# Technique practicality



## Sapper6 (Aug 28, 2005)

Mr. Parker was often said that _a technique's usefulness and value doesn't necessarily lie in their street practicality._  i'm guessing he hinted at "hidden" reason's for a certain techniques incorporation into the curriculum.  would anyone like to further elaborate on this?  what is your take on what Mr. Parker possibly meant by this?

thanks in advance.

 :asian:


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Aug 28, 2005)

Several of American Kenpo's techniques aren't meant for combat in their "ideal" phase.  They are there just to teach a certain principle(s) of motion. Example: Deceptive Panther -- While being a very effective "street technique" it is against a not so common "street attack".  The technique is there mainly as a lesson in revers motion.  The technique "plays itself" in reverse after the left strike to the opponents neck/jaw depending on who teaches it.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 29, 2005)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> Several of American Kenpo's techniques aren't meant for combat in their "ideal" phase. They are there just to teach a certain principle(s) of motion. Example: Deceptive Panther -- While being a very effective "street technique" it is against a not so common "street attack". The technique is there mainly as a lesson in revers motion. The technique "plays itself" in reverse after the left strike to the opponents neck/jaw depending on who teaches it.


Would you be so kind as to list those you don't feel are made for combat in the ideal phase, you've got my curiosity piqued as I don't see that. As far as the not so common street attack, please, list what's most common. I can't figure where you guys come up with this stuff about not meant for combat, or, it's just there for category completion. You've been training AK for 7 years (http://www.arnis.org/certification/regional_representatives_hawkins.htm), to be honest, you don't have enough knowledge of the Kenpo system to be making quotes like that about AK. I can remember my time at that rank and feeling the same way, I've since grown out of it as my understanding of what Kenpo is grows daily.

BTW, Deceptive Panther comes nowhere close to playing in reverse, the targets are misaligned and the angles of execution are different for that to happen.

DarK LorD


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 29, 2005)

@DKL

i can see that you obviously disagree with Mr. Hawkin's perspective on this.  what is _your_ opinion on the question as stated in post #1.

i'd really like to hear all opinions as they apply to themselves, and what they personally think.  let's try not to criticize others about what they believe, as that wasn't the intent behind this thread.

all ideas of thought are welcomed, regardless if the masses would agree with them or not.

thanks again. :asian:


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 29, 2005)

Student of motion; mechanic of motion; engineer of motion. There is kenpo within kenpo, and the ideal and what-if phases are only a beginning. Stare into the mist long enough, deeply enough, and new dimensions begin to unwravel themselves as ever-increasing insights as to how concepts and sequences overlap, flow, and complement each other.

If your into kenpo for the short-haul, don't set too high an expectation for interpretation or understanding. Get your hobby fix, take what works for you, and enjoy the ride. If you want to trip-tic for the long-haul, keep staring into the crystal ball. There's some neat stuff buried in "techniques that don't work".

Regards,

Dave


----------



## kenpoworks (Aug 29, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> .....There is kenpo within kenpo......Stare into the mist long enough, deeply enough, and new dimensions begin to unwravel themselves as ever-increasing insights as to how concepts and sequences overlap, flow, and complement each other.
> ..............There's some neat stuff buried in "techniques that don't work".
> ......Dave


Well put my man, well put.
Richard


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 29, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Student of motion; mechanic of motion; engineer of motion. There is kenpo within kenpo, and the ideal and what-if phases are only a beginning. Stare into the mist long enough, deeply enough, and new dimensions begin to unwravel themselves as ever-increasing insights as to how concepts and sequences overlap, flow, and complement each other...
> 
> ...There's some neat stuff buried in "techniques that don't work".
> 
> ...



can you go deeper that this...?  what kind of neat stuff?

_a technique's usefulness and value doesn't necessarily lie in their street practicality._

again, how so?


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 29, 2005)

Every couple of years I re-visit books I've read before. My own experience is that I forget more than I remember, so they are worth re-reading. In Infinite Insights 5, Mr. Parker speaks to this very topic. First off, the ideal phase is meant to illustrate principles, with the full underdstanding that deviation is inevitable. In the book, a couple of self-defense techniques are demonstrated. They are then followed by (in some cases) several pages of principles and concepts that are illustrated in the technique. 

Hence, even if the technique itself may not SEEM to be pragmatic to you, the concepts illustrated in -- and taught by -- the technique have infinite application. Additionally, that same section speaks to identifying Master Key Moves present in various techniques...movements alone or in sequence that repeat themselves in several self-defense techniques. They may end the same, but how they are gotten to or applied differs...again as a way of elucidating different concepts, how CONTEXT plays a role in the decision making process about what techniques/basics/skills to use, when, where, and to what end.

Several pages of things to keep in mind while practicing techniques are also listed; environmental factors, opponents attacking weapons; his position; your position; and so on. The ultimate goal is complete ownership of the concepts and principles woven layers deep into each tech, so that one may operate from a position of spontanaety (sp?). Spontaneous response can only come from depth of ownership, which in turn can only come from dedicated and THOUGHTFUL practice. Not brainless rote repetition, but applying your noodle to what you're doing, and the thousands of possible "why's". Your body is only one weapon in your arsenal, and certainly not the most powerful. Mind drives mass; train your brain.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 29, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> ...First off, the ideal phase is meant to illustrate principles, with the full underdstanding that deviation is inevitable. In the book, a couple of self-defense techniques are demonstrated. They are then followed by (in some cases) several pages of principles and concepts that are illustrated in the technique...
> 
> ...Hence, even if the technique itself may not SEEM to be pragmatic to you, the concepts illustrated in -- and taught by -- the technique have infinite application.
> 
> ...



so are you saying that there is a chance that _that_ particular technique's value is not based upon face value of the technique, but the underlying principles of what makes the technique what it is...?


