# Opponent's reaction to strikes



## punisher73 (Aug 19, 2004)

Question for you all.  Many of the technique's flow is based on an opponent's reaction to the strikes. Do any of you find that some techniques are based on an incorrect assumption of how an opponent will react?  

For example,  I have seen some techs that have a follow up strike to a solar plexus punch being a chop to the back of the opponent's neck because he has bent over from the solar plexus strike.  Most of the time (almost 100%) when I have hit someone with a punch to the midsection the opponent "folds" around the punch but does not bend over at the waist. 

Anyone else have the same result or do your opponent's always bend over?


----------



## Mark Weiser (Aug 19, 2004)

One of the great things about Kenpo is we can borrow movements from our arsenal to deal with this problem.

If an Opponent refuses to bend over from a punch to the Solar region. We can follow up with a upward palm heel strike to the chin lifting the opponent up on his toes or even backwards. However if the opponent bends over we like to shot an upward elbow to the chin/neck area followed by an downward fist across the face then unleash a scooping kick to the groin and then move back into the recovery position to unleash another series of blows if needed.


----------



## MA-Caver (Aug 19, 2004)

Having the adaptablity to change forms/techniques is one of the things that attracts me to Kenpo, although I'm not (presently) studying it. GM Parker (Sr.) was an experienced street fighter and he _knew_ from personal experience and observation that not everyone is going to react in the same way all the time. It is up to the kenpoist to be able to switch in the middle of one form to another. This takes additional practice on-top of the regular practice. Kenpo from what I know of it has numerous of techniques/forms that allows the artist to pick and choose which will suit. Of course the higher the belt ranking the more options said artist will have to choose from. It'll be a matter of doing it instantaneously.

As a (former) street-fighter I've seen and experienced many fights where a guy would hit another and the other just stood there and grinned, while others over-reacted and you're/they're like... I just barely touched him!???. 
IMO for the kenpoist (or any other MA) adaptability is the key in a "for-real" situation... (isn't that what we're all really training for??). Point is; having the flexibility to change in the middle of the fight/form/technique goes a long way in helping to be coming out ahead. 
 :asian:


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Aug 19, 2004)

dont think "technique". techniques are tools to help you understand movement...... once you have developed a keen sense, you no longer think technically, you just move.

shawn


----------



## Han-Mi (Aug 20, 2004)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> dont think "technique". techniques are tools to help you understand movement...... once you have developed a keen sense, you no longer think technically, you just move.
> 
> shawn


I agree and disagree. You don't think  technically, but you tend to move technically. The better your technique, the more effective it is.  Sometimes movements that are not techniques at all are most useful, but a good technical base is important.

The main thing I think you were eluding to is that you do not group techniques based on what you are to in sets, but by what is happening in the moment. That I agree with completely.


----------



## MJS (Aug 20, 2004)

punisher73 said:
			
		

> Question for you all.  Many of the technique's flow is based on an opponent's reaction to the strikes. Do any of you find that some techniques are based on an incorrect assumption of how an opponent will react?
> 
> For example,  I have seen some techs that have a follow up strike to a solar plexus punch being a chop to the back of the opponent's neck because he has bent over from the solar plexus strike.  Most of the time (almost 100%) when I have hit someone with a punch to the midsection the opponent "folds" around the punch but does not bend over at the waist.
> 
> Anyone else have the same result or do your opponent's always bend over?



It all comes down to being able to flow smoothly.  I've seen some people doing a tech. and the 'attacker' moves in a different way than what the defender is used to.  The typical response from the defender...

"You moved wrong.  Here, throw the attack at me again."

That is a perfect example of being able to just flow from one move to the next.  If one thing isnt working, you need to be able to keep the flow going and do something else.

The SD techs. are always taught in the 'ideal phase' to start off.  Once the person gets used to that, they shoulndt be relying on those techs. but instead, use them as a foundation, and be able to build off of them and be creative.  

Mike


----------



## bignick (Aug 20, 2004)

in a self-defense situation...do you best to make plan A work....but you better have a good plan B too


----------



## MJS (Aug 20, 2004)

Something that might help this to make more sense.  Check out the new On the Mat clip in the Kenpo EPAK thread.  Some very good examples of different reactions are shown there.

