Why long NOW?

[Robbo]

I read that Chuck Norris failed his yellow belt grading so his natural ability must have come through after that. I'm not taking anything away from Chuck but it just demonstrates that maybe natural ability wasn't at play there.

You should read his biography. The test was held in the middle of winter in a dojo with no heat. They had to wait for hours in a seiza (kneeling) waiting for their turn. He seized up and forgot part of a form. They failed him. I'm pretty sure it was for BB though not Yellow, I'll check it and get back.

Rob

 

[cdhall]

Originally posted by Big Pat
...Also,the large number of techniques did not exsist in Mr. Parker's early Kenpo. Mr. Sullivan has stated that there were only 25 or so base techniques in the beginning. It is also important to note that many of Mr. Parker's first students already had martial arts experience, making their journey somewhat quicker to Black belt.

Right. In "the old days" I think Mr. Swan got his Black Belt from Mr. LaBounty and the last form in the System was Long 3. I know Mr. Sullivan said there were only about 30 techniques in the system...

And, some of those guys were there several hours a day and apparently they were Fighting all the time. So if they were there 10 hours a day but only training 2hrs... they still work out more than I do. I'm lucky to do anything at all part of 3 days a week, much less 5 or 7.

And we don't fight now like they did then either. Ask Mr. Tom Kelly about "the safety equipment known as tape." I think the learning curve is shorter when someone is trying to flatten you with his bare knuckles. Especially if you are being graded on your fighting proficiency.

Mr. Duffy has said that there is a lot more material in our system now than for example when he got his Black in 72 or so, that the general Kenpo student is more "book smart" than students back then, but that back then generally speaking everyone was tougher.

What is the name of the Chuck Norris bio? I'd like to read it. Also, it was not uncommon for a serviceman in the Korean War to get a Black Belt in Korea before they came back to the US, no matter how long that was going to be... from what I've heard.

I think Joe Lewis' belt also supports the fighting prowess theory. I mean you'd think that 7 months wouldn't be enough time to perfect Long 4, but then Mr. Lewis went out and proceeded to beat up every other black belt tournament fighter and kickboxer in the world, so he was primarily focused on fighting and sparring.

And I think if you go to his website now, he teaches a fighting system. I don't think he advertises it as much other than a fighting system. I'm going to look into this myself because I need more fighting practice. Our art is supposed to be comprised of 3 equal divisions:
1. Basics
2. Self-Defense
3. Fighting

I think most of the Old Timers came up while the Self Defense and Basics (forms and sets...) were being developed and that this also explains a lot. If it takes 4 yrs to Black now, then you should be able to learn 1/3 the material in 1/3 the time which would be about 1.5yrs. And if you were really fighting hard every day, could you do it sooner? I think Mr. Tom Kelly said it took him 18 months to get to Black and (like Big Pat mentioned) Mr. Kelly was also Already a Black belt from somewhere else (from Mr. LaBounty?).

I think that if you can fight a good fighter, then the Basics are obviously being employed well and you won't have a problem with Self-Defense. I suspect that if we go to Joe Lewis and try to explain/teach/defend Five Swords for example and go into the extension... he would likely prefer to slip the punch and knock you out and he would have a good argument for knowing Self-Defense as well as anyone.

This is a complex question. I think that the non-fighting parts of Kenpo have opened up the system/art to be more useful and practical to a non-professional athlete.

While Joe Lewis doesn't need Five Swords to defend a punch, I can take almost anyone off the street and get them to be effective with Five Swords MUCH faster than I can train them to be an effective competition fighter or street brawler. If you look at the guys in the Journey most of them were pretty hard core athletes who could mix it up and a lot of them are in better shape than today's average student. I think.

Some of this is speculation but it represents a lot of my observations and theories so I thought I'd throw it out there to see how it goes over. :asian:

I see Gou is back with us. I forgot how much longer all the threads were when he was with us. Did anyone win a bet on him coming back?

