# Long 4



## bayonet (Sep 15, 2005)

Perhaps you Kenpoist out there can shed some light on this subject. Why do some schools/clubs/associations teach Long 4 at 2nd Brown and others require Long 4 for Shodan? And BTW I know what Infinite Insights #5 reads...


----------



## KenpoDave (Sep 16, 2005)

bayonet said:
			
		

> Perhaps you Kenpoist out there can shed some light on this subject. Why do some schools/clubs/associations teach Long 4 at 2nd Brown and others require Long 4 for Shodan? And BTW I know what Infinite Insights #5 reads...



The Tracy System teaches it at 3rd brown.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 17, 2005)

Our school teaches the forms and sets as listed below. 

Form 4 is where it is because it is the natural progression. 

Learn the basic moves in 1 and 2.
The 3's are against grabs, because they are less dangerous than punches.
4 is against the next highest level of danger, punches.

Yellow - Short 1 - Block Set 1
Orange - Long 1 - Strike Set 1
Purple - Short 2 - Coordination Set 1 - Stance Set 1
Blue - Long 2 - Finger Set 1
Green - Coordination Set 2 - Strike Set 2
3rd Brown - Short 3 - Blocking Set 2
2nd Brown - Long 3 - Stance Set 2
1st Brown - Form 4 (First Half) - Two Man Set
1st Black - Form 4 Complete


----------



## CB2379 (Sep 17, 2005)

That is interesting. I too have visited some Kenpo School websites and found Long 4 taught at a level other than Black I. I suppose, like most things, the school instructors decide where certain forms and techniques are taught. There really doesn't seem to be alot of organization between different Kenpo schools in the manner in which forms and techniques are taught. 

 For example, at my school, Stance Set #1 is the first form students work at white belt and it is considered the very basic, foundation set. However, at other schools, I notice that this set is taught at Purple Belt. 

 Just to serve for some information, here are the forms and sets taught at my school in order in which I was taught or will learn them:

 WHITE TO YELLOW: Stance Set #1, Short Form #1
 YELLLOW TO ORANGE: Long Form #1
 ORANGE TO PURPLE : Universal Set #1
 PURPLE TO BLUE: Short Form #2, Kicking Set #1, Striking Set #1
 BLUE TO GREEN: Coordination Set #1, Long Form #2, Finger Set #1
 GREEN TO BROWN III: Short Form #3, Finger set #2
 BROWN III TO BROWN II: Stance Set #2, Long Form #3
 BROWN II TO BROWN I: Coordination Set #2
 BROWN I TO BLACK I: Long Form #4, Personal Form


----------



## kenpo tiger (Sep 18, 2005)

CB and I attend the same school, which is Tracy techs through Green and then we learn EPAK from Brown III onward.

My question is:  why is Long 4 broken into two parts, as shown in two of the posts upthread;  and where is the delineation made?

I can understand why it is taught earlier in some schools, since it's a difficult form in which to master the subtleties.

By the by, we learn Two Man Set after Long Five (between Black I and Black II.)


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 18, 2005)

Long 4, at our studio is broken into to parts because it is 'Long'. We break right after Snaking Talons ... at a point we call, 'The Half-Way Horse'.

As to why ... <shrugg> ... don't know, still a student.


----------



## TwistofFat (Sep 19, 2005)

Just my two cents...

It seems schools that teach Form 4 as a 1st Brown/1st BB requirement are schools that do not focus on the extentions. With 154 techniques and at least 7 Forms (plus Two Man, kicking, finger, et al), plus many have added grapling, stick work, boxing...no wonder BB takes so long. This is not an endorsement of either approach, just what I have noticed travelling around.

With good instruction, we all end up in the same place (generally).

Regards - Glenn.


----------



## KenpoDave (Sep 19, 2005)

In Tracy's, Long #4 is taught in 3rd brown because all of the techniques contained in the form are taught in our green belt curriculum.  It is the same with most of the numbered forms from Long #3 forward.  We learn the techniques in one belt, then put them into the form in the next.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Sep 22, 2005)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Long 4, at our studio is broken into to parts because it is 'Long'. We break right after Snaking Talons ... at a point we call, 'The Half-Way Horse'.
> 
> As to why ... <shrugg> ... don't know, still a student.


That's interesting to know.  I originally thought that that was the case, but I asked my instructor about it anyway and he said:  "half of Long IV is the right side of Long IV, originally known as Short IV, but I'm pretty sure it's not widely taught that way these days."

Hmm.

Thanks guys.  It's always interesting to hear what each school does.  Helps me as a teacher and a student.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2005)

Let me get out on a limb here ... but from what I have learned, performing just the right side of Long 4 (or Short 4) just doesn't seem correct. Part of what Long 4 teaches, as I understand it, is different entrances to each of the techniques. And these different entrances are there for a reason. Let me throw out a couple of examples .... to see if I can make myself understood. 

Example 1
In the technique 'Gathering Clouds', the first time through the technique requires *quick timing* because the left foot has just a short distance to move (from the foward bow in Flashing Wings to the Horse Stance in the first strike of Gathering clouds. ... 

where as the second pass on the technique the timing is not as quick, because the right foot has a longer distance to travel (from behind the left foot in the pivot, all the way out to the Horse stance). ​Example 2
Looking at the technique 'Prance of the Tiger', we begin with the pushdrag reverse into a cat stance *with* a right upward block.