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 29, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> so are you saying that there is a chance that _that_ particular technique's value is not based upon face value of the technique, but the underlying principles of what makes the technique what it is...?


Partly. What I will go out on a limb to say is that, if you get the opening moves of a technique into ownership, you won't get the chance to finish it. Kenpoists tend to train for hand-speed that neglects to take the speed of collapsing bodies into account. There is a black belt who was out of Mr. Whites school who tells a story as a policeman...guy on a bus (I think with a knife)...narrow width to respond in. Bad guy makes the attack; kenpo guy initiates 5-swords...gets off the block and the chop. Palm heel strikes air. Why? The guy was downed from the hack to the neck.

Commercial kenpo has failure built into it...fall-back positions and successive strikes in the event the ideal phase doesn't take. Mr. Chapel has made training for success an integral part of the kenpo he teaches; the technique is taught in its entirety, but one must not expect to get that far when the front end of the tech is done correctly. The "what if" becomes "what if the guy falls to the floor before you finish the technique?". Oddly, the capacity for this was built into kenpo all along...most just don't have the eyes to see, or are unwilling to have them opened if it threatens their pre-existing understandings of possibility & limitation.

For as unrealistic as a technique may seem to you, remember this: Someone, somewhere, can pull it off without a hitch. So, is it really unrealistic?

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Aug 29, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Kenpoists tend to train for hand-speed that neglects to take the speed of collapsing bodies into account.
> 
> For as unrealistic as a technique may seem to you, remember this: Someone, somewhere, can pull it off without a hitch. So, is it really unrealistic?
> 
> ...



And therein lie two of the greatest fallacies in Kenpo mythology.

1)  Kenpo techniques are overkill and a well executed technique will be so devastating that the attacker will hit the ground before you've had a chance to execute all 8 strikes in 3 seconds.

2)  Because someone somewhere makes it work once, it must be good.

Just as many times as times as you will find an example of an attacker falling from a well executed technique before it is finished, you will find examples of attackers fighting back and causing the Kenpoist to alter the technique in order to win.  

Just as many times as you find a Kenpoist who can make a technique work, you will find a Kenpoist who can't make it work.   You shouldn't have to be able to solve a rubik's cube in order to draw a square.  And you shouldn't have to spend 5 - 25 years learning Kenpo in order to execute the system's basic techniques.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 29, 2005)

Old Fat Kenpoka said:
			
		

> And therein lie two of the greatest fallacies in Kenpo mythology.
> 
> 1) Kenpo techniques are overkill and a well executed technique will be so devastating that the attacker will hit the ground before you've had a chance to execute all 8 strikes in 3 seconds.
> 
> ...


Couldn't agree with you more than I already do, Alan. This is exactly the point to studying techs for concepts, principles, and key movements; you SHOULDN'T get the whole thing off. In my personal kenpo journey, I had to switch to boxing for a time to learn to hit hard enough to hurt someone. After I finally got it, I could go back to kenpo and make the "marriage of gravity" lessons I'd heard ad nauseum actually apply. Independently of me, they worked the whole time. I just needed a different perspective from a different venue to put the pieces together in my own pea brain. Palm heel take downs were more viable for me after spending hours drilling osoto throws. I just learn better via cross-training (helps the light bulbs come on). 

And I ain't saying it must be good because someone somewhere did it once. I personally view many SD techs as not being ready for use off the line. Then someone will come along and offer a different perspective on the same move that makes the whole thing light up again. As a learning journey, I would say the impracticality doesn't lay with what we do know of a technique, but what we don't. I can look at techniques and forms now with a different set of eyes than I had 25 years ago. That's the "long haul" part of the journey. Long kenpo journeys aren't for everyone, nor should they be. But for those of us tweaked enough in the head to make this a life-long hobby, the information -- and skill -- unfolds in layers.

I'd say...learn it now, re-visit it later. About every 3-5 years, I get another layer of the onion peeled back off my eyes, and develop a whole new appreciation for the complexities and subtleties that are layers deep in kenpo. Keeps it fun; keeps it interesting.  Perfect? Hell no. But nevertheless entertaining. Beats being bad at video games.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Rich_Hale (Aug 29, 2005)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> Several of American Kenpo's techniques aren't meant for combat in their "ideal" phase. They are there just to teach a certain principle(s) of motion.


In the last post that Mr. Hawkins and I both responded to, I disagreed with him as to "Mr. Parker's" meaning of the term Reverse Marriage of Gravity.

In this case I couldn't agree with him more. I may not have chosen to use the same example he used, but that has less to do with the correctness of his answer, and more to do with the fact that I'm old . . . I mean older, and maybe just a little more wise in the ways of the written word (and how it can be used against me).

The quote referred to in Sapper6's question is actually an exact quote from my web site, so I feel compelled to respond to the question, and as to what I meant when I wrote it.

James is absolutely correct when he said, "Several of American Kenpo's techniques aren't meant for combat in their "ideal" phase. They are there just to teach a certain principle(s) of motion."

This goes back to what Mr. Parker thought the "ideal" phase of a technique was; not what you and I think its ideal phase is. As he taught it to me, the ideal phase of a technique has less to do with its street practicality, and more to do with the principle, or movement he wanted me to learn.

This can be as complex as a technique like Deceptive Panther, or as simple as the use of a hammerfist instead of a handsword. Let's face it, there are many a technique that call for a handsword, where a hammerfist could be just as effective, if not more so, and vise versa. But in order to make sure we practiced both handswords and hammerfists, Mr. Parker divided these weapons (somewhat) evenly throughout the system, so we would be exposed to both.

