# The Myth Of The Techniques



## MJS (May 7, 2009)

A recent discussion with my Kenpo teacher got me thinking about this. Of course, after reading a current thread in the General Martial Arts section, specifically one post by a member, got me thinking even more.

If we look at the Kenpo system, Parker and Tracy, we see a huge number of techniques. We see base techniques, the extensions, ABC variations, etc. Now, these techs. will include countless punch techs., grab techs., chokes, defenses for if the person grabs and pulls in, grabs and pushes out, a high push, a low push, etc., etc. 

So, it would make one wonder, how that specific tech. is going to be summoned, for lack of better words, and put into use, during stress. I mean, someone pushes you, grabs you, whatever, and you can't tell me that you're brain isn't going to have to think for a moment. On the other hand, you have people that are thinking, "Well, theres only so many ways to punch, so why do you need 50 right punch techs.?" Of course, that can be countered with the reason I listed above, which comes down to a different method of execution. Sure, only one way to grab a lapel, but will that same tech work no matter what they do?

So, that brings me to this....do you feel that we should be executing the tech. as written, with little to no change, or take the principles and concepts from all of the techs., and form a response to the attack using those idea?

Often when working spontaneous reaction drills in class, I find myself just reacting. I rarely find myself going into 5 Swords against a roundhouse punch, but I do find myself using ideas from that tech. I'm not thinking a specific tech, but instead not getting hit, or escaping from the hold. So I'm not thinking Twin Kimono or Kimono Grab, I'm thinking, well, I could just as easily reach their face, so 2 palm strikes to the ears and a kick to the groin would work just as easy.

One could say that the reason the techs. don't come as easy, is because one doesnt spend enough time working them. So, in other words, if I drilled 5 Swords a thousand times a day or that one tech for 8 hrs straight, that it would be so embedded in my brain, that it would just come out. On the other hand, going on that logic, it would take 30yrs before someone was effectively able to defend themselves. Now, I'm not saying that we should look for a quick fix, but I dont think that we should have to wait X number of years before we can effectively defend ourselves.

This is why I feel that once the foundation is built, once you understand the tools available to you, that you should be able to expand outside of the box, and not be held by the set techniques.

Thoughts?


----------



## celtic_crippler (May 7, 2009)

My 0.02...

Techniques are a learning tool. They help teach and reinforce particular principles through repetition. 

Through repetition you build "muscle memory." 

The reason for this is to help you attain that ultimate goal in execution; *spontaneity. *

One can not afford to take the time needed to consciously assess and deal with an attack, it must be imbedded in your subconcious in order for you to have spontaneous, and effective, reactions to an attack. "He who hesitates, meditates in the horizontal position." -SGM Parker.

I remember coming up and my instructor telling me during the practice of techniques or say when we "ran a technique line" what we did was only wrong if we stopped in the middle of execution to think about it. 

Of course if we violated a principle in the process he would point that out but he viewed corrections as part of the learning process and really pushed us to apply what we were learning from the techniques. The one thing he didn't want was us stopping in the middle of it to think about it. You did that during the analyzation process following the execution.


----------



## DavidCC (May 7, 2009)

we approach it as the techs are valuable in smaller pieces.  Position recognition is built, so that if you find yourself in any particular orientation with an attacker it should be familiar from one or more techniques.  Also by training the different techniques each person eventually discovers a strategy they are comfortable with, a "way to win" that works for them, and then you can start to use position recognition proactively to get the bad guy right where you want him from wherever you started.


----------



## stone_dragone (May 7, 2009)

I personally view each technique as a story designed to teach some moral... perhaps the moral is defeating the height and width zones, perhaps it is circular footwork against a linear attack.  

You can tell the story of Little Red Riding Hood however you want, but there needs to be a "wolf" type character, a "Grandma" type character, a "Little girl" type character, etc.

If you tell the story of "Delayed Sword," however you chose to tell it, there needs to be an upper body attack, a block, etc...

Little Red Riding Hood teaches us not to trust strangers, "Delayed Sword" teaches defense and rapid re-attack.

However you tell the basic story, as long as the elements are there and we learn the lesson, life's good.

My .02


----------



## SL4Drew (May 7, 2009)

MJS said:


> So, it would make one wonder, how that specific tech. is going to be summoned, for lack of better words, and put into use, during stress.


 
This really goes to 'how' you train and 'what' you are training.




MJS said:


> I mean, someone pushes you, grabs you, whatever, and you can't tell me that you're brain isn't going to have to think for a moment.


 
I don't know if I agree.  You train in order to have a certain degree of an unconscious reflexive response to what you perceive, thus reducing or bypassing the mental element of speed.  This general kind of 'no-mind' has all sorts of names and variants across the martial arts.



MJS said:


> So, that brings me to this....do you feel that we should be executing the tech. as written, with little to no change, or take the principles and concepts from all of the techs., and form a response to the attack using those idea?


 
I am not being flip, but my answer would be as long as you don't get hurt, then however it happens was good.  And slightly more involved answer would be--it depends. 



MJS said:


> Often when working spontaneous reaction drills in class, I find myself just reacting. I rarely find myself going into 5 Swords against a roundhouse punch, but I do find myself using ideas from that tech. I'm not thinking a specific tech, but instead not getting hit, or escaping from the hold. So I'm not thinking Twin Kimono or Kimono Grab, I'm thinking, well, I could just as easily reach their face, so 2 palm strikes to the ears and a kick to the groin would work just as easy.


 
This is illustrative of way I find Doc's training methods so good.  First, by insisting on real attacks, you've received the stimulus countless times.  Second, by insisting on surviving first, with solid basic skills, and then training to deploy a devastating retaliation, by the time you are 'aware' of your response to a surprise attack, it's over.  Through training it becomes very much See--->Do rather than See--->Think--->Do.  Plenty of guys in the school have had the experience for me to believe, and some old timers that have been around the block have similar stories.  So, I have high regard for good, sound training.


----------



## punisher73 (May 7, 2009)

Think of it as learning to write.  We teach our students how to write letters (Basic techniques), then we teach them HOW to put those letters into something that makes sense (combinations and movement), then we teach them how to construct a sentence that makes sense (self-defense techniques).

You can't teach a student the alphabet and then expect them to play around with the letters and learn how to write sentences or logicl words.  Although there are some styles that do expect that (JKD).

