# Techniques that don't fit the person?



## IWishToLearn (May 29, 2007)

Question for the seniors - 

There are some techniques that just wouldn't be overly valid for people to learn due to disparities in size - like some of the techniques with full nelsons for very short people vs. a very large person, etc. (Just an example - I know there are more.)

So, how do you teach your students these type of techs? Since it isn't viable for them to use themselves - but 
they should still be at least knowledgeable about the tech if they're going to teach someday. Thoughts?


----------



## fnorfurfoot (May 29, 2007)

Even though the attack isn't really something certain people are likely to see, they should still work the technique for a couple of reasons.  First, "what if?"  You never really know how someone is going to attack you.  Second, like you said, they should know it in case they ever have to teach the technique.  Lastly, I think that even if the technique itself isn't valid for certain people, there may be a move or two from that technique that might be.  

I explain this sort of situation to my students when they ask me about different techniques.  Many are almost gender specific.  Guys are less likely to get grabbed by the wrist or the hair and women are probably not going to have a full nelson applied to them but within those techniques are ideas that will help any student create their own techniques.


----------



## IWishToLearn (May 30, 2007)

Thanks for taking the time to respond, however I posted my question in the Seniors forum for a reason. I'm hoping the Seniors will chime in with their thoughts.


----------



## Doc (May 31, 2007)

IWishToLearn said:


> Thanks for taking the time to respond, however I posted my question in the Seniors forum for a reason. I'm hoping the Seniors will chime in with their thoughts.



The previous poster is correct and I've posted here before that many of the techniques were borrowed from Mr. Parker's self-defense class he created briefly for women. In fact he ultimately wrote a book on the subject.

These techniques are indeeed "gender specific" and we categorize them as such. Gender specific meaning assaults that are 'more likely' male to female. 

While we may identify these techniqes by gender, in practical application we prefer to train them according to body geometry. In other words we don't have a small short statured 'attacker,' attack their trainng partner who is much larger and taller with an an 'unlikely' assault under those circumstances.

However the converse is 'more likely' and students proceed normally in training.


----------



## IWishToLearn (May 31, 2007)

Followup/continuance question:

How do you ensure that someone coming up has the full breadth of knowledge about such a technique in the "unlikely" category in order to gain full teaching credentials?


----------



## Doc (May 31, 2007)

IWishToLearn said:


> Followup/continuance question:
> 
> How do you ensure that someone coming up has the full breadth of knowledge about such a technique in the "unlikely" category in order to gain full teaching credentials?



I teach it.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Dec 26, 2007)

IWishToLearn said:


> Question for the seniors -
> 
> There are some techniques that just wouldn't be overly valid for people to learn due to disparities in size - like some of the techniques with full nelsons for very short people vs. a very large person, etc. (Just an example - I know there are more.)
> 
> ...



Well, I must disagree with your statement "Since it isn't viable for them to use themselves" since it is _*most viable*_ to use them for what they were designed...... sorry to burst your bubble, but self defense applications are only _*one*_ valued use.

You should ask yourself what are these techniques for?
What is their purpose ...
What do they contain ...
What do they teach ...

All techniques are _coordination exercises_ in the _beginning_... in which we all can utilize for developmental purposes.

What about... (each of these categories have sub categories as well)
Environmental conditions
Range
Positions
Maneuvers
Targets
Natural Weapons
Natural Defenses

Possible various Self Defense applications

etc etc....

:asian:


----------



## Doc (Dec 26, 2007)

Goldendragon7 said:


> Well, I must disagree with your statement "Since it isn't viable for them to use themselves" since it is _*most viable*_ to use them for what they were designed...... sorry to burst your bubble, but self defense applications are only _*one*_ valued use.
> 
> You should ask yourself what are these techniques for?
> What is their purpose ...
> ...



I agree. I teach some techniques whose value in certain parts, lies in learning the mechanics rather than a strict application of all that's taught. In the Old Chinese Tradition, techniques are like forms and sets. Every move doesn't necessarily have an "in context as presented application." The Okinawan's made that mistake interpreting the Chinese material and creating their own, and the Japanese followed with their Bunkai as well. 

"Sometimes the physical movements are indices or indexes of information that cannot be written down, and can only be preserved and passed on physically."  