The same holds true for the distribution of targets as it does for weapons.

Take for example Dance of Death, Thundering Hammers, and The Sleeper. They all start out basically the same - executing a left inward block to your opponent's right punch, with your right arm hanging naturally at your side. Dance of Death then strikes low, Thundering Hammer strikes to the middle, and The Sleeper strikes high. Students often ask if they could strike to the groin (low) for Thundering Hammers, because they feel it would be more effective. I simply tell them that if anyone ever attacks them, on the street, with a right punch, they have my blessing to defend against it any way they please . . . but in class I want Thundering Hammer to be a middle level strike, because we are already practicing a low strike when we do Dance of Death.

All too often people confuse Mr. Parker's techniques with the techniques from other systems. Many other systems teach techniques for the sole purpose of street defense. To Mr. Parker this was like teaching your children sentences one at a time, on an as-needed basis, instead of teaching them how to read and write the language itself.

Many of our techniques are very effective in the street, but I agree completely with James (if I'm correctly interpreting what he is trying to say) in that as effective as they may be, their street practicality is still secondary to the principles of Kenpo that they were designed to teach.

In closing, though Mr. Hawkins may have only 7 years in the art, I'd say he has a better understanding of Kenpo than many high ranking old timers I have met over the last 33 years. Furthermore - I'll be the first to admit that I wasn't half a knowledgeable, as he is, after my first 7 . . .10 or 12 years.

Keep up the good work James, it takes a lot of guts to put your opinions out there knowing someone may stomp on them. Which reminds me - if we were to stomp on your opinions, that would be using marriage of gravity, but if you were to take what was meant to be abuse and used it to your own advantage "that" would be reverse marriage of gravity. 

Take care my friend,


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 29, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Partly. What I will go out on a limb to say is that, if you get the opening moves of a technique into ownership, you won't get the chance to finish it. Kenpoists tend to train for hand-speed that neglects to take the speed of collapsing bodies into account. There is a black belt who was out of Mr. Whites school who tells a story as a policeman...guy on a bus (I think with a knife)...narrow width to respond in. Bad guy makes the attack; kenpo guy initiates 5-swords...gets off the block and the chop. Palm heel strikes air. Why? The guy was downed from the hack to the neck.
> 
> Commercial kenpo has failure built into it...fall-back positions and successive strikes in the event the ideal phase doesn't take. Mr. Chapel has made training for success an integral part of the kenpo he teaches; the technique is taught in its entirety, but one must not expect to get that far when the front end of the tech is done correctly. The "what if" becomes "what if the guy falls to the floor before you finish the technique?". Oddly, the capacity for this was built into kenpo all along...most just don't have the eyes to see, or are unwilling to have them opened if it threatens their pre-existing understandings of possibility & limitation.
> 
> ...


This is akin to Plato's "Allegory of the Cave". 

Me, I teach the technique to work, ideal phase, if it doesn't the Even-IF comes into play, which leads back to ideal. The techniques are taught at many levels, but if you can't make it work ideal, how can you make the concepts that it entails work later? Changing the technique and teaching it the altered way robs future students of the value of the original they never got.

I won't argue the techniques are the vessel to teach the proper concepts, theories, and principles, otherwise, we'd be doing San Soo or JKD.

BTW, I agree completely with your statement above, less the COMMERCIAL KENPO reference.


DarK LorD


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 29, 2005)

Mr. Hale, Mr. Hawkins, Dr. Dave, and all others who've taken the time to respond here,

thank you greatly for offering your ideas of what this statement means to you; even if it is met with confliction, it cannot be removed from your realm of understanding.  thanks again. :asian: 

while there very well may be other's who wish to offer insight into this perplexing statement, i feel at this point i somewhat understand what Mr. Parker might have intended to convey to his martial followers.  while it may certainly not be perceived to mean the same to many others, well...can we say the same of anything?  certainly not.  but i do believe that is what was meant.



> Several of American Kenpo's techniques aren't meant for combat in their "ideal" phase. They are there just to teach a certain principle(s) of motion.



to understand this statement, one must concede that not _all_ of American Kenpo's techniques were completely "studio to the street" effective.  that's not to say that they _couldn't_ be effective, it's just saying that wasn't their _main_ purpose for incorporation and that a superior motive existed behind it.  to believe this is pure mind-boggling to laymen martial artists, yet makes perfect sense to the martial scientist.  it's rather disturbing to think not _everyone_ would possesses this level of understanding behind what they are doing in the combat arts.  and even more disturbing knowing there are some that will commit their entire lives to such an endeavor, and die not even scratching the surface.

i wonder what drove Mr. Parker's inclination to explore these facets of fighting?  i'm in awe of the scientific reasoning that had to be present during its inception.

thanks again.

 :asian:


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 29, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> i wonder what drove Mr. Parker's inclination to explore these facets of fighting? i'm in awe of the scientific reasoning that had to be present during its inception.
> 
> thanks again.
> 
> :asian:


 
I feel the same way.

DarK LorD


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Aug 30, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> Mr. Hale, Mr. Hawkins, Dr. Dave, and all others who've taken the time to respond here,
> 
> thank you greatly for offering your ideas of what this statement means to you; even if it is met with confliction, it cannot be removed from your realm of understanding. thanks again. :asian:
> 
> ...


You're welcome for my response and the underlined portion describes exactly what I believe.  I don't knock other's beliefs as they have their own path on the journey and can support their beliefs as well.  But that segment is exactly what I was trying to get across.

