# The old Beagles Eak :)



## don bohrer (Jul 14, 2004)

Is this old favorite in your sytem? If so... is it the same or slightly different? If taught as an Epak, Tracy, Kenpo off shoot what and how would you teach it. What's important from your systems point of view. Any takers?

*Eagles Beak*​
Defend against a right shoulder grab. The opponent is at our right and the grab is with his left hand.

1. Our left hand traps and pins the opponents hand to our right shoulder. 
2. Step with your left foot away from the opponent into a horse (Straightens the attackers arm).
3. Deliver a verticle middle knuckle strike (thrown like an uppercut) to the nerve between the bicep/tricep. 
4. Drive a straight middle knuckle into the opponents arm pit.

Option

After the middle knuckle strike to the armpit.

5. Circle your right arm downward, out, and over the top of your opponents trapped arm. 
6. Drop your forearm across his bicep (same motion as a downward verticle hammer fist).
7. On contact with his bicep rake your forearm inward and downward toward your chest. 
8. Rebound off your opponents arm with a right sword hand to the side of his throat.  		 	

Guard and Cover away from the opponent.

Don (El Paso)   :ultracool


----------



## pete (Jul 15, 2004)

hi don... 

i train in an epak system, with the sensibility to retain many of the older techniques (i think they are refered to as chinese kenpo).  we do eagle beak just as you've described in the first part, and the way i understand your "extension", it seems that you've grafted in "lever"!  

for you "pure" epak guys out there, it would be akin to grafting from  clutching feathers to snapping twig after the knuckle shot. 

we also do a technique called "wing break" a little later in the system (i think either purple or blue), which adds a takedown by bringing your elbow down to his bicep, continuing the counter clockwise motion locking his arm from underneath, and taking him down by torquing hips and pushing against the tricep... and for fun you can kick him on the way down!

personally, i find the progression of these techniques more suitable for beginners than epak's sword and hammer... since the defender initally steps away from the attacker to create our old friend distance, and applies non-life treatening counters as you identify and evaluate the threat of your attacker. when i teach S&H, which you advance toward the attacker and immediately chop his throat, it always goes with the caveat... "this is a fast technique, and you can kill someone quickly.  be sure thats your intent before using it"

good stuff, regardless which system~

pete


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Jul 15, 2004)

Don:  In Rod Martin's Kenpo system the technique (including what you call the extension) is an Purple Belt requirement we call Key to the Sword.  Omit the clear and chop and substitute a knife-edge kick to the knee and it is an Orange Belt technique called Striking Key.  Rod Martin left Tracy's San Jose school to start his own school in 1964.  I think the Tracy guys still do this technique.  Not sure of their name though.


----------



## Blindside (Jul 15, 2004)

My school is a Tracy offshoot, and we do the technique including your "optional" section almost verbatim.  The only difference is the strike to the armpit where we use the first two fingers in a supported dart instead of the center-knuckle.  It seems to give a bit more penetration, especially if the opponents arm is longer than yours.   

If I was an AK student, I would view this as Lone Kimono from the side with an inserted shot to the armpit.

Lamont


----------



## don bohrer (Jul 16, 2004)

Hi guys,

Pete,
My org was known as Tra-Co in days past and is now a 20 tech system plus extensions. I hear that was shortend from 30+ in the old days. At one time we might have been known as Co-Par or TraCoPar. Not sure if that makes it Chinese Kenpo or not. We do wing break too, but hand placement lower for a hip throw on the take down. 

Sword and Hammer? You'll have to write that up for me. It's probably a tech I am familiar with but am having a senior moment on. It almost sounds like inward defense (stepping back) to me or the start of Short 2 (going foward)?

Old Kenpoka,
I guess it's hard to copy-right a good thing. A lot of guys left to do their own thing in those days. I think Kenpo was better for it. Was Mr. Martin's system a 20 or 30+ system? I heard the old 30+ system took forever to get through. Was it you asking for Book Set? I have and old version on tape if you'd like a copy, or perhaps I could upload to MT. 

