what makes it kenpo?

[twinkletoes]

This is an OPINION question:

What is it that makes kenpo what it is?

What can be changed without losing "the kenpo" in it?

Could you.......

....change or remove all the katas?

....change or remove all the techniques?

....change or remove some of the techniques?

....change the way basic strikes, stances, etc. are done?

....not make reference to the same principles?

....call it something else?

and would it still be Kenpo?

This is an actual question, not forum weirdness. I want to know what people think defines kenpo opposed to other systems.

If someone had a system that was based on drills instead of techniques, would it be kenpo?

If someone had a system in which the basic moves were done differently, would it still be kenpo?

If you changed the name but taught the same material the same way, that seems obviously to still be kenpo.......



Thoughts?


Best,

~Chris

 

[KenpoDragon]

Originally posted by twinkletoes
This is an OPINION question:

Every question on this forum is a matter of opinion.

What is it that makes kenpo what it is?

EVERYTHING in the ORIGINAL system.

What can be changed without losing "the kenpo" in it?

Could you.......

....change or remove all the katas?

Why would you want to do that???

....change or remove all the techniques?

I seriously hope your joking!!!

....change or remove some of the techniques?

Why would you want to do a thing like that???

....change the way basic strikes, stances, etc. are done?

There are only a set number of basic moves-all else are variations of the same. Quoted from 3rd Brown Belt sayings.

....not make reference to the same principles?

The "principles" are what the system is based off of.

....call it something else?

I think that has been done quite enough already.

and would it still be Kenpo?

In my opinion NO!!!

This is an actual question, not forum weirdness. I want to know what people think defines kenpo opposed to other systems.

Simply put, the effectiveness of "our" system.

If someone had a system that was based on drills instead of techniques, would it be kenpo?

Nope.

If someone had a system in which the basic moves were done differently, would it still be kenpo?

Nope.

If you changed the name but taught the same material the same way, that seems obviously to still be kenpo.......

This is true, but SO many people see fit to alter this or alter that, just so they can call it "their" system. If you changed everything then it wouldn't be Kenpo, it would be whatever you decided to call it. Here in lies the difference between sticking to what works in general for everyone, and sticking to what works only for you. In Kenpo we are taught to learn the "base" techniques and alter if necessary what we need to, to make it work for us. Unfortunately when some teachers do this, they decide to stick with what worked best for them and teach that, not the true "base" techniques, but their version of them. This is the problem that occurs, not everyone is equal in height, weight, or strength, speed, flexibility,etc.etc. Altering a technique should be done on an "individual" basis, not a mass basis. This of course is "only" my opinion on the matter, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

:yinyang: :asian:

 

[Blindside]

Hmmm, someone better notify Professor Chow that what he did wasn't kenpo since he didn't have the principles, techniques, forms, and arguably not even the same basics. Yet Mr. Parker decided to call what he created "kenpo."

Lamont

 

[kenpochip]

I'll throw this out there.
I've had conversations about similar topics.
(Such as how much of a human body can you replace with artificial parts and still have a human?)


For Kenpo, I think you can change techniques and forms as long as the principles and concepts are covered.
If the students end up moving like students in the "original" kenpo, then it is still kenpo, perhaps should even be considered the same or "pretty much the same" kenpo.

What one would have done under this scenario is to
create a new teaching method for the same subject (kenpo).
Some people get attached to the teaching method and consider that to be inseparable from the subject. Most things can be improved, so getting too attached to a teaching methodology might keep one from trying something better.


Now, if you substantially change all or most of the basics, you might still have kenpo, but it would definitely deserve to be distinguished by some other name. It wouldn't really be the SAME kenpo. It might be super-Kenpo or new-improved Kenpo with a Golden Drop of Rich creamy nougat. Ah.. .. Nougat


KenpoChip

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by twinkletoes
This is an OPINION question:

What is it that makes kenpo what it is?

What can be changed without losing "the kenpo" in it?

Could you.......

....change or remove all the katas?

....change or remove all the techniques?

....change or remove some of the techniques?

....change the way basic strikes, stances, etc. are done?

....not make reference to the same principles?

....call it something else?

and would it still be Kenpo?

This is an actual question, not forum weirdness. I want to know what people think defines kenpo opposed to other systems.

If someone had a system that was based on drills instead of techniques, would it be kenpo?

If someone had a system in which the basic moves were done differently, would it still be kenpo?

If you changed the name but taught the same material the same way, that seems obviously to still be kenpo.......



Thoughts?


