# Overkill



## MJS (May 9, 2006)

I was recently reading a thread over on KenpoTalk regarding the sleeper hold. The thread began with discussion on the technique Sleeper, with discussion on how to properly apply the choke, then leading to discussion on the results of choking someone, and finally ending with discussion on the end results of the application of the various moves found in our techniques. 

Looking at the wide variety of techniques in the various Kenpo, Kempo and Kajukenbo arts, obviously they have the potential to be extremely dangerous.

So, when we're applying the moves, are we thinking about the end results or legal ramifications of what we do? Obviously, every situation is going to be different, so in one situation we may be forced to break a limb, but in another a controlling move may be better suited.

I saw mention in that thread of SL-4 and how it appears to differ in application.

I thought we could open this up for discussion, talking about the differences between the two as well as looking at other alternatives to our techniques for those of us who are in training in SL4.

Mike


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2006)

MJS said:
			
		

> I was recently reading a thread over on KenpoTalk regarding the sleeper hold. The thread began with discussion on the technique Sleeper, with discussion on how to properly apply the choke, then leading to discussion on the results of choking someone, and finally ending with discussion on the end results of the application of the various moves found in our techniques.
> 
> Looking at the wide variety of techniques in the various Kenpo, Kempo and Kajukenbo arts, obviously they have the potential to be extremely dangerous.
> 
> ...


 
I was recently speaking to someone about this at the IKC in Holland who opened up my eyes to some of the overkill of some techniques.

He said that it allowed Mr Parker to 'live out' what he'd like to do to someone in ever more increasingly violent ways. They were never designed to actually be used in a realistic environment. Consider some of the purple, blue and green belt extensions (or full techniques to others), how workable are these? And that's where some of these techniques belong - in the studio.

In it's most simplified - SL4 utilises predescribed exact movements and their natural body effects to immobilse an opponent with minimal physical damage. A concept that is very different from Motion Kenpo. For example, Motion Kenpo uses strikes to soft tissue and relies on pain as it's main weapon. SL4 targets the structure of their body and breaks this down.

But then I'm still very much a beginner with SL4 so hopefully I'm not too far off the mark.

Ross


----------



## Danjo (May 9, 2006)

I always thought the  concept (which preceeds Parker) was designed to train someone to get used to continuous motion in logical progression. In other words, it's to get the muscle memory to the point where one doesn't simply hit and stop but rather continues hitting etc until the job it done. It's similar to boxing combinations that one works out with. If all one trained with was: Jab, stop, Jab, stop,  Jab, stop, Cross, stop, Cross, stop, Cross. etc. etc. then one would never develop the required flow to become a good boxer. Using knowledge of autonomic relfex reactions, one develops set ideal defensive techniques and thus trains the nervous system to be able to develop continous flow. Clearly one will not actually get to the final moves in a given set in an actual fight, but having the ability to keep moving from one technique to another is valuable.


----------



## liuseongsystem (May 9, 2006)

i do kuntao which definately has some similarities, as i have seen a few kenpo hand pattens.

our art has this overkill aspect, a common factor in certain styles, bagua is this way as well.

i must agree that it is primarily for the development of the principle of continous flow.

as well, skeletal freeze/lock technique is to make the opponent does not break away or escape, and this is the inherent lesson in continous flow.

finish it.


----------



## Doc (May 9, 2006)

Ross said:
			
		

> I was recently speaking to someone about this at the IKC in Holland who opened up my eyes to some of the overkill of some techniques.
> 
> He said that it allowed Mr Parker to 'live out' what he'd like to do to someone in ever more increasingly violent ways. They were never designed to actually be used in a realistic environment. Consider some of the purple, blue and green belt extensions (or full techniques to others), how workable are these? And that's where some of these techniques belong - in the studio.
> 
> ...


No, you're not off. I know you didn't want to name drop, so I'll do it for you. It was Ed Parker jr. you were talking to. It is a conversation he, I, and his father have had many times, and partly why my and others path is 'different.'