On the second side of 'Prance of the Tiger', the left upward block comes as a separate move ... to show that we must cock high to block(strike) low.
​I hope these comments make sense ... I also hope that if I look back at them a year from now, I don't have to give myself a dope-slap. 

There is a lot of meat in Form 4. And while I don't think I understand it yet, I am getting to understand certain parts of the form (Thank You Mr. Planas - and Mr. Hogan).


----------



## Blindside (Sep 23, 2005)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> That's interesting to know.  I originally thought that that was the case, but I asked my instructor about it anyway and he said:  "half of Long IV is the right side of Long IV, originally known as Short IV, but I'm pretty sure it's not widely taught that way these days."



Being an unofficial form, I'm sure there are alot of versions out there.  However, the version of Short 4 that I learned, and the the two versions I have seen being performed by others, the form is one side of each technique pair, done in alternating sequence, left, right, left, right, (except for where it doesn't.)  

Lamont


----------



## kenpo tiger (Sep 23, 2005)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Let me get out on a limb here ... but from what I have learned, performing just the right side of Long 4 (or Short 4) just doesn't seem correct. Part of what Long 4 teaches, as I understand it, is different entrances to each of the techniques. And these different entrances are there for a reason. Let me throw out a couple of examples .... to see if I can make myself understood.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I concur. 

We are not taught Short IV -- ever -- In my school. It is left up to each of us individually to tinker with the concept if we so choose.


----------



## kenpo black belt (Oct 3, 2005)

In my system of kenpo it the katas go like this.

White to yellow- none

Yellow to orange- Short 1 and Long 1

Orange to Purple- Short 2 and Long 2

Purple to Blue- Short 3 and Long 3

Blue to Green- Book set (Panther set)

Green to 3rd Brown- Mass Attack and Long 4

3rd Brown to 2nd Brown- Tiger & Crane and Darkroom Staff

2nd Brown to 1st Brown- Skylight staff and Two person Black Belt set A

1st Brown to Black- Two person Black Belt set B and Sword set #1 and Long 5.


----------



## parkerkarate (Oct 3, 2005)

kenpo black belt said:
			
		

> In my system of kenpo it the katas go like this.
> 
> White to yellow- none
> 
> ...



Which system is this?


----------



## kenpo black belt (Oct 7, 2005)

I am a student at Elite Defensive Tactics. We learn Traditional Tracy's Kenpo Karate.


----------



## parkerkarate (Oct 7, 2005)

kenpo black belt said:
			
		

> I am a student at Elite Defensive Tactics. We learn Traditional Tracy's Kenpo Karate.



O Ok


----------



## kenpochad (Oct 7, 2005)

long 4 was green belt


----------



## kenpo tiger (Oct 7, 2005)

TwistofFat said:
			
		

> Just my two cents...
> 
> It seems schools that teach Form 4 as a 1st Brown/1st BB requirement are schools that do not focus on the extentions. With 154 techniques and at least 7 Forms (plus Two Man, kicking, finger, et al), plus many have added grapling, stick work, boxing...no wonder BB takes so long. This is not an endorsement of either approach, just what I have noticed travelling around.
> 
> ...


You are assuming that 154 techs is the max, along with 7 forms.  We learn 170 techs before testing for Black I, as well as 16 forms and sets.  Those 170 techs include extensions.  As I said upthread, we learn Tracy techs through green, then EPAK.  

Learning Long IV at Brown I was actually much easier because I had most of the techs in it.

I learn something new every time I do each form and set because subtleties abound.

Been in schools where it was quick and easy to make Black belt.  My kenpo black belt means so much to me because of the long hours spent working the material, getting bones broken sparring, being hit in the nose too many times, sweating like an animal, doing techniques in my hotel room at 3 am (no, security wasn't called -- we were in Las Vegas...)  and being disappointed with myself because my 52 year old body can't move like a 20-somethings can. [sorry for the thread gank]  Each of us does kenpo in our own special way, and I think that was Mr. Parker's point.


----------



## bayonet (Oct 8, 2005)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> You are assuming that 154 techs is the max, along with 7 forms. We learn 170 techs before testing for Black I, as well as 16 forms and sets. Those 170 techs include extensions. As I said upthread, we learn Tracy techs through green, then EPAK.
> 
> Learning Long IV at Brown I was actually much easier because I had most of the techs in it.
> 
> ...


You the man! 52 and still bangin' I hope 19 years from now I can too...Lord willing. But the fact that you are getting bones broken during sparring... I know that it happens but CONTROL should be every Sifu's first rule of thumb...keep rocking Kenpo Tiger...Van Halen may need a new lead singer soon!!!


----------



## kenpo tiger (Oct 8, 2005)

bayonet said:
			
		

> You the man! 52 and still bangin' I hope 19 years from now I can too...Lord willing. But the fact that you are getting bones broken during sparring... I know that it happens but CONTROL should be every Sifu's first rule of thumb...keep rocking Kenpo Tiger...Van Halen may need a new lead singer soon!!!


Thanks for the implied compliment, Bayonet, but I the WOMAN.

My master instructor does exert a great deal of control over our sparring situation.  Broken bones can happen at any point in one's training -- some of mine are as a result of having techniques done on me and my not getting out of the way.  My fault, not Sifu's.

And, I hope David Lee Roth returns to Van Halen.


----------



## Sigung86 (Dec 19, 2005)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> Thanks for the implied compliment, Bayonet, but I the WOMAN.
> 
> My master instructor does exert a great deal of control over our sparring situation. Broken bones can happen at any point in one's training -- some of mine are as a result of having techniques done on me and my not getting out of the way. My fault, not Sifu's.
> 
> And, I hope David Lee Roth returns to Van Halen.


 
You give me hope Tiger!  LOL!

I'm 57 and chunking at it ... This year I acquired a new student that I am particularly proud of.  He's 70 years old, had quadruple bypass, and a few other surgeries.  His Doctor says that whatever I'm doing to him is great and to keep it up.   

And I kind of miss David Lee, myself.


----------



## Doc (Dec 19, 2005)

Sigung86 said:
			
		

> You give me hope Tiger!  LOL!
> 
> I'm 57 and chunking at it ... This year I acquired a new student that I am particularly proud of.  He's 70 years old, had quadruple bypass, and a few other surgeries.  His Doctor says that whatever I'm doing to him is great and to keep it up.
> 
> And I kind of miss David Lee, myself.


You young whiners need to quit!


----------



## Sigung86 (Dec 19, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> You young whiners need to quit!


 
Yes ... Papa San!!!! :asian: :asian: :asian: 

:roflmao:


----------



## jdinca (Dec 21, 2005)

We do a modified version of Tracy Kenpo up to 3rd degree brown, then it's gets more eclectic and unique to our system. I believe we complete the Tracy system for 1st degree BB in the 3rd degree brown belt. We've, split orange and purple into 2 belts each. It's also hard to equate because our names are somewhat different but here goes:

Yellow:Kata 1
Orange: Kata 1a
Orange II: Kata 2
Purple: Kata 2 left side
Purple II: Kata 3
Blue: Kata 4
Green: Kata 5, 6 and 7(staff form)
3rd Brown: Kata 8(staff form), Bit-Ti 1, Bi-Ti 2, Bi-Ti 3, Kata 12 (Kata 1-6 right and left side), Orange Set, Purple Set, Blue Set, Green Set
2nd Brown: Finger Set, Punching Set, Animal Set, Mass Attack (Finger, Punching and Animal set all have standing, stance and movement sections)
1st Brown: Whirling Blades, Black Belt Set, Book Set, Long 6
Black Belt: Don't know but it does include an open hand thesis form and a weapon thesis form


----------



## teej (Dec 23, 2005)

Form 4 being the blk blt form, I teach it during brown belt as long as the student has it down for their blk blt test. There is no blk blt test without knowing and being about to perform form 4. So the student has to have time to not only learn it, but practice it. Mr. Planas has said all you have to do is watch someone do form 4 and tell whether they are a blk blt or not. [someone may wear a blk blt, doesn't mean they deserve it (disagreement with this would be topic for another thread)} Being able to perform form 4 will tell all.

Teej


----------



## Seabrook (Jan 3, 2006)

teej said:
			
		

> Mr. Planas has said all you have to do is watch someone do form 4 and tell whether they are a blk blt or not. [someone may wear a blk blt, doesn't mean they deserve it (disagreement with this would be topic for another thread)} Being able to perform form 4 will tell all.
> 
> Teej


 
Hmmm....the way someone performs Long Form 4 would tell me whether the individual moves like a black belt in terms of his/her basics. But what if the same person can't fight himself out of a wet paper bag?


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Sigung86 (Jan 3, 2006)

> Hmmm....the way someone performs Long Form 4 would tell me whether the individual moves like a black belt in terms of his/her basics. But what if the same person can't fight himself out of a wet paper bag?
> Jamie Seabrook




Interesting comment... Far be it from me to disagree with anyone so far, but ... The ability to move like a black belt is way over-rated ... Long philosophical discourse to follow. 

Most people, so it seems, appear to have forgotten that the black belt is really the entry level to learning and that is for any art, chess, aikido, various forms of karaté and our own Kenpo.

The way people scramble for belts now a days, is intriguing. I know one fellow that I, personally, am fond of and he has numerous black belts. Does this make him able to fight his way out of a wet paper bag, as it were? Hardly. 

The black belt is only an indication of knowledge acquired and perceived skill or technical capability. It has, now at any rate, no real indication of overall proficiency in the arena of combat.

As Martial Artists, we cover ourselves with various cloaks of ethics, honor, integrity, and bravery (well some of us do at any rate), but that, and all that, does not create a warrior.

There are, I surmise, a number of black belts out there, and some of them are relatively highly ranked I'd wager, who have never been in a fight. They have all the tools and knowledge, because they have done the required materials and put in the time and effort to become what they are. Is this an indication that they could fight their way out of a wet paper bag?

NOT  AT  ALL!

In my tiny shelllike mind, I believe that we can all sit around and talk "smack" as they call it today. But it is a different time and place than it was when folks like Doc, Conatser, myself (not including myself as a notable, only as at it a very long time), and others came up through the ranks. 

In those golden and halcyon days, it was not improbable to come out of the dojo with smashed, sprained, gouged, and broken things hanging off of our bodies. It was not a matter of someone attacking you, you defending and then having to defend yourself again when s/he sued you for whatever they could get.  A fight, win, lose or draw, was simply that, a fight.

We, I think I speak for others here but maybe not all, really aspired to the much coveted *Black Belt*. Not necessarily for how tough we were, but more for the idea that, at that point, we realized we really could begin to learn the system of Kenpo.

Heck, where I was, there was no rank beyond third Black and in our inestimable opinion, a first black could walk on water, lift buildings and walk under them, and catch arrows in his teeth (too bad no one carries bows and arrows anymore). But I digress.

The provenance of the black belt is, as I said before, nothing more than an indication of time spent. In the old Chinese arts, the didnt use belts, they used titles, and called it all "Kung fu", a word that boils down in translation, to time spent and skill learned and earned. You could be considered to be "Kung fu" as a floor mopper, mechanic, cook, or whatever.

The black belt skills do not necessarily indicate that, in real life, a person could fight his or her way out of a wet paper bag. That, however, is the perception that we place on it, however mistaken that perception might be.

The only real way to know if someone can fight their way out of a wet paper bag is for them to have been tested in combat, and not found wanting. And, in all honesty, unless one lives in a movieland neighborhood like Speakman did in Perfect Weapon, or has a job like a bouncer, mercenary, bounty hunter, special ops, or the like, one does not have that many opportunities to find out if one can fight oneself out of a wet paper bag. Today, all these combative types of livelyhoods rely more on technology to complete the destruction of an enemy. 

Even then, it is problematic.

It depends on the day, the surroundings, the opponent, the time, and on and on. One day, you may be the bravest or most foolish warrior in existence, like Funakoshi, who said, "If the foe be 10,000, but the cause is just, I go".   Or ... you may be cloaked in all the sayings of Ed Parker, have all the chivalric attitudes of a Knight Templar, and when it comes down to crunch you might freeze and get your butt kicked. It happens.
So  I put to you that a Black Belt is not an indication of warrior capability.

Hope my ramblings didnt put you to sleep.


----------



## Seabrook (Jan 3, 2006)

A black belt should be able to defend oneself, and that is the bottom line. Being able to perform a form choreographed nicely to music doesn't qualify someone as a black belt in my opinion. 


Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Sigung86 (Jan 3, 2006)

Seabrook said:
			
		

> A black belt should be able to defend oneself, and that is the bottom line. Being able to perform a form choreographed nicely to music doesn't qualify someone as a black belt in my opinion.
> 
> 
> Jamie Seabrook
> www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


 
That is one perception among many, and rightfully, or wrongly, it ain't necessarily so in all cases.

I'm not trying to argue with you Jamie, not at all ... Just saying that, regardless of perception, there are many realities in this wonderful world of Martial Arts.


----------



## teej (Jan 6, 2006)

Seabrook said:
			
		

> Hmmm....the way someone performs Long Form 4 would tell me whether the individual moves like a black belt in terms of his/her basics. But what if the same person can't fight himself out of a wet paper bag?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Doc (Jan 6, 2006)

Sigung86 said:
			
		

> Interesting comment... Far be it from me to disagree with anyone so far, but ... The ability to move like a black belt is way over-rated ... Long philosophical discourse to follow.
> 
> Most people, so it seems, appear to have forgotten that the black belt is really the entry level to learning and that is for any art, chess, aikido, various forms of karaté and our own Kenpo.
> 
> ...


OK I'm awake now Dan. For the record over time I've come across quite a plethora of individuals who didn't know Form 4 or anything else in Kenpo whom it would not be a good idea to challenge unless you had a lot more than the ability to perform form 4 well to someone else's satisfaction. So where do we draw the line? Just a thought.


----------



## Doc (Jan 6, 2006)

teej said:
			
		

> ... an individual does not have to be a black belt to be able to fight his way out of a wet paper bag. Many and or most of Mr. Parkers original students were already fighters before starting their kenpo training with him.


I agree sir. There were a bunch of tough guys who just got better under the guidance of Ed Parker when they began Kenpo. Many of them were "marker collectors," bikers, ex-military, etc. No women or children allowed. The "tradition" he brought from Chow when he started on the mainland was strickly blood and guts - and then he began teaching them kenpo. 


> I totally agree that a black belt should be able to defend themselves. That is a problem that I see a lot with students focusing on learning so many techniques but not being able to react properly or in time.


The "business" of kenpo makes no warranty beyond the teaching of the material. Most people never have a physical confrontation so the business model is "safe." Students "assume" they can defend themselves with what the guy tells them will really work.


> Watching someone do form 4 and you can tell if they have black belt understanding of Kenpo mechanics.


Well yes, and a big no. The first thing that must be acknowledged is that the understanding of body mechanics among Kenpo practitioners in particular, and martial artists in general, is a wide, varied, and dubious bit of information. 

The term "martial art" is an American creation initially coined to describe the "artistic" nature of the movements by western journalists and observers, of forms and "kata." The combat interaction initially was de-emphasized or omitted, except in the "martial sports" primarily coming out of Japan. Even "karate-do" practitioners were known as "karate players," modeled after its "judo players" precursor. 

All of the sports out of Japan ending in "do" emphasized the activity as a discipline and the proper "way" to execute, with effective body mechanics relative to realistic applications not a requirement.

From the Western perspective, the combat "art" was actually "jiu-jitsu" (termed "combat judo"), to make the distinction from the competition "rondori" based "ju-do" that reached mainland America first.

So a discussion of "body mechanics" is one requiring extensive knowledge and experience that is essentially and generally absent. Particularly in the western hemisphere, with the exception of the limited perspective and application of high school, college, and pro sport coaches, and scientists who study such things. But even the scientists study the science of living mobility, and not combat applications.

Those who have studied "martial arts" from a guy with a belt, who studied from another guy who also had a belt, is no guarantee any of them know what they are doing in that regrad. The reason lineage was so important historically was to insure teachers were doing things the "way" the progenitor wanted things done. The efficacy of that "way" was not subject to examination for physical effectiveness of the body mechanics. Translation: "Do it the way I teach you and you will advance."

But we discovered many years ago, much of the "mimic" teaching of the "martial arts" prevalent then and today, does not guaratee anything except tuition payments on a regular basis.


> What sets EP American Kenpo apart from other arts? Kenpo is the study of motion and body mechanics.


That statement alone is extremely insightful and describes the two biggest diversions and divisions in Ed Parker's own evolutions.  The problem is they were/are never compatible in his teaching, and he made a very clear distinction between the two. Mr. Parker *NEVER* used the two terms together. He either taught "motion," *OR* he taught body mechanics. *NEVER BOTH*. The two are absolutely mutually exclusive of each other. "Motion" is an abstract general term and was used exclusively by Mr. Parker to describe the "art" he created for his business model. 

"Body mechanics" is a specific term that has very specific parameters and knowledge when applied to the dynamics of human combat interactions. Mr. Parker did use this term to describe the "martial science" he was evolving and creating. Proper body mechanics requires *specific* movement, postures and their transitions.

If your school teaches Kenpo Motion, the first question to ask as a student is, who gave the teacher their understanding of "motion?" 

If the school teaches "body mechanics," the second question to ask as a student is, where did the teacher get his knowledge of "body mechanics."

Very insightful Teej.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Jan 9, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> You young whiners need to quit!


 
Sorry Dr. Chapel.  I didn't see this until today.  Ask anyone who knows me.  I don't whine. 

Teej and Sigung 86:  Further to the discussion of *combat testing* a fighter:  what about those of us who, when confronted with a dangerous situation, were/are able to talk our way out of the fight?  [We don't unleash the warrior until last in the salutation, do we?]  Does that make one less of a fighter, or maybe demonstrates something else?


----------



## Doc (Jan 9, 2006)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> Sorry Dr. Chapel.  I didn't see this until today.  Ask anyone who knows me.  I don't whine.
> 
> Teej and Sigung 86:  Further to the discussion of *combat testing* a fighter:  what about those of us who, when confronted with a dangerous situation, were/are able to talk our way out of the fight?  [We don't unleash the warrior until last in the salutation, do we?]  Does that make one less of a fighter, or maybe demonstrates something else?


It makes you "smart." De-escalation is a sign of maturity not found in the young tiger professors who are only impressed by their phyical prowess. Doesn't mean an old dragon can't smoke you if you get out of the pocket.


----------



## Sigung86 (Jan 9, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> It makes you "smart." De-escalation is a sign of maturity not found in the young tiger professors who are only impressed by their phyical prowess. Doesn't mean an old dragon can't smoke you if you get out of the pocket.


 
Indeed ... Doc is absolutely correct.

But back to the original point of my getting into this fray... There are, in my estimation, Black Belts who have done everything they need to do to achieve the Black Belt, who are either by experience, or disposition, unable to fight their way out of the aforementioned wet paper bag.

Walking away is preferred, but not always an option.  

I recall, about 12 years ago, or so, a TKD Black Belt self defense instructor in Los Angeles, of all places.  She found her self in a bad situation, was unable to fight her way out and was consequently, strangled to death.  

I suppose that we could assume that she decided it better to pay the ultimate price rather than fight back, but I would wonder why spend all that time and money learning to fight if one is not going to use it, if necessary?

That, is one example only, but still it is one.


----------



## Doc (Jan 9, 2006)

Sigung86 said:
			
		

> Indeed ... Doc is absolutely correct.
> 
> But back to the original point of my getting into this fray... There are, in my estimation, Black Belts who have done everything they need to do to achieve the Black Belt, who are either by experience, or disposition, unable to fight their way out of the aforementioned wet paper bag.
> 
> ...


The business of teaching martial arts does not warrant your ability to fight for obvious reasons. On the streets that I've worked, they have always said the same thing, "That karate s&#8226;&#8226;t don't work!" I've always agreed with them because the majority of these people who have never fought, are being taught by someone else who has never fought. How do I know? The techniques have no semblance of reality or workability as performed. Most strret guys will take that black belt and strangle you with it, as Dan alluded to here in Los Angeles. Yes it really happened. I had a female student I inherited from another teacher of Tracy's Kenpo. She was an adult brown belt in her mid-twenties. During a technique line she kept freezing and didn't know what to do. I admonished her to do "something" even if she couldn't "remember" the technique at the moment. Instead, she cried. I told her it was ok to cry just don't stop fighting to do it. She didn't understand why she needed to do techniques "this way." She dclared that she was a brown belt and that her former teachers told her she was really good, so why was this necessary? I told her because when someone assults her, her teachers won't be there to protect her. "You'll be all by yourself, and the person attacking you won't give a dam what your teachers told you. She quit!