Mike


----------



## Rick Wade (Aug 20, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Something that might help this to make more sense.  Check out the new On the Mat clip in the Kenpo EPAK thread.  Some very good examples of different reactions are shown there.
> 
> Mike



We work with this in our Monday night advanced class in that towards the end of the night we start juicing the techniques up.  Now what I mean is we don't break bones or send anyone to the hospital but I like to start attacking harder so that you defend more like you would in the street.  and it is amazing.  example this week we were woring on grasp of death with some extentions.  We pointed out the head lock is not coming from I bend over you put your arm around me and yadda yadda yadda.  the attackis comming from some one jumping on you from the back and he has forward momentum, that is how you get out of the head lock and that in combination is how you spin him around.   Put a little bit of realisim into your attacks and see what happens.

I see the same thing in non Kenpo shools but it is in the form of someone says hit me and the attacker thows a punch that couldn't have hit them. i.e. the attacker with a strait arm and his fist isn't even touching the opponts body.  where you see the transition is in sparring at tournaments alot of people throw punches and kicks that can't reach because that is how they practice.

Remember you fight like you train.

V/R
Rick


----------



## punisher73 (Aug 20, 2004)

The SD techs. are always taught in the 'ideal phase' to start off. Once the person gets used to that, they shoulndt be relying on those techs
 ----------------

 I understand going beyond the technique and flowing to open targets etc.  My question was when the technique is in the "ideal phase" and everything is perfect you notice that the way the technique is set up that no one would respond to a strike that way no matter what. 

 The technique that comes to mind is called "fists of fury" and seems like a 5 swords variation.  In the technique the main strikes are a right inward block that goes into a right backfist. Then a left reverse punch using a vertical fist to the solar plexus. Then you kind of move off angle and then a right hammerfist to the back of the opponent's neck because he has bent over at the waist from the punch.


----------



## Kenpodoc (Aug 20, 2004)

Heretic!   %-} 

I agree.  Several techniques are based on wrong assumptions for the ideal phase.  Thundering Hammers works far better if you start with an uppercut to the groin (Trejo).  Five swords works beautifully if you do the uppercut "too low" (Planas).  I agree with all the responses that Kenpo contains the answers to variable response to a technique, but that's not what P73 asked.  

Mr. Planas states that Kenpo contains True/False questions which the student needs to ask for themselves. I'm not comfortable with this because I can't imagine why we should practice anything in a wrong manner.


----------



## MJS (Aug 20, 2004)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> We work with this in our Monday night advanced class in that towards the end of the night we start juicing the techniques up.  Now what I mean is we don't break bones or send anyone to the hospital but I like to start attacking harder so that you defend more like you would in the street.  and it is amazing.  example this week we were woring on grasp of death with some extentions.  We pointed out the head lock is not coming from I bend over you put your arm around me and yadda yadda yadda.  the attackis comming from some one jumping on you from the back and he has forward momentum, that is how you get out of the head lock and that in combination is how you spin him around.   Put a little bit of realisim into your attacks and see what happens.



Yes, I enjoy doing the same thing as well.  Especially in the advanced ranks, you need to pick up the pace.  Nothing like adding in some good power, resistance and aliveness to supercharge the workout a little!!!!



> I see the same thing in non Kenpo shools but it is in the form of someone says hit me and the attacker thows a punch that couldn't have hit them. i.e. the attacker with a strait arm and his fist isn't even touching the opponts body.  where you see the transition is in sparring at tournaments alot of people throw punches and kicks that can't reach because that is how they practice.



It drives me nuts when I see that!!!  The same thing is done with chokes.  It looks more like a shoulder massage than a choke.  As you said above, I'm not saying put the person in the ER, but come on, at least put your hands around the throat!!!



> Remember you fight like you train.



Absolutely!!!!

Mike


----------



## MJS (Aug 20, 2004)

punisher73 said:
			
		

> The SD techs. are always taught in the 'ideal phase' to start off. Once the person gets used to that, they shoulndt be relying on those techs
> ----------------
> 
> I understand going beyond the technique and flowing to open targets etc.  My question was when the technique is in the "ideal phase" and everything is perfect you notice that the way the technique is set up that no one would respond to a strike that way no matter what.



While it may be possible to do that tech. in the ideal phase, the odds of it happening that way are slim.  Again, thats why I stress to the students they should use the techs. as a foundation to build off of.  Once they get the understanding of the tech. then they need to be creative and just react.  

Mike


----------



## Mekugi (Aug 21, 2004)

Hi! 