----------



## Doc (May 9, 2006)

Danjo said:
			
		

> I always thought the  concept (which preceeds Parker) was designed to train someone to get used to continuous motion in logical progression. In other words, it's to get the muscle memory to the point where one doesn't simply hit and stop but rather continues hitting etc until the job it done. It's similar to boxing combinations that one works out with. If all one trained with was: Jab, stop, Jab, stop,  Jab, stop, Cross, stop, Cross, stop, Cross. etc. etc. then one would never develop the required flow to become a good boxer. Using knowledge of autonomic relfex reactions, one develops set ideal defensive techniques and thus trains the nervous system to be able to develop continous flow. Clearly one will not actually get to the final moves in a given set in an actual fight, but having the ability to keep moving from one technique to another is valuable.


Personally I leave the whole 'motion' thing out as a superficial methodology that is totally abstract in nature by its Ed parker design. When you begin to speak in terms of absolute anatomical 'movement' sir, than specifics take over and dictate a different method. 

From that perspective, it is more efficient and effective to learn bursts of specific movement, with gauged breaks in rhythm for assessment purposes. To train continuous motion is actually a negative, and the 'flow' can prove to be difficult to contain when things to not occur as anticipated. According to Ed Parker himself, "Speed kills your technique." When training sequences in this 'hurried' fashoin to get from beginning to and abstract end, it can become very difficult to 'stop' when you need to 'alter' the technique sequence. The obsession with speed destroys good basic execution. There is nothing wrong with speed, but actually when engaged with a combatant, speed must be modulated to conform to the reactions of the attacker, and sequences must be engaged in a "Paired Rythm." I sure most would agree to move independently in a fight with no regard to what your attacker is doing or how they are reacting would be ludicrous, yet that is what SOME motion based kenpo aspires to do. Moreover these pauses and timed pauses allow you to adjust and realign your own body structure to insure aximum effect on every action. This notion of "overkill" is necessary because of the lack of effectiveness inherent in the teaching model, and is contrary to most arts who are the exact opposite. Motion based kenpo is an inverse piramid. The higher you go, the more mayhem is taught in eye gouges, rips, tears, smashes, and stomps in endless 'extensions.' Most arts are exactly opposite. The more skilled and higher you go, the less you do.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (May 9, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> Personally I leave the whole 'motion' thing out as a superficial methodology that is totally abstract in nature by its Ed parker design. When you begin to speak in terms of absolute anatomical 'movement' sir, than specifics take over and dictate a different method.
> 
> From that perspective, it is more efficient and effective to learn bursts of specific movement, with gauged breaks in rhythm for assessment purposes. To train continuous motion is actually a negative, and the 'flow' can prove to be difficult to contain when things to not occurr as anticipated.


 
Those pauses to regroup (align), take stock, plan and execute are pricelesss, and missing big-time from the hurried kenpo often seen. More should see what it looks like to take ones time, and do it right.

Regards,

D.


----------



## liuseongsystem (May 9, 2006)

'From that perspective, it is more efficient and effective to learn bursts of specific movement, with gauged breaks in rhythm for assessment purposes.'

excellent point, but dont you think that is inherent?

i dont think it means continous purposeless movement at the same tempo or to merely keep going at a fast pace.  there are periodic 'slowdowns' in the movement, as you say for assessment and breaking rhythym.

the point is not to stop, withdraw or otherwise disconnect from the opponent or his intention.

nice post btw.


----------



## liuseongsystem (May 9, 2006)

'The higher you go, the more mayhem is taught in eye gouges, rips, tears, smashes, and stomps in endless 'extensions.' Most arts are exactly opposite. The more skilled and higher you go, the less you do.'

interesting.... so you increase the volume of attack? doesnt this run counter to the principle of efficiency?

__________________


----------



## Doc (May 9, 2006)

liuseongsystem said:
			
		

> 'From that perspective, it is more efficient and effective to learn bursts of specific movement, with gauged breaks in rhythm for assessment purposes.'
> 
> excellent point, but dont you think that is inherent?
> 
> ...


