# Chinese Kenpo/Kempo or Kung Fu?



## Sapper6

Simple question with, perhaps, not such a simple answer:

What is the difference between Chinese kenpo/kempo and traditional animal form kung fu?

In researching this myself, I googled the term "Chinese Kenpo" was directed to several sites (all the top ranking ones) that traced the history of Chinese Kenpo/Kempo to the 5 animal forms of the Shaolin Temple.  Quite perplexing since I've always thought the temple forms of fighting were raw kung fu in it's finest.

So, what's the deal?


----------



## Flying Crane

This is how I understand it.

Kenpo is a Japanese translation of a Chinese word (kuen fa) that means roughly "law of the fist".  Use of the term is recognition of the Chinese origins of an art that came thru Japan.  Tracing its roots back to any specific Chinese art, however, is difficult at best, probably impossible, altho some try awfully hard to make that connection, often claiming some direct lineage to the Shaolin temple.  I think it's a big stretch of the imigaination, at best.  Kenpo looks very little like the Shaolin arts today.  Suffice it to understand that the art came to the US thru Hawaii, from Japan, but has roots and influences in China.  

The Karate arts tried to hide this by changing the written character meaning "China" Hand to "Empty" Hand, even tho the pronounciation remained the same.  This was a deliberate attempt to obscure the Chinese influences of the Okinawan and Japanese arts.  It was done for political reasons at that time in history.

Those arts that use the word Kenpo continue to acknowledge the Chinese roots and influences, thru use of that term.

At least this is how I understand it for those who try to equate the various Kenpo/Kempo arts to a Kung Fu style.

I understand that Ed Parker studied under some Kung Fu people and that influenced his development of his Kenpo.  What he taught during that time period (I guess the 1960s or so) sometimes is called "Chinese Kenpo" because of this influence.  I am sure others here, such as DOC could explain this much better than I could.


----------



## pstarr

Yes, you're right.  Kenpo..."ken" is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese character "chuan" which means "fist.  "Po" is the Japanese pronunciation for "fa" which means "method; way of doing something."  So Kenpo means the same thing as "chuan-fa" - "Fist Method."

     To use the term "Chinese Kenpo" is a bit odd because the word "kenpo" is Japanese...so it's kind of like saying "Japanese Chuan-Fa"...if you see what I mean.

     The original characters for "Karate" ("Kara" and "Te") meant "China Hand" (actually the "kara" character was indicative of the Tang Dynasty but generically referred to China).
     Later, when the political climate changed and relations between China and Japan were not so smooth the character was changed to read "empty" - the word for "empty" and the word for "China; Tang" were pronounced alike but written differently.


     But Flying Crane is right.


----------



## Mariachi Joe

I think that a student of Prof. William Chow, a Bill Chun Jr teaches a style called Chinese Kempo.


----------



## Sapper6

Thanks for the replies.

I understand the term "kenpo" and it's translation of "chuan fa".  I guess what I'm really asking is, what is the difference between those systems, and animal form kung fu?

Let me throw this out there: Is it the modernization of the techniques that are tailored more for present day street encounters that separates the systems from more traditional kung fu?  

A large percentage of the the Chinese kenpo websites I found refer to themselves teaching Chinese Kenpo, Chinese karate, etc., but teach Ed Parker's commercial curriculum.  How can this be when Parker's system has been labeled American kenpo?

I'd like to hear from the CMA guys and gals on this as well as the Parker guys.  Maybe I should have posted this under the Kenpo board to field more input.  (maybe a mod can help out )

One more question:  Is the NCKKA under Mr. Swan the original Chinese kenpo?  What about the Tracy systems?

Thanks in advance for your reply.


----------



## dianhsuhe

You might research Chinese Kara-Ho Kempo Karate.  Professor Chow's art has a pretty noticeable Chinese influence.