Best,

~Chris

From the voice of experience it sounds as if you want to create your own system of particular aspects of the 15 arts you've studied. You're 23 and started at 6 which leaves 17 years of martial arts study, and the fact that you've attained a degree in philosophy, which eats up a substantial amount of time. What exactly are you looking for? Are you looking for recomendations to create a hybrid art? It would help if you made your intentions a little less vague.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Kenpomachine]

Originally posted by twinkletoes
What is it that makes kenpo what it is?

The way it makes us move, leaving room to personal interpretations as well.

What can be changed without losing "the kenpo" in it?

It seems that the way the curriculum is set. There's chinese kenpo, Tracy's kenpo, EPAK, etc, and they're all kenpo.

Could you.......
....change or remove all the katas?

No, it has been said before that they're the compendium of kenpo.

....change or remove all the techniques?

Not all, but some of them. You said you are Tracy, right? There are less techniques in EPAK, and it's still kenpo And there's people in EPAK that teach the extensions and people that don't.

....change or remove some of the techniques?

See above, and also read about Doc Chapél, Paul Mills and Skip Hancock just to name a few.

....change the way basic strikes, stances, etc. are done?

NO

....not make reference to the same principles?

As in motion kenpo vs sublevel-4? But I may be wrong here, as I don't know that much about SL-4

....call it something else?

It's been already done: AKKI, Kenpo 2000, SubLevel-4, chinese kenpo, Tracy's kenpo, EPAK...

and would it still be Kenpo?

If you're true to the system, I think so. But that's only my opinion.

An FWIW, in my school sets are not taught as part of the program and we have less than 16 techniques per belt. And it's still kenpo

This is an actual question, not forum weirdness. I want to know what people think defines kenpo opposed to other systems.

Its philosophy as an american martial art among other things.

If someone had a system that was based on drills instead of techniques, would it be kenpo?

No, you still need the techniques to learn self defense. But there are many drills that can be done with them.

If someone had a system in which the basic moves were done differently, would it still be kenpo?

I don't think so.

If you changed the name but taught the same material the same way, that seems obviously to still be kenpo.......

Yes, so it seems.

Ok, it seems like one has to explore more than one kenpo branch before trying to answer in a convincing way what is kenpo

Good luck in your search!!

 

[twinkletoes]

ProfessorKenpo-

Actually, it's just the opposite. I have NO intention of starting "my own" anything, except for a studio. I want to change the way I train, because in my experiences I have found more efficient and effective methods than the first ones I learned. The question is, when I take out all the tech's and katas and maybe more, and add tons of other stuff, what am I teaching? (If it has a name)

~Chris

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by twinkletoes
ProfessorKenpo-

Actually, it's just the opposite. I have NO intention of starting "my own" anything, except for a studio. I want to change the way I train, because in my experiences I have found more efficient and effective methods than the first ones I learned. The question is, when I take out all the tech's and katas and maybe more, and add tons of other stuff, what am I teaching? (If it has a name)

~Chris

Have you really found more efficient methods? I used to think the same way in my youth. After many years with a good instructor I saw the error of my ways. You should really get to know your art more before condemning it though it sounds as if you are more suited to the JKD philosophy, if so, attain skills there and call it anything you like.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[twinkletoes]

ProfessorKenpo,

I have tried to choose my words carefully so as not to sound like I am condemning my art, because I don't feel that I am. I like kenpo! I haven't said anything bad about it! I just want to change the way I train my students!

I said that in my experience (and I don't mean to say that it will be the same for others, whose experiences will be different) I have found more efficient/effective measures. This means that I have taught students many different ways (I have) for many years (also true) and that I have observed methods that work better than others, when it comes to developing a certain skill set.

To give it numbers (since you already have), I will make it more concrete. I am 23, and have studied kenpo since 1988. This august will mark my 15th year in the art. I became an assistant instructor at age 11 (blue belt), joined the paid staff at 14 (brown belt), became a black belt at 16, and earned a 3rd degree black belt 2 years ago this September. I have been learning to teach for the last 12 years. I have studied 15 other arts, and have senior ranks in some of them. So I have a decent well of experiences to draw from (I'm no expert, but not many people are).

Now, I am not looking to 1) change the skillset or 2) tell others that they should do things the way that I am. But I have found ways that I personally can more quickly and more effectively develop the target skillset in my students. From my experiences, this is the way that I am most comfortable teaching.

So what I am asking, really, is how much can we change the training approach, yield the same results, and call it the same thing?

~Chris

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by twinkletoes
ProfessorKenpo,

I have tried to choose my words carefully so as not to sound like I am condemning my art, because I don't feel that I am. I like kenpo! I haven't said anything bad about it! I just want to change the way I train my students!