Once you know the 'how to' of grammar you can endlessly create your own way of talking to communicate the best way possible.  In this case your communication is dealing with an attacker and "convincing" him that he does not wish to pursue his present course of action.


----------



## CoryKS (May 7, 2009)

punisher73 said:


> Think of it as learning to write. We teach our students how to write letters (Basic techniques), then we teach them HOW to put those letters into something that makes sense (combinations and movement), then we teach them how to construct a sentence that makes sense (self-defense techniques).
> 
> You can't teach a student the alphabet and then expect them to play around with the letters and learn how to write sentences or logicl words. Although there are some styles that do expect that (JKD).
> 
> Once you know the 'how to' of grammar you can endlessly create your own way of talking to communicate the best way possible. In this case your communication is dealing with an attacker and "convincing" him that he does not wish to pursue his present course of action.


 
That's how I see it too.  It's like learning a language.  :asian:


----------



## Thesemindz (May 7, 2009)

I've come to look at the techniques as pneumonic devices. We have the technique to remind us to establish our base, and blade our body, and move inside the arm, and strike the throat, and move around the opponent in a non linear fashion.

I don't think, at least in the style of motion based kenpo that I was taught, that perfect execution of the technique is the goal. Survival is the goal, and the techniques exist to remind us of how best to accomplish that goal. If I execute a technique perfectly, bonus. But executing the lessons within the technique is what's best.


-Rob


----------



## KenpoDave (May 7, 2009)

> Originally Posted by *MJS*
> 
> 
> _So, that brings me to this....do you feel that we should be executing the tech. as written, with little to no change, or take the principles and concepts from all of the techs., and form a response to the attack using those idea?_




_I give what I call the "math analogy."  Math is a science (or group of related sciences) dealing with the logic of quantity and shape and arrangement.  Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication, Algebra, etc., are not math, they teach math.  You must do these things to "do math" and in doing them, you come to understand math.  And yet, in order to apply math, you must do these basic things.  It's a circle._

_So it is with kenpo and kenpo techniques, as I see it.  The techniques work, as written.  So part of my answer is yes, they should be practiced as written.  In doing so, an understanding of the principles that they were founded upon should become apparent.  And yet, when it comes down to it, in order to apply the principles of kenpo, you must do techniques.  Maybe not THE techniques, exactly as you were taught, but why not?  They work, and you know them.  _

_I think that some people are content to work techniques without ever giving any thought to the underlying principles.  Not a big deal, since they work, assuming that they are taught and are doing them right._

_But far too many people disregard the techniques as written way too soon, and begin exploring the principles way before developing the fundamental physical skill necessary to do so._

_So, we have the kenpo techniques (teaching tools) that lead to an understanding of kenpo (principles).  Applied kenpo (spontaneous group of principles coming together to form a technique based upon the situation at hand) is considered correct if you win the fight.  It would seem to me, that if your kenpo training was correct and real, at some skill level, your applied kenpo would be the kenpo techniques.  Further, it would seem that as you advance in skill, this would be the case more often._

_This is not to say that along the way, you won't make up some patterns that you like, that work, and that are correct applications of principle.  I have made up my share, often to find later that they are techniques I already knew, applied to different attacks...  What I am saying that spontaneously re-inventing the wheel everytime somebody throws a right punch seems like a waste of time._

_Sort of like the "When I was a beginner, I thought a punch was just a punch" thing._


----------



## K-man (May 7, 2009)

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> Techniques are a learning tool. They help teach and reinforce particular principles through repetition.
> 
> Through repetition you build "muscle memory."
> 
> The reason for this is to help you attain that ultimate goal in execution; *spontaneity. *


All good points. The value of looking at the different applications is to be able to recognise targets as they may present. If we consider that, under pressure we are, at least initially, going to lose our fine motor skills. If we can preempt the threat and attack first, fine. But, if we are attacked, our first action must be to survive the attack. Then we can counter etc. It is in that phase, when we have no idea what is going to be thrown at us next, that muscle memory and the ability to recognise targets or find our hands in the right place to execute a trained technique come into play. If we haven't explored and trained the techniques we will never be able to apply anything but the most basic technique in a stress situation. :asian:


----------



## MJS (May 7, 2009)

celtic_crippler said:


> My 0.02...
> 
> Techniques are a learning tool. They help teach and reinforce particular principles through repetition.
> 
> ...


 
Good points.  Regarding the repitition.  I would think that this would vary from person to person no?  Additionally, with the large number of techs. that we have, we'd have to dedicate a huge amount of time to each individual tech in order to gain that desired result.  

I think its safe to say that between the time you learned say 5 Swords to present, that its possible to have done that tech. hundreds if not thousands of times, yet I could probably count the number of times on one hand, that I've done that tech. when a roundhouse came in.  I'm using ideas, and I've used parts, but the whole thing....rarely if ever.


----------



## MJS (May 7, 2009)

DavidCC said:


> we approach it as the techs are valuable in smaller pieces. Position recognition is built, so that if you find yourself in any particular orientation with an attacker it should be familiar from one or more techniques. Also by training the different techniques each person eventually discovers a strategy they are comfortable with, a "way to win" that works for them, and then you can start to use position recognition proactively to get the bad guy right where you want him from wherever you started.


 
Agreed.  More times than not, I find myself using parts.  I find myself in the position for X tech. but that tech isn't what comes out.


----------



## MJS (May 8, 2009)

SL4Drew said:


> This really goes to 'how' you train and 'what' you are training.


 
I've drilled the techs many times.  I'll have someone come in on me a bunch of times, fast and hard and I'll do the tech.  Change the setting from one in which I know what attack is coming to one where any random shot or kick is coming, fast and hard, and again, I'm not doing the tech., but parts of it.  Personally, given the nature of some of the techs. I have my doubts as to whether or not the full tech will be done anyway.  

Dont take this as me not liking the techs or the art, as thats not the case.  I just feel that many times, too much value is placed on them, and people think that a) if they dont do the full tech or b) if they dont know a response to an attack, that they have poor skills.  I've ran tech lines where I've had someone throw an attack at a lower belt, knowing that they didn't have a set tech for that.  I'd get the deer in the headlights look, and ask them if they knew how to block, move, punch and kick, to which they'd say yes.  I'd then tell them to do it then, and sure enough, they'd do something.  Was it a set tech?  No, but I didn't care if they pulled one off, what I cared about was whether or not they defended themselves and got hit. 






