# Evolving



## MJS (Dec 17, 2009)

On another forum, someone asked the question, "What is EPAK?"  One person commented that in Rich Hales Kenpo journal, there is a Q&A section, in which Mr. Paker answers some questions, and also stated that we are to constantly evolve.  I have not read the journal in question, so I can only go on what I read in the post.

So, my question is this: What does evolving mean to you?


----------



## girlbug2 (Dec 19, 2009)

Continually adapting the art to the changing times.

I live in Orange County where apparently BJJ has become ultra popular in the last few years. This means that likely, a street attacker may try to shoot in and bring me to the ground. Whatever art a martial artist studies, should be able to answer this recent development with appropriate self defense moves.


----------



## MJS (Dec 28, 2009)

Gee, I almost forgot about this thread.  Here are my thoughts...

IMO, when anyone hears the term 'evolve', right away, they think of the first thing that comes to their mind.  Much like that game, where a person is shown a picture of something and they have to say the first thing that comes to their mind.  So, when we hear something like evolve, many people think that it means to change, and not always for the better.  Now sure, evolving does entail changing, but that change isn't always bad. 

If we think about life, we'd see alot of changes.  The way houses are built, the way cars are built, medicine, being able to pay bills online and over the phone vs. using the mail system.  The list can go on and on.

I'm a firm believer in having a solid understanding of the system before making a change.  I mean, there're techniques in the Kenpo system that I'm not fond of and would never consider doing if my life depended on it, yet I still teach them, because someone else may find value in them.  Of course, another counter is saying that the person making the change, didn't know the system, thus resulting in the change.  That may be so...maybe they don't understand it.  But as I said, I teach the techs. as taught to me.  Any changes that I made or make, are for my benefit only, to make them work for me.  

2 people come to mind, when I think about change in Kenpo, and those 2 people are Jeff Speakman and Paul Mills.  IMO, both are great Kenpoists, but both have made some pretty big changes.  Speakman has, from what I can see, made some changes to the techs., as well as added in alot of grappling.  Paul Mills has also, from what I can see, made some big changes.   Does this mean that these 2 men dont understand Kenpo?  Both have been training a hell of alot longer than I, so personally, I wouldn't say that they dont understand the art, as I'm sure they understand it very well.  I would say that they've made changes and done what Mr. Parker would have wanted them and everyone else to do....dont let the art sit stagnant, but instead continue to evolve it and let it grow.

Its easy to say that a punch is a punch, and while I agree with that, I think its safe to say that methods of attack/delivery have changed over the years.  With the MMA craze still going strong, and with wrestling taught in many schools and colleges, the chances of running into a grappler are high.  One can argue that there is grappling, solid weapons disarms, etc. in the art, but to what extent does it go?  

Not long ago, I was working some Kenpo knife disarms with my Arnis inst., who is also a Kenpo BB.  From what I saw, there were some that IMO were pretty effective, and others that seemed to not take into consideration, any sort of counter from the knife holder.  

Evolving is something that will either be praised or frowned upon.  Will everyone want to evolve?  Of course not.  IMO, its up to each person to evolve themselves.  Look at how other arts do things, add to your toolbox, test your stuff out and continue to grow.  As I said above, there are 2 big names in Kenpo that thought that some changes needed to be made, so that, IMO, says alot.


----------



## HKphooey (Dec 28, 2009)

Life has taught me everything is revolving, not evolving.  Sooner or later you go back to the begining.  It is only a matter of time before everyone will come back to the basics and tradition.  You can try to translate things a 1000 ways, but in the end the definition is the same.  

To change things enough to make a difference, one must have a revolution, not evolution.  I think we call  much of the changes evolution, but they are really just another translation.


----------



## stickarts (Dec 28, 2009)

HKphooey said:


> Life has taught me everything is revolving, not evolving. Sooner or later you go back to the begining. It is only a matter of time before everyone will come back to the basics and tradition. You can try to translate things a 1000 ways, but in the end the definition is the same.
> 
> To change things enough to make a difference, one must have a revolution, not evolution. I think we call much of the changes evolution, but they are really just another translation.


 
Well said. One of my teachers often said " it is all the same." I think that is in part what he meant.