Lamont,
A supported Dart instead of the middle knuckle is a good option for the reach. When I start teaching again I'll have to show that to the younger adults. I have long arms and don't have a reach problem. 

I have a few days off work and am away to Silver City tomorrow. Be cool guys.

Don (El Paso)


----------



## pete (Jul 16, 2004)

don bohrer said:
			
		

> Sword and Hammer? You'll have to write that up for me.



as lifted from michael billings site:

_10. SWORD AND HAMMER (right flank- left hand shoulder grab) 

1. While you are standing naturally, your opponent (standing between 3:00 and 4:00) grabs your right shoulder with his left hand. Step off and to your right with your right foot toward 3:00 into a horse stance, facing 12:00 while striking your opponent's throat with a right upward outward diagonal hand sword. Simultaneous with this action pin your opponent's left hand to your right shoulder with your left hand. 
2. As your opponent reacts to your hand sword strike and bends backward, execute a right back hammer fist strike to your opponent's groin as you settle your stance utilizing Gravitational Marriage. 
_


----------



## Steve Howard (Jul 17, 2004)

Studied Chinese kenpo in a Jay T. Will studio, where Eagle Beak is taught at the Orange Belt (40 techniques/belt since 1968).  The technique as you described is taught as variations "B" & "C" in the Jay T. Will curriculum.   Variation "A" is an immediate middle-knuckle strike to the armpit (no uppercut), since--if the attacker's arm is already straightened as a reaction to the initial pin and step--the target is unobstructed.  Variation "B" (inserted uppercut) is used to further straighten the arm if the initial step and pin combination does not produce an unobstructed path to the desired target (the armpit).  ---One of my favorite techniques!


----------



## don bohrer (Jul 17, 2004)

Just got back from Silver City and had a pretty good time hiking. Nearly killed my brother! A friend and me got crazy and dragged my brother up and down the hiking paths for 7 miles or so. We didn't bring enough water or food. My poor brother thought he was going to the "Upper Room!" :EG: 

Pete, 
So that's "Sword and Hammer". I don't recall a tech exactly like it but we do a technique called "Intermediate Offense". It and it's variations make can Make "Sword and Hammer". Thanks for reminding me about Mr. Billings site. I will have to visit the site more often. 

Mr. Howard,
Forty techs per belt will sure stretch the memory. Would you mind posting a belt chart some time? I would be interesting in seeing what the tech layout is like. What Kata do you guys have in your system?

Thanks Guys.


----------



## Rob Broad (Jul 17, 2004)

I remeber learning Eagles Beak back in the 80's when I was a beginner.  Our school was a Tracy school, but my instructor implememtn many of his own ideas and modificationsinto the techniques 2 levels after you had tested.  So we started to play with Eagles Beak at Blue belt.  It was the introduction to nerve strikes for us, you are striking Triple Warmer/Heater 12 in the firts strike.  I really enjoyed this techniue.


----------



## Steve Howard (Jul 17, 2004)

Mr. Bohrer,
   I never thought that 40 techs per belt was bad---but since that's what I started with, I guess I just didn't know any better (lol).  I'll try to get a technique list posted on my website soon.  As far as katas, we do:
Blocking Set (Yellow)
Short 1 & Long 1 (Orange)
Short 2 & Long 2 (Purple)
Long 3 (Blue)
Short 3 & Book Set (Green)
Long 4, Staff Set & Standing Finger Set (3rd Brown)
Long 5, Mass Attacks & Moving Finger Set (2nd Brown)
Tiger & Crane, Two-Man Set (Black Belt Set) for 1st Brown
Sword Set 1, Spear Set 1 & Tam Tui (12 Sections) for Shodan.

Thanks,
Steve Howard
www.kenporaw.bravepages.com


----------



## Randy Strausbaugh (Jul 17, 2004)

Steve Howard said:
			
		

> Tiger & Crane, Two-Man Set (Black Belt Set) for 1st Brown


Mr. Howard,
Back when I studied with Jay, we also did a kata called Ling-po (aka Lin Bo, Lim Po, Lian Bu, etc.) for first brown.  Has that kata been dropped from the system?  Just wondering, as I don't get up to Columbus much anymore.


