# Changes in techniques over the years



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Sep 16, 2004)

This is a question for all the Seniors (esp. Mssr's White, Chapel, and Conatser). There are certain "signature techniques" in/from kenpo that seem to be held on to even in distant kenpo seperatist systems. That is, SDT's like Five Swords and Thundering Hammers will crop up in the requirements of pretty much every kenpo splinter out there, but with subtle differences (i.e., Five Swords shows up in TAI as Daggar Set; Lone & Twin Kimono are merged in UCKJ into "Breaking the Bridge"; Thundering Hammers seems to keep it's name, but look a bit different where ever it shows; etc.).

My question(s) is 3-fold:

1. How much do the differences represent a historic marking of where kenpo was at, at the time of seperation (i.e., different ways of doing seven/five swords during different "2.3" versions of kenpo...may give clue to timeframe of splinter teachers' seperation from the CK/AK pack).

2.  What have the rationale's been behind changes in the "signature techniques" that you've been exposed to during your journey's? Specifically, do you recall what was "broke" about an old version of an SDT that called for it to be "fixed"? (I'm throwing these in quotes because I don't suspect things were ever truly static, but merely variant explorations of ideas and principles demonstrated in/by a given tech.)

3.  I've seen some SDT's revisited at multiple levels, with more in-depth explorations of possibilities within the vocabulary of motion and it's expressions (i.e., multiple 5-swords seminars, each taking it to a new level with incrementally 'advanced' information). I know some Prof's opting for 16 method even have in their cirriculums planned revisitations of earlier techs at different levels in order to extract more and expand more on the ideas and options in the tech.  Is there a written resource, or constant standard, as to what each technique presents and looks like in, say, advanced shorthand? Are most or all of the Seniors aware of pretty much the same advanced-level shorthand variations/expansions on the SDT's?

(Note: The 3rd question relates to the 1st in regards to determining if it's possible to discern where a splinter teacher was in their kenpo knowledge development prior to leaving Mr. Parkers fold, via the depth with which they are able to continue exploring a given technique).

Best Regards,

Dave Crouch, DC


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Sep 18, 2004)

*chirp-chirp...chirp-chirp*


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Sep 20, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> This is a question for all the Seniors (esp.  Mssr's White, Chapel, and Conatser). There are certain "signature techniques"  in/from kenpo that seem to be held on to even in distant kenpo seperatist  systems. That is, SDT's like Five Swords and Thundering Hammers will crop up in  the requirements of pretty much every kenpo splinter out there, but with subtle  differences (i.e., Five Swords shows up in TAI as Dagger Set; Lone & Twin  Kimono are merged in UCKJ into "Breaking the Bridge"; Thundering Hammers seems  to keep it's name, but look a bit different where ever it shows;  etc.).
> 
> My question(s) is 3-fold:
> 
> ...


 Sorry for not responding sooner but  I was in hopes of others contributing to the section as well as  myself.

_*1st Question*_......



			
				Kembudo-Kai  Kempoka said:
			
		

> 1. How much do the differences represent a historic marking of where  kenpo was at, at the time of separation (i.e., different ways of doing  seven/five swords during different "2.3" versions of kenpo...may give clue to  time-frame of splinter teachers' separation from the CK/AK  pack).


 My view is that the individual technique  differences have little to do with historic "marking" of the  techniques as pertained to "separation" of several of the  break-away systems.  Yet, in hindsight, it "*may*" have more to do with the  "marking" of *precisely when* certain realizations or discoveries came to  Mr. Parker.   He always taught numerous "possibilities or variable  expansions".


_*2nd  Question*_......



			
				Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> 2. What have  the rationale's been behind changes in the "signature techniques" that you've  been exposed to during your journey's? Specifically, do you recall what was  "broke" about an old version of an SDT that called for it to be "fixed"? (I'm  throwing these in quotes because I don't suspect things were ever truly static,  but merely variant explorations of ideas and principles demonstrated in/by a  given tech.)