This is the reason traditionally, the teaching of forms and sets requires a lengthy and exacting teaching and execution style over application, laying the informational and physical foundations for practical applications. Modern Arts skip the exacting with a focus only on limited, and sometimes questionable applications for commercial appeal. In my teaching, Mr. Parker brought that same "exactness" from forms and sets to the technique applications as well, to broaden the mechanisms for passing on very valuable information. This is the reason my lineage is not motion based or free form. Information modeling doesn't allow for it. Application modeling is simply a different approach.


----------



## IWishToLearn (Dec 26, 2007)

Correct me if I'm improperly summarizing - but here goes...

Every tech has pieces that are important, not necessarily a step by step, this is how to apply against this defense...but a principle or concept that will give one another tool to use and familiarize with scenarios and situations so if A happens, principle or concept B is the result...with the caveat that B must be taught correctly. Close?


----------



## Doc (Dec 27, 2007)

IWishToLearn said:


> Correct me if I'm improperly summarizing - but here goes...
> 
> Every tech has pieces that are important, not necessarily a step by step, this is how to apply against this defense...but a principle or concept that will give one another tool to use and familiarize with scenarios and situations so if A happens, principle or concept B is the result...with the caveat that B must be taught correctly. Close?



Ohtay!  Or as I always say, "Everything matters."


----------



## Dr John M La Tourrette (Jan 7, 2008)

Goldendragon7 said:


> Well, I must disagree with your statement "Since it isn't viable for them to use themselves" since it is _*most viable*_ to use them for what they were designed...... sorry to burst your bubble, but self defense applications are only _*one*_ valued use.


 
Nicely put.

Back in 73 some of my brown belts were having trouble with a 1st black Kenpo Karate technique, so I developed "Striking Tiger" to teach my NEWER students the inner hurricane when they were in the basic ranks, so those master keys of movement had already been well rehearsed way prior to black belt.

Some of the mk's in that beginner's Striking Tiger are:
centering covertly
Centering for covert readiness
Centering for invisible attack
Timing of entrance
Timing of initial move
Timing of hand moving first
Timing of point of no-return
Extended peripheral awareness
Control of breath for explosiveness
Blab, blab, blab...

Then when I came up with The Speed Hitting Concepts (from NLP developmental seminar) back in 83 I developed my own waza's for the purpose of speed, target development, blab, blab, blab...

The one that seems to be known now by most of the kenpo world is "The Meat Grinder" which has 22 strikes in it and someone well trained and have done the necessary repetitions on live bodies can pull it off in about 1.2 seconds (yep, I know. Hard for someone to believe unless they FEEL it).

My point being, the down chunk skill is NOT primarily self-defense, and neither of the two above waza's (*or any waza*) should ever be used for self-defense.

But on the other hand, for global thinkers, it is all about real self-defense, and the tools those waza's of speed train their bodies, minds and spirits in.

Dr. John M. La Tourrette
Old guy with over 5 decades in MA's (almost 6 decades) and almost 4 decades in Kenpo Karate.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jan 8, 2008)

Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> My point being, the two waza's (*or any waza*) should ever be used for self-defense.
> 
> But on the other hand, for global thinkers, it is all about real self-defense, and the tools those waza's of speed train their bodies, minds and spirits in.
> 
> ...



Well, if you are gonna talk "KENPO" to KENPO people...... It would seem to me that you must use KENPO termonology..... in which waza is not one.

Supreme PhD of Kenpo ..... Dennis Conatser

:wuguns:


----------



## Doc (Jan 8, 2008)

Goldendragon7 said:


> Well, if you are gonna talk "KENPO" to KENPO people...... It would seem to me that you must use KENPO termonology..... in which waza is not one.
> 
> Supreme PhD of Kenpo ..... Dennis Conatser
> 
> :wuguns:



Wazaaaaaaaaaaaap?


----------



## Dr John M La Tourrette (Jan 9, 2008)

Goldendragon7 said:


> Well, if you are gonna talk "KENPO" to KENPO people...... It would seem to me that you must use KENPO termonology..... in which waza is not one.


 
A personal attack. I'm curious to why?

In my world "waza" is just as valid as the use of the word "kenpo" since kenpo is a Japanese word. 

And I've been using that word in teaching Kenpo Karate since 1970 so I really don't give a damn about your approval or disapproval or how it seems to you. So I will continue to use that word regardless of your snide remarks.

