# Kenpo Hands



## Danjo (Mar 14, 2007)

The phrase "Kenpo/Kempo Hands" has been used by various practitioners for years. I have a video with that title by Larry Tatum and also by Nick Cerio. However, they are quite different in application, though both are using multiple hand striking. I've seen the lightning-fast strikes by some that do not seem to be very powerful, and the very powerful strikes by some that do not seem to be very fast. Here's the question: how do you tend to strike when employing "Kenpo Hands"? Do you favor speed over power, or the opposite? Do you favor a rapid flurry of less powerful strikes or a few well placed powerful shots? Do you favor actual blows delivered by the hand, or clawing and poking type strikes?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 14, 2007)

Danjo said:


> The phrase "Kenpo/Kempo Hands" has been used by various practitioners for years. I have a video with that title by Larry Tatum and also by Nick Cerio. However, they are quite different in application, though both are using multiple hand striking. I've seen the lightning-fast strikes by some that do not seem to be very powerful, and the very powerful strikes by some that do not seem to be very fast. Here's the question: how do you tend to strike when employing "Kenpo Hands"? Do you favor speed over power, or the opposite? Do you favor a rapid flurry of less powerful strikes or a few well placed powerful shots? Do you favor actual blows delivered by the hand, or clawing and poking type strikes?


I prefer low energy shots with good body alignment... I'm Lazy.
sean


----------



## LawDog (Mar 14, 2007)

I prefer a short range power fist strike, one that utilizes many chamber points. The faster long range fist strikes are needed to set everything up so that you can apply the heavy hitter.


----------



## Mike Att (Mar 14, 2007)

I think one of the biggest problems in kenpo/kempo and one of the reasons many view it as an unrealistic "slap art" is that everyone wants to blow through their techniques a thousand miles per hour with no consideration to power. You just have to checkout some of the "crap" on youtube to see that. Most would be better served to slow down a little and put some stopping power behind their blows. 

To me, speed with nothing behind it is not that impressive, power will get someone's attention and speed and power..well, thats very impressive.

You mentioned Tatum and Cerio, I have the cerio tapes as well. I like how Cerio does not blow through the techs as fast as he can. His strikes are deliberate, and he uses great body positioning, which, b/c of his size, is something he needed to do.

Everybody tries to be Tatum but very few can really master or achieve that combination of speed and power. Though, we all keep trying.


----------



## jdinca (Mar 14, 2007)

One of the problems is the confusion between doing a SD technique fast, and doing the strikes within the technique fast. What I mean by this is that people, especially newer students, tend to rush a technique, thinking that they're doing a better job than they really are. The problem with this is that the strikes are never fully completed. What we stress in our system is that power comes through speed. This is one of the reasons a smaller person can be effective against a larger person. The key is making sure that the strike is completed. With the "soft hand" concept, the muscles are kept loose until just before impact, which allows for greater speed. This is coupled with timing and technique to be as efficient as possible. If you never give yourself the chance to tighten at the moment of impact and deliver the power generated to the target, you're not going to be nearly as effective.

Someone who knows how to move quickly may look impressive but that can also lead to the comments that kenpo is a "slap art", if they're not completing their strikes. Someone who knows how to move quickly and complete the strike will definitely stand above the rest because you can see the power delivered to the target.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 14, 2007)

Mike Att said:


> I think one of the biggest problems in kenpo/kempo and one of the reasons many view it as an unrealistic "slap art" is that everyone wants to blow through their techniques a thousand miles per hour with no consideration to power. You just have to checkout some of the "crap" on youtube to see that. Most would be better served to slow down a little and put some stopping power behind their blows.
> 
> To me, speed with nothing behind it is not that impressive, power will get someone's attention and speed and power..well, thats very impressive.
> 
> ...


Every one what? Speed for speed's sake is ok on the minor shots, they are supposed to be a set up.

God Speed
sean


----------



## Mike Att (Mar 14, 2007)

Sean, what would you classify as a minor shot?


----------



## Carol (Mar 14, 2007)

Personally I prefer power strikes and I prefer to avoid pokes and claws.  All those reflexes for protecting my fingers that I learned while earning a music degree...they never really went away.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 14, 2007)

The first two moves of every tech are technicaly minor shots, but if I may qualify, your are not truely fast without good alignment. 
Sean


----------



## Mike Att (Mar 14, 2007)

If you are speaking of a quick eye jab or shuto to the throat, than I would agree that getting in to stun or surprise the guy is fine. I think I was a little confused on the term "minor" shots, being that the effectivness of the first two strike/moves are more often that not going to dictate the outcome of the rest of the encounter. 

