# KT:Defense against an unfriendly handshake



## Clark Kent (Jun 22, 2007)

*Defense against an unfriendly handshake
By Carol Kaur - Fri, 22 Jun 2007 04:10:49 GMT
Originally Posted at: KenpoTalk*
====================

Jeff Speakman's Kenpo 5.0 curriculum removed the "gift" techniques, which are defenses against unfriendly handshakes.

What do you think about that?

Do you feel its important to have a defense against such a move?

Inquiring minds want to know. 


Read More...


------------------------------------
KenpoTalk.com Post Bot - Kenpo Feed


----------



## Doc (Jun 22, 2007)

Clark Kent said:


> *Defense against an unfriendly handshake
> By Carol Kaur - Fri, 22 Jun 2007 04:10:49 GMT
> Originally Posted at: KenpoTalk*
> ====================
> ...



I think it was a huge mistake, but prompted as always by a lack of significant knowledge. This is the inherent danger of removing things that you don't have real knowledge of its intended purpose. That "attack" holds valuable information that extends well beyond the obvious. Lessons that, depending upon the school curriculum and knowledge level, may not be available at all anywhere else.


----------



## Monadnock (Jun 22, 2007)

I say good for him. He has taken on a direction of his own and is following that path. To preserve something that does not fit that direction would not make sense. It is his version of Kenpo and so he should do what he sees fit with it.

I find that most Kenpo practitioners cannot look past the predefined attack/technique sets. For instance, they canot "see" that a left punch can be handled with techniques originally designed for a left grab with some slight altering. If you look at it, a handshake grab is not all that different from a cross grab. With a little insight, you do not need handshake techniques to get you out of such a situation.

This is not to say that they do not have other purposes as Ed Parker Sr. designed them, but I cannot fault the 5.0 system for lack of general knowledge.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 22, 2007)

I'm not a Kenpoist, but I find the handshake defenses in most arts silly as shown literally but an excellent way of learning some good principles of locks and of getting an immobile body to start moving--an often overlooked subject area--so as to have some motion with which to work (i.e., Newton's First Law of Motion). To my mind these wouldn't truly start as handshakes--if the handshake is that dangerous, throw a left cross, otherwise, use your left hand to poke him somewhere--but rather as a grab, most notably in a knife defense. You're not shaking the hand, you're covering his knife/gun/etc. hand.



Doc said:


> I think it was a huge mistake, but prompted as always by a lack of significant knowledge. This is the inherent danger of removing things that you don't have real knowledge of its intended purpose.



I think to say that Jeff Speakman is ignorant of (significant parts of) Kenpo based on this is a bit extreme. Surely those items to which you refer might be taught elsewhere in his curriculum? There must be other ways to teach them rather than via the handshake?


----------



## Doc (Jun 22, 2007)

arnisador said:


> I'm not a Kenpoist, but I find the handshake defenses in most arts silly as shown literally but an excellent way of learning some good principles of locks and of getting an immobile body to start moving--an often overlooked subject area--so as to have some motion with which to work (i.e., Newton's First Law of Motion). To my mind these wouldn't truly start as handshakes--if the handshake is that dangerous, throw a left cross, otherwise, use your left hand to poke him somewhere--but rather as a grab, most notably in a knife defense. You're not shaking the hand, you're covering his knife/gun/etc. hand.
> 
> 
> 
> I think to say that Jeff Speakman is ignorant of (significant parts of) Kenpo based on this is a bit extreme. Surely those items to which you refer might be taught elsewhere in his curriculum? There must be other ways to teach them rather than via the handshake?


Well sir, I agree with much of what you said, however when speaking about  the depth of information of Kenpo Material, the error in thowing it out, and in particular the lack of knowledge, I am somewhat an expert. 

Mr. Speakman's tenure in Kenpo was relatively speaking brief. He earned his black belt under Larry Tatum, and "worked with" Ed Parker for the movie Perfect Weapon and was a 4th. While Jeff is indeed talented his total tenure in Kenpo amounts to about 5/6 years prior to Parker's passing. I also, in this case, happened to be priviledged to what he was taught. 