I said that in my experience (and I don't mean to say that it will be the same for others, whose experiences will be different) I have found more efficient/effective measures. This means that I have taught students many different ways (I have) for many years (also true) and that I have observed methods that work better than others, when it comes to developing a certain skill set.

To give it numbers (since you already have), I will make it more concrete. I am 23, and have studied kenpo since 1988. This august will mark my 15th year in the art. I became an assistant instructor at age 11 (blue belt), joined the paid staff at 14 (brown belt), became a black belt at 16, and earned a 3rd degree black belt 2 years ago this September. I have been learning to teach for the last 12 years. I have studied 15 other arts, and have senior ranks in some of them. So I have a decent well of experiences to draw from (I'm no expert, but not many people are).

Now, I am not looking to 1) change the skillset or 2) tell others that they should do things the way that I am. But I have found ways that I personally can more quickly and more effectively develop the target skillset in my students. From my experiences, this is the way that I am most comfortable teaching.

So what I am asking, really, is how much can we change the training approach, yield the same results, and call it the same thing?

~Chris

You have 15 years in the martial arts in 15 different arts and have achieved senior ranks in that time, along with a degree in philosophy, do the math. As I said before, I used to think the same way, until I saw the crystal for what it was, a diamond, not just a rock. I see guys like you all the time and I have to wonder if it's because you're not getting the instruction you need to really interpret the art, or there's a larger agenda at work. If you don't like it, change it by all means. If you think you have a better way, then do so. Your students will tell the tale later in their training if you've done something wrong or right.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by KenpoDragon


In my opinion NO!!! .

Nope.

Nope.
[/B]

Well, KenpoDragon I can just see you consulting you r encyclopedia on this one; however, it's all Kenpo no matter what changes one makes. When skin kisses skin...

 

[twinkletoes]

I think I'm a little troubled by lines like "I see guys like you all the time and I have to wonder if it's because you're not getting the instruction you need to really interpret the art, or there's a larger agenda at work."

I'm not trying to start trouble! Also, my instructor was tops! (He is now retired and I have limited access to him). He is in the top 2 most functional martial artists I know! (Too close to call)

My problem is this (I am speaking personally about my training environment--yours may not correspond on all points. If it doesn't, try to see why the differences might give me a certain perspective):

We teach a number of techniques and patterns and forms.

The tech's etc. are prearranged (with numerous variations)

We do not expect that if our students got into a real fight they would use a curriculum technique move for move (because of the dynamic and chaotic environment of an actual situation).

We use the techniques as examples and say "these are just samples of how it *could* go. Use them as an idea, until you can spontaneously act using appropriate measures."

We spar using *very* limited rules: limited targets & tools, no weapons, no grappling, etc.

After 15 years of using techniques and katas I am just NOW reaching a point where spontaneous action is appropriate, speedy, powerful, etc. to the point where I am confident it could be effective.



Now again, these are the circumstances that I find myself in--your training experience may be different. Perhaps your school does much more grappling, or weapons sparring, or spontanaeity drills than mine. But this is the environment that has given me this perspective.

Now, if our goal is to teach effective improvisation, why not teach something like this:

-introduce skills (teach the basic, just the way you do now)

-drill the basics in specific and alive ways to foster attributes, especially timing, positioning, and improvisation.

-increase the nature of the drills so as to become more realistic (while maintaining safety, of course) so that improvisation branches out

-spar (safely) with a growing number of allowed tools and situations, including allowing clinching, striking in the clinch, takedowns, grappling, etc. occaisionally introduce weapons, multiple attackers, etc.


This kind of training environment teaches improvisation through application of good technique in a variety of situations, without the use of prearranged techniques and katas. Normally, it is considered a JKD Concepts approach (or SBG, if you want to be really specific).

Students who I have begun using this method with (as early as their first class) have shown tremendous improvement over others. They respond more quickly, and more appropriately on a consistent basis, even at white belt. They are still working on the same MOVES and doing them the same WAY as the other students, and the other instructors are teaching them the same way as their classmates. They are still Kenpo students.

It seems to me that I am teaching them Kenpo the JKD way. Does that seem right to anyone else? I am allowing them to freely learn and experiment in an alive fashion, while still introducing and developing the moves of kenpo karate. Now, I have only introduced maybe 75% of what I've listed above: I have not yet introduced many students to weapon sparring, or sparring that includes both striking and grappling. Also, multiple opponent sparring has been extremely limited. However, it is working, and working well. They are developing skills more quickly than the other students at the school.

Again, I am not saying that this is the method everyone should follow. However, it is a method that (for me) is showing vast advantages over other methods. So is it Kenpo the JKD way? I think that might be an appropriate way of thinking about it. Would I call it that? Never. It's Kenpo in my book, until the basic moves / concepts undergo radical change.