Hope you don't mind, but I would like to quote something from Iwaki Hideo on this subject. He uses the word "Henka" or varation in this case to describe what I believe is being discussed here. Pardon the intrusion, but I thought you may like it:



> Therefore, by entering form and withdrawing without trace, by being neither concerned with defense or offense, following the natural physical laws without strength and discarding any trace of oneself, you can bridal and ride the opponents form. You should think of this as though riding on the peak of a wave. We call this "log floating on the wave", and as though you were floating on that wave, you will be able to feel the opponents balance and intention at it's core. Using your body and gravity to eliminate the force that is felt, applying proper footwork to move in the direction in which it was eliminated, a version of the appropriate kata that fits the situation will appear. This is the same as the "standard" opening moves in the game of chess _(note: he said "Go" Originally)_. Although I said "standard", the substance is altogether different. This 'substance' is the subtlety in _henka_ where the inside and outside are Combined by acquiring a sense for this subtlety. Then, we can freely focus on the forces of natural movement which is the object of _henka_. Henka is to discard any trace of your predetermined action, to ride upon the enemy's form, to blend in the direction of that form and return to the beginning


Note: this is my translation of this passage, I had to change the language used slightly to have it make sense in English. Pardon is begged in advance!


----------



## Han-Mi (Aug 21, 2004)

One more thing to think about.

Not everyone is trained to our ability and physical standards. Often, if you hit an untrained person in the stomach they will fold over it more than a trained fighter.  In fact, a friend of mine started trainin 3 years ago. I always tried my techs on him and tried to teach him some stuff here and ther, before he started training. He pretty much reacted how he should. Once he started training, he reacted less, making the techs harder to apply.


----------



## 8253 (Aug 21, 2004)

The techniques in Kenpo are there to teach the basic movements of what could be done in a specific situation.  However no opponent will react exactly the way the techniques show in practice.  That is why there are so many variations taught in Kenpo at different levels.  As your training continues, the basics of the techniques only change slightly, but it is these variables that teach you to deal with the different reactions that a persons body does after you strike your target.  Granted there are major changes to techniques but those are just other variations as well.  It is very rare that a technique can be completed in an actual fight.  This is why there is such an arsenal in Kenpo.  There will always be another option.


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 21, 2004)

I find that is true for every style.


----------



## Karazenpo (Aug 21, 2004)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> dont think "technique". techniques are tools to help you understand movement...... once you have developed a keen sense, you no longer think technically, you just move.
> 
> shawn



First of all, Shawn, I totally agree with your post. Now, the answer to the originally question is 'yes' I have seen tecthniques that don't fit body reaction. For instance, a hammerfist to the groin followed by a backfist to the nose. I've seen this in several Kenpo/Kempo/Kajukenbo systems and even a Bruce Lee movie. I suppose one could say if you're fast enough you can catch him to the face before he buckles or the backfist is followup if the hammerfist did not serve it's purpose properly.........but that's just one that instantly comes to mind. The rule of thumb I use in body reactions is this. 1) When you strike an oppponent to the face the head goes backward. How far back? Who knows? It can be just a snap back to some degree or go all the way down to the ground. 2) When you strike to the groin or solar plexus, your opponent 'sucks in' , buckles over or goes down to the ground. In my experiences, that's about all you can count on regarding body reactions to strikes. The high strike he goes back, the mid to lower strike he comes forward. Bear in mind, I'm referring to hand strikes. It's goes without saying a powerful side kick, etc. to the solar plexus could knock an opponent over backwards!


----------



## Rick Wade (Aug 21, 2004)

Han-Mi said:
			
		

> One more thing to think about.
> 
> Not everyone is trained to our ability and physical standards. Often, if you hit an untrained person in the stomach they will fold over it more than a trained fighter.  In fact, a friend of mine started trainin 3 years ago. I always tried my techs on him and tried to teach him some stuff here and ther, before he started training. He pretty much reacted how he should. Once he started training, he reacted less, making the techs harder to apply.




We have a saying in the UKF ignore the mass.  learn how to make your friend fold over you can make anyone fold over.  adn THAT is what make you and him better.  That is what you see when you see the upper belts practicing and one guy hits someone and it doesn't look that hard but the guy folds up like an envelope.


----------



## Han-Mi (Aug 21, 2004)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> We have a saying in the UKF ignore the mass. learn how to make your friend fold over you can make anyone fold over. adn THAT is what make you and him better. That is what you see when you see the upper belts practicing and one guy hits someone and it doesn't look that hard but the guy folds up like an envelope.