> I don't know if I agree. You train in order to have a certain degree of an unconscious reflexive response to what you perceive, thus reducing or bypassing the mental element of speed. This general kind of 'no-mind' has all sorts of names and variants across the martial arts.


 
154 techs, tracy has much more.  If we are thinking of what to do rather than just reacting to whats thrown, I'd say that yes, our brain is going to need to process whats happening, go thru the list of 50 grab or punch techs and pick one and execute it.  I react just fine to a random attack.  I do this drill just about every week with my Kenpo inst. during my private lesson.  Sure, I defend myself, but am I doing a set tech?  No.  I am however, using principles from the techs. 





> I am not being flip, but my answer would be as long as you don't get hurt, then however it happens was good. And slightly more involved answer would be--it depends.


 
Well, that is the goal. 





> This is illustrative of way I find Doc's training methods so good. First, by insisting on real attacks, you've received the stimulus countless times. Second, by insisting on surviving first, with solid basic skills, and then training to deploy a devastating retaliation, by the time you are 'aware' of your response to a surprise attack, it's over. Through training it becomes very much See--->Do rather than See--->Think--->Do. Plenty of guys in the school have had the experience for me to believe, and some old timers that have been around the block have similar stories. So, I have high regard for good, sound training.


 
I agree with the real attacks.  Nothing pisses me off more, than when I'm being choked and its a shoulder massage, instead of feeling hands squeezing my neck. 

So, going on what you just said, when you're doing this, what do you find yourself doing?  A set tech or defending yourself using the above principles?


----------



## punisher73 (May 8, 2009)

MJS said:


> I've drilled the techs many times. I'll have someone come in on me a bunch of times, fast and hard and I'll do the tech. Change the setting from one in which I know what attack is coming to one where any random shot or kick is coming, fast and hard, and again, I'm not doing the tech., but parts of it. Personally, given the nature of some of the techs. I have my doubts as to whether or not the full tech will be done anyway.
> 
> Dont take this as me not liking the techs or the art, as thats not the case. I just feel that many times, too much value is placed on them, and people think that a) if they dont do the full tech or b) if they dont know a response to an attack, that they have poor skills. I've ran tech lines where I've had someone throw an attack at a lower belt, knowing that they didn't have a set tech for that. I'd get the deer in the headlights look, and ask them if they knew how to block, move, punch and kick, to which they'd say yes. I'd then tell them to do it then, and sure enough, they'd do something. Was it a set tech? No, but I didn't care if they pulled one off, what I cared about was whether or not they defended themselves and got hit.
> 
> 154 techs, tracy has much more. If we are thinking of what to do rather than just reacting to whats thrown, I'd say that yes, our brain is going to need to process whats happening, go thru the list of 50 grab or punch techs and pick one and execute it. I react just fine to a random attack. I do this drill just about every week with my Kenpo inst. during my private lesson. Sure, I defend myself, but am I doing a set tech? No. I am however, using principles from the techs.


 
This reminds me of another thread that Doc started called "Are you supposed to finish the techniques".  I think it outlines alot of what you are bringing up.
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=68474&highlight=finish+techniques


----------



## MattJ (May 8, 2009)

MJS - 



> take the principles and concepts from all of the techs., and form a response to the attack using those idea?


 
Absolutely. I don't think Mr. Parker ever intended for the techniques to be done as written. I would pull principles, and learn to employ them spontaneously as needed.  

I do feel that training model is very inefficient, and that more resistant training will teach the same things quicker. IMHO.


----------



## GBlues (May 8, 2009)

MJS said:


> A recent discussion with my Kenpo teacher got me thinking about this. Of course, after reading a current thread in the General Martial Arts section, specifically one post by a member, got me thinking even more.
> 
> If we look at the Kenpo system, Parker and Tracy, we see a huge number of techniques. We see base techniques, the extensions, ABC variations, etc. Now, these techs. will include countless punch techs., grab techs., chokes, defenses for if the person grabs and pulls in, grabs and pushes out, a high push, a low push, etc., etc.
> 
> ...


 
My dad started to teach me Kenpo Karate from a very early age. Off and on over the years. He would teach me different techniques here and there. Before I go any further I want to stress I do love Kenpo Karate. However, that being said. My pops taught me three different ways to get out of a lapel grab, and even a choke. He said they work just as well for a choke. He was wrong as you'll soon see.

Now, I was sixteen years old, just a punk kid. I was out one day rollerblading with some friends of mine down at the highschool, which was easily within walking distance to my house. Well, it was a wednesday night, which meant church night. I did not want to go. So I decided that I would just simply stay and rollerblade for awhile. This was not the smartest idea that I have ever come up with. So my dad shows up, and starts just slapping the piss out of my head. Just bang, bang, bang, the whole time he's yelling at me to get in the truck. He's really pissed. The whole way home, blam,blam, blam, just smacking the hell out of me. We get to the house, and I'm slowly rollerblading around the truck, and whack, he smacks me in the back of the head. Almost knocking me off of my feet. I reach down to pick up my hat, and he procedes to kick me in the butt. Now understand I know I deserved to be yelled, maybe even smacked a little bit, but I'd had just about enough of being slapped. So we get to the door, and my dad, decides that I'm not moving fast enough for him, and he decides to try for it again. This time I blocked it. Again not the brightest idea I've ever had. He started screaming at me, ' You wanna go boy, get those ****ing roller blades off and step out into the front yard.' I replied, "I don't want to fight you dad." As I walked into the house and headed for my bedroom, to start getting my blades off, and start changing my clothes. Well, I'd just got my roller blades off, and here he comes still stewing, mostly because we're gonna be late to church. Which meant we would be 15 minutes early instead of 30. So he and I started arguing, and for some reason it seemed like a bright idea to tell my dad, " hey you know what? **** YOU!" Yeah that went over really bad. I turned my head, and all I heard as I was being thrown on the bed, was " you son of a ***** I'll kill you, you little bastard!" and then his hands were around my neck choking the hell out of me. So fast. 

So there I lay on the bed, being choked by my own father, a guy who on his left hand is missing 2.5 fingers. Kind of looks like a "u" with one shorter end and a thumb. So you would figure he wouldn't have very much strength in that hand, yeah right. Well, First thing I tried was the right hand stiking down on his left arm and my left arm striking upwards on his right arm. Did nothing. So I tried both hands going in between his arms and knocking them out wide. Did nothing, so I tried grabbing his thumbs and pulling them apart. Did nothing. So finally I did the only thing I could do, I punched him in the throat and he let go.