Respectfuly,
James


----------



## Seabrook (Aug 30, 2005)

Rich_Hale said:
			
		

> Take for example Dance of Death, Thundering Hammers, and The Sleeper. They all start out basically the same - executing a left inward block to your opponent's right punch, with your right arm hanging naturally at your side. Dance of Death then strikes low, Thundering Hammer strikes to the middle, and The Sleeper strikes high. Students often ask if they could strike to the groin (low) for Thundering Hammers, because they feel it would be more effective. I simply tell them that if anyone ever attacks them, on the street, with a right punch, they have my blessing to defend against it any way they please . . . but in class I want Thundering Hammer to be a middle level strike, because we are already practicing a low strike when we do Dance of Death.


The way I teach my students is somewhat different. I tell them that these three family related moves start the same (left inward block, right arm hangs naturally), but your choice of target on the next strike *DEPENDS* on the position of the opponent's left arm. If his left arm is low, go into Sleeper or depending on how low it is, Thundering Hammers; if it is high, you should do Dance of Death. This takes a close eye in watching for these positionings but it's really no different then what we do when sparring against skilled opponents. 

If you don't watch for these arm positions of your opponent, and just arbitrarily choose any of the three techniques after the opponent does the step-through right punch, there is a greater probability that you won't be able to pull off your move. 

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Ray (Aug 30, 2005)

For me, part but not all of the practicality (or usefullness) of the techniques is akin to the contrived positions used in chess instruction. If the situation/position is familiar with one already known, then a course of action can be derived more quickly.

Another part of the usefullness of the techniques can be likened, in my mind, to the instruction of principles (again similar to chess: develop pieces quickly, don't waste time, don't weaken the pawn chain).

{but then again, I suck at chess too}

Another part of it is the movements themselves. Personally, I need some method of practicing strikes, blocks, etc. Using the techniques I can practice them, similar to a boxer practicing combinations. 

Has a complete technique been used in a fight? I dunno, but certainly chunks have been. Somewhere (I don't recall where) I heard that the "technique" "Lone Kimono" originated when Mr. Parker witnessed someone grabbing Mr. Chow in that manner...(I'm certainly open to correction on that story).


----------



## Rich_Hale (Aug 30, 2005)

Seabrook said:
			
		

> The way I teach my students is somewhat different.


   Hello Jamie,

 You say you teach the techniques differently, but it sounds like we may not actually teach the techniques differently at all. For example; if I were to teach Thundering Hammers, in the air, to someone who has never seen it before, I would teach it with a mid level strike. Now if you were to teach the same technique under the same circumstances, but taught it with a low strike  that would be teaching the technique differently.

 On the other hand, if we were teaching a student how to defend against a right punch, and offered up Thundering Hammers, Dance of Death, and The Sleeper as the evenings fare, its likely that we would both mix, and match, the pieces/parts in a made-to-order fashion, depending on a long list of variables.


----------



## Seabrook (Aug 30, 2005)

Rich_Hale said:
			
		

> Hello Jamie,
> 
> You say you teach the techniques differently, but it sounds like we may not actually teach the techniques differently at all. For example; if I were to teach Thundering Hammers, in the air, to someone who has never seen it before, I would teach it with a mid level strike. Now if you were to teach the same technique under the same circumstances, but taught it with a low strike  that would be teaching the technique differently.
> 
> On the other hand, if we were teaching a student how to defend against a right punch, and offered up Thundering Hammers, Dance of Death, and The Sleeper as the evenings fare, its likely that we would both mix, and match, the pieces/parts in a made-to-order fashion, depending on a long list of variables.


Gotcha Rich. I misinterpreted what you were stating. 

Cheers brother.

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## bdparsons (Aug 30, 2005)

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> Me, I teach the technique to work, ideal phase, if it doesn't the Even-IF comes into play, which leads back to ideal. The techniques are taught at many levels, but if you can't make it work ideal, how can you make the concepts that it entails work later?



Well said, Clyde, well said. Far too often folks are quick to deviate from the ideal without recognizing that the key function of "What-if; Even-if; Blending and Borrowing" is to "persuade" the individual to return to relative body position(s) that allow you to complete the ideal. 

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## MJS (Aug 30, 2005)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> Several of American Kenpo's techniques aren't meant for combat in their "ideal" phase.  They are there just to teach a certain principle(s) of motion. Example: Deceptive Panther -- While being a very effective "street technique" it is against a not so common "street attack".  The technique is there mainly as a lesson in revers motion.  The technique "plays itself" in reverse after the left strike to the opponents neck/jaw depending on who teaches it.



Certainly an interesting discussion.  There is a thread in the General MA section titled "Why train unusable techniques" and IMO it relates to this thread.  There is always something usefull to be gained from all techs. IMO.  What works for some, may not work as easily for others as Alan stated.  Another thing to look at is, will the person stay static for the entire tech? Most likely not, therefore the tech. in its 'ideal phase' will need to be change in order to adapt to our opponent.

Mike


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 30, 2005)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> You're welcome for my response and the underlined portion describes exactly what I believe.  I don't knock other's beliefs as they have their own path on the journey and can support their beliefs as well.  But that segment is exactly what I was trying to get across.
> 
> Respectfuly,
> James



i understand your point.   



			
				Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> ...but if you can't make it work ideal, how can you make the concepts that it entails work later? Changing the technique and teaching it the altered way robs future students of the value of the original they never got.



this discussion was never about "making techniques work" in _any_ phase.  this was about an interpretation of an Ed Parker quote.  you have yet to contribute effectively to the thread, instead, telling others they were wrong.  go back and look at the question posed in the first post of this thread and then tell us what it means to *you*; rather than discredit the posts of those before you.  this topic should not, in the least, present or invite challenge to anyone's thought or belief behind their personal interpretation of said statement.  what do _you_ have to offer to this thread that doesn't belittle the stance of others...?  

*a technique's usefulness and value doesn't necessarily lie in their street practicality.*

you are obviously a man of kenpo experience.  what does the above statement mean to you?  what do you understand of it?  i really want to know.  i thank you in advance for you contribution to this topic. :asian:


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 30, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> Mr. Parker was often said that _a technique's usefulness and value doesn't necessarily lie in their street practicality._ i'm guessing he hinted at "hidden" reason's for a certain techniques incorporation into the curriculum. would anyone like to further elaborate on this? what is your take on what Mr. Parker possibly meant by this?
> 
> thanks in advance.
> 
> :asian:


Hmm, I elaborate further and I'm condemned for not answering the question, but then again, I'm not asking questions on the internet because I have the answers.   I gotta wonder sometimes.

DarK LorD


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 30, 2005)

MJS said:
			
		

> Certainly an interesting discussion.  There is a thread in the General MA section titled "Why train unusable techniques" and IMO it relates to this thread.  There is always something usefull to be gained from all techs. IMO.  What works for some, may not work as easily for others as Alan stated.  Another thing to look at is, will the person stay static for the entire tech? Most likely not, therefore the tech. in its 'ideal phase' will need to be change in order to adapt to our opponent.
> 
> Mike



indeed, i agree with the thought process.  what i'm hoping to surmise is the personal interpretation of other Parker Kenpoists to the question posed.  to my understanding, there are only three people who have addressed the question.  the others just seemed to challenge the thoughts of others or merely add to that challenge.  

to my understanding, Parker Kenpoists seem to take to heart most of everything that became of Ed Parkers thought, including his thought process through spoken word.  what i hope to gain is what those Kenpoists think of this particular statement.  

thanks again for all contributions :asian:


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 30, 2005)

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> Hmm, I elaborate further and I'm condemned for not answering the question, but then again, I'm not asking questions on the internet because I have the answers.   I gotta wonder sometimes.
> 
> DarK LorD



i don't mean to condemn anyone.  it certainly is not my intent.  perhaps it is my own fault.  i don't know.  i certainly don't have the answers.  i'm just wondering what you think, that's all.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 30, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> i don't mean to condemn anyone. it certainly is not my intent. perhaps it is my own fault. i don't know. i certainly don't have the answers. i'm just wondering what you think, that's all.


The best thing for you to do is to get back in the studio and off the internet, find the answers to these questions in your own training.    Asking for opinions is asking for trouble.   

DarK LorD


----------



## MJS (Aug 30, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> to my understanding, Parker Kenpoists seem to take to heart most of everything that became of Ed Parkers thought, including his thought process through spoken word.  what i hope to gain is what those Kenpoists think of this particular statement.
> 
> a technique's usefulness and value doesn't necessarily lie in their street practicality.



The following are just my thoughts on the question.  They are by no means the end all be all of answers.  Here goes:

While the technique may not be 'the one' for the street, they could be teaching us:

1- a specific move such as a stance.

2- a specific block or parry.

3- body alignment or angles

4- concepts of height, width and depth

5- checking

6- how to flow from one move to the next.




> thanks again for all contributions :asian:



You're welcome! :asian:   I hope that this was more along the lines of what you're looking for.

Mike


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Aug 30, 2005)

Some techniques are better for teaching principles and may not be ideal or even practical in a fight.  This is just like the Sets:  they teach principles and movements, but are not going to be pretty in performance or kata competition.  

We could debate endlessly which techniques are better and which are worse, but we will never know for sure until someone tries all 154 several times each in live fights.  You could poll the entire Kenpo community and not be able to analyze all the data and draw any conclusions.   And, you will never be able to answer this question by testing these techniques in the dojo.


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 30, 2005)

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> The best thing for you to do is to get back in the studio and off the internet, find the answers to these questions in your own training.    Asking for opinions is asking for trouble.
> 
> DarK LorD



i'm not trying to learn kenpo via of internet discussion boards.  if this were the case, your statement would warrant merit.

i'm merely asking the opinion of those who i'll never have the pleasant forture of training with.  is there harm in that?  apparently so according to you.  i never said i was a student of Parker's American Kenpo, but i will say now, that i am not.  i am seeking insight into the matter, and who better to ask than people who train in it.  the question posed is of viable importance, regardless of system studied.  Ed Parker's Kenpo fascinates me.  i believe the principles he tought could be applied effectively regardless of the fighting style presently studied by any martial artist. 

i ask a question and am told, "get on the mat and find out for yourself...?"  what's your problem?  personal opinion from others is all of a sudden a harmful thing?  perhaps you're in the wrong place.  this is a domain of martial arts discussion.  perhaps *you* are in the wrong place.

either contribute to the thread or let it be.  to me, it makes no difference.  thanks.

 :asian:


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 30, 2005)

MJS said:
			
		

> The following are just my thoughts on the question.  They are by no means the end all be all of answers.  Here goes:
> 
> While the technique may not be 'the one' for the street, they could be teaching us:
> 
> ...



thank you! :asian:


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 30, 2005)

Old Fat Kenpoka said:
			
		

> Some techniques are better for teaching principles and may not be ideal or even practical in a fight.  This is just like the Sets:  they teach principles and movements, but are not going to be pretty in performance or kata competition.
> 
> We could debate endlessly which techniques are better and which are worse, but we will never know for sure until someone tries all 154 several times each in live fights.  You could poll the entire Kenpo community and not be able to analyze all the data and draw any conclusions.   And, you will never be able to answer this question by testing these techniques in the dojo.



thank you for your thoughts on the question posed.  it's all i was asking for. :asian:


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 30, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> i ask a question and am told, "get on the mat and find out for yourself...?" what's your problem? personal opinion from others is all of a sudden a harmful thing? perhaps you're in the wrong place. this is a domain of martial arts discussion. perhaps *you* are in the wrong place.
> 
> either contribute to the thread or let it be. to me, it makes no difference. thanks.
> 
> :asian:


Hmm, I'm in the wrong place (EPAK forum)? I study EPAK, and I discuss EPAK, get with the program bub, you're out of your element here. If you want answers to these questions I'd suggest you start training in what we do. If you'll notice, none of my posts have been in anything but Kenpo, I don't stray where I don't know what I'm talking about, and I reiterate, I have the answers so I don't need to ask these questions on the internet, and if one should pop up, I've got a direct link to my instructor to ask, 626-796-4029 LTKKA headquarters. 