Good point


----------



## Doc (Aug 22, 2004)

"General information always produces general results, (read I don't know how he will react) Specific information always produces specific results, (read I know exactly how he will react).

Techniques taught specifically with proper information will produce predictable results, therefore "default techniques" are absolutely functional. I know what he will do because I am causing it. If you are incapable of producing preditable results than your information is incomplete or executed negatively.


----------



## punisher73 (Aug 22, 2004)

Techniques taught specifically with proper information will produce predictable results
--------------------------

Then do you see your opponent folding around a vertical punch to the midsection or bending over at the waist?


----------



## Doc (Aug 22, 2004)

punisher73 said:
			
		

> Techniques taught specifically with proper information will produce predictable results
> --------------------------
> 
> Then do you see your opponent folding around a vertical punch to the midsection or bending over at the waist?



Sir, you must realize that your question is framed in generalities and assumptions that my previous statement answered. For the purposes of further discussion and examination, I must ask you some questions.

What occurred immediately before the punch?
What are the positions of his feet?
What is his weight distribution?
What is the position of his head?
What are the positions of his arms?
Is his mouth open or closed tightly?
What is his breath pattern?
Does he have on shoes?
Describe "mid-section."
Describe "vertical" punch
Explain "folding around."
Describe "bending over."

All of these things can and do effect the anticipated physical reactions of an "attacker." When executed within the context of a technique, the information necessary to answer the above questions are usually readily available within the scenario presented, (except for the shoes question) with very little thought of the process necessary. The attack scenario itself usually answers these questions as well as the default response. But you begin to see what Ed Parker meant when he said, "General information always produces general results."

This is also why I have always said the majority of available "manuals" created teach nothing. They suggest "what," but give absolutely no indication as to "how." A very important componant in a physical interactive martial exchange. They were designed to only give "general ideas" of responses to "general assaults." They were designed to get you to the restaurant, but you stll need a chef and a waiter to get you fed. It is the knowledgeable teacher whose job it is to "get you fed" and unfortunately for the most part these discussions are not taking place when and where they should be.

That being said let's examine one question. Describe to me what your definition of the mid-section might be. A strike to different parts of what some consider the mis-section will yield different responses. However in all fairness from my perspective and definitions, the "general" answer to your question is, "neither."


----------



## Doc (Aug 22, 2004)

8253 said:
			
		

> The techniques in Kenpo are there to teach the basic movements of what could be done in a specific situation.  However no opponent will react exactly the way the techniques show in practice.


I disagree.


> That is why there are so many variations taught in Kenpo at different levels.


I disagree


> As your training continues, the basics of the techniques only change slightly,


Basics don't change, in my understanding.


> It is very rare that a technique can be completed in an actual fight.  This is why there is such an arsenal in Kenpo.  There will always be another option.


interesting observation sir.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 22, 2004)

8253 said:
			
		

> The techniques in Kenpo are there to teach the basic movements of what could be done in a specific situation. However no opponent will react exactly the way the techniques show in practice. That is why there are so many variations taught in Kenpo at different levels. As your training continues, the basics of the techniques only change slightly, but it is these variables that teach you to deal with the different reactions that a persons body does after you strike your target. Granted there are major changes to techniques but those are just other variations as well. It is very rare that a technique can be completed in an actual fight. This is why there is such an arsenal in Kenpo. There will always be another option.


I have to admit, I'm with Doc on this one, basics don't change, that's why they're called basics.    Your techniques teach you to control height, width, and depth, and to use time to adjust, regulate, and monitor thruout your motion.   There are no major changes to techniques, only the equation formula.

DarK LorD


----------



## punisher73 (Aug 22, 2004)

*What occurred immediately before the punch? *Opponent steps forward with his right leg to throw a straight right punch to your head. You step forward and block with 2 inward blocks to his arm.  Right back knuckle to temple followed by a left foreknuckle strike (also heard is called a cookie cutter strike) to the jaw. left foot moves from 6 o'clock to 4:30 and then you throw a right vertical punch to the solar plexus 
*What are the positions of his feet? *Opponent is now in a right forward bow stance
*What is his weight distribution? *weight is forward on his right leg
*What is the position of his head? *head is held upright 
*What are the positions of his arms? *right arm extended, his left arm is down by the left hip
*Is his mouth open or closed tightly? *closed
*What is his breath pattern? *not sure on that one
*Does he have on shoes? *yes 
*Describe "mid-section." *In this case the solar plexus
*Describe "vertical" punch *punch coming from the right hip striking the solar plexus that does not turn over. 
*Explain "folding around." *When opponent is struck in the solar plexus, the opponent "folds" around the punch. the spine rounds, the shoulders come down and in.  Looks similar to a person slouching in a chair
*Describe "bending over." *Just that the person bends completely at the waist while the back stays mostly straight.