Hope this helps-


----------



## Jade Tigress

Mod Note 

Thread moved to the Kenpo Forum.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Moderator


----------



## Flying Crane

Sapper6 said:


> Thanks for the replies.
> 
> I understand the term "kenpo" and it's translation of "chuan fa". I guess what I'm really asking is, what is the difference between those systems, and animal form kung fu?
> 
> Let me throw this out there: Is it the modernization of the techniques that are tailored more for present day street encounters that separates the systems from more traditional kung fu?
> 
> A large percentage of the the Chinese kenpo websites I found refer to themselves teaching Chinese Kenpo, Chinese karate, etc., but teach Ed Parker's commercial curriculum. How can this be when Parker's system has been labeled American kenpo?
> 
> I'd like to hear from the CMA guys and gals on this as well as the Parker guys. Maybe I should have posted this under the Kenpo board to field more input. (maybe a mod can help out )
> 
> One more question: Is the NCKKA under Mr. Swan the original Chinese kenpo? What about the Tracy systems?
> 
> Thanks in advance for your reply.


 
Al, Jim and Will Tracy were among the earliest students of Ed Parker in the 1950s and early 1960s (I think Will claims to have been a student of William Chow).  As Mr. Parker later changed the art that he was teaching, the Tracys decided to keep the original curriculum.  For whatever reasons they had, they disagreed with the direction Mr. Parker was taking the art, so they ultimately split away completely.  Their claim is that they teach the original art as it was taught in the early days by Mr. Parker, and this makes the assumption that Mr. Parker at that time was teaching the art as he learned it from William Chow.  The Tracys call their art "Tracys Kenpo Karate", and refer to it as "traditional kenpo".  The Tracy Curriculum contains many more formal Self Defense Techniques than the EPAK curriculum, (some 381 in Tracys, plus variations totaling about 600, to about 154 plus extensions in EPAK) but you would find much that is similar in the two curriculi.  Tracys don't have all the "sets" that EPAK has, but the numbered forms follow closely.  Tracys also has a number of other forms and material that were adopted from other Chinese arts.

As to the differences between kenpo and animal and other forms of Kung Fu:  to my knowledge, kenpo is the only art that has a curriculum structured in the way that it does.  This vast body of Self Defense techniques is an approach that other arts tend to not do.  Many other arts do have some self defense techniques similar to kenpos, but not nearly so many, and they don't make them the main focus of their curriculum.  So kenpo is a bit unique in that regard.  Whether that makes it a more "modern" or somehow "effective" or "useful" system would be subject to debate and personal opinion.

Typically, Chinese arts tend to be focused around forms.  Students learn basics first: stances, strikes, blocking, kicking, footwork, etc.  Then they learn the forms, which contain the formal body of knowledge contained in the system.  Once the form is learned, the student studies it and learns how to apply the movement in the form to actual fighting.  The forms can be very stylized, esp. in the animal systems.

Kenpo tends to work in the other direction.  The student learns the SD techniques, which are the main focus of the curriculum, and many of the forms are built using these same SD techs.  The kenpo forms, at least in Tracys and EPAK systems, are not stylized in the way the animal arts are.  They are just straight forward SD techs, no fluff, not much "hidden" or obscured the way the Asian arts can be.

Some Kenpo branches claim to have added Chinese material, in particular the animal material.  I believe these branches trace their lineage back to William Chow in Hawaii (Ed Parker's teacher), but route thru people like Nick Cerio and Fred Villari on the East Coast, perhaps also Ralph Castro in California.  I have not seen their material so I cannot really comment on it.  However, it is my suspicion that what they have added is not true Chinese animal material.  I think there is a tendency by some to learn a little material that contains a few animal-like movements, i.e. tigerclaws, or crane stances, and then claim that they have incorporated the "Five Animals Kung Fu".  Again, I can't really judge because I am not familiar with their stuff, but I am suspicious and doubtful.  I think Animal Kung Fu is deep and thorough all by itself, and isn't something that one can just quickly and easily "add" to their kenpo system.  It would require a lot of deep study and long practice to understand and gain competence with it first.  Maybe these people have really done this, but I just don't know.

There is also a difference between Five Animals kung fu, and complete Animal arts.  Five Animals is something that several Chinese systems contain, like Hung Gar and Choy Li Fut.  These are sort of subsets, or specific forms developed around the five animals, tiger, dragon, crane, deer, I can't remember the fifth, and they make up only a portion of the complete curriculum of the system.  And I think different arts may list the five animals differently.

But this is different from the complete systems based around an animal, such as Tibetan White Crane, Fukien White Crane, Preying Mantis, Black Tiger, Dragon Style, etc.  The Crane that you would find in Choy Li Fut's Five Animals would not be the same as the Tibetan White Crane, or the Fukien White Crane systems, for example.