----------



## Randy Strausbaugh (Jul 17, 2004)

Back to the topic, I also learned the first variation as Mr. Howard describes.  An excellent strike to Heart 1.


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Jul 18, 2004)

Rod Martin taught a 30 technique system + variations for a total of 40 or so per belt.


----------



## don bohrer (Jul 31, 2004)

> you are striking Triple Warmer/Heater 12



In our Eagles Beak the first strike to a nerve is between the bicep/tricep. The second is in the arm pit cavity, and the third is the radial nerve along the forearm?

Would anyone care to expain the nerve strikes found in Eagle's Beak, and how better to activate these points? Are there complimentary nerve strikes that make these points work better? What red flags come to mind when executing this technique. Any insites or observations are welcome.

Rob,
Could you expain the Triple Warmer/Heater a bit.

Eagles Beak again.

Eagles Beak​
1. Our left hand traps and pins the opponents hand to our right shoulder. 
2. Step with your left foot away from the opponent into a horse (Straightens the attackers arm).
3. Deliver a verticle middle knuckle strike (thrown like an uppercut) to the nerve between the bicep/tricep. 
4. Drive a straight middle knuckle into the opponents arm pit.

After the middle knuckle strike to the armpit.

5. Circle your right arm downward, out, and over the top of your opponents trapped arm. 
6. Drop your forearm across his bicep (same motion as a downward verticle hammer fist).
7. On contact with his bicep rake your forearm inward and downward toward your chest. 
8. Rebound off your opponents arm with a right sword hand to the side of his throat. 

Don (El paso)


----------



## distalero (Sep 16, 2004)

Consider this: why did your opponent place his hand on your shoulder to begin with? Was it the dreaded One Finger Of Death tap? This technique was practiced for a grab of the right shoulder of your gi (on the street, clothing) with the intent to pull you in and back, so he can punch you down, onto your back. If you practice stepping to your left, you've just done his takedown for him. We instead stepped with the right foot into him, left hand on guard and ready to do slap checks, right elbow in motion up and into his grasp, or over it depending on differences in body size, with a sword hand across the base of his throat. "Second" strike was a back knuckle to the floating rib (drop a little in your horse, although  you may have time to  be in a neutral bow at this point), THEN you step with the left foot to place yourself in an even lower horse to strike upwads with a hammer fist into his groin, or pubic symphysis, or bladder, or.... I'm sure you have a formal descriptive term for this in AK; sorry I don't know most of them because they came after my time. 
     Having said this, obviously if the opponent is quick enough (and they always are) he can control your movement for a short period of time by pulling you in and then pushing out, so the key in all this is NOT to step first to the left. The desciptions I read above in the other posts are of the stylized training stances, and the "safe" strikes, and not what was practiced a long time ago, in the stone age.
     Thanks for the opportunity.


----------



## bzarnett (Sep 17, 2004)

Randy Strausbaugh said:
			
		

> Back to the topic, I also learned the first variation as Mr. Howard describes. An excellent strike to Heart 1.


May I ask what your expectations are here in striking Jiquan (Heart 1)?

I agree that the center of the axilla hurts to be struck but I am curious to what additional effects you think it creates that are specific to HT1.

Cheers.


----------



## Randy Strausbaugh (Sep 17, 2004)

bzarnett said:
			
		

> May I ask what your expectations are here in striking Jiquan (Heart 1)?


Pain.  I used Heart 1 to identify the target, nothing more.


----------



## ReturningThunder (Oct 20, 2004)

some one said by stepping to the left while doing this technique you help the attacker throw you please explain this


----------



## Doc (Oct 24, 2004)

distalero said:
			
		

> Consider this: why did your opponent place his hand on your shoulder to begin with? Was it the dreaded One Finger Of Death tap? This technique was practiced for a grab of the right shoulder of your gi (on the street, clothing) with the intent to pull you in and back, so he can punch you down, onto your back. If you practice stepping to your left, you've just done his takedown for him.