 

[Mike]

Nice post Doug. I like the idea the 'old timers' were more focused on fighting skills, and that the increase in volume of the material that needs to be learned is a main reason for the longer time requirements. Some of the previous posts sound pretty cynical about the money aspect of things now. If this were the case, all instructors would have vacation homes and would drive expensive cars, etc. My school offers supplies, etc. but I don't think there is much of a mark up there. They also do not charge extra for belt and stripe tests prior to black belt. Not everyone involved in martial arts is in it for the buck. (thankfully)

 

[Brother John]

Has martial arts been dumbed down?

Maybe instruction has improved?
Just a thought...
Your Brother
John

 

[brianhunter]

Okay, the "better" fighters seems to come up a lot. So is our generation worse by choice? Or by litigation? There are guys out there that would fight bare knuckle NOW and probably be very good at it. Schools have moved away from it. Just because we fight differently (not by choice mind you) does not deem us worse as a fighting generation.
Would you run a school balls to the wall bare knuckle? How long before you get sued? Ill bet if you ran an old school beat the crap out of each other a lot of people would stay in attendance....but my money says that now a days you'd still wait 4-5 years even in that type of school because of peer pressure from other instructors......I dont know exactly how to feel about this issue but I know its something that kenpo people have made fun of other arts for when our history is full of it!!

 

[jeffkyle]

If instruction has improved, then wouldn't the time it takes to get a student to any level be shorter than longer? With better instruction wouldn't they be able to increase the learning curve so that the student learns faster?

 

[brianhunter]

Originally posted by Brother John
Maybe instruction has improved?
Just a thought...
Your Brother
John

If it has been dumbed down...wouldnt it take less time?

and also if instruction has improved shouldnt you be there quicker?

I dont know....seems like waiting in line because too many people are already the grand pobah I havent even gotten my hat yet

 

[jeffkyle]

What I just said!

 

[brianhunter]

well we have been known to agree from time to time

 

[cdhall]

Originally posted by brianhunter
Okay, the "better" fighters seems to come up a lot. So is our generation worse by choice? Or by litigation? There are guys out there that would fight bare knuckle NOW and probably be very good at it. Schools have moved away from it. Just because we fight differently (not by choice mind you) does not deem us worse as a fighting generation.
Would you run a school balls to the wall bare knuckle? How long before you get sued? Ill bet if you ran an old school beat the crap out of each other a lot of people would stay in attendance....but my money says that now a days you'd still wait 4-5 years even in that type of school because of peer pressure from other instructors......

I think that Mr. Parker had more famously great fighters as students and on his teams (even if they weren't students, they must have worked out with him somewhat) than there are in Kenpo right now so that is about all I have to go on. Steve Sanders, Tom Kelly, Steve LaBounty, Ralph Castellanos, Ron Marchini, John Natividad, Benny the Jet all those guys from the New Gladiators. They could probably take out most Kenpo instructors right now.

I'm speculating of course.

And yes, I think the schools moved away from the hard-core fighting on purposes for legal and marketing reasons and that generally speaking a brown belt in Mr. Parker's Pasadena school in 1965 could kick my butt today in a fight because of his training vs mine.

And no, I don't think Mr. Parker would have succumbed to any peer pressure. If he wanted to promote a Black Belt in 2 years today I don't think he'd consider what someone else might think.

I know there are fighting schools out there still, but even Bob White focuses on Tournament fighting, but his guys are sharp and could do equally well without gloves from what I've seen. Generally though there are less "fighting schools" than other types. I know some HUGE schools that don't spar at all and/or don't let their students train elsewhere for that matter. Seems odd to me. I think Bruce Lee was right in that the more exposure you have, the better off you are.

Originally posted by brianhunter
I dont know exactly how to feel about this issue but I know its something that kenpo people have made fun of other arts for when our history is full of it!!

I don't know exactly what you mean by this.

 

[cdhall]

I especially meant to say earlier that I don't know what Kirk meant by this but I don't think it has been dumbed down otherwise we'd still have 3times the material but get a Black Belt in 1 year.

With the change in emphasis on 3 equal parts to the system and with us having to know roughly 6 times as many techniques, twice as many forms, and Lord knows how many more sets (I don't think some of the first guys had sets, especially since some of them invented sets later themselves), that this is adequate to explain a longer road to Black Belt no matter what else is going on.
:asian:

 

[Bob Hubbard]

The answer I think is, yes...and no....