Best,

~Chris

 

[KenpoDragon]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
Well, KenpoDragon I can just see you consulting you r encyclopedia on this one; however, it's all Kenpo no matter what changes one makes. When skin kisses skin...

Awwww....is little Touch"o"Death mad because I embarrassed him in another thread???? Go cry to your momma boy. Just because you don't have a friggin clue about what your talking about, doesn't mean the rest of us don't!!!!


:wah: :lol:

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by twinkletoes
I think I'm a little troubled by lines like "I see guys like you all the time and I have to wonder if it's because you're not getting the instruction you need to really interpret the art, or there's a larger agenda at work."

I'm not trying to start trouble! Also, my instructor was tops! (He is now retired and I have limited access to him). He is in the top 2 most functional martial artists I know! (Too close to call)
Best,

~Chris

Don't be troubled, I'm just playing devil's advocate. I'm assuming you're Tracy Kenpo and not American. If that is the case, I would suggest you take a look at our curriculum and you might possibly feel differently. Most that are with Tracy Kenpo are happy but personally I feel it lacks alot of the techno thinking I'm used to, not that it's a bad thing, I like to use the brains instead of brawn. Mind you I'm a big guy and could probably make anything work if I had the mind to, you know, mind over matter, if you don't mind, it don't matter. Good luck in your edeavors.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by KenpoDragon
Awwww....is little Touch"o"Death mad because I embarrassed him in another thread???? Go cry to your momma boy. Just because you don't have a friggin clue about what your talking about, doesn't mean the rest of us don't!!!!


:wah: :lol:

DUDE, you really need to chill a bit, please.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
DUDE, you really need to chill a bit, please.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

Oh **** .. now I've seen everything

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by Kirk
Oh **** .. now I've seen everything

I don't get that bad Kirk, I usually don't resort to telling someone to go cry to momma, not yet anyway. LOL

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Klondike93]

twinkletoes - I've been reading how you still like kenpo and all that but when I visited the web site you have in your signature there's no mention of it. All I could find on it was in your bio but no where else. Lots of mention about BJJ, Krav Maga and Modern Arnis, but where's the kenpo curriculum at?

I don't have an answer for you, but I thought I would ask where's the kenpo?



:asian:

 

[Michael Billings]

I do not mean to slam you twinkletoes. I rarely feel the need to feel superior ... well at least to try to prove my superiority or the superiority of my Art ... Cuz I Ain't.

I have been around way to long to feel comfortable with your "changing Kenpo" per se. Method of teaching, hopefully, is what you are referring to. Your years in Kenpo, while worthy of respect, have to be tempered by the fact that at 11years old, or 14, or 17 or 21 you cannot understand or necessarily absorb the lessons that were being taught at the time. Now, you can revisit them and, contingent on your subjective recall, re-analyze, evaluate, and prioritize your lessons. I really encourage you to sit down and do this.

I am specifically thinking about my own epiphanies over the years. OK, so I got black, then I got another black (in Kenpo this time, circa 1986 under the Steven LaBounty, Tom Kelly, Gary Swan, Brian Duffy lineage.) Then after meeting Dennis Conatser, Ed Parker, Howard Silva, Bob Liles, etc. I get to start all over again and learn it all anew. Maybe I am being somewhat pushy here, but you have to understand that there is so much to learn in your own Art, it staggers the mind, literally! There are layers and layers and layers of Kenpo. You can take it as far as you want to ... or not. But don't blame Kenpo for the limitations you chose to place on it.

It is OK if you want to do BJJ or JKD. I have both at my school ... but they are different Arts. I have more than I can handle being in John Sepulveda's organization, under Tommy Burks, with friends like Dennis Conatser who help me challenge my own Journey regularly. A true mark that you have attained wisdom (and maturity) is when you realize how much you don't know. In this case I am specifically addressing Kenpo. Heck, I have been at it since 1979, 24 years now, with a decade of other martial arts prior to that, and I am still opening my eyes and mind in amazement whenever I have a lesson with John Sepulveda, Dennis Conatser, or my teacher.

You are a 3rd in an Art that takes a lifetime to evaluate, dissect, re-evaluate, and learn to apply. Maybe you need to look at it from another perspective, or spend some time with some of the other Seniors in the Art, they all have a different perspective on material that came from the same source ... Ed Parker.

Good Luck and Good Hunting.
:asian:

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
I don't get that bad Kirk, I usually don't resort to telling someone to go cry to momma, not yet anyway. LOL

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

I know .. but I couldn't pass up the opportunity to give you a hard
time :asian: