# Fix your catalyst



## Sami Ibrahim (Mar 22, 2017)

For a Kenpo movement to be really internalized to the degree that it will manifest during an aggressive, assault requires a degree of training beyond memorization of mimicked movement. The repetition of a combative motion without a realistic catalyst will ingrain several dangerous bad habits. While these bad habits all overlap and cause one another I will divide them up to draw attention to each of them. 

1) Unrealistic Speed - because the catalyst is moving at an unrealistic speed, you are synchronizing your action to the wrong beat and develop bad timing when you have to face a realistic speed.

2)  Unrealistic Commitment - when the catalyst lacks destructive commitment the engagement (structural) pressure on contact is light, your structure remains unchallenged and thus can become neglected, when encountering a truly destructive commitment, a break down in structure occurs, destroying balance and the launching platform. The true recovery time is not accurately ingrained and responses are trained that would be impossible when the structure is under real pressure.

3) Unrealistic Distance - if the catalyst is out of range such that even if you did not move, it would not do anything more than graze your skin or maybe not touch you at all, your own response will be unrealistic, you will have space to maneuver that you would not have in reality and you will have to compensate for the gap if you are to enter into a realistic distance, if you ingrain combative movement from unrealistic distances, you will find much of your arsenal reduced in effectiveness when you inevitably respond as you have trained.

4) Unrealistic Aggression - while safety is important, feeding your training partners catalysts that lack realistic aggression will condition them to deal with movements absent aggression, when at last they encounter aggressive behavior it can become a distraction that obscures the movement of the enemy. More importantly speed, commitment and distance coupled with attitude (emotion) are elements of aggression that will all be off if training against Unrealistic Aggression. 

Progressive training is important but not an excuse for unrealistic catalysts. Contrary to some people's excuses you can start training your students against realistic catalysts from the very beginning because they too can be progressive. The nature of the attack is the controlling mechanism, just select realistic catalysts that don't require excellent timing for beginners, such as grabs, pushes, hugs and holds and build up to more percussive and demanding catalysts. Above all fix your catalysts so your not slipping out of the way of an attack that would not have even reached you or working a sequence against a suddenly frozen statue. Remember that it is YOUR life that is on the line or the life of YOUR loved ones, don't role play the warrior embody the real deal.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Mar 22, 2017)

well you have done a decent job of listing some of the problems. but i think you have missed the over arching problem. you still thinking like a duck....you see you can send a duck to eagle school and it will go through all the classes and do the work but come graduation day he will still waddle across the stage.
if you need to "fix" a catalyst then you actually have a systemic issue.  people in boxing schools dont have a catalyst problem. they punch each other.  what your trying to do is take and unrealistic  method of training and make an eagle out of a duck.

the first three on your list should have never even existed if the exercise in and of it self was realistic.  the standard kenpo method is one person stands across from the other and steps forward with a linear punch to center mass. the other guy does his technique.  ok so there was no realistic approach. no bad guy interview,. no ambush, no emotional or physical pressure and no fear.  so explain to me why you are trying to make a duck drill into something its not and never will be, by its very nature and the underlying philosophy... its not an eagle.  to me this is the real underlying problem,  instructors trying to take something that dosent work and twist it to have some similar characteristics of things that do work.

the drill is fine for what it is , its just not what you are trying to make it.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 22, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> well you have done a decent job of listing some of the problems. but i think you have missed the over arching problem. you still thinking like a duck....you see you can send a duck to eagle school and it will go through all the classes and do the work but come graduation day he will still waddle across the stage.
> if you need to "fix" a catalyst then you actually have a systemic issue.  people in boxing schools dont have a catalyst problem. they punch each other.  what your trying to do is take and unrealistic  method of training and make an eagle out of a duck.
> 
> the first three on your list should have never even existed if the exercise in and of it self was realistic.  the standard kenpo method is one person stands across from the other and steps forward with a linear punch to center mass. the other guy does his technique.  ok so there was no realistic approach. no bad guy interview,. no ambush, no emotional or physical pressure and no fear.  so explain to me why you are trying to make a duck drill into something its not and never will be, by its very nature and the underlying philosophy... its not an eagle.  to me this is the real underlying problem,  instructors trying to take something that dosent work and twist it to have some similar characteristics of things that do work.
> ...


This is dumb; because, wrestling is the same way. You have to give the student the tech without beating the crap out of them, or they will never learn the complex wresting moves, and escapes. Thanks for playing.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Mar 22, 2017)

Touch Of Death said:


> This is dumb; because, wrestling is the same way. You have to give the student the tech without beating the crap out of them, or they will never learn the complex wresting moves, and escapes. Thanks for playing.