Depends on where you are going.

Theres a reason why muay thai is effective with its limited 'technique' list. I saw a pretty brutal system recently..had all of 12 techniques, all broken down into just 3 movements. Bo spinning backfists, or boots to the head there.

I've heard it said that you have the 'core' of kenpo at yellow belt...that everything else is just gravy afterwards.

In a world with 26yr old grandmasters, and 8 month in students running their own schools, has the level really gone up? Dont think so.

In a world where most students are casual, has the elvel of student gone up? Nope.

Regarding the seniors, they all seem to have come in with some experience, there was alot! less material back then, so experience+less to learn = faster time. I think thats like that with many systems. Remy Presas called Arnis "the art within your art". Why? Because I've seen sooo many things that are either the same, or so similar between Arnis, Kenpo, Wing Chun, and JKD. I've also seen major differences too. But if you have the experience to see the 'sames' and the 'similar', all you really have to learn is the 'new'. Right?

A punch is a punch is a punch is a punch. Now that you know that, go learn 50 different ways to do it. Does it really matter if the only difference between 'thrusting rabbit' and 'flying kitten' is that you kick the right knee first, and then elbow the head, rather than kick the left knee and chop the junction of the neck? A kick is a kick is a kick is a kick. Now go learn 75 different ways to do that. A block is a strike is a block. Ohh..now we are getting complex.

Thousands of black belts (and above) know little more than fancy dance steps, but will get hurt or worse in a real fight. Many have never taken a shot nor thrown one. The tourny player will eat them for dinner, and the trained fighter will have the tourny guy for desert.

If you only had 12 techniques that are easily mastered, how much $ will you get long term from a student? We spend more today to learn more, yet never perfect the basics that have always been there. Our attention span is gone, so we 'play' at 3 reps twice a week for 15 techniques, then, get our belt, and move on, never to revisit them for 4 years until its black belt time...and have long since forgotten 'Short 1'.

I think for all the 'improvements' and 'extra techniques', we've gotten worse. How do we fix it? Ya got me...I'm just an orange belt.

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by cdhall
I especially meant to say earlier that I don't know what Kirk meant by this but I don't think it has been dumbed down otherwise we'd still have 3times the material but get a Black Belt in 1 year.

With the change in emphasis on 3 equal parts to the system and with us having to know roughly 6 times as many techniques, twice as many forms, and Lord knows how many more sets (I don't think some of the first guys had sets, especially since some of them invented sets later themselves), that this is adequate to explain a longer road to Black Belt no matter what else is going on.
:asian:

Funny .. so many are saying that we have more to learn than they
did back then. That their curriculums were by far, a lot less to
learn than we have now. But they were better martial artists.

Danger Will Robinson! Does not compute! Error! Error!

 

[jeffkyle]

Originally posted by Kirk
Funny .. so many are saying that we have more to learn than they
did back then. That their curriculums were by far, a lot less to
learn than we have now. But they were better martial artists.

Danger Will Robinson! Does not compute! Error! Error!

And on top of that...still longer to black belt!

 

[brianhunter]

Originally posted by cdhall
I think that Mr. Parker had more famously great fighters as students and on his teams (even if they weren't students, they must have worked out with him somewhat) than there are in Kenpo right now so that is about all I have to go on. Steve Sanders, Tom Kelly, Steve LaBounty, Ralph Castellanos, Ron Marchini, John Natividad, Benny the Jet all those guys from the New Gladiators. They could probably take out most Kenpo instructors right now.

So do you think a good team of fighters couldnt be assembled now? These guys where exceptional dont get me wrong. But are we really fooling ourselves into thinking this? If you would have said something about a fighter like Mike Tyson (in his prime) would come along when Cassius Clay was fighting people would have called you nuts! How many tourneys where there to stand out in during those days? a few, how many today? thousands



[/i][/QUOTE]
And no, I don't think Mr. Parker would have succumbed to any peer pressure. If he wanted to promote a Black Belt in 2 years today I don't think he'd consider what someone else might think.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I did not say Mr Parker