----------



## Gary Crawford (Aug 22, 2004)

MACarver,unsurprisingly you are right about "adaptabilty".I really don't think it matters what style of MA one learns as long as the person thinks about self-defense realisticly.Anyone who sparrs knows this,fortunately for Kenpo and JKD students,the teaching of changing situations are very well addressed.Funny thing about Ma's.Once one becomes "seasoned",we almost never need to actually fight anyone.I have often joked about the fact of "If you are just trying to get along and being peaceful,someone almost always wants to mess with you,but if you go around looking for a fight,nobody wants one".I think that's a really funny statement,unfortunatly it's too true.


----------



## 8253 (Aug 22, 2004)

I do not study Parkers Kenpo.  If you take a basic technique and throw an extra punch when there is an opening, you have changed the basic technique.
If you punch one person in the face, they may drop to the ground.  Or they may stand there an look at you.


----------



## Ceicei (Aug 22, 2004)

8253 said:
			
		

> I do not study Parkers Kenpo. If you take a basic technique and throw an extra punch when there is an opening, you have changed the basic technique.


Not really. It is still the same technique, even if you add in an extra punch or change a strike for different strike. What Parker's Kenpo teaches is the flexibility to adapt when needed, whether at the beginning, middle, or end of a technique.

- Ceicei


----------



## Doc (Aug 22, 2004)

punisher73 said:
			
		

> *What occurred immediately before the punch? *Opponent steps forward with his right leg to throw a straight right punch to your head. You step forward and block with 2 inward blocks to his arm.  Right back knuckle to temple followed by a left foreknuckle strike (also heard is called a cookie cutter strike) to the jaw. left foot moves from 6 o'clock to 4:30 and then you throw a right vertical punch to the solar plexus
> *What are the positions of his feet? *Opponent is now in a right forward bow stance
> *What is his weight distribution? *weight is forward on his right leg
> *What is the position of his head? *head is held upright
> ...



Im afraid you missed my point sir that, everything matters. The questions were designed to give you things to consider that have an impact on the question at hand and the subsequent outcome.

However, based on the scenario you describe from the beginning there are even further misunderstandings. You seem to be under the impression you can block his punch with two inward blocks.  By definition this is not possible. Additionally the scenario you suggest would indicate your attacker would not be facing you, and even if he didnt change positions, (which is highly unlikely considering the preceding strikes), if you angle off to 4:30 the solar Plexus would not be accessible. But even if I allow for your scenario, striking the solar plexus will not cause a person to bend over initially. Allowing that the strike had sufficient energy, the body will drop in height and their hips will move rearward, and the feet will move backwards as well to compensate for the hip displacement. Although this appears to look like bending over it is not. However the person will end up in a bent over position, and may ultimately bend over after the fact depending upon the execution of the punch. The act of bending over is not the same as being bent over and it makes a huge difference anatomically. Because of this and other factors, my original answer stands. Neither.

Overall the scenario is invalid for a host of reasons. What you describe as being specific Im afraid is far from it. I suggest you start with analyzing the attack and work from there sir.


----------



## Rainman (Aug 22, 2004)

Ceicei said:
			
		

> Not really. It is still the same technique, even if you add in an extra punch or change a strike for different strike. What Parker's Kenpo teaches is the flexibility to adapt when needed, whether at the beginning, middle, or end of a technique.
> 
> - Ceicei



Techniques teach specific zone cancellations done in a specific order to specific targets from a specific attack.   Drills teach variable expansion along with concepts, theories, principles and an instructor who understands what he or she is doing and why he or she is doing it.


----------



## Ceicei (Aug 22, 2004)

Rainman said:
			
		

> Techniques teach specific zone cancellations done in a specific order to specific targets from a specific attack. Drills teach variable expansion along with concepts, theories, principles and an instructor who understands what he or she is doing and why he or she is doing it.


Yes, I agree with you.  As long as you keep in mind the basic principles and the intent of what you wish to achieve from doing the technique, it is possible to substitute one strike for another or add in one extra move to enhance the zone cancellation (and still keep it the same basic technique).  This can be done within the "what-if phase". 