I kind of like the phrase "lead with spead but devour with power."


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 14, 2007)

No, I'm not actually. So much of what we call power has to do with your dimensional stage of action, weapon choice for that dimensional stage, target choice, and, as I have said, alignment, that you really don't need to muscle this stuff.
Sean


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 14, 2007)

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this is where and why I feel so fortunate to have cross trained in Kung Fu San Soo with my Kempo. KFSS is practiced slowly, yet when demonstrated shows amazing speed and unbelievable power (I've still got bruises from practices as much as five years ago at maybe 1/3 speed/power). 

Jimmy Woo (the founder of Kung Fu San Soo) said to go fast, practice slowly. Here's what I think he meant (it works out as a syllogism, for the literati out there ). *Practice *the basics *slowly *(with good form--many have mentioned alignment); *then *over time, this proper, *relaxed form breeds speed* (muscles are not tightened to restrict movement--some have mentioned newer people going fast and wrongly thinking they're generating power); and *finally*, *good form plus speed generates power*, at least in the body-fighting arts, which put some weight into the strikes. 

Too much of the Kempo I was taught was about arm power. In another lifetime, my boxing manager would equate this arm power to a jab--good in its place, but not anything like a hook. When he talked about the left hook, his eyes lit up behind those coke bottle lenses (he'd been a ranked middle weight back in the day). He made it his trademark because the hook may only travel a few inches, but with the trained body behind it, and to the right target, it became a knockout punch.

Now is there a place for the quick strike, the jab if you will? I agree with those who have said, Yes, as a spear hand or open tiger's mouth (web hand) to the throat; no need for body power there, arm power is more than enough. Same with eye rakes, fingers to eyes or throat, etc. But I wouldn't use these or count on these to work as a flurry (doesn't mean others couldn't do so, but I wouldn't bet my life on _me _being able to do this). If I get in the first strike, one of these would be a very fine start. But if we're already in it, one or two and at the most three good Kung Fu San Soo type shots should do the trick. If not, I may be in for a long ride.


----------



## jdinca (Mar 14, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this is where and why I feel so fortunate to have cross trained in Kung Fu San Soo with my Kempo. KFSS is practiced slowly, yet when demonstrated shows amazing speed and unbelievable power (I've still got bruises from practices as much as five years ago at maybe 1/3 speed/power).
> 
> Jimmy Woo (the founder of Kung Fu San Soo) said to go fast, practice slowly. Here's what I think he meant (it works out as a syllogism, for the literati out there ). *Practice *the basics *slowly *(with good form--many have mentioned alignment); *then *over time, this proper, *relaxed form breeds speed* (muscles are not tightened to restrict movement--some have mentioned newer people going fast and wrongly thinking they're generating power); and *finally*, *good form plus speed generates power*, at least in the body-fighting arts, which put some weight into the strikes.
> 
> ...


 
Jimmy Woo had it right. To me, when kenpo teachers teach arm power, they're missing the boat. Even a rigid claw to the eye needs to have some body movement behind it to be anatomically correct and develop maximum speed. The speed developed is the same as it would be if it were a punch. What is different is the hand strike chosen and how the body is utilized to it a more powerful strike. "Muscleing" it, for most people, will only result in a slower strike and as a result, less power.


----------



## Tames D (Mar 15, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this is where and why I feel so fortunate to have cross trained in Kung Fu San Soo with my Kempo. KFSS is practiced slowly, yet when demonstrated shows amazing speed and unbelievable power (_*I've still got bruises from practices as much as five years ago*_ at maybe 1/3 speed/power).
> 
> Jimmy Woo (the founder of Kung Fu San Soo) said to go fast, practice slowly. Here's what I think he meant (it works out as a syllogism, for the literati out there ). *Practice *the basics *slowly *(with good form--many have mentioned alignment); *then *over time, this proper, *relaxed form breeds speed* (muscles are not tightened to restrict movement--some have mentioned newer people going fast and wrongly thinking they're generating power); and *finally*, *good form plus speed generates power*, at least in the body-fighting arts, which put some weight into the strikes.
> 
> ...


Jeez, I swear I can still feel the bruises Jimmy gave me 30 years ago.


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 15, 2007)

jdinca said:


> Jimmy Woo had it right. To me, when kenpo teachers teach arm power, they're missing the boat. Even a rigid claw to the eye needs to have some body movement behind it to be anatomically correct and develop maximum speed. The speed developed is the same as it would be if it were a punch.



I just learned something huge here! Truly an _Aha!_ moment. I have practiced and taught the Kempo strikes such as claws, rigid fingers (as spear hand), etc. with some body movement, but hadn't put it together. Now I see, for my kempo at least, these were never just arm strikes. *Thanks, jdinca!* :asian:



> "Muscleing" it, for most people, will only result in a slower strike and as a result, less power.


Exactly. Power developed from relaxation--slow repitition of good form, which leads to relaxed speed, which in turn = power generated--is not even close to the same as 'muscling it,' which implies struggling to make arm power enough.


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 15, 2007)

QUI-GON said:


> Jeez, I swear I can still feel the bruises Jimmy gave me 30 years ago.



:lfao: I'm sure! I only got it from his first gen. masters--have just led a charmed life, I guess. But I have seen him on tape.


----------



## Tames D (Mar 15, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> :lfao: I'm sure! I only got it from his first gen. masters--have just led a charmed life, I guess. But I have seen him on tape.


You can imagine how scary it was for me, being a teenager at the time.


----------



## LawDog (Mar 15, 2007)

I am curious, it has been mentioned on this thread that kenpo uses arm power, in what system(s) of kempo/kenpo is this done? All of the Kempo/Kenpo systems that I am aware of advocate the use of multi muscle groups, when possible, applied into all of their strikes and blocks. Speed and power by technique is a golden rule.
On many vid clips I have seen the slapping thing, I attribute this to an individual who is trying to impress.
:supcool:


----------



## MJS (Mar 15, 2007)

Danjo said:


> The phrase "Kenpo/Kempo Hands" has been used by various practitioners for years. I have a video with that title by Larry Tatum and also by Nick Cerio. However, they are quite different in application, though both are using multiple hand striking. I've seen the lightning-fast strikes by some that do not seem to be very powerful, and the very powerful strikes by some that do not seem to be very fast. Here's the question: how do you tend to strike when employing "Kenpo Hands"? Do you favor speed over power, or the opposite? Do you favor a rapid flurry of less powerful strikes or a few well placed powerful shots? Do you favor actual blows delivered by the hand, or clawing and poking type strikes?


 
I would think that many of us have people that we look up to and do our best to mimic.  However, the fact remains that each of us is unique and chances are, no matter how hard we try, we are not going to move 100% like the person in question.  Some people just have a natural skill that we can't replicate.  I have not seen either tape you mention, but I have seen Larry Tatum move, both on clips and in person one time.  

As for the question:  I favor well placed, powerful shots.  Why?  IMHO, I'd rather have my shots make more of an impact rather than blitz someone with shots that are not going to have much effect.  Don't get me wrong, I still feel that speed is a part of the application, but IMO, it should not take priority of quality shots.

As to what type of shots:  Punches have their place like all shots.  Personally, I prefer open handed shots.  Heel palm, rakes, pokes, elbows.  

Mike


----------



## MJS (Mar 15, 2007)

jdinca said:


> One of the problems is the confusion between doing a SD technique fast, and doing the strikes within the technique fast. What I mean by this is that people, especially newer students, tend to rush a technique, thinking that they're doing a better job than they really are. The problem with this is that the strikes are never fully completed. What we stress in our system is that power comes through speed. This is one of the reasons a smaller person can be effective against a larger person. The key is making sure that the strike is completed. With the "soft hand" concept, the muscles are kept loose until just before impact, which allows for greater speed. This is coupled with timing and technique to be as efficient as possible. If you never give yourself the chance to tighten at the moment of impact and deliver the power generated to the target, you're not going to be nearly as effective.
> 
> Someone who knows how to move quickly may look impressive but that can also lead to the comments that kenpo is a "slap art", if they're not completing their strikes. Someone who knows how to move quickly and complete the strike will definitely stand above the rest because you can see the power delivered to the target.


 


kidswarrior said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this is where and why I feel so fortunate to have cross trained in Kung Fu San Soo with my Kempo. KFSS is practiced slowly, yet when demonstrated shows amazing speed and unbelievable power (I've still got bruises from practices as much as five years ago at maybe 1/3 speed/power).
> 
> Jimmy Woo (the founder of Kung Fu San Soo) said to go fast, practice slowly. Here's what I think he meant (it works out as a syllogism, for the literati out there ). *Practice *the basics *slowly *(with good form--many have mentioned alignment); *then *over time, this proper, *relaxed form breeds speed* (muscles are not tightened to restrict movement--some have mentioned newer people going fast and wrongly thinking they're generating power); and *finally*, *good form plus speed generates power*, at least in the body-fighting arts, which put some weight into the strikes.


 
These 2 posts are very true!  I couldn't agree more!  This is the method I use when I go thru my techniques.  I'll run thru them slow at first.  I want to make sure that not only do I have good form, but also that I'm targetting my shots properly.  I may not finish a tech. in .3 seconds, but my shots are reaching their intended targets. 

Mike


----------



## Mike Att (Mar 15, 2007)

When I speak of hitting with power, I am not talking about "muscling up" on strikes. I am speaking of finishing your strikes and putting body mass behind the blows. A lot of times people want to appear as though they are moving really fast and cut their strikes way short of the target and wind up only moving their hands without the body behind it.

Speed is of course one of the things that make ken/mpo an effective fighting art, but speed for the sake of speed, with little regard for the impact of the blows, diminishes the arts effectivness.


----------



## Danjo (Mar 15, 2007)

It's been mentioned about "Set-up Shots" and that brings up another question. In Jack Dempsey's book on how to fight, he talked about the "Jab" and said that he and other old time boxers prefered to call them "Jolts" because they would be delivered in a more powerful fasion than what came later. He basically delivered his "Jab" with what we call a drag-step in Kajukenbo where the landing of the forward foot and the forward fist were simultaneous. It was still a "set up shot" for the crosses, overhands, hooks etc. , but it wasn't a throw-away shot in the least. Also reminds me of Larry Holmes' jabs that could knock a person down.

Should "set-up" shots be essentially non-powerful shots that serve merely to annoy or distract on their own, or should they be used to actually do damage?


----------



## Danjo (Mar 15, 2007)

Mike Att said:


> When I speak of hitting with power, I am not talking about "muscling up" on strikes. I am speaking of finishing your strikes and putting body mass behind the blows. A lot of times people want to appear as though they are moving really fast and cut their strikes way short of the target and wind up only moving their hands without the body behind it.
> 
> Speed is of course one of the things that make ken/mpo an effective fighting art, but speed for the sake of speed, with little regard for the impact of the blows, diminishes the arts effectivness.


 
I agree in that I have seen the difference between people rushing through techniques and being sloppy and those that look very crisp and clean in their execution of the same techniques. It seems to me that those that are in the latter group have more power in their movements without sacrificing speed.


----------



## MJS (Mar 15, 2007)

Danjo said:


> It's been mentioned about "Set-up Shots" and that brings up another question. In Jack Dempsey's book on how to fight, he talked about the "Jab" and said that he and other old time boxers prefered to call them "Jolts" because they would be delivered in a more powerful fasion than what came later. He basically delivered his "Jab" with what we call a drag-step in Kajukenbo where the landing of the forward foot and the forward fist were simultaneous. It was still a "set up shot" for the crosses, overhands, hooks etc. , but it wasn't a throw-away shot in the least. Also reminds me of Larry Holmes' jabs that could knock a person down.
> 
> Should "set-up" shots be essentially non-powerful shots that serve merely to annoy or distract on their own, or should they be used to actually do damage?


 
I would say they could work both ways.  Take for example a defense against a wrist grab.  If we go straight to a release, the opponent is focusing all of his attention on what he's doing.  Now, prior to our main defense, we do a quick flick with our fingers to the eyes or a quick kick to the shin.  This is not meant to do anything more than distract him, so we can execute our defense.

On the other hand, a technique against a punch.  We do an initial block.  I'm not only blocking to avoid getting hit, but I'm blocking hard enough to possibly do some damage to the arm.  It may be nothing more than deadening the arm for a moment, but its damage nonetheless.

Mike


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 15, 2007)

MJS said:


> I would say they could work both ways. Take for example a defense against a wrist grab. If we go straight to a release, the opponent is focusing all of his attention on what he's doing. Now, prior to our main defense, we do a quick flick with our fingers to the eyes or a quick kick to the shin. This is not meant to do anything more than distract him, so we can execute our defense.
> 
> On the other hand, a technique against a punch. We do an initial block. I'm not only blocking to avoid getting hit, but I'm blocking hard enough to possibly do some damage to the arm. It may be nothing more than deadening the arm for a moment, but its damage nonetheless.
> 
> Mike


 
A very good breakdown of the concept and two alternate applications. Your answer reminds me of the admonition of Kane and Wilder in _The Way of Kata_: Strike to disrupt, Disrupt to strike. And of course, even tho' they're speaking of Goju Ryu, the same concept is probably found in every art.


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 15, 2007)

Danjo said:


> It's been mentioned about "Set-up Shots" and that brings up another question. In Jack Dempsey's book on how to fight, he talked about the "Jab" and said that he and other old time boxers prefered to call them "Jolts" because they would be delivered in a more powerful fasion than what came later. He basically delivered his "Jab" with what we call a drag-step in Kajukenbo where the landing of the forward foot and the forward fist were simultaneous. It was still a "set up shot" for the crosses, overhands, hooks etc. , but it wasn't a throw-away shot in the least. Also reminds me of Larry Holmes' jabs that could knock a person down.
> 
> Should "set-up" shots be essentially non-powerful shots that serve merely to annoy or distract on their own, or should they be used to actually do damage?


 
Danjo, would you stop asking these hard questions! I just got the first one resolved in my my mind, and here you go again. :ultracool 

Seriously, I think MJS gave an excellent reply. Something else occurs to me as I think of your description of Dempsey's 'jab' with a step drag. That's a pretty heavy-duty jab. I picture it akin to Kung Fu San Soo's extension punch, where you essentially use a straight (vertical fist) punch and long front step to drive right through him. It's the setup and followup punch rolled into one.

A jab with a step drag. Whew! Damage.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 15, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> Danjo, would you stop asking these hard questions! I just got the first one resolved in my my mind, and here you go again. :ultracool
> 
> Seriously, I think MJS gave an excellent reply. Something else occurs to me as I think of your description of Dempsey's 'jab' with a step drag. That's a pretty heavy-duty jab. I picture it akin to Kung Fu San Soo's extension punch, where you essentially use a straight (vertical fist) punch and long front step to drive right through him. It's the setup and followup punch rolled into one.
> 
> A jab with a step drag. Whew! Damage.


You can be equaly effective by getting under the jab with your body. I didn't say the shots should be weak throw aways, I said they shouldn't require much energy.
Sean


----------



## Danjo (Mar 15, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> You can be equaly effective by getting under the jab with your body. I didn't say the shots should be weak throw aways, I said they shouldn't require much energy.
> Sean


 
Ideally, proper technique should take less energy to do effectively. However, I think your opener should be something substantial for a couple of reasons. 1) you might not get a second shot and 2) if the guy is pumped up with adrenaline or "psyched up" he may not feel it if it's a blow meant only to distract him.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 15, 2007)

Danjo said:


> Ideally, proper technique should take less energy to do effectively. However, I think your opener should be something substantial for a couple of reasons. 1) you might not get a second shot and 2) if the guy is pumped up with adrenaline or "psyched up" he may not feel it if it's a blow meant only to distract him.


Speed of action and you getting off the line of attack and keeping it that way, takes precidence. Minor shots are not distractions they are key building blocks for successfull major shots. (see Mike Tyson learning that lesson in his later fights) If the guy is open and unprepared, by all means take the major shot. 
Sean


----------



## jdinca (Mar 15, 2007)

kidswarrior said:


> I just learned something huge here! Truly an _Aha!_ moment. I have practiced and taught the Kempo strikes such as claws, rigid fingers (as spear hand), etc. with some body movement, but hadn't put it together. Now I see, for my kempo at least, these were never just arm strikes. *Thanks, jdinca!* :asian:
> 
> Exactly. Power developed from relaxation--slow repitition of good form, which leads to relaxed speed, which in turn = power generated--is not even close to the same as 'muscling it,' which implies struggling to make arm power enough.


 
:asian:  Just passing on what I've been taught.


----------



## jdinca (Mar 15, 2007)

Danjo said:


> It's been mentioned about "Set-up Shots" and that brings up another question. In Jack Dempsey's book on how to fight, he talked about the "Jab" and said that he and other old time boxers prefered to call them "Jolts" because they would be delivered in a more powerful fasion than what came later. He basically delivered his "Jab" with what we call a drag-step in Kajukenbo where the landing of the forward foot and the forward fist were simultaneous. It was still a "set up shot" for the crosses, overhands, hooks etc. , but it wasn't a throw-away shot in the least. Also reminds me of Larry Holmes' jabs that could knock a person down.
> 
> Should "set-up" shots be essentially non-powerful shots that serve merely to annoy or distract on their own, or should they be used to actually do damage?


 
Depends on the purpose of the set up shot. Are you trying to just distract so that other targets are open, or are you trying to strike him hard enough to hurt him and move him into a more vulnerable position for something more devastating?

A quick jab may daze, or distract your opponent long enough to drive your other fist/knee, whatever, into a more vulnerable target before he can react. A quick jab can also be hard enough for your opponent to stagger back a little, drop his guards with the result being his entire core is open to all kinds of fun and mayhem. What the result is will all depend on your technique, how accurate your strike was and to what extent your opponent was able to take it. A jab that hits the cheek, or forehead may just cause a momentary distraction. A jab that hits where the chin becomes the jaw could stagger him back, or even drop him. You won't know what the results are until after the strike is delivered.

It also depends on what the set up shot is. If I'm doing a rigid claw to the eyes, I want the altercation done and over with now because he's trying to kill me. That's the only reason I would use that strike. But, it's not the only strike I'm going to do because it may miss. The same goes for a half fist to the throat. It's life and death and the order of things should be my life and his death. Yes, I would try and save his life after I tried to take it. After all, it's what I do. 

A heel hand to the face, or a punch to the solar plexus is more likely to be used as a set up for something that can be more damaging. Yes, they can end the attack but chances are you may need to follow up with something else to finish the job.


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 15, 2007)

Mike Att said:


> When I speak of hitting with power, I am not talking about "muscling up" on strikes. *I am speaking of finishing your strikes and putting body mass behind the blows.* A lot of times people want to appear as though they are moving really fast and cut their strikes way short of the target and wind up only moving their hands without the body behind it.
> 
> Speed is of course one of the things that make ken/mpo an effective fighting art, but speed for the sake of speed, with little regard for the impact of the blows, diminishes the arts effectivness.



Finishing your blows with body mass behind them is exactly right, even, as jdinca said, the claws, etc. :ultracool


----------



## LawDog (Mar 16, 2007)

Kenpo Hands are strikes that do what ever you indended them to do.
Be it to: 
*hit and cause a break, to stun or control,
*create set ups or multi patterns.
All of our presets train us so that we can do these simple things.
It's all good stuff.


----------



## Joe Shuras (Mar 16, 2007)

Danjo said:


> The phrase "Kenpo/Kempo Hands" has been used by various practitioners for years. I have a video with that title by Larry Tatum and also by Nick Cerio. However, they are quite different in application, though both are using multiple hand striking. I've seen the lightning-fast strikes by some that do not seem to be very powerful, and the very powerful strikes by some that do not seem to be very fast. Here's the question: how do you tend to strike when employing "Kenpo Hands"? Do you favor speed over power, or the opposite? Do you favor a rapid flurry of less powerful strikes or a few well placed powerful shots? Do you favor actual blows delivered by the hand, or clawing and poking type strikes?


 
Good thread Dan, this question is thrown around a lot and is a favorite of mine to discuss. Here's my take.....

I think you need a balance of both which distinguishes the Kempo/Kenpo arts from others. You need to develop the power of, let's say a good boxer in your punches and a good Shotokan practitioner in your strikes BUT you should also develop speed techniques to overwelm an opponent when and if neccessary. Speed strikes would be equivilent to the boxer's jab, set your opponent up and then go in with the power shot to try to take him out. In Kempo/Kenpo we can also resort to the takedown/follow up or the lock or hold as a finishing move. Regardless of your choice, it would be the speed technique that sets it up and makes it possible. I know many here have posted the same concept. I think we're all pretty much on the same page.

Another strategy in our system is taught in the form Hansuki/Honsuki. Hansuki translates to half or small opening. I was reading an article by Ralph Castro of Shaolin KeNpo (who also practices a variation of the Hansuki form) and he was speaking of Professor Chow's teachings and wrote this theory-to find or create and opening in an opponent's defense ( if I may add, offense also) through the utilization of rapid fire hand strikes to vital areas. I take this to mean, say you have a 'worthy' opponent, you throw a barrage of strikes/punches at him to various areas/angles to confuse, startle and overwelm him, (these stikes may not have the power of one or two well placed bombs), eventually creating an opening where you can put him away with your power punches/strikes or finishing moves.

I also agree what the poster stated on Nick Cerio not going all out on hand speed but slowing down somewhat to maximize power and positioning. This was the foundation that Prof. Cerio learned from SGM. S. George Pesare and why SGM. Pesare's has put out powerful kickboxing champions over the years. I remember Mr. Pesare had a saying in the 70's when I first met him, 'the hands may be moving at 100 miles an hour but they're not going anywhere'. In other words, he would tell the class to slow down for more power and focus. He always stressed "the three'' - *speed, power and accuracy*. - Joe


----------



## Danjo (Mar 16, 2007)

LawDog said:


> Kenpo Hands are strikes that do what ever you indended them to do.
> Be it to:
> *hit and cause a break, to stun or control,
> *create set ups or multi patterns.
> ...


 
Perhaps this is what I was looking for in terms of definition. What makes them so fast etc. is the fact that they are pre-set patterns designed along the autonomic reflex reactions of the person being hit. Whether the shots are light or heavy is not the determining factor, but rather whether they follow the above definition. They're not "One Shot: One Kill" techniques (though the first one may be all you need if it's a heavy blow to the right area). Having them be pre-set makes them much faster than they would be otherwise due to the drills that have ingrained them into the nervous system.


----------



## Matt (Mar 16, 2007)

Danjo said:


> Perhaps this is what I was looking for in terms of definition. What makes them so fast etc. is the fact that they are pre-set patterns designed along the autonomic reflex reactions of the person being hit. Whether the shots are light or heavy is not the determining factor, but rather whether they follow the above definition. They're not "One Shot: One Kill" techniques (though the first one may be all you need if it's a heavy blow to the right area). Having them be pre-set makes them much faster than they would be otherwise due to the drills that have ingrained them into the nervous system.



I'd definitely back this answer. Prof. Kimo often says  when explaining some of his pre-set drills, (paraphrasing) - boxers knock people out for a living, and they use pre-set combinations. Although his always seem to feel heavy, at least when I'm on the receiving end. :ultracool 


Matt


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 16, 2007)

Joe Shuras said:


> an article by Ralph Castro of Shaolin KeNpo (who also practices a variation of the Hansuki form) and he was speaking of Professor Chow's teachings and wrote this theory-to find or create and opening in an opponent's defense ( if I may add, offense also) through the utilization of rapid fire hand strikes to vital areas. I take this to mean, say you have a 'worthy' opponent, you throw a barrage of strikes/punches at him to various areas/angles to confuse, startle and overwelm him, (these stikes may not have the power of one or two well placed bombs), eventually creating an opening where you can put him away with your power punches/strikes or finishing moves.


 
Yes, good point. _This_ is the place for Kempo's trademark rapid fire barage--a worthy opponent with no apparent weakness/opening. 'Disrupt to strike' (and , strike to disrupt).


----------



## green meanie (Mar 16, 2007)

I prefer powerful well placed shots over the rapid flurry. I don't do bother with the clawing or poking at all. :asian:


----------



## kidswarrior (Mar 16, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> Personally I prefer power strikes and I prefer to avoid pokes and claws. All those reflexes for protecting my fingers that I learned while earning a music degree...they never really went away.


 
This is a good reminder of jdinca's point, that even these types of strikes must be done with body 'power', i.e., *full body involvement/strong intention* behind the strike. This makes the claw/spear/poke strong enough not to be injured. To use the jab comparison, the jab--even if not a 'Dempsey' shot--is a strong enough fist strike not to be injured, even if blocked hard, and can easily roll into a hook, second jab, or feint and opposite hand cross. Just so, the strong kempo flurry of quick strikes can set up all manner of finishing blows with body mass following them.

And I didn't even get a music degree.


----------



## marlon (Mar 16, 2007)

i have read the whole thread so i apologize for any redundancey.  Kempo hands works best in my opinion with loose relaxed limbs that tense only on impact for a fraction of a second.  of course this requires proper body alignment, quick rooting strong intention and lots of practice to make it real.  speed creates power, striking with the timing that the body and strike lands simultaneaously creates power,improper body alignment and poor stances  / rooting makes for weak strikes no matter what.  Kempo hands works but it is not just throwing your arms and legs around as quickly as possible.

Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## Mike Att (Mar 16, 2007)

Matt, I like that little saying by Prof. Kimo and it also goes along with what GM Cunningham said about what the pre-sets help develop. For me, and maybe others, the hard part was understanding that the pre-sets, like boxers combinations, should be viewed as training tools, a means to an end, not the end itself. Early in my training, I would become fixated on the "technique" instead of the movement...if that makes any sense to anyone.


----------



## KenpoDave (Mar 17, 2007)

jdinca said:


> To me, when kenpo teachers teach arm power, they're missing the boat.


 
Perhaps.  But that could often be just part of deconstructing the movement.  Now, if that is all that gets taught, you are right.  But arm power is a component of powerful hitting, and should be addressed.


----------



## KenpoDave (Mar 17, 2007)

green meanie said:


> I prefer powerful well placed shots over the rapid flurry. I don't do bother with the clawing or poking at all. :asian:


 
A couple of powerful, well placed shots will feel "fast" to your opponent who has no choice but to react to the blows and therefore cannot defend.


----------



## green meanie (Mar 17, 2007)

KenpoDave said:


> A couple of powerful, well placed shots will feel "fast" to your opponent who has no choice but to react to the blows and therefore cannot defend.


 
My thoughts exactly. I've found that I appear faster than I really am just because my movements were efficient and my strikes were accurate.


----------



## Joe Shuras (Mar 17, 2007)

Mike Att said:


> Early in my training, I would become fixated on the "technique" instead of the movement...if that makes any sense to anyone.


 
Makes perfect sense, this happens to many martial artists early on. I make sure I stress to my students that the techniques are just that, 'a means to an end and not the end itself '......a training aid. They are a method or vehicle to drive home to the student the idea or concept while teaching them how to move with speed, power and accuracy. - Joe


----------



## LawDog (Mar 17, 2007)

Danjo,
In Kenpo the understanding of pre-set patterns is but one side of the thought process. 
When you interact with an opponent you will usually see multi doorways for various target areas, these doorways / targets should be viewed as a multi pattern. Now you only have to use a multi pattern of strikes that match.
Following a pattern is easy, no heavy though process is required making for a faster response time.
Kenpo Hands, why they respond so fast.
Have a good day,
:ultracool


----------



## marlon (Mar 17, 2007)

Mike Att said:


> Matt, I like that little saying by Prof. Kimo and it also goes along with what GM Cunningham said about what the pre-sets help develop. For me, and maybe others, the hard part was understanding that the pre-sets, like boxers combinations, should be viewed as training tools, a means to an end, not the end itself. Early in my training, I would become fixated on the "technique" instead of the movement...if that makes any sense to anyone.


 

makes lots of sense...it is the same with combinations...kempos ...weapons defenses...and forms

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## gixxershane (Mar 17, 2007)

Danjo said:


> The phrase "Kenpo/Kempo Hands" has been used by various practitioners for years. I have a video with that title by Larry Tatum and also by Nick Cerio. However, they are quite different in application, though both are using multiple hand striking. I've seen the lightning-fast strikes by some that do not seem to be very powerful, and the very powerful strikes by some that do not seem to be very fast. Here's the question: how do you tend to strike when employing "Kenpo Hands"? Do you favor speed over power, or the opposite? Do you favor a rapid flurry of less powerful strikes or a few well placed powerful shots? Do you favor actual blows delivered by the hand, or clawing and poking type strikes?


 

i like to mix it up.. some shots dont need all the power that you can muster up. some shots dont need the speed. so i guess it would all depend on the application.


----------



## jdinca (Mar 17, 2007)

KenpoDave said:


> Perhaps.  But that could often be just part of deconstructing the movement.  Now, if that is all that gets taught, you are right.  But arm power is a component of powerful hitting, and should be addressed.



Absolutely.


----------



## Juggernaut (Mar 17, 2007)

Very good thread, very informative.

Regards,

James Bullock


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 18, 2007)

KenpoDave said:


> A couple of powerful, well placed shots will feel "fast" to your opponent who has no choice but to react to the blows and therefore cannot defend.


Too true; however, you can't commit to everything.
Sean


----------



## KenpoDave (Mar 18, 2007)

Touch Of Death said:


> Too true; however, you can't commit to everything.
> Sean


 
True.


----------