There is nothing wrong with 'stopping.' In fact merely 'slowing down' a sequence keeps the synapses fired and the tendancy to continue the sequence is still there when fully ingrained even though you have recognized you need to alter your response.

Anyone who has had the occasion of getting out of their car and automatically locking and closing the door can relate. Think about that time you got out of the car, looked at your keys in the ignition, recognized them, but because your hand was already in the process of closing the door, you couldn't stop.  "Dam!" Where's a wire coat hanger?


----------



## Doc (May 9, 2006)

liuseongsystem said:
			
		

> 'The higher you go, the more mayhem is taught in eye gouges, rips, tears, smashes, and stomps in endless 'extensions.' Most arts are exactly opposite. The more skilled and higher you go, the less you do.'
> 
> interesting.... so you increase the volume of attack? doesnt this run counter to the principle of efficiency?


I'm sorry sir, I'm not sure I understand your question.


----------



## Michael Billings (May 10, 2006)

I actually heard EP, Sr. refer to the "Kenpo Fantasy."  He knew exactly how long someone would remain standing in front of him, but Kenpo is also for the 98 lb model, or the 17 year old football player.  

While I call the staccato broken rhythym of Kenpo almost syncopated, it provides for those "decision points" which to me, include ongoing evaluation of the attacker's responses to your strikes, and allow you to control the level of injury, potential for a contact control, or immobilization, etc.

-Michael


----------



## liuseongsystem (May 10, 2006)

'I'm sorry sir, I'm not sure I understand your question.'

pardon my inadequate phrasing..


if you increase the volume of attack as you progress in Kenpo, and other arts actually reduce or become simpler, are they not more efficient? 

my reasoning...if you use x number of attacks to deal with an attack and  another system uses less attacks to do so, is that not better?

this is very simplified but,  at a basic level, what you seem to be saying is that in kenpo it takes more attacks at a higher level to complete, whereas in other arts it takes less.  the inference is that other arts are more powerful or efficient if it takes less motion to complete.  

now, as i sit and type, there are a lot of things that i expect you will say.  and i am in no way critizing kenpo, in fact i know very well what you gentlemen are referring to in this thread as my style of kuntao has a similiar methodology.  and another inference in what you said is that the experienced Kenpo practitioner can throw more attacks in a smaller time frame.

however, i am still intrigued by the correlate you drew and why you did it.
why do you say that the other arts become simpler and how?

i just wanted to hear your reasoning as i make an academic study of the martial arts as well as training in them, and i am always keen on other's views.

thanx.


----------



## Michael Billings (May 10, 2006)

The higher you go the more you learn, longer techniques, multiple attackers, weapons attacks and use of the same.  The Black Belt Extension will never necessarily be utilized from the base technique, if the technique is executed correctly.  Heck, I knocked someone out with the inward block to the arm in Delayed Sword.  It does not get much better than hitting someone's arm once and they fall down ... yes it surprised me also.

What you can do is graft from technique to technique, or you find yourself in a position where a piece of an extension is the most appropriate response to the attack.  You do not think about it, you just do it.  Your repetoire expands, you choices, in terms of responses expands, and you have a better base from which to evaluate or learn other arts.

At least that is how I interpret it.

-Michael


----------



## Jimi (May 11, 2006)

I always thought in Kenpo there was no such thing as OVERKILL. In a real self defense situation, you don't know for sure what an attacker has in store for you. Be capable of going to the extreme to defend yourself and loved ones. Sure, you may jab the eyes, break their arm and strike the throat and it may be enough, but being able to continue on and snap the neck then kick the groin, what have you, may be what it takes to end the confrontation if needed. If you don't finish it, the attacker may very well with-stand some punishment and turn the tables. Weither you use a sequence taught by Grandmaster Parker himself or something else, what you do must save you and loved ones, you do not want to find your abilities lacking when the pressure is on and not be able to end the confrontation. Just my opinion. PEACE