I hope this helps?  and I hope I'm characterizing this correctly.  I don't personally have experience with Five Animals kung fu, but this is how I understand it based on what I have read and seen and discussions I have had.


----------



## almost a ghost

Great explanation by Flying Crane!


----------



## bill007

Mariachi Joe said:


> I think that a student of Prof. William Chow, a Bill Chun Jr teaches a style called Chinese Kempo.


 
Your correct, Master Chun jr. style is Go Shin Jitsu Kai/Chinese Kempo, I had the chance to train twice with him this year and he is very nice.


----------



## Sigung86

Well done Michael, aka Flying Crane!

Kenpo as I have seen it and understand it today, and probably yesterday, has no real animal style to it, other than perhaps some of the hand forms and stances.  A really good reference to this would be Ed Parker's, Secrets of Chinese Karate.

Kenpo is a system/school based on a particular set of methods, applications, philosophy, and strategy.  While it is most effective, and generally extremely efficient, it does not incoporate the Chinese Animal methods in any entirety.

I say Chinese Animals, because there are, in fact, a great number more of animal styles than the five that are directly attributed to the Shaolin.

Some styles of Kenpo vary in application.  Take me, for example ... When I began way back in the way back, I was learning Tracy Karate (China Hand) which was relatively smooth, but much less circular and speedy in application.  At the same time I was studying a Shaolin family system, which was smoother, even more circular, and lined with animal style applications and forms.  As a result, my "style" of Kenpo as taught in my school, is a series of methods, applications, phnilosophy, and strategy which may not reflect as well in a strict Kenpo environment.  But it works very well and just as effectively as straight EPAK or Tracy method.

Although, it does tend to piss off some others.  I was at a seminar this past Summer, and when all the "seniors" were being given introduction and props according to their various ranks, and schools, I was intro'd as, Dan Farmer, a senior Black Belt in "SOME OTHER STYLE"... :rofl:

Pomposity is something else that I suspect Kenpo has picked up along the way, but also not from Kung fu/Gung fu/Chuan fa/.... :angel:

And so it goes...


----------



## Flying Crane

Flying Crane said:


> These are sort of subsets, or specific forms developed around the five animals, tiger, dragon, crane, deer, I can't remember the fifth, and they make up only a portion of the complete curriculum of the system. And I think different arts may list the five animals differently.


 
LEOPARD!!! for crying out loud, I can't believe I forgot that one.

I think sometimes Monkey is substituted for Deer perhaps, in some "5 animals" methods...


----------



## Flying Crane

Sigung86 said:


> I was at a seminar this past Summer, and when all the "seniors" were being given introduction and props according to their various ranks, and schools, I was intro'd as, Dan Farmer, a senior Black Belt in "SOME OTHER STYLE"... :rofl:
> 
> Pomposity is something else that I suspect Kenpo has picked up along the way, but also not from Kung fu/Gung fu/Chuan fa/.... :angel:
> 
> And so it goes...


 

Ain't it nice to hold a place on equal footing with the red-headed stepchild...


----------



## Sapper6

Flying Crane said:


> LEOPARD!!! for crying out loud, I can't believe I forgot that one.
> 
> I think sometimes Monkey is substituted for Deer perhaps, in some "5 animals" methods...


 
i guess it depends on locality and influence, but i've always thought/heard the most common referrenced 5 animals of kung fu were dragon, tiger, snake, crane, and leopard.  never have i hard deer mentioned.

however, it would be interested to see a deer form.  wonder if it has anything to do with turning up it's whitetail and running away from danger...?


----------



## Sigung86

Sapper6 said:


> i guess it depends on locality and influence, but i've always thought/heard the most common referrenced 5 animals of kung fu were dragon, tiger, snake, crane, and leopard. never have i hard deer mentioned.
> 
> however, it would be interested to see a deer form. wonder if it has anything to do with turning up it's whitetail and running away from danger...?


 

I'm thinkin' you'd be not so laughing if you ran across the bear method.  Oh ... But there is always the Magnificent Battling Butterfly!  :lol:


----------



## Sigung86

Flying Crane said:


> Ain't it nice to hold a place on equal footing with the red-headed stepchild...