I disagree sir. We practice this technique regularly stepping to the left settling into a horse stance and moving us out of the stance is not possible. 


> We instead stepped with the right foot into him, left hand on guard and ready to do slap checks, right elbow in motion up and into his grasp, or over it depending on differences in body size, with a sword hand across the base of his throat.


For one the assumption is the grab is a close one for momentary control. If he grabs he will be close because he is not afraid. If he were afraid, he wouldn't grab at all and just punch instead. If he is so far away from you you have to step in front of him, you may be moving into a secondary strike with his right hand, and your angle will not be able to stop it.


> ... Having said this, obviously if the opponent is quick enough (and they always are) he can control your movement for a short period of time by pulling you in and then pushing out,


If he can, than something is being done incorrectly.


> so the key in all this is NOT to step first to the left.


Well Ed Parker taught me to step to the left. He made it functional, and so do I. We practice and train techniques very realistically based on how I was taught and the personnel I train regularly who depend upon our methodology on a day-today basis in their regular employment in public law enforcement. May I ask, what is it you do to establish structural integrity significant enough so that your stance is immoveable?


----------



## pete (Oct 24, 2004)

attacker uses left hand to grab right shoulder... 

left pin attackers hand: neutralizes it from being a threat and attaches you to him.
left foot steps left, drop weight into horse stance: centers your balance, extends attackers left arm, checks depth and width... his right fist is no longer a threat.
right palm heel attacks outstretched left arm at elbow: checks height, gets him on his toes, attacker loses his center, right punch is even less of a threat
right middle knuckle to armpit: wide open soft target

now, if you step right to towards the attacker (or slightly in front), he can drop his elbow and prevent you from straightening his arm... so no elbow strike, no dimensional checks, no open target at the armpit.... however, you can do a right wraparound under his tricep to lock him up and regain those checks...but that's another story.



			
				doc said:
			
		

> We practice this technique regularly stepping to the left settling into a horse stance and moving us out of the stance is not possible... If he can, than something is being done incorrectly.


aye.

pete.


----------



## distalero (Oct 24, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> I disagree sir. We practice this technique regularly stepping to the left settling into a horse stance and moving us out of the stance is not possible.
> 
> Well..........of course this technique can be taught in many different ways, but to address this: it's the act of stepping into that "immoveable" horse that can be the downfall, literally. I, we, practiced this as being a surprise move against us, who were standing there, humming and blinking, oblivious to what was about to happen. The grab of our shoulder was a grab into the attacker and back, so that there was not time to step with anything but the right foot, mostly to break an already beginning fall. The attacker is pulling the weight of your head (no offense) and your thorax, over the pivot of two points (your feet) which becomes even more effective for him if you kindly remove one of those pivot points by stepping away from him. The hand work intent was to start in on working on what was available, on the "fall in" as it were. When I stand around casually I don't stand in a wide stanced horse, and this technique was taught to us assuming that no one else does either.
> 
> ...




Land in some semblance of a neutral bow while windmilling arms and hands with some accuracy, maybe even, if the attacker is dumb enough to allow it, cutting a 45 (angle not pistol, although the pistol would be a better choice) on him. Seriously, this technique is for a situation that is bad from the beginning. I practiced it with the understanding that it happens that way, and going back and reconstructing the attack so that I can "do it better" is good for teaching the movement involved, but not for practicing the movement involved. Thanks for your response.  What I've written here is only my understanding, not "the" understanding, and maybe even not a very insightful understanding.


----------



## Adept (Nov 7, 2004)

Without bothering with quaint names, we do incorporate a similar move in our training. 

 We encourage situational awareness in our training, so when practicing maneuvers like this we start with out hands up facing our agressor. As the attacker grabs the left shoulder (presumably for body control so he can smack you in the face) you grab his hand and hold it tight to your shoulder. At the same time step backwards with your left foot and right with your right foot, keeping a stong stance as you pull him slightly forward and to his left.