I had a student I inherited


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 9, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> On the streets that I've worked, they have always said the same thing, "That karate st don't work!" I've always agreed with them because the majority of these people who have never fought, are being taught by someone else who has never fought.


 
This is an interesting point.  As our society tends to frown upon fighting, and our law enforcement services are supposed to handle violent situations, it is entirely possible to go thru your whole life without ever having a real fight.  Under these circumstances, the practice of a martial art is much more theoretical.  What do you propose is the solution?


----------



## Sapper6 (Jan 9, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> This is an interesting point. As our society tends to frown upon fighting, and our law enforcement services are supposed to handle violent situations, it is entirely possible to go thru your whole life without ever having a real fight. Under these circumstances, the practice of a martial art is much more theoretical. What do you propose is the solution?


 
train as if you are going to get your *** stomped tomorrow.


----------



## jdinca (Jan 9, 2006)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> train as if you are going to get your *** stomped tomorrow.



Eloquently put!


----------



## kenpo tiger (Jan 9, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> The business of teaching martial arts does not warrant your ability to fight for obvious reasons. On the streets that I've worked, they have always said the same thing, "That karate s&#8226;&#8226;t don't work!" I've always agreed with them because the majority of these people who have never fought, are being taught by someone else who has never fought. How do I know? The techniques have no semblance of reality or workability as performed. Most strret guys will take that black belt and strangle you with it, as Dan alluded to here in Los Angeles. Yes it really happened. I had a female student I inherited from another teacher of Tracy's Kenpo. She was an adult brown belt in her mid-twenties. During a technique line she kept freezing and didn't know what to do. I admonished her to do "something" even if she couldn't "remember" the technique at the moment. Instead, she cried. I told her it was ok to cry just don't stop fighting to do it. She didn't understand why she needed to do techniques "this way." She dclared that she was a brown belt and that her former teachers told her she was really good, so why was this necessary? I told her because when someone assults her, her teachers won't be there to protect her. "You'll be all by yourself, and the person attacking you won't give a dam what your teachers told you. She quit!


 
The reason I came to kenpo is because my former instructors, both in tkd and a *mud* (as my master instructor likes to put it) art kept telling me that I knew "enough".  Well, exactly what is "enough"?  That poor woman who was killed may have thought she knew "enough".  I used to view black belt (before I earned one) as "enough".  Now it's not "enough" because it's a starting point where I see that I am really just beginning to learn.  If techniques are ideas, which I'm told Mr. Parker Sr. conceived them as (I know you'll correct me if that's wrong), then I'm just starting to get the idea by practicing them on large bodies (albeit benign ones but they still hit me hard enough at times to make my teeth rattle.)  

Most women are brought up NOT to be fighters but rather nurturers and care-givers.  It's an alien concept to hit and be hit for most of us.  Takes a great deal of determination and suspension of the ethos with which one was raised to throw and connect with that first strike.  But how amazing is it when you realize you can do it.

Man I worked with used to say to me "take the measure of your opponent and give him half again".  Yes, it's scary to be confronted in the street 'all by yourself' -- it's happened twice -- but I'd rather live to tell the tale and escape relatively unscathed because I could avoid the fight or engage long enough to disable and run.  

Just don't threaten my kids.  No telling what I'd do then.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jan 9, 2006)

jdinca said:
			
		

> Eloquently put!


 
thank you.  i really need to write a book.  the martial arts need more common sense inserted during training.  what i said is how i train.  i've been in three different physical altercations since graduating high school 8 years ago.  no serious injury, no jail time.  i call it success.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 9, 2006)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> train as if you are going to get your *** stomped tomorrow.


 
Of course, but there is always a reality gap between training and real fighting, no matter how you train.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jan 9, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Of course, but there is always a reality gap between training and real fighting, no matter how you train.


 
well unless your training really involves getting the crap beat out of you, what else are you gonna do?  

the largest percentile of people walking this planet are right handed.  should you be on the receiving end of a right punch, train hard against it.  most of the altercations i've witnessed at social interactions begin with a push/shove/lapel grab; so train hard against it.

you can only do what is realistically available.  if you indeed want "reality training", this week when you go to the studio, tell your instuctor you had an affair with his significant other.  only then will you get "reality training".

good luck in your search.


----------



## Doc (Jan 9, 2006)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> well unless your training really involves getting the crap beat out of you, what else are you gonna do?
> 
> the largest percentile of people walking this planet are right handed.  should you be on the receiving end of a right punch, train hard against it.  most of the altercations i've witnessed at social interactions begin with a push/shove/lapel grab; so train hard against it.
> 
> ...


Mr. Parker had an interesting perspective he passed to Bruce Lee. He said, "Training in boxing over-daring. Classical traditional 'karate training' is not daring enough. Kenpo strives to balance between the two."


----------



## Sapper6 (Jan 9, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> Mr. Parker had an interesting perspective he passed to Bruce Lee. He said, "Training in boxing over-daring. Classical traditional 'karate training' is not daring enough. Kenpo strives to balance between the two."


 
so, just short of over-bearing yet still "living on the edge" training for the unexpected?  

i agree with the quote.

most often, people want specifics and "how-to's".  i ask that folks use a common sense approach to training.  

martial arts training should never seem "theoretical" because at any given moment in your day, should that "theory" become a reality, you best have the tools necessary at your disposal to thwart harm to oneself.  when one adapts the mentality "that could never happen here, to me", they are only counting the blessings that have been afforded to them.  one day it will happen.  it won't take place the way you thought it would.