 
At least, in that respect, I'm on an equal footing.  If, however, you are referring to my current physical predicament... I'm up to my gluteal muscles in an ice storm that has been falling upon me for the past 14 hours.  Fortunately, I am well supplied with salami, apple fritters, milk, eggs, and bread (the staples of a Missouri winter storm).  My Dishnet satellite dish is still in place on the roof, and the power is still on, as you can see.  LOL


----------



## Flying Crane

A good friend of my Sifu is an accomplished sifu of Choy Li Fut.  I will ask him about the Five Animals next time I see him, and see if I can get some clarity, at least from his perspective...


----------



## Flying Crane

Sapper6 said:


> i guess it depends on locality and influence, but i've always thought/heard the most common referrenced 5 animals of kung fu were dragon, tiger, snake, crane, and leopard. never have i hard deer mentioned.
> 
> however, it would be interested to see a deer form. wonder if it has anything to do with turning up it's whitetail and running away from danger...?


 

Yeah, see, I think it varies from group to group.  The interesting thing about Chinese arts that I have come to realize:  there ain't just ONE way things are done, even tho it might have the same name.


----------



## Flying Crane

I had a chance to speak with my Sifu's friend who is an accomplished Choy Lay Fut guy.  He says that in Choy Lay Fut, the Five Animals is an internal set, incorporating the five different animals together.  It is done slowly, kind of like tai chi chuan.

He did indicate that the Five Animals material varies from one art to the next.  Some arts have it as external material, and may have separate material for each animal, as well as combined material.  I think he also agreed that the animals themselves may be different from one art to another.

I hope this adds something to the picture.  It seems pretty clear that nothing is clear.  The Five Animals can take many manifestations from system to system.  I guess if some of the Kenpo schools claim to have incorporated this material, it is possibly true.  One single judgement on what constitutes Five Animals cannot be made.

It would be interesting to hear from someone where their Five Animals in kenpo came from, and how it is manifest.  I hope someone steps up and shares...


----------



## KempoGuy06

Ok first and foremost, I love this site. I have learned a lot in the last couple of minutes i have spent reading this thread especially from Flying Crane. 

I study Shaolin Kempo Karate. I know that my instructors, instructor learned under GM James Brassard. How far back it goes from there I can not tell you. 

As for the way our curriculum is set up, I know the five animals (crane, snake, dragon, leopard and tiger) are taught from the very beginning. Im only an orange belt but I know from talking to the higher ranks the emphasis on the animals is great the higher you climb especially in the forms.

My instuctor also uses the animals when it comes to our sparring. Movements, power, speed etc. 

My 2 cents

B


----------



## Flying Crane

KempoGuy06 said:


> Ok first and foremost, I love this site. I have learned a lot in the last couple of minutes i have spent reading this thread especially from Flying Crane.
> 
> I study Shaolin Kempo Karate. I know that my instructors, instructor learned under GM James Brassard. How far back it goes from there I can not tell you.
> 
> As for the way our curriculum is set up, I know the five animals (crane, snake, dragon, leopard and tiger) are taught from the very beginning. Im only an orange belt but I know from talking to the higher ranks the emphasis on the animals is great the higher you climb especially in the forms.
> 
> My instuctor also uses the animals when it comes to our sparring. Movements, power, speed etc.
> 
> My 2 cents
> 
> B


 
Thanks for chipping in here.  I would be curious to know if your instructors would tell you where their five animals comes from?  Is it something that was adopted from a specific Chinese art, like Hung Gar?  That would certainly narrow down just what kind of material it is.

And what is the lineage of your Shaolin Kempo?  Under whom did Mr. Brassard train?  Thx!


----------



## clfsean

Sapper6 said:


> i guess it depends on locality and influence, but i've always thought/heard the most common referrenced 5 animals of kung fu were dragon, tiger, snake, crane, and leopard. never have i hard deer mentioned.
> 
> however, it would be interested to see a deer form. wonder if it has anything to do with turning up it's whitetail and running away from danger...?


 
The "Five Famous Animals" of kung fu are like was mentioned before: tiger, crane, dragon, leopard & snake.

The deer is found in a qigong set from a physician named Hua To. His animal qigong sets were: monkey, bear, deer, bird, tiger. That in itself is a point of contention about if it still exists or not. Some say yes, some say no.