----------



## Ross (May 11, 2006)

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> The higher you go the more you learn, longer techniques, multiple attackers, weapons attacks and use of the same. The Black Belt Extension will never necessarily be utilized from the base technique, if the technique is executed correctly. Heck, I knocked someone out with the inward block to the arm in Delayed Sword. It does not get much better than hitting someone's arm once and they fall down ... yes it surprised me also.
> 
> What you can do is graft from technique to technique, or you find yourself in a position where a piece of an extension is the most appropriate response to the attack. You do not think about it, you just do it. Your repetoire expands, you choices, in terms of responses expands, and you have a better base from which to evaluate or learn other arts.
> 
> ...


 
I understand exactly what you are saying and where you are coming from. 

I was thinking about this the other day but for me, IMHO Kenpo - "Economy of motion" is just that. Step back - bam! game over! 

I was always told that it doesnt matter how good the rest of your technique is if you dont block the punch (or SIA) who cares?


----------



## Doc (May 11, 2006)

Jimi said:
			
		

> I always thought in Kenpo there was no such thing as OVERKILL. In a real self defense situation, you don't know for sure what an attacker has in store for you. Be capable of going to the extreme to defend yourself and loved ones. Sure, you may jab the eyes, break their arm and strike the throat and it may be enough, but being able to continue on and snap the neck then kick the groin, what have you, may be what it takes to end the confrontation if needed. If you don't finish it, the attacker may very well with-stand some punishment and turn the tables. Weither you use a sequence taught by Grandmaster Parker himself or something else, what you do must save you and loved ones, you do not want to find your abilities lacking when the pressure is on and not be able to end the confrontation. Just my opinion. PEACE


That could come back to haunt you in court. But understand, no one is suggesting you shouldn't do absolutely everything available to protect you or your loved ones. However if you call yourself a martial artist instead of someone who has taken a quickie self defense course, and you have actually learned something well, than much of what you suggest should not be necessary. When actually training these elongated sequences, they are out of context. Truth is, if you are so inept that your first 4 or 5 offensive move don't work, you're not likely to gain additional ability or skill on the next 5 to 10 after dealing with the failure of the first 5. You've already lost. Too many are playing 'movie fantasy fights' out in their mind, when they should be working on making sure their blocks work.


----------



## jazkiljok (May 11, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> Truth is, if you are so inept that your first 4 or 5 offensive move don't work, you're not likely to gain additional ability or skill on the next 5 to 10 after dealing with the failure of the first 5. You've already lost. Too many are playing 'movie fantasy fights' out in their mind, when they should be working on making sure their blocks work.



recalls monty python's movie the holy grail- where the black knight gets his limbs hacked off one by one but insists on continuing the fight because...he never loses.


----------



## Jimi (May 11, 2006)

I agree with you DOC, overkill can land you in court. When Kenpo and other effective arts were first spreading, I think most Sensei/Sifu were not concerned with legal matters, just that their students and loved ones remained safe. Fantasy is not for the real life & death situation, but the traing hall is were we experiment. Sometimes in that experimentation, people indulge the "what if". Not saying everyone should train to kill or finish someone, just that I can understand that Kenpoists are ready to go the whole 9 yards if need be. No disrespect, just wanted to voice my opinion. Kenpo rules! PEACE


----------



## MJS (May 11, 2006)

I think this chart does a pretty good breakdown of use of force issues:

http://www.jimwagnertraining.com/rbma/use_of_force.html

So...back to the original question:  Considering the fact that the majority of techniques include some sort of serious move on our part, should we look a bit more carefully into how we apply these techniques?

Mike


----------



## Sigung86 (May 14, 2006)

Doc said:
			
		

> That could come back to haunt you in court. But understand, no one is suggesting you shouldn't do absolutely everything available to protect you or your loved ones. However if you call yourself a martial artist instead of someone who has taken a quickie self defense course, and you have actually learned something well, than much of what you suggest should not be necessary. When actually training these elongated sequences, they are out of context. Truth is, if you are so inept that your first 4 or 5 offensive move don't work, you're not likely to gain additional ability or skill on the next 5 to 10 after dealing with the failure of the first 5. You've already lost. Too many are playing 'movie fantasy fights' out in their mind, when they should be working on making sure their blocks work.