[/i][/QUOTE]
I know there are fighting schools out there still, but even Bob White focuses on Tournament fighting, but his guys are sharp and could do equally well without gloves from what I've seen. Generally though there are less "fighting schools" than other types. I know some HUGE schools that don't spar at all and/or don't let their students train elsewhere for that matter. Seems odd to me. I think Bruce Lee was right in that the more exposure you have, the better off you are.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I think you are right in the more exposure the better, some instructors have problems with this though

[/i][/QUOTE]
I don't know exactly what you mean by this. [/B][/QUOTE]


Well Im kinda torn here I know how I used to feel about the whole how long is too long issue....I know someone who spent too much time as an underbelt and skill was not the issue. I guess i used to be optimistic but weighing the facts of what happened then as to what is happening now Im starting to think its a good ole boy thing.

 

[jeffkyle]

Im starting to think its a good ole boy thing.

It sure has seemed to have turned into that!

 

[cdhall]

Originally posted by brianhunter
So do you think a good team of fighters couldnt be assembled now? These guys where exceptional dont get me wrong. But are we really fooling ourselves into thinking this? If you would have said something about a fighter like Mike Tyson (in his prime) would come along when Cassius Clay was fighting people would have called you nuts! How many tourneys where there to stand out in during those days? a few, how many today? thousands

Excellent points. I was just saying that I think those guys trained hard and are still better than a lot of the generally available commercially-focused instructors. That's all.

I mentioned Mr. Parker because I was not sure what instructors you were talking about.

I don't know about the Good Ole Boy stuff. I think Mr. Parker never failed anyone on a Black Belt test but most of my instructors lean the other way. I think it should be pretty clear though. If they have a list of stuff to do to get to Black Belt then if you can do it, they should tell you what it missing. If they want you to be faster, have more endurance, whatever, then they should tell you. As long as the belt charts are there, you should be able to work through them, otherwise why have them?

You make many good points, I think I agree with about 90% of what you said even if I didn't address it specifically. Good work.

 

[cdhall]

Originally posted by Kirk
Funny .. so many are saying that we have more to learn than they
did back then. That their curriculums were by far, a lot less to
learn than we have now. But they were better martial artists.

Danger Will Robinson! Does not compute! Error! Error!

I think Kaith put it pretty well, but I will say that in 1994 at Mr. Duffy's camp Mr. LaBounty was teaching a class and commented "I really have to learn the technique names." He came up under a Tracy curriculum I think. And after that camp he hooked up with Mr. Liles to get some of the later Parker stuff that he never got (I think he never got it).

But there were not many Black Belts at that camp who could take him. I think he supports the observation that he knew less but was better. The question is "better at what?" Mr. LaBounty was not better at teaching the upper belt material with extensions than Mr. Liles I bet. But Mr. LaBounty could punch through your spine whether you threw a kick, a punch or a club attack at him.

If the effect you are after is to a) Not get hit, b) diable your opponent, then I think they had this in 1969.

If you want to know Exactly how that all happens and what is the best way to do it, then I think Mr. Parker had that pretty well nailed down by the time he died.

It's like this. You don't have to know how to be a Chef to enjoy eating dinner, but a Chef would have a greater appreciation for a good meal, would know how to make one himself when he felt like it and could probably pick the right wine/aperitif to enhance the entire experience.

Does this make a Chef a better eater?

P.S. Sometimes I REALLY surprise myself. I think that Chef thing is pretty good!

 

[Kirk]

Ah, but has the training to be a Chef been drastically altered in
the last 10 - 30 years?

The $$$$ thing holds water well. Mr Parker, Huk and a third
gentlemen (no disrespect, I can't remember the name) worked
together to establish a commercial program. It had to have it's
$$$ appeal.

Mr Labounty is one man. By saying that he could punch through
your spine is only relevant if: All that trained with him during that
time could do the same thing, and none of those that trained
later could do this.

 

[GouRonin]

On top of being a good system in itself the EPAK system has a built in "shelf life" if you will. It lays out a time frame in which people should be able to attain certain levels. This not only gives the person in the system a time frame to judge themselves on but it guarantees a certain level of income for the studio owner. the owner can always stretch out the time frame if the student needs more work but it guarantees that they will have a dedicated income from that student. So the time frames not only serve to produce a student of a certain quality but it also has a financial aspect.