  BTW, you sound like a spoiled child when told they have to work to earn the money for a car when they get their driver's license instead of good ole mommy/daddy buying it for you.    To learn it is to earn it, to earn it is to respect it.

DarK LorD


----------



## Bode (Aug 31, 2005)

_



			a technique's usefulness and value doesn't necessarily lie in their street practicality
		
Click to expand...

 _My opinion...
 First, the quote doesn't say the techniques aren't street practical, but that even the ones that are practical have more value than simply "street practicality."

 I believe every single technique has street practicality. In addition, each technique feeds off of the basic principles which, when analyzed, are apparent to the instructor and sometimes the student (depending on rank, intelligence, etc...). 

 More than likely a real confrontation will not involve all of Five Swords, but perhaps multiple "pieces" of a technique grafted together. Too many possiblities align themselves against you actually pulling off a complete technique, which is why we train ourselves to have weapons for every possilbe attack. 

 When discussing street pracicality and EPAK you cannot limit yourself to discussing one technique, but rather, the system as a whole. No one technique can sum up the capabilities of a highly trained Kenpoist. The street practicality of Kenpo comes from the spontaneous and proper use of basic movements which are present in every technique.

 It's the basics that matter...


----------



## Rich Parsons (Aug 31, 2005)

*
Moderation Note:

Please keep the discussion Polite and Respectful

Rich Parsons
Martial Talk
Assistant Admin
*


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 31, 2005)

Bode said:
			
		

> My opinion...
> First, the quote doesn't say the techniques aren't street practical, but that even the ones that are practical have more value than simply "street practicality."
> 
> I believe every single technique has street practicality. In addition, each technique feeds off of the basic principles which, when analyzed, are apparent to the instructor and sometimes the student (depending on rank, intelligence, etc...).
> ...


Not to do the "Mr. Parker said.." whiny thing, but this, Bode, is exactly what Mr. Parker was talking about when referencing becoming an engineer of motion. To master the underlying principles and techniques so that you're able to make one up on the spot that matches the factors present at the time of altercation. You can't plan for an unknown, but you can master the basics so you can respond to -- and dictate reaction -- *in *an unknown.

Hence Mr. Chapels emphasis on planned success in technique execution of the basics. We must be able to adapt and respond to changes that occur in our environment, but we need not be passive in dictating them. Much of the SL4 material manages the reactions of the opponent via the basics method of execution.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Bode (Aug 31, 2005)

> Not to do the "Mr. Parker said.." whiny thing, but this, Bode, is exactly what Mr. Parker was talking about when referencing becoming an engineer of motion.


 That's not whiny. I haven't been around long enough to have heard all of the "Mr. Parker said...." I appreciate it.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 31, 2005)

Theres an old joke in kenpo about the number of kenpoists it takes to change a light bulb. That dynamic still rears its head on these forums, daily. Everyman an expert, each quoting his experience with Mr. Parker, or a Senior / Semi-Senior. When possible, I try to own my opinions by relating them to my experience, in an attempt to avoid this fallacy of appeal to authority (argumentum ad verecundium). But thanks for your patience, Bode. It's refreshing in a kenpo community where the wagons have circled, but the guns are pointed in, not out.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## kenpoworks (Aug 31, 2005)

I think I posted this before, but well hell..
When Mr. Parker was asked .."so you think you have all the answers".....he replied .."hmm... I have'nt heard all the questions yet.....next"............. 
......what a guy!
Rich


----------



## Sapper6 (Aug 31, 2005)

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> Hmm, I'm in the wrong place (EPAK forum)?



yeah you are.  take a look around.  this is a *discussion forum*, where questions are asked and discussion takes place.  i ask a question and you say *"The best thing for you to do is to get back in the studio and off the internet, find the answers to these questions in your own training. Asking for opinions is asking for trouble."*  stop the train.  someone needs to tell Bob Hubbard this whole forum thing is a waste of time and money, no more questions from here on out!  so who's outta *their* element here, "bub"?



			
				Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> If you'll notice, none of my posts have been in anything but Kenpo...



sure they're about kenpo, just never has anything to do with the thread topic or questions posed, that's of course because "question askers" are beneath you.



> ...and I reiterate, I have the answers so I don't need to ask these questions...



hhmm, ok.  your system's creator openly states he didn't have all the answers, i guess that makes you better *and* smarter...riiight.  keep on believing that one.  you fail to master casual conversation, how'd you master kenpo?  



> BTW, you sound like a spoiled child when told they have to work to earn the money for a car when they get their driver's license instead of good ole mommy/daddy buying it for you. To learn it is to earn it, to earn it is to respect it.



real display of maturity there.

god forbid someone ask a kenpo question while you're around.  work on your manners a little more, it'll make you a better person, and a better martial artist.

to everyone else, thanks again for the time you took to offer a little piece of insight.  

cheers,

 :asian:


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 31, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> yeah you are. take a look around. this is a *discussion forum*, where questions are asked and discussion takes place. i ask a question and you say *"The best thing for you to do is to get back in the studio and off the internet, find the answers to these questions in your own training. Asking for opinions is asking for trouble."* stop the train. someone needs to tell Bob Hubbard this whole forum thing is a waste of time and money, no more questions from here on out!  so who's outta *their* element here, "bub"?