----------



## MJS (Dec 29, 2009)

HKphooey said:


> Life has taught me everything is revolving, not evolving. Sooner or later you go back to the begining. It is only a matter of time before everyone will come back to the basics and tradition. You can try to translate things a 1000 ways, but in the end the definition is the same.
> 
> To change things enough to make a difference, one must have a revolution, not evolution. I think we call much of the changes evolution, but they are really just another translation.


 


stickarts said:


> Well said. One of my teachers often said " it is all the same." I think that is in part what he meant.


 
Yes, in a way, it is all the same.  A house is a house, a car a car, etc., but here, IMO, is the difference...its the way we see those things today.  A car built in 1965 still has 4 wheels and an engine, but compared to a car built today, the changes, performance, overall construction, should be obvious.

Changing things enough to make a difference...well, I think that with other things, ie: cars, houses, medicine, etc., that is what the majority of people want.  But when it comes to the arts, people tend to be content with what they have...and thats fine, as long as they accept that there may be others that will continue to advance.  

Im just taking a guess here, so maybe one of the students of the above mentioned Kenpoists, Speakman and Mills, can comment further, but IMO, those guys are not trying to change all Kenpo, just theirs.  They're concerned with themselves and their students.  If someone from outside their group is interested in doing what they do, fine, I'm sure they could join with them, but if they're not, thats fine too, those people will just keep doing what they're doing.


----------



## HKphooey (Dec 29, 2009)

MJS,

I think it comes down to the definition... do you consider changing and evolving the same thing?  Since you posted in the EPAK section, I assumed you were taking about the EPAK system, specifically.  I think that American Kenpo is evolving to the point it is changing into many different things.  

To use your analogy... are cars really better these days?  That is in the eye of the beholder.  I would rather have a classic 1967 Shelby Mustang than one of the new ones they are calling a Mustang.   

So is evolving good or bad?  I think that is million dollar question.

But as you mentioned... There are some great new ways of looking at and presenting material.  Each master and instructor brings something to the table.  It is up to the end-user to decide if it will work for them or not.  I, personally, have been open to all those different versions, views and styles.  I just chose what will or will not work for me.  I love to see what others are trying to accomplish.  Good or Bad.  The good gives us something new and the bad gives us something to learn from.


----------



## MJS (Dec 30, 2009)

HKphooey said:


> MJS,
> 
> I think it comes down to the definition... do you consider changing and evolving the same thing? Since you posted in the EPAK section, I assumed you were taking about the EPAK system, specifically. I think that American Kenpo is evolving to the point it is changing into many different things.




http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/change

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evolve

Yes, I consider both to be the same.   As for what art I was talking about...yes, anyone that teaches Parker Kenpo.  I mentioned Speakman and Mills, because while they may have made changes, they both trained under the Parker branch.  I am curious though....I mentioned 2 well known Kenpoists, both of which have made changes to what they teach, but I'm the only one whos commented about them.  I'm interested in what you or anyone else has to say about either man, comments about the changes they've made, etc




> To use your analogy... are cars really better these days? That is in the eye of the beholder. I would rather have a classic 1967 Shelby Mustang than one of the new ones they are calling a Mustang.





> So is evolving good or bad? I think that is million dollar question.




Agreed, and I think I may have said to each his/her own, at some point in my post.   As for the cars...I dont know...I saw a new GT500 at a dealership, not long ago....man, what I would've given to have that baby! 




> But as you mentioned... There are some great new ways of looking at and presenting material. Each master and instructor brings something to the table. It is up to the end-user to decide if it will work for them or not. I, personally, have been open to all those different versions, views and styles. I just chose what will or will not work for me. I love to see what others are trying to accomplish. Good or Bad. The good gives us something new and the bad gives us something to learn from.


----------



## James Kovacich (Dec 30, 2009)

When I am gone, I hope that people won't try to traditionalize my Art. I want you to always remember that Kenpo will always be the Art of Perpetual Change. If you remember this, then the Art will never become obsolete because it will change with the times. While the ignorant refuse to study and the intelligent never stop, we should always be mindful of the fact that our reward in life is proportionate with the contributions we make.