So everything that my dad had taught me, failed me, except causing an injury. Now I didn't crush his throat, or knock him out. But I did enough damage, he reflexevly grabbed his throat. That is the difference. All the other things aside, there really is only one way to deal with a lapel grab or a choke that is going to work every single time, causing an injury. Getting a spinal reflex reaction from your opponent, stops what he is doing every single time, and forces him, to protect that area to stop you from striking it again. Where as all the techinque in the world isn't going to do you any good, if it doesn't cause an injury. There are a lot of techniques, that don't cause injury in a lot of martial arts. If I am going to mess with a guys arm, for any reason in a self-defense situation, it should be because it is necassary to break that arm to save my life. The deal is it doesn't take 154 different techniques to learn how to cause an injury. Only knowing the targets. Of course there are proper ways to strike those targets that will get you bigger impact, or more bang for your buck if you will. But it shouldn't take you 20 years to learn how effectively protect yourself. There are one answer solutions to most of the given self-defense problems. Get an injury, and keep giving injuries until the man can no longer hurt you. Doesn't matter if it's a right punch, a left punch, a knife, a stick, or a gun. If you can get the injury, all those problems go away. So while the subconscious mind can make a thousand decisions before you've made one, and that is where your training should me embedded after 20 years. The fewer techniques that you focus on, and work on the principles and teach the fundamentals of blocking, striking, joint breaking, getting injuries. You should be able to be effective inside of a 1 to 2 year period if not sooner. Because the few things that you learned were embedded into your sub-conscious that much faster. As opposed to opponent throws a right punch, I have to step back into my neutral bow, throw my left outward block, my right hand has to come up for my check, now, which version do I use, a, b, c, or d, and then execute, following up with the rest of your attacks. As opposed to my opponent throws a right punch, I have to block it with a left outward and then what, cause an injury, how do I do that, doesn't matter, so long as I do it. That's it. That is all that should go through your mind. Get an injury. Every single time your in a violent situation. I don't go to the bars, I don't start fights, and I don't look for trouble, but if I want to be sure I'm going to end the confrontation, I want an unjury. If your not getting injuries your prolonging the fight, and allowing him the chance to cause an injury to you and even possibly if his intent was to kill you, to do that too. No matter how good you are, you can't block everything. 

So the point that I'm trying to make is this. If there is only one answer that is going to work every single time. WHy does it take 20-30 years to be effective? To be a master? It shouldn't. You guys apparently, and I'm not being condescending truly, that have studied for 20-30 years. Yes, what you know now is probably plenty to keep you safe. However, I may not have 20 years to spend, or the money to spend learning something, that has holes in it. Where I have to learn 40 different responses to one attack. Which is pointless. They are there because over the years people wanted to learn well, what if he does this, or he does that, or they just wanted to learn more techniques. So eventually those what if techniques got incorporated into a system or style, and they became a permanent fixture to the system. Doesn't mean they aren't valid, just means they are what if's, and what if's go away when you get injuries. Having to have so many versions of one technique, goes away if you train to get injuries. Once you get one, the next one is wide open. As an example of the above "opponent throws a right punch, the reality is I only need one version, maybe two, at the most. Because both cause injury. You either block it and chop the guy to the neck hitting the carotid artery, or you rake his eyes. I just got an injury on the guy. Now I can break his ankle if I want. He won't be able to chase me that's for sure. Or I can strike to the solar plexus, knee and or kick the groin, strike to the neck if I went for the eye rake. All of those targets open up, because I got the first one. On top of that, I actually do have time, now, to see the other targets. So that being said in my mind you need very little in the way of technique. You need to know all of your blocks and be very good at them. you need to know how to punch, kick, knee elbow and headbutt. After that, you need to know what targets to hit,and how to hit them to get the reaction you want. THen it's just practice getting injuries. Without injuring your partner of course. You can make up your own "techniques" as you get better at identifying targets. 

Well, that's my opinion. That's why it takes so long to be effective, because it's slowed down to a small drip, when it comes to learning. That is all the techniques being taught in martial arts is trying to do. Show you where the targets are. But you have to wait until your a black belt to figure out, that wow, I didn't need to do any of that other stuff, I just needed to gouge his eyes, and hit him in the neck. I didn't need to try and break his arms apart, or pull his thumbs apart to relieve the choking on my neck, I just needed to punch him in the throat. I didn't need 3 or 4 different ways out of a choke, I only needed one that worked.


----------



## LawDog (May 8, 2009)

Presets, as far as impacting goes, teach us how to develop fixed striking / blocking patterns that will match the existing fixed doorway patterns on your opponent. These are not supposed to be remembered during a fight, instead, just applied.
This is only step one.
Developing "free flow" patterns for for use against fluid doorways is the "big step" number two.


----------



## KenpoDave (May 8, 2009)

GBlues said:


> My dad started to teach me Kenpo Karate from a very early age. Off and on over the years. He would teach me different techniques here and there. Before I go any further I want to stress I do love Kenpo Karate. However, that being said. My pops taught me three different ways to get out of a lapel grab, and even a choke. He said they work just as well for a choke. He was wrong as you'll soon see.


 


> Well, that's my opinion. That's why it takes so long to be effective, because it's slowed down to a small drip, when it comes to learning. That is all the techniques being taught in martial arts is trying to do. Show you where the targets are. But you have to wait until your a black belt to figure out, that wow, *I didn't need to do any of that other stuff, I just needed to gouge his eyes, and hit him in the neck. I didn't need to try and break his arms apart, or pull his thumbs apart to relieve the choking on my neck, I just needed to punch him in the throat.* I didn't need 3 or 4 different ways out of a choke, I only needed one that worked.


 
Sad story.  I never like hearing those.

However, you began with your dad teaching you kenpo at an early age.  I would suggest that what he taught you was not kenpo.  It may have been part of a curriculum of something somebody called kenpo, but it is my opinion that it's not kenpo if it does not involve striking the vital points of the body.  It would seem that you agree, because the rest of your post focused on that and was very well stated.

What I highlighted in bold above, "that other stuff," to me, is just not kenpo.  Interestingly, the very first technique I learned when I started kenpo was against a two-hand front choke.  The first movement in the technique is a punch to the throat.

You don't need to wait until you are a black belt to fgure that stuff out.  You just need the right teacher.


