilled.

Side Note: the elbow to the ribs is not the main point of the first move...it's just icing on the cake. But everyone seems to think that the elbow is the point(pun intended).
 

Kenpojujitsu3

Master Black Belt
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
1,221
Reaction score
9
As for piercing lance, something doesn't seem correct with what you posted. The knife should be disarmed before you spin with the elbow.

Apparently this is not being taught in most places like I thought/hoped it was.
 
OP
M

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
430
Location
Cromwell,CT
Whats the knife tech where you turn your back on the guy and hit him with a spinning elbow? That sounds like a great idea, just peachy.

I'd like to see techs that address slashing knife attacks, it seems like that category got misplaced somewhere. You have thrusting club attacks but no slashing knives.... that makes sense. I'd also like to see examples versus the "grab and stab" shanking type attacks. Mostly I'd like to remove the assumption of a moronic adversary.

Lamont

Interestingly enough, I'm sure depending on who you said that to, you'd hear, "Well, if you have an attack for a round house/backhand club attack, theres your slashing kinfe defense!" I'm not disagreeing with you here, just giving the reply that I've got in the past. :)

As for the shank type attack...yes, I agree, it would be nice to have examples. :)

Mike
 

Latest Discussions

Top