A true Martial Artist is not one who fears change, but one who causes it to happen. To live is to change, and to obtain perfection is to have changed often. Progress is a necessity that is a part of nature. While it is true that casting the old aside is not necessary in order to obtain something new, we should study old theories not as a means of discrediting them, but to see if they can be modified to improve our present conditions. A word of advice, The humble man makes room for progress; the proud man believes he is already there." - SGM Ed Parker


----------



## MJS (Dec 30, 2009)

James Kovacich said:


> When I am gone, I hope that people won't try to traditionalize my Art. I want you to always remember that Kenpo will always be the Art of Perpetual Change. If you remember this, then the Art will never become obsolete because it will change with the times. While the ignorant refuse to study and the intelligent never stop, we should always be mindful of the fact that our reward in life is proportionate with the contributions we make.
> 
> A true Martial Artist is not one who fears change, but one who causes it to happen. To live is to change, and to obtain perfection is to have changed often. Progress is a necessity that is a part of nature. While it is true that casting the old aside is not necessary in order to obtain something new, we should study old theories not as a means of discrediting them, but to see if they can be modified to improve our present conditions. A word of advice, The humble man makes room for progress; the proud man believes he is already there." - SGM Ed Parker


 
QFT!  Preach it brother, Preach it!


----------



## Carol (Dec 30, 2009)

Personally I don't think there is much controversy over Kenpo evolving. 

We can already see different flavors.  The AKKI is from bit different Parker-Planas, which is a bit different from Kenpo 5.0, for example.  I don't think there are many folks that have issue with what Messrs. Mills, Planas, or Speakman have done with their systems.

The  issue seems to be more based on how it evolves, and perhaps more specifically, how it is presented to the buying public.

Once I was talking to my colleague whose two sons study Kempo.   My colleague stated that both of his boys started Kempo at a young age, and the training helped them to cope with the bullying in school.  This wasn't a huge surprise to me...but what was surprising was when he talked about their school experiences.  Both sons experienced more bullying in 1st and 2nd grade than they did in 3rd and 4th grade.

I know my former school modified a number of techniques to make them easier for children to learn or more suitable for their situations.  I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing, and I think my colleague's boys are an example of how this can be a very good thing.

But, rhetorically speaking, what happens when the child earns (say) a brown belt in the juvenile format?   Do they have a brown belt in Parker Kenpo?  What if the school decides to teach all or some of the juvenile curriculum to adults because its easier?  Is this school teaching Parker Kenpo?

I think its questions like these that bring the most controversy.


----------



## K831 (Dec 31, 2009)

Using the car analogy;

A car is a car yes. 

Good question asked; is the evolution of cars today better? 

That depends entirely on the purpose you chose the car for.

For example, I would rather have a 1967 GTO than the current rice rocket version. I feel the same way about the Mustang, as someone mentioned earlier. 

But that is because in this instance I subscribe to the _criteria _that makes up the _original _"American Muscle Car".... Power, size, sweeping lines etc, not gas mileage... 

Now, a car is a car (4 tires etc) but we can apply a certain _criteria _and the difference begins to matter. For example, the evolution of the car is great if the criteria of size, power, ease of maintenance etc don't matter. IF you look towards gas mileage, gizmos, GPS, etc then the evolution has been great. 

It's the same with martial arts. 

We could go back to the begging, but then I wouldn't work gun disarms, retention drills, weapon presentation (draw stroke) mass attacks, etc. If I went back to EPAK from the AKKI, I would go back to more formalized and memorized techniques on a static Uke, more forms, more passive moves and compound traping, less interception and less two man driils, sets, less knife work, less realistic attacks, less takedown defense and so on. 

If that is the case, I DO NOT WANT TO GO BACK TO THE BEGINING. 

My _criteria _for positive evolutions is simple;

- combat tested
- simplified (in terms of learning curve)
- adresses current combat needs (i.e. Knives and guns more common, multiple attackers more common, takedowns more common) 
- in keeping with Mr. Parkers (and any correct) principle of motion and structure.


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2010)

Carol said:


> Personally I don't think there is much controversy over Kenpo evolving.
> 
> We can already see different flavors. The AKKI is from bit different Parker-Planas, which is a bit different from Kenpo 5.0, for example. I don't think there are many folks that have issue with what Messrs. Mills, Planas, or Speakman have done with their systems.
> 
> The issue seems to be more based on how it evolves, and perhaps more specifically, how it is presented to the buying public.


 
Interestingly enough, you'd be surprised at how many people bash those that were mentioned.  I've seen guys on forums bash one person, claiming that the person being bashed doesnt know the real Kenpo, isn't sticking with the principles that Parker uses, etc.  I see the flavors that you're talking about and I like I always say, its all the same, just another branch on the Kenpo tree.  Others I guess aren't seeing it that way.  