----------



## Doc (Jan 9, 2006)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> The reason I came to kenpo is because my former instructors, both in tkd and a *mud* (as my master instructor likes to put it) art kept telling me that I knew "enough".  Well, exactly what is "enough"?  That poor woman who was killed may have thought she knew "enough".  I used to view black belt (before I earned one) as "enough".  Now it's not "enough" because it's a starting point where I see that I am really just beginning to learn.


The recognition is huge. The young lady I spoke of took her teachers word for it in the face of overwhelming evidence he was wrong. Yes, even women have egos in the arts. She had so much invested in what she had done, she was unwilling to accept what was in front of her face. It was clear she was incompetent under any circumstance that even began to approach reality.


> If techniques are ideas, which I'm told Mr. Parker Sr. conceived them as (I know you'll correct me if that's wrong), then I'm just starting to get the idea by practicing them on large bodies (albeit benign ones but they still hit me hard enough at times to make my teeth rattle.)


No you are correct. The commercial technique manuals and the techniques are entirely conceptual, and in many cases unworkable. They were simply meant to be a starting point for discussion among teachers and exploration.
This is why they convey so little information.


> Most women are brought up NOT to be fighters but rather nurturers and care-givers.  It's an alien concept to hit and be hit for most of us.  Takes a great deal of determination and suspension of the ethos with which one was raised to throw and connect with that first strike.  But how amazing is it when you realize you can do it.


Unfortunately, as elements in our society become more violent, women must be smarter, and prepare themselves whether it ever comes or not.


> Yes, it's scary to be confronted in the street 'all by yourself' -- it's happened twice -- but I'd rather live to tell the tale and escape relatively unscathed because I could avoid the fight or engage long enough to disable and run.


Either one is acceptable. Take the path of least resistance, survive, and be there for your kids. Male or female.


> Just don't threaten my kids.  No telling what I'd do then.


All bets are off when the lioness' cubs are threatened.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 9, 2006)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> well unless your training really involves getting the crap beat out of you, what else are you gonna do?
> 
> the largest percentile of people walking this planet are right handed. should you be on the receiving end of a right punch, train hard against it. most of the altercations i've witnessed at social interactions begin with a push/shove/lapel grab; so train hard against it.
> 
> ...


 
I guess my point is that this trend is probably what is leading to a general decline in the quality of many of the martial arts as they are practiced today.  Many people who are students and even teachers don't have the real world, practical experience that people did even a generation or two ago.  They just don't have the need to actually use it, because of social changes that have happened in our society.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 9, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> No you are correct. The commercial technique manuals and the techniques are entirely conceptual, and in many cases unworkable. They were simply meant to be a starting point for discussion among teachers and exploration.
> This is why they convey so little information.


 
yeah, I like this and this is how I have begun looking at this stuff.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jan 9, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> I guess my point is that this trend is probably what is leading to a general decline in the quality of many of the martial arts as they are practiced today. Many people who are students and even teachers don't have the real world, practical experience that people did even a generation or two ago. They just don't have the need to actually use it, because of social changes that have happened in our society.


 
i agree with you. students, regardless of age, need teachers that teach things that work; proven methods, not just "works in theory" thinking. the more seasoned the teacher, the better the instruction; greater the chance that student will apply what's necessary when confronted with an undesireable situation.

too bad this isn't the case with the large majority of MA instruction.

we've obviously gotten off the topic of Long 4.  my apologies for contributing to that.


----------



## Doc (Jan 9, 2006)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> so, just short of over-bearing yet still "living on the edge" training for the unexpected?
> 
> i agree with the quote.
> 
> most often, people want specifics and "how-to's".  i ask that folks use a common sense approach to training.


Yes, but how does someone who is not a 'street person who has never had a fight utilize 'common sense' in training? They must rely on someone else to give them 'common sense.' Common Sense is a "relative oxymoron." What is common sense for one, may be completely unknown to another. It depends on many factors including age, experience, education, and mental capacity.


> martial arts training should never seem "theoretical" because at any given moment in your day, should that "theory" become a reality, you best have the tools necessary at your disposal to thwart harm to oneself.


Unfortumately a grest deal of Kenpo training is theorectical based on a concept of "Assumption of Failure." Look in the manuals. What is 'real' about what's in there? Nothing. An instructor is supposed to bring the reality to the training. Most haven't a clue.


> when one adapts the mentality "that could never happen here, to me", they are only counting the blessings that have been afforded to them.  one day it will happen.  it won't take place the way you thought it would.


Yes and they will instantly switch political philosophies.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jan 9, 2006)

> Yes, but how does someone who is not a 'street person who has never had a fight utilize 'common sense' in training? They must rely on someone else to give them 'common sense.' Common Sense is a "relative oxymoron." What is common sense for one, may be completely unknown to another. It depends on many factors including age, experience, education, and mental capacity.


 
agreed.  i often forget this.