----------



## Flying Crane

clfsean said:


> The "Five Famous Animals" of kung fu are like was mentioned before: tiger, crane, dragon, leopard & snake.
> 
> The deer is found in a qigong set from a physician named Hua To. His animal qigong sets were: monkey, bear, deer, bird, tiger. That in itself is a point of contention about if it still exists or not. Some say yes, some say no.


 

Yeah, I couldn't remember where I saw the Deer reference.  Might be part of the Xing-I Twelve Animals, or something, as well.


----------



## KempoGuy06

Flying Crane said:


> Thanks for chipping in here. I would be curious to know if your instructors would tell you where their five animals comes from? Is it something that was adopted from a specific Chinese art, like Hung Gar? That would certainly narrow down just what kind of material it is.
> 
> And what is the lineage of your Shaolin Kempo? Under whom did Mr. Brassard train? Thx!


 
Im guessing it was Mr. Villari, but do not quote me on that. I have class tomorrow night so I will ask my instructor then. My school is linked to GM Brassards in MA, i dont know if this will help at all. 

According to this http://www.urbin.net/EWW/MA/KF/famtrees.html GM Brassard *DID* train under Villari. (scroll down to the "Shaolin Kempo Karate Family Tree" section)

B


----------



## dj99526

KempoGuy06 said:


> Im guessing it was Mr. Villari, but do not quote me on that. I have class tomorrow night so I will ask my instructor then. My school is linked to GM Brassards in MA, i dont know if this will help at all.
> 
> According to this http://www.urbin.net/EWW/MA/KF/famtrees.html GM Brassard *DID* train under Villari. (scroll down to the "Shaolin Kempo Karate Family Tree" section)
> 
> B


these links should help you
http://www.urbin.net/EWW/MA/KEMPO/fv-ft.html

http://jamesbrassard.com/


----------



## jdinca

"Chinese kenpo" is also used to differentiate from other forms of kenpo. Case in point, my school which teaches Bok Fu Do. Although GM Lee was one of Tracy's first black belts and taught his system extensively, the system he developed that became Bok Fu Do goes farther down the Chinese path as far as style of movement. Yes we still start out hard, as does the Tracy system, quite frankly because it's easier to learn. As the student advances, the more circular style of movement found in CMA starts to show itself and gradually takes the place of the harder style learned early on. 

On an even more basic, basic level, we call ourselves a chinese system because we focus on using the attacker's force against him, as opposed to many Japanese styles, where it's force against force.


----------



## BlackCatBonz

jdinca said:


> "Chinese kenpo" is also used to differentiate from other forms of kenpo. Case in point, my school which teaches Bok Fu Do. Although GM Lee was one of Tracy's first black belts and taught his system extensively, the system he developed that became Bok Fu Do goes farther down the Chinese path as far as style of movement. Yes we still start out hard, as does the Tracy system, quite frankly because it's easier to learn. As the student advances, the more circular style of movement found in CMA starts to show itself and gradually takes the place of the harder style learned early on.
> 
> On an even more basic, basic level, we call ourselves a chinese system because we focus on using the attacker's force against him, *as opposed to many Japanese styles, where it's force against force.*


 
i cant quite think of any japanese systems that work that way.


----------



## The Kai

Shotokan
Goju Ryu
Judo. Jujitsu


----------



## BlackCatBonz

The Kai said:


> Shotokan
> Goju Ryu
> Judo. Jujitsu


 
shotokan maybe.....
you think these styles are force against force?

sounds like you havent seen much of it.


----------



## jdinca

Shotokan was what I was thinking of in particular.


----------



## dianhsuhe

Judo and Jujitsu are DEFINITELY not force vs force based systems... Quite the contrary- Jigoro Kano would not have done well since he was what?  A little over 5 feet tall and thin?

Shotokan, yes very hard linear etc. and like Kyokushinkai they do some body conditioning to it could be considered force on force.


----------



## KempoGuy06

dianhsuhe said:


> Judo and Jujitsu are DEFINITELY not force vs force based systems... Quite the contrary- Jigoro Kano would not have done well since he was what? A little over 5 feet tall and thin?
> 
> Shotokan, yes very hard linear etc. and like Kyokushinkai they do some body conditioning to it could be considered force on force.


 
I will second that notion about Juijitsu ( i dont know much about Judo so i cant make an educated response). From my training in BJJ i know force can be your downfall if you are up against someone with more experience.