That is kind of what I am saying.  I think what Sami is proposing is that the drill is unrealistic because the puncher isn't punching fast and hard. I'm saying even then it's not realistic.
To use the Monte python skit, if you are attacked by a man wielding a banana,  it's  ridiculous. Having the guy attack with the banana faster and with more intent does not make it less ridiculous. You would have to step up the drill to add those other factors I mentioned. Other wise the drill will always be a beginner drill.
I'm NOT saying beat the crap out of eachother. I am saying add angles, scenarios, verbal interactions.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 22, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> That is kind of what I am saying.  I think what Sami is proposing is that the drill is unrealistic because the puncher isn't punching fast and hard. I'm saying even then it's not realistic.
> To use the Monte python skit, if you are attacked by a man wielding a banana,  it's  ridiculous. Having the guy attack with the banana faster and with more intent does not make it less ridiculous. You would have to step up the drill to add those other factors I mentioned. Other wise the drill will always be a beginner drill.


No. You have missed the problem completely. The problem is student retention, and money. If you take a bunch of military guys and make them work inside and outside defenses, you are going to have better results keeping a bunch of people, that pay you money, happy. The business model is the problem, and it always has been.


----------



## Sami Ibrahim (Mar 23, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> well you have done a decent job of listing some of the problems. but i think you have missed the over arching problem. you still thinking like a duck....you see you can send a duck to eagle school and it will go through all the classes and do the work but come graduation day he will still waddle across the stage.
> if you need to "fix" a catalyst then you actually have a systemic issue.  people in boxing schools dont have a catalyst problem. they punch each other.  what your trying to do is take and unrealistic  method of training and make an eagle out of a duck.
> 
> the first three on your list should have never even existed if the exercise in and of it self was realistic.  the standard kenpo method is one person stands across from the other and steps forward with a linear punch to center mass. the other guy does his technique.  ok so there was no realistic approach. no bad guy interview,. no ambush, no emotional or physical pressure and no fear.  so explain to me why you are trying to make a duck drill into something its not and never will be, by its very nature and the underlying philosophy... its not an eagle.  to me this is the real underlying problem,  instructors trying to take something that dosent work and twist it to have some similar characteristics of things that do work.
> ...



I guess I have been very lucky, in the first Kenpo school I started learning in, we did not follow the method you described of standing across from each other and stepping forward with a linear punch to center mass. We actually had a realistic approach, bad guy interviews, ambush and physical pressure and aggression, we also had realistic weapons training our opponent's did not freeze or allow us to do anything without at least some form of resistance that increased as the technique became more ingrained and we conditioned. I found our techniques had a blend of grappling and striking elements, when I demonstrate my Kenpo to some of the Kenpo OGs they remark that they recognize the manner in which I execute my technique as something Mr. Parker eventually changed to make it easier for students. It is not a case of trying to turn a duck into an eagle, but to remove the duck costume the eagle has been wearing so that little ducks would feel comfortable around it. Someone once said "The major barrier in responding to a violent attack is not a lack of martial art skill but rather the brains inability to reconcile the differences between the actual attack and the response trained in practice." I agree with this wise observation. ; )

As for you question on trying to take something that doesn't work and twist it to have some similar characteristics of things that do work, I can share with you my philosophy or point of view on that note. I believe that their is absolutely no reason to train in a manner or method that will not work, if the student is convinced that a method is illogical and foolish, why bother with it. Where I am talking about the entire process of developing an effective Kenpo, I suspect that you are fixated on the written outlines of the ideal phase and have your own opinion on what the purpose is for training them. For me the purpose of the art is first and foremost to be used by the student to develop his or her martial ability, but it is definitely the student who has to use the art to develop their ability, a martial art demonstrated in front of a student who proceeds to memorize and mimic the movements without further effort will be destined for failure.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Mar 23, 2017)

Sami Ibrahim said:


> Someone once said "The major barrier in responding to a violent attack is not a lack of martial art skill but rather the brains inability to reconcile the differences between the actual attack and the response trained in practice."


sounds very familiar to me ....



Sami Ibrahim said:


> I suspect that you are fixated on the written outlines of the ideal phase and have your own opinion on what the purpose is for training them. For me the purpose of the art is first and foremost to be used by the student to develop his or her martial ability, but it is definitely the student who has to use the art to develop their ability, a martial art demonstrated in front of a student who proceeds to memorize and mimic the movements without further effort will be destined for failure.


the thing is Sami that i have never worked out with you so i can only use my own local observations for a reference.  however looking at kenpo as an institution rather than one persons practice, we have to admit that Touch of Death is correct about money and students, albiet in a round about way.  the student HAS to practice what the instructor has shown and how he expects it to be done.  if the student ever wants go up in rank he has to meet the expectations of the instructor.  the student also has the expectation that what the teacher is giving as a curriculum is effective which we both know may not be true.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 23, 2017)

Touch Of Death said:


> No. You have missed the problem completely. The problem is student retention, and money. If you take a bunch of military guys and make them work inside and outside defenses, you are going to have better results keeping a bunch of people, that pay you money, happy. The business model is the problem, and it always has been.



Guess I'm lucky then our students are both military and pay to train lol.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 23, 2017)

Another issue is the teacher. Within kenpo, you can up the level of training; so, Yellow Belt stuff, is pretty unrealistic, and some black belts are lucky if they made it to a purple belt level before slapping on a red brick. It is crazy, and nobody know the kenpo I've seen... Nobody knows my sorrow.


----------