- Ceicei


----------



## punisher73 (Aug 23, 2004)

Overall the scenario is invalid for a host of reasons
-------

That scenario was described exactly as it was shown. That was the whole point of my original question. Is that some people have made up techniques or show reactions that do not follow what will happen (this is a Parker offshoot technique that I have described) in a real situation.  

In the situation, the person did not drop in height while his hips moved back. I know how to cause that reaction. I know how to get an opponent to move anyway I want them to with my strikes. This person bent over at the waist after being struck and that was my point, no one would move that way.

PS: I did mistype saying 2 inward blocks. Right hand is inward, left hand is outward.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 23, 2004)

punisher73 said:
			
		

> Overall the scenario is invalid for a host of reasons
> -------
> 
> That scenario was described exactly as it was shown. That was the whole point of my original question. Is that some people have made up techniques that do not follow what will happen (this is a Parker offshoot technique that I have described) in a real situation.
> ...


The conversation with Doc regarding an opponent bentover or bending over is a rich one...bring your thinking cap. 

D.


----------



## Doc (Aug 23, 2004)

punisher73 said:
			
		

> Overall the scenario is invalid for a host of reasons
> -------
> 
> That scenario was described exactly as it was shown. That was the whole point of my original question. Is that some people have made up techniques or show reactions that do not follow what will happen (this is a Parker offshoot technique that I have described) in a real situation.
> ...



My apologies for misunderstanding. When a technique is taught, it must be examined from multiple perspectives that includes "Distance #1." All persons involved must understand their role in the scenario, and be taught in some instances to react accordingly. In others the proper reactions may be induced through mild contact to insert extenal stymuli and trigger reflex response tht is "realistic" as opposed to false perceptions of what is supposed to happen."


----------



## Doc (Aug 23, 2004)

Ceicei said:
			
		

> Yes, I agree with you.  As long as you keep in mind the basic principles and the intent of what you wish to achieve from doing the technique, it is possible to substitute one strike for another or add in one extra move to enhance the zone cancellation (and still keep it the same basic technique).  This can be done within the "what-if phase".
> 
> - Ceicei


I disagree. Changing weapons, (along with other factors) changes results. There are reasons that one weapon is chosen over another that may be beyond your understanding, yet those reasons still exist. The question should be asked, "Why am I being taught this as opposed to that."


----------



## Doc (Aug 23, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> The conversation with Doc regarding an opponent bentover or bending over is a rich one...bring your thinking cap.
> 
> D.



You OK?


----------



## 8253 (Aug 23, 2004)

Ceicei said:
			
		

> Not really. It is still the same technique, even if you add in an extra punch or change a strike for different strike. What Parker's Kenpo teaches is the flexibility to adapt when needed, whether at the beginning, middle, or end of a technique.
> 
> - Ceicei



If you add a move to a technique, then it will not be the same technique and in adding a move to a technique since it is not the same technique as described in training, you have changed from one basic to another, but you are still changing the basics for a particular defensive or offensive move.  Kenpo is highly adaptive, this is why it starts with basic defensive techniques, and builds to defensive and offensive techniques.  Basics will always be a part of anything that you do.  However they will never be the same basics as before, due to the only constant in the universe: change.


----------



## Ceicei (Aug 23, 2004)

What I was trying to say is that a technique is still recognizable for what it is even if an extra punch is added in or a strike modified.  For example, Five Swords can still be recognized if a person changed stright fingerthrust to a palmheel strike or the upward fingerthrust with an uppercut. As was mentioned upthread, Thundering Hammers changing the first hammerfist to an uppercut is still recognizable as Thundering Hammers.  Whether it is officially sanctioned as such is another story.

It's like if a cat lost an ear, it is still a cat, unless you're arguing it is an entirely new animal.

If one change in a technique doesn't make it a variation of that technique, but as an entirely new technique, then I don't know what it is.  Aren't kenpoists encouraged to adapt and modify whenever needed without having to rename every technique?

- Ceicei


----------



## Mark Weiser (Aug 23, 2004)

I belive you are correct. The idea behind KENPO is borrowing and adaptive fighting making it one of the premier street fighting arts. This way no two fighters are the same or any two fights. You take two Kenpoist with the same training and they both will fight differently.  Each opponent needs to be approached differently and taken out differently. 

I love Kenpo the aresnal is vast and powerful.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 23, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> You OK?


Nope. But I will be.


----------