 Well, this is an easy question to answer.   As  Mr. Parker evolved and continually taught or "spit shined" (as he would often  say) his system to his students (either publicly in Seminars or privately in his  house, airplane, airport, restaurant etc.  LOL), he would always look for  cleaner or better ways of executing the movements {techniques}.  To the credit  of many of his personal Black Belt Students, who would question, research and  eventually offer debate over certain aspects of any given technique... if the  discussion resulted in LOGICAL or improved strategies or ideas..... he would  "ponder" the material and if it had merit... would on occasion adjust it.  Thus  a slightly different version of a technique.

 As an example...... the  first Yellow Belt Technique "Delayed Sword",  started with your left hand  pinning the opponents right hand as you executed the right inward strike to the  opponents arm, then followed by a right front ball kick to the groin, then  replant and deliver a right outward handsword to the opponent's right side of  his neck.   This was the "initial" way to perform the technique that I  originally learned.  It was later "adjusted" in his most recent updating of his  AC [Accumulative Journal] to _alter_ or actually delete the first  _*PIN*_ with your left hand, and then changed the maneuver  to  become a _*Positional Check*_ under the opponents grab as  executed the rest of the technique the same.   

 The reason for this  update, change, alteration etc. etc., was...  since this is the YELLOW BELT,  he  didn't want the student (in the ideal phase) to _possibly_ have to deal  with the opponent still _*holding on*_ to your lapel and thus  having to need to do additional movements to dislodge the initial grab!   

 Another adjustment was the realization of numerous one-armed techniques  developed in the early days.   Mr. Parker moved on and updated much more duality  of action with a new emphasis on the principle of "*WITH*" during the later  technique updates and versions which involved both arms and legs during the  technique which were noticeably missing from earlier versions.

 This is  the type of reasoning that went on from technique to technique through the  system.  The earlier methods are not wrong... but just additional versions  compared to his new "ideal" phase.  


_*3rd  Question*_......



			
				Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> 3. I've seen  some SDT's revisited at multiple levels, with more in-depth explorations of  possibilities within the vocabulary of motion and it's expressions (i.e.,  multiple 5-swords seminars, each taking it to a new level with incrementally  'advanced' information). I know some Prof's opting for 16 method even have in  their curriculums planned revisitations of earlier techs at different levels in  order to extract more and expand more on the ideas and options in the tech.
> 
> *Is there a written resource, or constant standard, as to what each  technique presents and looks like in, say, advanced shorthand? Are most or all  of the Seniors aware of pretty much the same advanced-level shorthand  variations/expansions on the SDT's?
> *
> ...


 Good  Question,  My opinion is this,..... (responding to your bold type question),  No  there is not a constant or standard that all instructors have had access to  {this will answer many questions I'm sure}.   There were only a few that were  closely involved with Mr. Parker at the time of his death that were working on  exactly what you are speaking of.  He was in process of updating his "belt  manuals" as well as in process of a fairly large video series on the system (of  which he only released the first 2).  Had he been able to finish this  series..... the world would be a much different place today.

 TODAY, you  the student are at the mercy of all the instructors out there and YOU must  evaluate the quality of what each instructor teaches (and I might add that each  Kenpo Instructor that I know has much good to teach but many are specialists in  certain areas and those areas do not necessarily match each of the students  needs).   Difficult..... yes to say the least but true.  My advice is to  "interview" the person you are about to study with and do your research and find  out if what he/she has is what you want or need to assist you in your Journey  thru Kenpo.  Those that don't want to answer your questions, or give you the  runaround or beat around the bush may need to be put lower down on your priority  list.  

 Get all the answers to your questions and find someone you like  and wish to spend time with (and that will spend the time needed with YOU) that  is also  concerned with your _*PROGRESS*_ in *Ed  Parker's American Kenpo*.

 :asian:


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Sep 21, 2004)

Thank you for your informative, and in some ways cryptic, reply. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during some of the spit-shine discussions/debates; I suspect the reasoning process was as - if not more - educationally informative than the finished product.

D.


----------



## Doc (Sep 21, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> > My question(s) is 3-fold:
> >
> > 1. How much do the differences represent a historic marking of where Kenpo was at, at the time of separation (i.e., different ways of doing seven/five swords during different "2.3" versions of Kenpo...may give clue to timeframe of splinter teachers' separation from the CK/AK pack).
> 
> ...


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Sep 22, 2004)

Doc:

Thanks for your reply as well. Always a pleasure. I look forward to learning more.

Regards,

Dave


----------