Yea, it really is a waste of time and money, besides, I'm only here to watch and create a little drama for the wannabees.     

DarK LorD


----------



## MJS (Sep 1, 2005)

And the last 2 posts on this thread pertain to it how exactly??  I really don't see anything productive coming out of them so can we try to get back on topic??  Also, feel free to use that little "Ignore" button found on everyones profile.

So....back to the discussion of technique practicality!! :ultracool 

Mike


----------



## pete (Sep 1, 2005)

ok mike, its really a silly discussion anyway.  the system and the statement speak for themselves.  

yes, there is more to American Kenpo than each individual technique's apparent street practicality.

no, there are no techniques that are flawed by-design and won't work against the attack they were meant to be used against.

yes, techniques will fail based on an individual's ability and understanding of how, when, and why to use it.

no, there are no attacks that simply will never happen, some are just more likely than others to start out that way.

yes, category completion is the stock answer when there is a lack of understanding.  how can categories ever be completed if the insights are infinite....

pete


----------



## Kenpodoc (Sep 1, 2005)

pete said:
			
		

> ok mike, its really a silly discussion anyway.  the system and the statement speak for themselves.
> 
> yes, there is more to American Kenpo than each individual technique's apparent street practicality.
> 
> ...


Huk Planas helped design the system and states that when they designed it some parts of techniques were placed in the system for category completion. I think that you can argue that all of the techniques can be made to work, you can argue that some use category completion too readily, but if Huk says that he put a part of a technique in the system for category completion, perhaps we should believe him.

Jeff


----------



## Seabrook (Sep 1, 2005)

Uh, oh....here we go with the category completion stuff...

I can just see what is coming, LOL.

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## MisterMike (Sep 1, 2005)

Well, if anyone wants to stand in a horse stance facing 12:00 and punch to 9:00 or 3:00 (end of Long 1), that's their perrogative.


----------



## MJS (Sep 1, 2005)

pete said:
			
		

> ok mike, its really a silly discussion anyway.  the system and the statement speak for themselves.
> 
> yes, there is more to American Kenpo than each individual technique's apparent street practicality.
> 
> ...



Well, if we stop and think about it, there are many silly discussions that take place.  Many of them get a few replies and then they die.  The original thread poster stated that he did not have a background in EPAK, so apparently this was not too silly of a discussion for him.

The in-thread warning and the nudge by myself were done to get the thread back on track because the topic was going off thread!  

There are 2 simple solutions to things:

1- Use that ignore feature if someone does not want to read someone elses posts.

2- If a discussion is silly or does not interest someone, they simply don't have to post there!

Mike


----------



## pete (Sep 1, 2005)

well mike, i guess i didn't see it as going off too far thread. The underlying intent, as i see it, to be asking such a question without a background in American Kenpo, is one in a long line of attempts to shortcut the system. 

_hey, EPAK looks cool! i have a friend whose uncle's barber does it, but it took him like 6 years to get a blackbelt. maybe if i eliminate the stuff that doesnt work anyway i can learn it in a year and a half._ 

... not sure if that was what was written, but that's what i read...

learn the system. train hard, seek knowledge, and develop a full understanding... especially with the stuff you dont think works. dont bail out anything you have a little trouble with as category completion, or errors in the system strategically placed as a test, or other ludicrous ideas. some posters might be a little more tired of seeing this attitude than me and just tell 'em directly get onto the mats and come back when you have a real question. i agree with that, just said it differently.

... and yes i know how the ignore buttons work, having joined this forum at roughly the same time as you, and by posting only about 15% the number of posts would seem i'd be relatively judicious regarding where and when i do post.

pete


----------



## Sapper6 (Sep 1, 2005)

pete said:
			
		

> well mike, i guess i didn't see it as going off too far thread. The underlying intent, as i see it, to be asking such a question without a background in American Kenpo, is one in a long line of attempts to shortcut the system.
> 
> _hey, EPAK looks cool! i have a friend whose uncle's barber does it, but it took him like 6 years to get a blackbelt. maybe if i eliminate the stuff that doesnt work anyway i can learn it in a year and a half._
> 
> ...



pete,

you are *sorely mistaken * about my intentions behind starting this thread.  i'm not looking for any manner of shortcut.  it's curiosity plain and simple.  i've been a student of martial arts since i was a young child, 1991 to be exact, having actively studied 4 different systems.  at one time, i did study American kenpo, but do not anymore.  i often find myself dwelling into the "general" topics Mr. Parker often touched on, especially in the Infinite Insights series.  the reason i refer to them as "general", is because you don't have to be a student of American Kenpo to understand what he is trying to convey; as they would apply to all forms of unarmed combat, regardless of system.  i am seeking clarification from American Kenpoists on a philosophy stated by the grandmaster of American Kenpo.  if you perceive my intentions in any other manner, then you are simply wrong.

i should't feel obligated to quit my current study to study American Kenpo, just because i have specific questions.  that is the purpose behind having a forum, especially one such as this.  if you have troubles in answering those questions, then don't reply.  and certainly, don't form your own opinions about the motivations behind such questions.  

this thread was never about the "stuff that doesn't work".  other people who took part in this thread made it seem that way.  this thread was about the practicality of techniques, as it applies to the kenpo system as a whole.  i took a stated quote from the grandmaster of kenpo, and simply asked for their interpretation of said quote.  don't take what others have said and use this as ammunition against my creating this discussion.

i am on the mat no less than five nights a week, i just don't wear a Kenpo crest on my chest.  this makes me no less of a person than the one who does.  

the entire reason behind MT's existence is for discussion of the martial arts.  people are entitled to ask questions about things they wouldn't necessarily understand bluntly.  they shouldn't be criticized for asking such questions, by you nor anyone else.  if you feel you have something informative and helpful to offer in aiding their understanding, then all is welcomed. but...if you possess the inability to answer their questions, then refrain from conversation;  don't redicule and criticize them.

good day,

 :asian:


----------



## Bode (Sep 1, 2005)

Let's not let this turn into KenpoNet...