And "karate" is also a Japanese word, the kanji variation used since 1938. 

The spelling (kanji) of the word "karate" was different before 1938 and came from a different country, Okinawa. Then it meant "the way of the Chinese hand". That was C. Motobu's meaning.

Should we not use "karate" also? I mean, my gosh it came from both Okinawa and Japan so it must be an inferior word using your logic (sic).

So do we do "techniques" of "Methods of the fist" and "way of the empty hand" because of you, instead of "kenpo karate" waza?

Waza, waza, waza, waza. Do you feel really bad, yet?

Dr. John M. La Tourrette
Ps. I really did love your spelling of the word "terminology". Is your excuse "it's not american" like the word "kenpo"?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Health Tip for the day: Fat kills faster than Cancer. So sweat 45 minutes a day every day, or die young.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2008)

Guys,

I'm sure everyone here is aware of the RTM feature.  Rather than reply to a post that you deem rude, with similar fashion, report the post.  There are many terms in the arts, some may be more familiar to some than others.  A misunderstanding?  Possibly, but regardless, I suggest we all return to the original topic of the thread.

Thank you

Mike


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jan 9, 2008)

Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> A personal attack. I'm curious to why?



My my.... are we a bit touchy...... sorry to have ruffled any feathers.  If I'm not mistaken, this is the American KENPO Senior Corner, of which I am a valid LISTED Contributor and responder.  I have been accused of being brutally honest.   Not meant to be a personal attack..... just not Ed Parker's Kenpo terminology.



Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> In my world "waza" is just as valid as the use of the word "kenpo" since kenpo is a Japanese word.



"In your world" you can use anything you wish, it's all valid, however, someone may disagree with you from time to time ..... KeMpo _*is*_ a Japanese Word..... yes..... But... KeNpo was changed by Chow to denote more Chinese roots, an English translation.  Besides..... Mr. Parker wanted more American or English terminology since he considered his Art AMERICAN.  (yes, there are a few old Japanese terms that we still utilize [karate, gi, & kiai] as well as a Japanese uniform design "gi" due to its durability. Mr. Parker himself never used the term "waza" that's all I was saying)




Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> And I've been using that word in teaching Kenpo Karate since 1970 so I really don't give a damn about your approval or disapproval or how it seems to you. So I will continue to use that word regardless of your snide remarks.



What you use during your teaching is your business so continue as you wish.  I _*am*_ surprised at your  reaction to a very calm and non threating statement.  I never sought your approval since I don't need it.




Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> And "karate" is also a Japanese word, the kanji variation used since 1938.



Ok 



Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> The spelling (kanji) of the word "karate" was different before 1938 and came from a different country, Okinawa. Then it meant "the way of the Chinese hand". That was C. Motobu's meaning.



OK



Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> Should we not use "karate" also? I mean, my gosh it came from both Okinawa and Japan so it must be an inferior word using your logic (sic).



My gosh, not inferior, but not a word used By Ed Parker in HIS system.  I don't consider Ed Parker logic sic.



Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> So do we do "techniques" of "Methods of the fist" and "way of the empty hand" because of you, instead of "kenpo karate" waza?



Look it's not about Me!  Let's put apples and apples together not apples and cucumbers.



Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> Waza, waza, waza, waza. Do you feel really bad, yet?



This sounds a bit juvenile to me.  No, I don't feel bad.... I hope you don't either.



Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> Ps. I really did love your spelling of the word "terminology". Is your excuse "it's not american" like the word "kenpo"?



Ok ok, so I missed a spell check..... is that what you want to attack me with.  Again, sorry to have hit what seems to be a raw nerve.. never tried.

Peace
:asian:


----------



## Dr John M La Tourrette (Jan 10, 2008)

Goldendragon7 said:


> My my.... are we a bit touchy...
> (bunch omitted)Peace:asian:


 
Thank  you Mr. C,

I did enjoy our telephone conversation today, and going over what each of us meant.

And I did enjoy your reply to my post. 

Sincerely & respectfully,
Dr. John M. La Tourrette


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jan 10, 2008)

Dr John M La Tourrette said:


> Thank  you Mr. C,
> 
> I did enjoy our telephone conversation today, and going over what each of us meant.
> 
> ...




Awesome, I enjoyed the call as well...... lets keep in touch!  

PS thanks for the email and outline.

:asian:


----------