> Unfortumately a grest deal of Kenpo training is theorectical based on a concept of "Assumption of Failure." Look in the manuals. What is 'real' about what's in there? Nothing. An instructor is supposed to bring the reality to the training. Most haven't a clue.


 
i was more talking about the mindset of learning and training, rather than the execution of techniques.  to say "this may or may not happen to me so why should i train it..." kind of thinking.  from what i understand, the Assumption of Failure deals more with the execution of strikes within a technique.  of course one should always retain the fact that the first and second strikes in a defense "may not" work so there must exist a follow thru to seal a victory.  (my apologies if this is incorrect, as i do not study Kenpo).  this theory i believe in.  it's the "theoretical" mindset behind _motivation_ of training that worries me.  you're right, it is up to the instructor to instill in their students what they are learning will work, only when properly executed.



> Yes and they will instantly switch political philosophies.


 
i don't wish this on anyone, although, experience is the best teacher.


----------



## Doc (Jan 9, 2006)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> agreed.  i often forget this.
> 
> 
> 
> i was more talking about the mindset of learning and training, rather than the execution of techniques.  to say "this may or may not happen to me so why should i train it..." kind of thinking.


agreed.


> from what i understand, the Assumption of Failure deals more with the execution of strikes within a technique.  of course one should always retain the fact that the first and second strikes in a defense "may not" work so there must exist a follow thru to seal a victory.  (my apologies if this is incorrect, as i do not study Kenpo).  this theory i believe in.


Well, maybe you do sir, but then again maybe you don't. When the entire philosophy is based on Assumption of Failure, than it is a 'failed' philosophy. The emphasis is placed on 'moving on' with quick expedition strikes in 'hopes' that they may be successful. The emphasis here is on speed first, effectiveness is somewhere down the line hopefully initiated by speed.

Of course this is a bad idea but sells really well. It is very impressive to see a guy smack another guy standing still with multiple fast strikes with no regard for body mechanics. Being fast is really easy if you have to move nothing but an arm. Besides if your first move is a block, and it fails, the rest may be a moot point.


> it's the "theoretical" mindset behind _motivation_ of training that worries me.  you're right, it is up to the instructor to instill in their students what they are learning will work, only when properly executed.


Yes, and most have no idea what they're doing relative to a street assault, and the answer isn't in so-called NHB sport competition.


> i don't wish this on anyone, although, experience is the best teacher.


----------



## teej (Jan 10, 2006)

I think we are overlooking individuals mind sets, or their will to survive. I can teach and condition anyone teaching them all the drills, forms, techniques, but if that person does not develope the will to use it when needed, all their training will not make a difference.

 Example, I have a very good friend. He is insistant that he does not feel that he could ever take a life regardless of the circumstances. That is his choice or belief. I hope he is never put in any situation where he has to find out. [me either for that matter, but my mind set is that I will do whatever I have to do to protect my family or myself]

Another example. I had a women student years ago. She was a waitress in a lounge. She trained for a while, but in class she was constantly saying how she would never be able to kick someone in the groin or poke someone in their eyes. She quit after a short while. A year later she stopped in to thank me. A man drunk man in the parking lot one night wouldn't let her get to her car and was getting rough. She dropped him with a well placed kick to his groin and she escaped. She didn't need to know all the techniques, didn't have to be able to perform form 4. She did what she needed at that time and got away.

Turns out that when she needed it, she had the will to survive and do what needed to be done to save herself. Anyone with this will can fight their way out of a wet paper bag. No training required, just the correct mind set or will to survive.

So, how do you go bout training your students to develope this mindset? {without beating them into the ground. I see too many students broken instead of developed using this method of sparring them hard before they are ready. Get a student that flinches bad and you will find somewhere they were either trained too rough before they were ready or they were abused somewhere} So, how do you mentally train or develope students?

Teej


----------



## Doc (Jan 10, 2006)

teej said:
			
		

> I think we are overlooking individuals mind sets, or their will to survive. I can teach and condition anyone teaching them all the drills, forms, techniques, but if that person does not develope the will to use it when needed, all their training will not make a difference.
> 
> Example, I have a very good friend. He is insistant that he does not feel that he could ever take a life regardless of the circumstances. That is his choice or belief. I hope he is never put in any situation where he has to find out. [me either for that matter, but my mind set is that I will do whatever I have to do to protect my family or myself]
> 
> ...


One of the luxuries I have is hand picking all full time members of the student body, so we have a sense of who they are from the background check. Secondly, at the appropriate times during the course of study, all students are subjected to various levels of stress, mentally, emotionally, and physically. All students are required to perform under these conditions to pass a course. This is a fairly reliable indicator of performance potential in reality. The student body, not coincidentally, has its share of federal agents/deputies, police officers, and sheriff's deputies, to compliment the firemen, paramedics, lawyers, computer geeks, well known actors, advanced degree college students, and a few very special high school seniors in our mentor program. 

Although we have students in the US and Europe, we are not interested in numbers. Quality is the benchmark of our program, and for the most part, it is really an Instructors Program. This  insures the knowledge and training methodology will be preserved within the collective of the student body irrespective of any one individual. I have 30 year students of mine on the floor at least once a week, and I know Kevin Mills in the U.K. maintains the same high standards in our European groups.

"Excellence through Integrity, Integrity through excellence. No exceptions! If you don't "pack the gear," you must find another school.


----------