----------



## KenpoDave (May 8, 2009)

LawDog said:


> Presets, as far as impacting goes, teach us how to develop fixed striking / blocking patterns that will match the existing fixed doorway patterns on your opponent. These are not supposed to be remembered during a fight, instead, just applied.
> This is only step one.
> Developing "free flow" patterns for for use against fluid doorways is the "big step" number two.


 
I agree.  But I feel that people too often assume that the application will be different than the presets, causing them to move beyond (read "disregard") them way too soon.  It makes step two quite a leap.

Spontaneous - coming or resulting from a natural impulse or tendency; without effort or premeditation; natural and unconstrained; unplanned.

Not necessarily something new everytime you do it.  Just because someone is attacked and does a preset technique does not mean it is not spontaneous.


----------



## GBlues (May 8, 2009)

KenpoDave said:


> Sad story. I never like hearing those.
> 
> However, you began with your dad teaching you kenpo at an early age. I would suggest that what he taught you was not kenpo. It may have been part of a curriculum of something somebody called kenpo, but it is my opinion that it's not kenpo if it does not involve striking the vital points of the body. It would seem that you agree, because the rest of your post focused on that and was very well stated.
> 
> ...


 
Well, maybe he just didn't want to teach me the real deal, for fear that I would use it against him one day? I don't know. He stopped showing me stuff after that.


----------



## LawDog (May 8, 2009)

KenpoDave,
A preset technique will work as long as the doorway for it exists. Free flow is needed when the entrance doorways are fluid and change their location rapidly.
I agree, some will move beyond way to soon. One should develop and master presets before moving beyond.


----------



## GBlues (May 8, 2009)

LawDog said:


> KenpoDave,
> A preset technique will work as long as the doorway for it exists. Free flow is needed when the entrance doorways are fluid and change their location rapidly.
> I agree, some will move beyond way to soon. One should develop and master presets before moving beyond.


 
Yeah but I think there are more factors that play into presets. As an example a technique that I was taught was a gentleman throws a left lead or jab. I have to step into my neutral bow, parry his jab, and throw in a check/grab shuffle step forward, bringing my right parrying hand down to strike at his ribs. I have struggled with this idea for awhile. By the time I get to the back knuckle to the ribs his hand has already returned to it's original starting position, and in the heat of combat I seriously run the risk of striking his forearm as a opposed to his ribs. Now, I can see that working in the dojo, and I've performed it and practiced it, but in the street, people don't leave appendages hanging in the air. It's more dynamic. I understand the concept of the presets. They are there to give you a firm foundation in some examples of what could happen, and how you should respond if they attack in that manner. It also should prepare you for becoming spontaneous. Because once they have become so ingrained in your nervous system your blocks and strikes should be automatic actually giving you time to think in a situation where there is no time to think, just do. But I also know that the majority of the things that I've been taught, just didn't work the way they do in the classrooms. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I've walked away from every fight I've ever been in unscathed. Matter of fact I've probably lost as many as I've won, and maybe a few more. The thing that always made the difference, always, was hurting the other guy. Getting an injury. I didn't really know what I was doing, or even really how to do it. But it always boiled down to that. WHo got the injury first, and whoever got it, and capitalized on it, won. I really personally feel that if more time was spent on blocks, parries, and then on strikes and where to hit. You could be effective in a very short time. You could actually make your own techniques up on the fly if you had those things. Just the principles and the mechanics, and the knowledge of where to strike, and what the reaction is. If your able to practice landing on those targets, getting your accuracy down, I think the myth of technique would be busted. Might be a good show for mythbusters. One could spend some time at a dojo learning techniques and another learning targets and how to hit them, and then have them attacked out in the street from a padded individual, and see what happens. The results might be shocking. Or they might just anger some people LOL! Or they might say, you know the techniques were spot on able to defend myself. Myth  plausible. That would be a really cool show.


----------



## still learning (May 9, 2009)

Hello,  Most of the Kempo/Kenpo techniques works well in Class room training and in Kung-fu movies...

Ever see it use in real life and use  all the time?    Most people will not just stand there to let you hit time 5 times or more without moving or blocking or ducking away....

Ever see it use in and Mix martial art fights?   ....we never did..

I am sure there will be many stories of people who did use some of the mulitle techniques...

In real life?  ...how many train enforcement officers and armies depend on these kempo/Kenpo moves?

It is easy to do and learn in classroom training when the opponent does not have to MOVE!  ...try it in a real life situtions?....

Many answers will be given on what works and what doesn't.....

If it was really effective?  ...everyone would be doing it...?

Kung-fu movies and kempo moves....looks the same....

IN real life? ....NO one fights like the kung-fu movies actors...

Here we go again...still learning will get blasted from this comment...

Thats OK...we all have our beliefs....and myths...( your own experiences in real life situtions....some will say it works...others will find the truths/or lies....

Aloha,  ...


----------



## Kenpodoc (May 9, 2009)

still learning said:


> Hello, Most of the Kempo/Kenpo techniques works well in Class room training and in Kung-fu movies...
> 
> Ever see it use in real life and use all the time? Most people will not just stand there to let you hit time 5 times or more without moving or blocking or ducking away.......


Your talking about bad Kenpo as seen repeatedly on the internet. Stone statue Kenpo *is* stupid, but not the Kenpo i was taught.



still learning said:


> Ever see it use in and Mix martial art fights? ....we never did..


MMA is ring fighting. A lot of very talented hard working folk quite capable of defending themselves. Good Kenpo teaches skills that even aging out of shape people can use to defend themselves. A lot of MMA guys will be limping through the second half of their lives in constant pain. Well taught Kenpo can teach people to defend themselves beyond their obvious abilities. It is not dependent on mere quickness or strength or youth. All of these attributes will fade even in the best athletes. 



still learning said:


> I am sure there will be many stories of people who did use some of the mulitle techniques...
> 
> In real life? ...how many train enforcement officers and armies depend on these kempo/Kenpo moves?


Mr LaBounty and Doc Chapel have trained numerous people to use Kenpo in Law Enforcement. Mr. Wedlake relates a story about a student of his who trained all of the men in his unit the yellow techniques before going to Iraq. They used them and they worked. One guy even use spreading Branch when attacked going from house to house. those men all returned home alive and felt the Kenpo saved their lives.



still learning said:


> It is easy to do and learn in classroom training when the opponent does not have to MOVE! ...try it in a real life situtions?....