 Sapper6, do you have any other questions or clarifications regarding this topic?


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Sep 1, 2005)

Pete:

There are many in kenpo -- including some of the seniors and semi-seniors -- who have concerns regarding the pragmatic application of techniques, fresh out of the box. There are many who do not practice the extensions, because they don't see the point, not because they don't know them. Category completion, me thinks, is less important than being able to actually defend yourself when the poop hits the fan; a skill missing in many kenpo black belts...folks who know the techs, thier definitions like the backs of their hands, etc.

There is the art of our art, and there is the part where the rubber meets the road. I don't think dialogue about the similarities and differences is necessarily a bad thing, even if all the parties aren't in agreement. It sounds like you're suggesting dialogue regarding these matters is pointless, particularly in the face of knowledge possessed by the true few who know.

I'm not sure I agree.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Sapper6 (Sep 1, 2005)

Bode said:
			
		

> Let's not let this turn into KenpoNet...
> 
> Sapper6, do you have any other questions or clarifications regarding this topic?



not right now, but stay tuned :supcool: .

thanks for your contribution :asian:


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Sep 1, 2005)

pete said:
			
		

> ok mike, its really a silly discussion anyway. the system and the statement speak for themselves.
> 
> yes, there is more to American Kenpo than each individual technique's apparent street practicality.
> 
> ...


Dude, you are so THE MAN   LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DarK LorD


----------



## MJS (Sep 1, 2005)

pete said:
			
		

> well mike, i guess i didn't see it as going off too far thread. The underlying intent, as i see it, to be asking such a question without a background in American Kenpo, is one in a long line of attempts to shortcut the system.
> 
> _hey, EPAK looks cool! i have a friend whose uncle's barber does it, but it took him like 6 years to get a blackbelt. maybe if i eliminate the stuff that doesnt work anyway i can learn it in a year and a half._
> 
> ...



Well Pete, asking a question is hardly a crime IMO.  As for things being off topic, please check out this link:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?&threadid=314&

The snipes and personal shots that were taking place is what is off topic!  This is not the place for it!

I think that it would be best for the discussion to return to topic please!

Mike


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 1, 2005)

**Moderator Note**

 Please, return to the original topic and keep the conversation polite and respectful.

  -G Ketchmark / shesulsa
  -MT Senior Moderator-


----------



## pete (Sep 2, 2005)

i dont think i was mistaken on this one at all. if someone were to develop a real interest in AK, looking for hidden meanings behind some obscure statement made by its founder is not the place to start. this is my opinion, not fact, so please feel free to disagree. but, i'd argue that is about as good a place to start as jumping into Long-4 and asking about the double secret applications hiding in the transitions. 

aside from that opinion, i did answer the question in my post #44. 

dr dave hit the nail on the head. those who have been through the system and know it are in a position to choose how and what to practice. those of us who haven't put a lifetime into it yet, should be developing an understanding of how when and why a technique will work, rather than looking for excuses to rationalize their own deficiency in ability, knowledge or both. 

case in point: mistermike's elementary view of the 'punches' at the end of long-1. 

once you accept the fact that each of the techniques in all of the incarnations of kenpo will 'work' under the prescribed conditions, then you can adjust, regulate, and modify (ARM) those techniques based on the environment and target availability. there in is where our similarities and differences lie, and dialogue regarding these options is where there is value.

pete


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Sep 2, 2005)

pete said:
			
		

> i dont think i was mistaken on this one at all. if someone were to develop a real interest in AK, looking for hidden meanings behind some obscure statement made by its founder is not the place to start. this is my opinion, not fact, so please feel free to disagree. but, i'd argue that is about as good a place to start as jumping into Long-4 and asking about the double secret applications hiding in the transitions.
> 
> aside from that opinion, i did answer the question in my post #44.
> 
> ...


I hope your KenpoMama is coming along as nicely as you are LOL.     I like your use of ARMing as well with modify on the end, something I'll have to use in future seminars, and make sure you get the credit.

DarK LorD


----------



## PBMaster (Oct 2, 2005)

I am not a Kenpo Man, however Chinese Martials Artists we are in common. Could it be that non-street worthy techniques might have at their core, elements that might train the mind to use the body in a new way and thus propel him further along in the use of something more street worthy and complex? Perhaps the non-street worthy technique might drill-in some simpler movement which is less practiced by the student and raise his body awareness. Further, perhaps when a simpler movement is incorporated with more elaborate flourishes, in a more street worthy technique, those flourishes may serve to disguise and distract the practitioner from feeling that simpler movement and learning it. Finally, the less street worthy movement might work like a charm in the street, the element of surprise perhaps coming into play.

Many techniques in my system are not first choices for street use. But their simplicity allows the student to really work on a larger critical movment , thus enhancing their timing, balance and coordination.

Children learn to crawl, then walk, then run, then skip, then roll, and eventually they may do back flips. All in good time.

I agree also that student's should sometimes take things at face value. Understanding often comes after mastery. Doesn't mean the student can't try to read into things, but a good instructor/mentor can put "the crystal ball" into better focus and help the process on a little bit. Anyhow, students are not suppose to know and see everything, that's why they are called students.

Interesting Discussion.

PB


----------