 Then your options are many. You can control the arm and force a takedown, strike to the underside of the upper arm and the follow through, kick to his left leg, whatever you feel most comfortable executing.


----------



## Doc (Nov 7, 2004)

Adept said:
			
		

> Without bothering with quaint names, we do incorporate a similar move in our training.
> 
> We encourage situational awareness in our training, so when practicing maneuvers like this we start with out hands up facing our agressor. As the attacker grabs the left shoulder (presumably for body control so he can smack you in the face) you grab his hand and hold it tight to your shoulder. At the same time step backwards with your left foot and right with your right foot, keeping a stong stance as you pull him slightly forward and to his left.
> 
> Then your options are many. You can control the arm and force a takedown, strike to the underside of the upper arm and the follow through, kick to his left leg, whatever you feel most comfortable executing.


Excuse my ignorance but that doesn't seem to make much sense. We were speakinh of flank attacks (I think), that incorporate a completely different dynamic than frontal assaults. Additionally, if the attack is from the flank, "Pinning" the hand to your shoulder is not prudent due to anatomical considerations.


----------



## Adept (Nov 7, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> We were speakinh of flank attacks (I think)


 Ah yes. My mistake, I'm afraid. I misread the original post as 'to the front' not 'to the right'.


----------



## distalero (Nov 7, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> Excuse my ignorance but that doesn't seem to make much sense. We were speakinh of flank attacks (I think), that incorporate a completely different dynamic than frontal assaults.
> 
> 
> I don't seem to have this "Quote" feature down yet, so who knows how it will show up, but I wanted to agree with your "I think", above. I thought we were talking about a flank attack as well. The original post that got this going also mentioned pinning the attacker's hand, which for a bunch of reasons doesn't make sense, if for no other reason than it applies "down", and restricting, force to your own shoulder joint; or have I missed something? It sounds like you don't practice it this way either. Also, a pokey-poo to the axillary area is even more questionable than our "strike to the floating rib"/ old time way of doing this techinque. Is this the first strike in your version? Confusing, so now I have to ask: how do you critique my interpretation in my last post (sorry, hard to read because of hashing up the quotes)?


----------



## Doc (Nov 7, 2004)

_Originally Posted by Doc

I disagree sir. We practice this technique regularly stepping to the left settling into a horse stance and moving us out of the stance is not possible. 
_


> Well..........of course this technique can be taught in many different ways, but to address this: it's the act of stepping into that "immoveable" horse that can be the downfall, literally. I, we, practiced this as being a surprise move against us, who were standing there, humming and blinking, oblivious to what was about to happen


I think everyone practices this as a "surprise." If it wasn't a surprise, you would retaliate before he grabbed.


> The grab of our shoulder was a grab into the attacker and back, so that there was not time to step with anything but the right foot, mostly to break an already beginning fall.


It seems you do not understand the dynamics of this technique, at least as I understand it. If the attack is from the flank, as we established, you are talking about a different set of circumstances. What you describe is a rear attack on one hand and a flank on another.


> The attacker is pulling the weight of your head (no offense) and your thorax, over the pivot of two points (your feet) which becomes even more effective for him if you kindly remove one of those pivot points by stepping away from him. The hand work intent was to start in on working on what was available, on the "fall in" as it were. When I stand around casually I don't stand in a wide stanced horse, and this technique was taught to us assuming that no one else does either.


It appears you are taking two positions, one being my description depends upon standing in a stationary horse "waiting" for someone to grab. I believe I said we "step" into a horse.
_
For one the assumption is the grab is a close one for momentary control. If he grabs he will be close because he is not afraid. If he were afraid, he wouldn't grab at all and just punch instead.
_


> Well, you can make the case that anyone who attacks you is afraid, but that aside, he has to get close to either pull or strike. He is wisely choosing to do both.


My experience suggests otherwise. People who are afraid on the street don't walk up and touch people they are afraid of.


> If by momentay control you meant the time it takes to pull and punch you down to the ground then yes, it's for momentary control.