 
So, and consequently, the presumption is that techniques are built on the assumption of failure?  Fie!  Fie!  That would be the only reason I could see to have techniques built that last that long.  You ought to see some of the schtick I am still "unlearning"!

And just for "S and G"s, the knight in the Monty Python Schtick is very much the fantasy fighter, and a comedy routine to boot.


----------



## Seig (May 17, 2006)

While watching a tape of Mr. Parker, I heard him say that the techniques were the way they were in case something goes wrong. As I tell my students, if you are in a fight, something went wrong. I believe and teach that you do not want to be in a prolonged altercation. If you must use your Kenpo to defend yourself, rely on the good solid basics.


----------



## Michael Billings (May 17, 2006)

Seig said:
			
		

> While watching a tape of Mr. Parker, I heard him say that the techniques were the way they were in case something goes wrong. As I tell my students, *if you are in a fight, something went wrong.* I believe and teach that you do not want to be in a prolonged altercation. If you must use your Kenpo to defend yourself, rely on the good solid basics.


Good lesson Mike.  I think I will borrow it, or a slight alteration if you don't mind.  

-Michael


----------



## Seig (May 19, 2006)

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> Good lesson Mike. I think I will borrow it, or a slight alteration if you don't mind.
> 
> -Michael


Feel free, I'm glad you like it.
M


----------



## jazkiljok (May 19, 2006)

Seig said:
			
		

> While watching a tape of Mr. Parker, I heard him say that the techniques were the way they were in case something goes wrong. As I tell my students, if you are in a fight, something went wrong. I believe and teach that you do not want to be in a prolonged altercation. If you must use your Kenpo to defend yourself, rely on the good solid basics.



not wanting to start anything up with the man himself... especially since he's not here to explain the thought process behind is comments but--- how does that make any sense? if a technique is a set of prescribed movements to counter and repell an attack-- then one would think the logic behind them is that they go from working well-- to working realllllly well.

in the context of continuosly moving through a technique, the suggestion that your opponent has not been effected enough to warrant you stopping doesn't seem to take into account that he might have gotten a little pissed at your first two not so effective moves. at this point you are probably in an exchange style fight with him throwing back at you circumventing the prearranged scenario.  so logic would dictate that you do not get to pass go or collect your 200 bucks when things go wrong.

which is of course the reason behind solid basics.

overskilled would be to me as Doc posits-- that i don't have to break your face against pavement cause my "over"skills have ended this encounter on a more efficient, less messy note.


----------



## Ginsu (May 23, 2006)

Jaz,
I believe the point here is "What if"? You can have a great technique and it can go from working well to working great. Even along the lines of what Seig and Mr. Billings were saying about simply having more options as you learn more.

Which I believe is what you are saying and to that point you never know the answer to "What if". So you train to have the chance to answer that quesiton in an effective manner if it should ever arise in an encounter.

My thoughts anyway.

_Ginsu_


----------



## HKphooey (May 23, 2006)

The best analogy I can give is the difference between a revolver handgun and an automatic rifle. Sure you can inflict damage with one accurate/targeted shot from a .45 Magnum, but when caught off guard you have a better chance of hitting a target with the automatic rifle. 

Condition your mind to all the possibilities and you will train yourself not to hesitate when the attacker counters or an initial block or strike misses its intended target.