True, but good studios teach kenpo with resistance. Ideally initial training involves learning basics very well. It is these basics which could save your life when you are old and frail. You can't teach basics against actively resisting attackers until you are more advanced. Therefore good Kenpo traing will always look hokey to the impatient foks racing for mastery without building the foundation needed. 



still learning said:


> Many answers will be given on what works and what doesn't.....
> 
> If it was really effective? ...everyone would be doing it...?
> 
> ...


True, real life and movies are not the same. It's also truethat a lot of people train in what is essentially Movie Kenpo and unfortunately aren't getting the self defense skills they believe they have. Real kenpo is different and very effective. Personally I'm going back to my basics and trying to learn the skills that my aging body with it's fading speed and strength can use far into the future.

Jeff


----------



## hongkongfooey (May 9, 2009)

MJS said:


> A recent discussion with my Kenpo teacher got me thinking about this. Of course, after reading a current thread in the General Martial Arts section, specifically one post by a member, got me thinking even more.
> 
> If we look at the Kenpo system, Parker and Tracy, we see a huge number of techniques. We see base techniques, the extensions, ABC variations, etc. Now, these techs. will include countless punch techs., grab techs., chokes, defenses for if the person grabs and pulls in, grabs and pushes out, a high push, a low push, etc., etc.
> 
> ...


 

I haven't read all of the thread yet, but I'm going to say that the principles and concepts are all what's important, and that the techniques are just vehicles to introduce and build upon the concepts and principles. That's not to say that some of the techniques couldn't work as written, but the way that some Kenpoists work their techniques (no resistance or agressiveness, no contact or power)they would be better off drilling the basics and work the principles against a resisting training partner, and lots bag work.


----------



## hongkongfooey (May 9, 2009)

Thesemindz said:


> I don't think, at least in the style of motion based kenpo that I was taught, that perfect execution of the technique is the goal. Survival is the goal, and the techniques exist to remind us of how best to accomplish that goal. If I execute a technique perfectly, bonus. But executing the lessons within the technique is what's best.
> 
> 
> -Rob


 

I agree. I recall reading in a Black Belt interview with Ed Parker where he stated something along the lines of that. I won't quote him exactly because I don't remember all that he said, but it was something like "I don't care what a technique looks like as long as it is effective"


----------



## KenpoDave (May 10, 2009)

GBlues said:


> Well, maybe he just didn't want to teach me the real deal, for fear that I would use it against him one day? I don't know. He stopped showing me stuff after that.


 
That is very possible.  Sounds like you continued learning, though.


----------



## KenpoDave (May 10, 2009)

LawDog said:


> KenpoDave,
> A preset technique will work as long as the doorway for it exists. Free flow is needed when the entrance doorways are fluid and change their location rapidly.
> I agree, some will move beyond way to soon. One should develop and master presets before moving beyond.


 
Agreed.


----------



## KenpoDave (May 10, 2009)

hongkongfooey said:


> That's not to say that some of the techniques couldn't work as written, but the way that some Kenpoists work their techniques (no resistance or agressiveness, no contact or power)they would be better off drilling the basics and work the principles against a resisting training partner, and lots bag work.


 
Agreed, mostly.  I think all the techniques should work as written if taught and trained correctly.

If not, I am not sure the principle or concept within is valid.


----------



## still learning (May 12, 2009)

Hello,  Seeing and believing....in real fights.   Will show truths and myths of the Kempo/Kenpo techniques.

A rule of thumb...lots of people found it effective and it work!

Lots of people use it!  and do it ...the techniques.

Everytime one sees Black belts fight each other- all the techniques they learn is never use?    it ends up looking more like a street fight!  (not all fights)....just alot of them!

Just beaware?  ....everything you are learning....ALWAYS QUESTION THE EFFECTIVENESS IN A REAL SITUTIONS.  

  Use what works for you? ...and only in real fights you will find the answers

Aloha,


----------



## MJS (May 12, 2009)

KenpoDave said:


> [/i]
> 
> _I give what I call the "math analogy." Math is a science (or group of related sciences) dealing with the logic of quantity and shape and arrangement. Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication, Algebra, etc., are not math, they teach math. You must do these things to "do math" and in doing them, you come to understand math. And yet, in order to apply math, you must do these basic things. It's a circle._
> 
> ...


 
Hey Dave,

Thanks for your feedback.   Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying or thinking that we should toss out the techs., but to not be so bound by them.  If someone pulls off a tech. as written, great.  Afterall, that is the idea of learning them in the first place.  I'm just saying that we shouldn't be so bound by them, that we can look at no other options.


----------



## MJS (May 12, 2009)

GBlues said:


> My dad started to teach me Kenpo Karate from a very early age. Off and on over the years. He would teach me different techniques here and there. Before I go any further I want to stress I do love Kenpo Karate. However, that being said. My pops taught me three different ways to get out of a lapel grab, and even a choke. He said they work just as well for a choke. He was wrong as you'll soon see.
> 
> Now, I was sixteen years old, just a punk kid. I was out one day rollerblading with some friends of mine down at the highschool, which was easily within walking distance to my house. Well, it was a wednesday night, which meant church night. I did not want to go. So I decided that I would just simply stay and rollerblade for awhile. This was not the smartest idea that I have ever come up with. So my dad shows up, and starts just slapping the piss out of my head. Just bang, bang, bang, the whole time he's yelling at me to get in the truck. He's really pissed. The whole way home, blam,blam, blam, just smacking the hell out of me. We get to the house, and I'm slowly rollerblading around the truck, and whack, he smacks me in the back of the head. Almost knocking me off of my feet. I reach down to pick up my hat, and he procedes to kick me in the butt. Now understand I know I deserved to be yelled, maybe even smacked a little bit, but I'd had just about enough of being slapped. So we get to the door, and my dad, decides that I'm not moving fast enough for him, and he decides to try for it again. This time I blocked it. Again not the brightest idea I've ever had. He started screaming at me, ' You wanna go boy, get those ****ing roller blades off and step out into the front yard.' I replied, "I don't want to fight you dad." As I walked into the house and headed for my bedroom, to start getting my blades off, and start changing my clothes. Well, I'd just got my roller blades off, and here he comes still stewing, mostly because we're gonna be late to church. Which meant we would be 15 minutes early instead of 30. So he and I started arguing, and for some reason it seemed like a bright idea to tell my dad, " hey you know what? **** YOU!" Yeah that went over really bad. I turned my head, and all I heard as I was being thrown on the bed, was " you son of a ***** I'll kill you, you little bastard!" and then his hands were around my neck choking the hell out of me. So fast.
> 
> ...