Sorry, but either I'm dense or you're not making any sense.
_
If he is so far away from you you have to step in front of him, you may be moving into a secondary strike with his right hand, and your angle will not be able to stop it.
_


> See above: you had no choice but to move into him, and yes of course the next shot is his, but you can do something too, and the theoretical hope is that elbowing his grasp will "denature" that next shot. "Start throwing something" is the real world, especially if you weren't paying attention to things, and yes I understand that Kenpo nowadays couches everything in the "science" of the art, but hell, start throwing something. My angle is what it is; maybe not what I practiced (although with my way of doing it, it's pretty close, ie lousy). Too bad for me, but......( insert the phrase "start throwing something" here).


It sounds to me like you are not very experienced, nor do you have an understanding of the Ed Parker technique that I am familiar with.
_
If he can, than something is being done incorrectly.
_


> Yes, of course. I wasn't originally paying attention.



Then why are you writing?
_
Well Ed Parker taught me to step to the left. He made it functional, and so do I. We practice and train techniques very realistically based on how I was taught and the personnel I train regularly who depend upon our methodology on a day-today basis in their regular employment in public law enforcement.
_


> Which I respect, of course. "Killer/hunters" (no offense) can make most anything work, especially if their usual focus is hypervigilance. Can't hurt, though, for the average schmuck like yours truly to practice like he isn't a badass (or in a perceived war zone) because......I'm not.


Clearly you have no understanding of the dynamics of street confrontations on any level.


			
				distalero said:
			
		

> Land in some semblance of a neutral bow while windmilling arms and hands with some accuracy, maybe even, if the attacker is dumb enough to allow it, cutting a 45 (angle not pistol, although the pistol would be a better choice) on him. Seriously, this technique is for a situation that is bad from the beginning. I practiced it with the understanding that it happens that way, and going back and reconstructing the attack so that I can "do it better" is good for teaching the movement involved, but not for practicing the movement involved. Thanks for your response.  What I've written here is only my understanding, not "the" understanding, and maybe even not a very insightful understanding.


I absolutely have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps someone else reading can translate/interpret what you are trying to say.


----------



## distalero (Nov 7, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> _Originally Posted by Doc
> 
> Clearly you have no understanding of the dynamics of street confrontations on any level.
> 
> I absolutely have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps someone else reading can translate/interpret what you are trying to say._


_




Ah, yes. Well.....pretty much most of what I wrote was maybe just a little tongue in cheek. There is a level of reality that lies just below the one you seem to be focusing on, and that's the level I was alluding to for the most part. You seem to be very analytical, and perhaps have a tendency towards the literal (not that those are necessarily negative qualities) as evidenced by some of your comments, not to mention the terms "dynamics" of "street confrontations"; very formal sounding, very neatly catagorized. What I was referring to has nothing to do with believing that theoretical diagrams, ie techniques, including "immoveable horse(s)" are a guaranteed best response to an unexpected attack.  It's true, I'm not a cop. My "understanding" of "confrontations" comes mainly from military experience 30 plus years ago. But from what I can tell, cops practice the same "dynamics" that we did: 5 to 10 on one, club the sh**! out anybody that even looks like they're going to move (we could be a little more extreme: we just opened up), and the recognition that a radio, and the real help it can bring, was always the best first move, and always, always, keep scanning the crowd, surroundings, etc. Were those the dynamics of a confrontation you were referring to? Anything short of that is is really just theoretical practice, but possibly effective, I'll grant that, if your job is to look for sought after targets, while you scan your surroundings, staying in constant contact with dispatch ie, basic LE survival. Me, I get to walk away if it's just words and gestures, and run if it's more serious (unless protection of the young/innocent is involved). In my experience actual attacks are chaotic, even the ones you saw coming, especially 30 years (and almost as many pounds) later, and nobody freakin' diagramed them, so as a consequence I practice with this in mind. But it's just practice, not "real".  
Chaos; want a definition? Ask around your classes, ask a vet what the accepted, perhaps the only, way out of an ambush is. 
     :asian:_


----------