Even more significant is the fact that he was for a short period my student, and has a diploma with my signature. Yes he is very talented and intelligent, but there is much he has not seen, or been exposed to, or is actually interested in.

The Kenpo 5.0 material by his own admission, is a collaboration between he, and one of his own students, (Trevor Sherman; who was a former student of Sean Waugh), and I commend him for seeking his own path in the art. I like the idea he is addressing these things from his perspective, and I really like the physicality of his primary students. Good for him. But I am also uniquely qualified to assess and comment on the particular question at hand being his however brief instructor, and kenpo senior of at least a quarter of a century.

Mixing conceptual sport grappling with Kenpo is not new nor unique. In fact, if you will, the "Original Kenpo" out of Hawaii was just that with a significant Danzan Ryu influnce through direct instruction from Henry Okazai to Kwai Sun Chow. While a great deal of that material was removed, adjusted, or reinterpreted for mass market appeal in coming to the mainland, Parker never loss sight of the information nor many of his most senior students like Chuck Sullivan, Dave Hebler, Steve LaBounty, or the late Dave German. With good friends and collaborator reminders like Wally Jay and Gene LeBell, this would be difficult for Parker to do.

As for the "handshake" techniques, there are a multitude of ways of examining them. First you could consider them what I call, Gendar Specific Assaults. That is they may be more likely to occur between the sexes (male to female), and therefore needs to be significant addressed. 

Secondly they, regardless of gendar typing, present a unique perspective that encompasses in some cases, a pain mechanism as well as control manipulation possibilities that are unique in defense scenarios. You could also consider them from the perspective of them actually being "cross wrist seizures," that may occur in conjunction with other physical actions. And probably the most interesting is as it is in the intracacies of the Chinese Arts where all is never as it seems, and a lesson of body mechanics, body posture, and skelatal alignment in conjunction with specific indexing of major Propriocept Nueromuscular Sensors that can be manipulated to a position and circumstance of advantage.

As for simply, "throwing a left cross ..... or poking him somewhere with the left hand ...." I'm not entriely confident that is as easy as it sounds when faced with a committed attacker who is either "holding" your wrist, or shaking your hand" with additional physical assaults also a part of the scenario. Having been on the end of a determined suspect with only one handcuff on, taught me years ago that just because you got one arm, don't mean you are not in jeopardy or that you control the other sir.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 23, 2007)

I defer to your knowledge of the facts w.r.t. Kenpo and Kenpoists!



Doc said:


> As for simply, "throwing a left cross ..... or poking him somewhere with the left hand ...." I'm not entriely confident that is as easy as it sounds when faced with a committed attacker who is either "holding" your wrist, or shaking your hand" with additional physical assaults also a part of the scenario.



Well, when I hear "handshake attack" my experience has been that people are referring to a situation where two men shake hands at a party or something and one tries to crush the other's hand in a strong grip. So, if someone truly feels that this is a serious self-defense situation, the left hand is available for a response. I don't really think of this as a self-defense situation per se, and I was pointing to what I see as the sterile and static nature of many handshake techniques I see taught in various arts.

Viewing it more broadly is what I like to do--say, defending a knife thrust to the abdomen and trying to gain control of the weapon hand, thereby putting _yourself _into a "handshake" position--where the techniques make more sense, in my opinion.

You mention one person gaining control of the other person and I think this is important. The wrist grab may be used to hold a person while an accomplice attacks from another angle. (Look what happened to Luca Brasi.) I hadn't thought of handcuffing as an aspect of this, but then, that's far from my personal experience.


----------



## Doc (Jun 24, 2007)

arnisador said:


> I defer to your knowledge of the facts w.r.t. Kenpo and Kenpoists!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like I said, I felt we agree a whole lot more than we disagree.


----------



## kenpoworks (Jul 10, 2007)

Hi Doc (and others),
I just received a we are missing you email from martialtalk forum, so I thought I would drop by and I landed here!
I have seen a unfriendly handshake attack for real and I always relay the incident to students when teaching handshakes, I will not tell the story here, because if i did I would have no anecdotal material left, suffice to say that it was not perceived by anyone who witnessed the event (except the assailant) as an unfriendly handshake.
Rich


----------