 
I wouldn't say that it failed you, instead I would say that what you decided to do at the time, prior to hitting the throat was perhaps not the best moved suited for that situation.  In other words, I can know 5 different techs. for a 2 hand lapel grab, but, if in the process of that lapel grab, the badguy slammed me up against a wall, and is pushing into me, well, stepping back and forward is out of the question, so I'm going to have to do something suited for whats happening at the time. 




> That is the difference. All the other things aside, there really is only one way to deal with a lapel grab or a choke that is going to work every single time, causing an injury. Getting a spinal reflex reaction from your opponent, stops what he is doing every single time, and forces him, to protect that area to stop you from striking it again. Where as all the techinque in the world isn't going to do you any good, if it doesn't cause an injury. There are a lot of techniques, that don't cause injury in a lot of martial arts. If I am going to mess with a guys arm, for any reason in a self-defense situation, it should be because it is necassary to break that arm to save my life. The deal is it doesn't take 154 different techniques to learn how to cause an injury. Only knowing the targets. Of course there are proper ways to strike those targets that will get you bigger impact, or more bang for your buck if you will. But it shouldn't take you 20 years to learn how effectively protect yourself. There are one answer solutions to most of the given self-defense problems. Get an injury, and keep giving injuries until the man can no longer hurt you. Doesn't matter if it's a right punch, a left punch, a knife, a stick, or a gun. If you can get the injury, all those problems go away. So while the subconscious mind can make a thousand decisions before you've made one, and that is where your training should me embedded after 20 years. The fewer techniques that you focus on, and work on the principles and teach the fundamentals of blocking, striking, joint breaking, getting injuries. You should be able to be effective inside of a 1 to 2 year period if not sooner. Because the few things that you learned were embedded into your sub-conscious that much faster. As opposed to opponent throws a right punch, I have to step back into my neutral bow, throw my left outward block, my right hand has to come up for my check, now, which version do I use, a, b, c, or d, and then execute, following up with the rest of your attacks. As opposed to my opponent throws a right punch, I have to block it with a left outward and then what, cause an injury, how do I do that, doesn't matter, so long as I do it. That's it. That is all that should go through your mind. Get an injury. Every single time your in a violent situation. I don't go to the bars, I don't start fights, and I don't look for trouble, but if I want to be sure I'm going to end the confrontation, I want an unjury. If your not getting injuries your prolonging the fight, and allowing him the chance to cause an injury to you and even possibly if his intent was to kill you, to do that too. No matter how good you are, you can't block everything.


 
I should probably break this post up a bit more, but I'll hit on a few things.  If we look at what the attack each of the techs address, we'll most likely see, on the surface, the same attack.  Yet its the nature of the attack that people are not seeing.  If we look at all of the bearhug techs. on the surface it seems that is what every one of them is defending against, but is that really the case, or is the nature of the attack slighty different?  That is the reason for many of the techs.  

But yes, IMO, the techs are there to teach a foundation.  My purpose of this thread was to talk about those who are bound by those techs vs. those who're not. 



> So the point that I'm trying to make is this. If there is only one answer that is going to work every single time. WHy does it take 20-30 years to be effective? To be a master? It shouldn't. You guys apparently, and I'm not being condescending truly, that have studied for 20-30 years. Yes, what you know now is probably plenty to keep you safe. However, I may not have 20 years to spend, or the money to spend learning something, that has holes in it. Where I have to learn 40 different responses to one attack. Which is pointless. They are there because over the years people wanted to learn well, what if he does this, or he does that, or they just wanted to learn more techniques. So eventually those what if techniques got incorporated into a system or style, and they became a permanent fixture to the system. Doesn't mean they aren't valid, just means they are what if's, and what if's go away when you get injuries. Having to have so many versions of one technique, goes away if you train to get injuries. Once you get one, the next one is wide open. As an example of the above "opponent throws a right punch, the reality is I only need one version, maybe two, at the most. Because both cause injury. You either block it and chop the guy to the neck hitting the carotid artery, or you rake his eyes. I just got an injury on the guy. Now I can break his ankle if I want. He won't be able to chase me that's for sure. Or I can strike to the solar plexus, knee and or kick the groin, strike to the neck if I went for the eye rake. All of those targets open up, because I got the first one. On top of that, I actually do have time, now, to see the other targets. So that being said in my mind you need very little in the way of technique. You need to know all of your blocks and be very good at them. you need to know how to punch, kick, knee elbow and headbutt. After that, you need to know what targets to hit,and how to hit them to get the reaction you want. THen it's just practice getting injuries. Without injuring your partner of course. You can make up your own "techniques" as you get better at identifying targets.


 
My God, I hope it wouldnt take anyone 20yrs to learn to defend themselves.  If it does, they should probably sit down and review what exactly it is they've been spending all that time on. LOL.  I look at it like this....anyone can throw a kick, punch, or block.  How effective it is, is another story.  Look at a white belt throw a punch.  Kinda sucks doesnt it.  Why?  Because they dont really "Know" what they're doing.  Watch a more advanced student.  Should look much better.  Why?  Because they know the finer points.  So, this applies to the techs. again, as well.  The techs. IMO, will re-enforce the basics, and give that foundation.  



> Well, that's my opinion. That's why it takes so long to be effective, because it's slowed down to a small drip, when it comes to learning. That is all the techniques being taught in martial arts is trying to do. Show you where the targets are. But you have to wait until your a black belt to figure out, that wow, I didn't need to do any of that other stuff, I just needed to gouge his eyes, and hit him in the neck. I didn't need to try and break his arms apart, or pull his thumbs apart to relieve the choking on my neck, I just needed to punch him in the throat. I didn't need 3 or 4 different ways out of a choke, I only needed one that worked.


 
This reminds me of the principles of Krav Maga.  If we look at their techs. we'll often see the same beginning to the tech but a different ending.  Why?  They're going off of the typical instinctive response.  Some of their basic techs for a choke from the front, side or rear, is what they call the pluck.  Its taught this way, so as to make the initial defense easier to recall when the stress is on.  After that, you just adapt to where ever the person is.  But the initial defense is the same so it takes away that thinking of..."Ok, I'm being choked.  Where is it from?  Ok, its from the rear.  Ok, I have 6 techs to do, which one do I pick?"  Versus..."I'm being choked, doesnt matter where, because the initial defense is the same.