B


----------



## eyebeams

jdinca said:


> Shotokan was what I was thinking of in particular.



"Hard blocks" issue force along an uncontested or indirect angle. It eventually serves as an offensive movement that complements body shifting. It's different from the conditioning, which is very much based on resistance.


----------



## jdinca

Reread my post, "many" was not the right word, "some" would have been more appropriate. It's also somewhat relative to the type of movement we're talking about. Although Japanese systems may not all be "hard" in style, I would say, as a generality, that they can be typically harder and more straight line than Chinese systems. Yes, I know, there are exceptions to every rule. My caveat is that much of my knowledge is what has been passed on through teachings from my GM. His first BB was in Shotokan, which is one of the reasons we have some of that style in the earlier parts of our system. I always appreciate the different opinions and knowledge that can be gained here.


----------



## BlackCatBonz

i'll give you some okinawan systems as being "hard" or force against force (but those artists may argue the point), but when i think of japanese martial arts, it's something that yields and blends with all of the fancy movement stripped away.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Even with shotokan, it's not just force against force. Often, they're taught to met force with nothing. They have PLENTY of hard force, but they also know how to get out of the way and let the opponent defeat himself.


----------



## Iron Leopard

I know it's been said before but just to put my experience into this....

Chinese/shaolin Kempo is basically karate with kung fu/chinese influences.

A life long student of kung fu watching a kempo guy would say "that's karate!"

A life long karate student watching a kempo guy might say."that looks kinda like what I do and kinda like kung fu!"


----------



## Gufbal1982

KempoGuy06 said:


> I will second that notion about Juijitsu ( i dont know much about Judo so i cant make an educated response). From my training in BJJ i know force can be your downfall if you are up against someone with more experience.
> 
> B


 

A lot of Judo is in BJJ.  side mount is also called kazagatami (I think I spelled it wrong) but is from judo.  There's lots of fun stuff if you look up the history of the style.  It's all about the technique.


----------



## Shotochem

Josh Oakley said:


> Even with shotokan, it's not just force against force. Often, they're taught to met force with nothing. They have PLENTY of hard force, but they also know how to get out of the way and let the opponent defeat himself.



I concur, as a former Shotokan practioner.  We were hard and linear but we were taught not to meet force with force if possible.  We were also taught to move Tae Sabaki-like and not so much in a predictable straight line.

On another note I am currently under a Kempo System which also uses animal forms and movements.  I do not think it is in as much depth as a true Chinese system but I find the animal elements to be a refreshing change from all that linear and hard movements.  They have really opened up my mind as a MA in regards to applications, strategy and movement and have enriched my training.

                                                                              -Marc-


----------



## jdinca

Josh Oakley said:


> Even with shotokan, it's not just force against force. Often, they're taught to met force with nothing. They have PLENTY of hard force, but they also know how to get out of the way and let the opponent defeat himself.


 
Let's change it up a bit. Would you consider Shotokan more linear than circular? How about some of the other traditional Japanese styles? Remember, we're not looking at one side in a vacuum, we're comparing Japanese to Chinese. I'm curious as to what the answers might be.


----------



## Danjo

jdinca said:


> Let's change it up a bit. Would you consider Shotokan more linear than circular? How about some of the other traditional Japanese styles? Remember, we're not looking at one side in a vacuum, we're comparing Japanese to Chinese. I'm curious as to what the answers might be.


 
Definitely more linear. Every block is a strike, every strike a block etc. the one and three step sparring kumite drills are all linear in my memory moving straight back and forth.


----------



## Iron Leopard

I trained with a shotukan guy and he was more powerful than me but my movement was more fluid and my angles in sparring ended up being far superior to his.  Having said that...let me say this...he was very linear but did incorporate a lot of angles in his techniques including circular techniques and movement but...again my shaolin kempo had more.


----------



## Gufbal1982

Danjo said:


> Definitely more linear. Every block is a strike, every strike a block etc. the one and three step sparring kumite drills are all linear in my memory moving straight back and forth.


 

Definately agree with you there!  I remember someone that used to spar like that, and then, somehow, he became more circular...hmmm.  Shotokan does have it's place though.  It gives a great foundation to build upon.  I always told people from other styles that wanted to try out a class with me to never forget what they learned because all I want to do with SKK was to build upon it.  I think I did my job right as an instructor...


----------