----------



## jazkiljok (May 23, 2006)

HKphooey said:
			
		

> The best analogy I can give is the difference between a revolver handgun and an automatic rifle. Sure you can inflict damage with one accurate/targeted shot from a .45 Magnum, but when caught off guard you have a better chance of hitting a target with the automatic rifle.
> 
> Condition your mind to all the possibilities and you will train yourself not to hesitate when the attacker counters or an initial block or strike misses its intended target.



hitting someone 3-4 times is certainly not looking to take a guy out with one shot. it's the 5-15 predicated on the effectiveness of those first 3-4 that  is not working in concept for me (if no one else..) we're speaking of course in generalities about the conditioning of the mind and not hesitating when you find your technique countered or ineffective. it's not a state of mind that need be determined by learning to extend an imaginary confrontation-- contrast with other arts for example-- you'll see very few really arguing for one punch one kill-- not even the japanese arts with its embrace of sport full contact believes that much anymore-- yet, none of this attacking some one you've already floored and testicle-mashed is seen in those arts.

the fall down on extension is the logic-- it's not there for me at least- it becomes as Mr. Steve LaBounty once noted "a mini form"-- what, not enough forms already? a couple of dozen more mini ones needed?

not saying you shouldn't learn what you feel is necessary for you to develop your skills- just examing the logic behind it and finding it wanting.

peace.


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 23, 2006)

The word 'overkill' implies unusefull motion. This is relative to personal experience and security. While a severe stare may cease a threat for some, others may have a real fight on their hands. We have a saying... there is always one more person in the fight than you anticipated. In other words the third point of view makes this topic irrelavant.
Sean


----------



## HKphooey (May 23, 2006)

jazkiljok said:
			
		

> hitting someone 3-4 times is certainly not looking to take a guy out with one shot. it's the 5-15 predicated on the effectiveness of those first 3-4 that is not working in concept for me (if no one else..) we're speaking of course in generalities about the conditioning of the mind and not hesitating when you find your technique countered or ineffective. it's not a state of mind that need be determined by learning to extend an imaginary confrontation-- contrast with other arts for example-- you'll see very few really arguing for one punch one kill-- not even the japanese arts with its embrace of sport full contact believes that much anymore-- yet, none of this attacking some one you've already floored and testicle-mashed is seen in those arts.
> 
> the fall down on extension is the logic-- it's not there for me at least- it becomes as Mr. Steve LaBounty once noted "a mini form"-- what, not enough forms already? a couple of dozen more mini ones needed?
> 
> ...


 
I think I know where you are coming from...  To clarify, I am not supporting the use of 50 strikes in a technique, just saying one benefits by having all those tools in their arsenel.  I personally like to get in, get out. 

Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 23, 2006)

Further more... One mans five Swords can be about six simple strikes but If I utilize my whole body as a weapon, make use of my return motion then Im hiting you about sixteen times with the same basic motion and concievably doing a level of damge that a six shotter may call overkill but is nothing more than a simple indication of their lack of skill...   sisies!
Sean


----------



## HKphooey (May 23, 2006)

Touch Of Death said:
			
		

> Further more... One mans five Swords can be about six simple strikes but If I utilize my whole body as a weapon, make use of my return motion then Im hiting you about sixteen times with the same basic motion and concievably doing a level of damge that a six shotter may call overkill but is nothing more than a simple indication of their lack of skill... sisies!
> Sean


 
 One of my favorite techniques... 

MJS,

That would make a good technique post!


----------



## Michael Billings (May 23, 2006)

I like Five Swords with the extension (short as it is, bringing it up to Seven Swords).  But you know when they fall down after the inward block, it is a waste to have learned the rest of it?  I don't think so.  It may take you two or three shots.  How about all of them to put him away.  How do you know what drugs he is on?  Is he drunk, changes responses to knockout points.  Has adrineline made you miss targets in your "pump me up" state?  

Numerous extensions lend themselves to being a separate technique, if you find an attacker in a position from which you have never executed a technique.  

Just some ideas.  

What is USEFUL?
What is NOT USEFUL?
And what is USELESS?

Very little is truely useless.  Remember the mind only works when it is open "like a parachute."  I would posit that it may be your understanding of the application that may be lacking, if in fact you cannot FIND A USE for the material Mr. Parker taught.  And yes, I am part of the Sigung LaBounty lineage also.

-Michael


----------