----------



## MJS (May 12, 2009)

LawDog said:


> KenpoDave,
> A preset technique will work as long as the doorway for it exists. Free flow is needed when the entrance doorways are fluid and change their location rapidly.
> I agree, some will move beyond way to soon. One should develop and master presets before moving beyond.


 
Great post!  This is what I was getting at.  I wasn't hinting, and I apologize in advance if that was the impression I gave to anyone, that we toss out the presets.  I'm saying just what you are....learn the presets, get the foundation built, and from there, expand.  Pretty good chance things will be changing, so its important for us to not be bound by something, but to be able to adapt.


----------



## MJS (May 12, 2009)

GBlues said:


> Yeah but I think there are more factors that play into presets. As an example a technique that I was taught was a gentleman throws a left lead or jab. I have to step into my neutral bow, parry his jab, and throw in a check/grab shuffle step forward, bringing my right parrying hand down to strike at his ribs. I have struggled with this idea for awhile. By the time I get to the back knuckle to the ribs his hand has already returned to it's original starting position, and in the heat of combat I seriously run the risk of striking his forearm as a opposed to his ribs. Now, I can see that working in the dojo, and I've performed it and practiced it, but in the street, people don't leave appendages hanging in the air. It's more dynamic. I understand the concept of the presets. They are there to give you a firm foundation in some examples of what could happen, and how you should respond if they attack in that manner. It also should prepare you for becoming spontaneous. Because once they have become so ingrained in your nervous system your blocks and strikes should be automatic actually giving you time to think in a situation where there is no time to think, just do. But I also know that the majority of the things that I've been taught, just didn't work the way they do in the classrooms. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I've walked away from every fight I've ever been in unscathed. Matter of fact I've probably lost as many as I've won, and maybe a few more. The thing that always made the difference, always, was hurting the other guy. Getting an injury. I didn't really know what I was doing, or even really how to do it. But it always boiled down to that. WHo got the injury first, and whoever got it, and capitalized on it, won. *I really personally feel that if more time was spent on blocks, parries, and then on strikes and where to hit. You could be effective in a very short time. You could actually make your own techniques up on the fly if you had those things.* Just the principles and the mechanics, and the knowledge of where to strike, and what the reaction is. If your able to practice landing on those targets, getting your accuracy down, I think the myth of technique would be busted. Might be a good show for mythbusters. One could spend some time at a dojo learning techniques and another learning targets and how to hit them, and then have them attacked out in the street from a padded individual, and see what happens. The results might be shocking. Or they might just anger some people LOL! Or they might say, you know the techniques were spot on able to defend myself. Myth plausible. That would be a really cool show.


 

You're right..the person probably will pull their hand back and do something else, therefore nullifying your preset. But, even if you pulled off a part, the initial move of the preset, thats ok.  You're still...hopefully...using ideas from those presets, to make your defense stronger, vs. just swinging away, hoping that what you throw connects. 

When I say *you* I'm not talking about YOU, but anyone who is attempting to defend themselves. 

I wanted to come back to this and talk about the bold part.  I may have to disagree with this slightly.  I'll refer back to the dvd set that I was watching recently.  I have mentioned this in other posts/threads on here.  The first thing that came to mind when watching this was that it was not for beginners, due to the fact that with the way the inst. was given, it was assumed that the viewer already had a solid MA background.  A newbie, could probably muttle thru it, but they probably wouldn't understand due to the fact that a) they dont have a foundation, and b) dont understand the strikes.  The dvd was giving various options, simple ones at that, to various situations, however, there were no set techs. like you'd see on a typical instructional dvd set. 

So, while it may sound simple to just show someone blocks punches and strikes, we need to, IMO, do more than just say, "Here're some blocks, here're some punches, and some kicks.  Work 'em and then I'll come back and attack you."  The techs will give that person all of the above, with one way to apply those things.  It'll show how to move, where to hit to be most effective, how to move, etc.  Again, once that base is built, then, and only then, IMO, can the person remove themselves from the preset mindset and into the spontaneous on the fly mode.


----------



## MarkC (May 12, 2009)

Thesemindz said:


> I've come to look at the techniques as *pneumonic* devices. We have the technique to remind us to establish our base, and blade our body, and move inside the arm, and strike the throat, and move around the opponent in a non linear fashion.
> 
> I don't think, at least in the style of motion based kenpo that I was taught, that perfect execution of the technique is the goal. Survival is the goal, and the techniques exist to remind us of how best to accomplish that goal. If I execute a technique perfectly, bonus. But executing the lessons within the technique is what's best.
> 
> ...



Is this really the word you're looking for?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pneumonic


----------



## KenpoDave (May 13, 2009)

MJS said:


> Hey Dave,
> 
> Thanks for your feedback.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying or thinking that we should toss out the techs., but to not be so bound by them. If someone pulls off a tech. as written, great. Afterall, that is the idea of learning them in the first place. I'm just saying that we shouldn't be so bound by them, that we can look at no other options.


 
Agreed.  If the presets are what come out of you spontaneously, though, I don't think you are bound by them.  It just means they work and you know how to make them work, and you have practiced them so much that they have become a part of you.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for spontaneity.  But I think that assuming (and teaching the assumption) that spontaneous movement will not be techniques implies to the student that they should start disregarding the techniques.

I think that spontaneous application of the presets is a worthy goal.  I have seen people "do techniques" and I have described others as "he moved, and a technique came out."  Big difference.


----------



## DocWard (May 13, 2009)

I will preface what I am about to say with the comment that I have been fortunate to have very limited need for my Kenpo training in real life. Without going into details, when I have, what I have used has worked for me.

Now, with that in mind, I can imagine few positions to be in that would be worse than on my back, on a soft surface such as a bed, with my attacker mounting me and choking me. The soft surface means that I am limited in my ability to apply any leverage to complete a technique, particularly against the arms of my assailant, as my back is going to be sinking or moving in response to my efforts.

Finally, it may have been mentioned, and I simply didn't see it, but my instructor always explained that one of the reasons for the multiple strikes so often associated with Kenpo is to allow multiple opportunities if one strike misses or fails. I seem to recall Mr. Wedlake saying the same thing at a seminar I attended. Of course, I was so overwhelmed by his knowledge and speed at that seminar, that I am amazed to this day, and that was years ago!


----------