> Once I was talking to my colleague whose two sons study Kempo. My colleague stated that both of his boys started Kempo at a young age, and the training helped them to cope with the bullying in school. This wasn't a huge surprise to me...but what was surprising was when he talked about their school experiences. Both sons experienced more bullying in 1st and 2nd grade than they did in 3rd and 4th grade.
> 
> I know my former school modified a number of techniques to make them easier for children to learn or more suitable for their situations. I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing, and I think my colleague's boys are an example of how this can be a very good thing.


 
Many schools that I've seen will make subtle changes for kids.  Ex: A 4 finger shot to the eye, may be modified to a palm strike for a child.  IMO, I see nothing wrong with that.  Last thing we would need is Johnny eye gouging Tommy on the play ground because he took Johnnys baseball. LOL.



> But, rhetorically speaking, what happens when the child earns (say) a brown belt in the juvenile format? Do they have a brown belt in Parker Kenpo? What if the school decides to teach all or some of the juvenile curriculum to adults because its easier? Is this school teaching Parker Kenpo?
> 
> I think its questions like these that bring the most controversy.


 
In many cases, from what I've seen, this is where the JR. BB comes into play for the kids.  One they reach that point, they usually go back and learn the material they didn't when they were younger, as well as the correct way of executing the techs., ie: changing that palm strike back to the 4 finger jab.  

As for the adults...IMO, I think the material should be taught to the adults, with the only mods. being for physical purposes.  In other words, I'm taller than my inst.  Therefore, I do not nor would I expect him to perform a tech. in the same way I would, due to height differences.  He may have to adjust his stance, footing, etc. to adapt to my size.  But as far as rewriting the entire tech...no.


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2010)

K831 said:


> Using the car analogy;
> 
> A car is a car yes.
> 
> ...


 
Very well said, and my thoughts exactly!


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 6, 2010)

to evolve is to adapt to new concerns.
Sean


----------



## MJS (Jan 6, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> to evolve is to adapt to new concerns.
> Sean


 
To keep this thread going, in your opinion, do you feel that there're any new concerns that need to be addressed?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 3, 2010)

MJS said:


> To keep this thread going, in your opinion, do you feel that there're any new concerns that need to be addressed?


Considering they sell credit cards capable of shooting flames, yes. On a normal note, the popularity of grappling arts and the UFC, it may be a good idea to learn some counters.
Sean


----------



## MJS (Feb 3, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> On a normal note, the popularity of grappling arts and the UFC, it may be a good idea to learn some counters.
> Sean


 
Yup, I agree.  This is something that I've been saying for a long time, however, I used to get so much **** for saying it. LOL.  I think that people thought that I was suggesting to stop Kenpo and take up the latest flavor of the month.  That wasn't the case at all.  I was simply suggesting to do as you said...learn some of the basics, drill the hell out of them, work your Kenpo in, and there ya go!


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 3, 2010)

MJS said:


> Yup, I agree. This is something that I've been saying for a long time, however, I used to get so much **** for saying it. LOL. I think that people thought that I was suggesting to stop Kenpo and take up the latest flavor of the month. That wasn't the case at all. I was simply suggesting to do as you said...learn some of the basics, drill the hell out of them, work your Kenpo in, and there ya go!


Considering that Kenpo is a way of thinking, then expanding your way of thinking is not a bad thing.
Sean


----------



## Jenny_in_Chico (Feb 3, 2010)

My kenpo sensei is constantly encouraging us to consider all the different directions in which a fight or self-defense situation might progress. When we do a technique line, he discusses "what if" a lot...what if the attacker moved a different way, or did this or that, how would you modify the technique to deal with it? 

He also has trained in many different arts, so he shows us judo joint locks or grappling basics or stick disarms just to round out our training, and he heavily emphasizes *boxing*.


----------



## MJS (Feb 8, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> Considering that Kenpo is a way of thinking, then expanding your way of thinking is not a bad thing.
> Sean


 
Of course, there're some that disagree with this line of thinking.  Personally, I'm all for expanding and learning.  Theres so much out there.  I mean, its like going to a buffet table, but only taking 1 food item, when there're so many others to pick from as well.


----------



## Carol (Feb 8, 2010)

MJS said:


> Of course, there're some that disagree with this line of thinking.  Personally, I'm all for expanding and learning.  Theres so much out there.  I mean, its like going to a buffet table, but only taking 1 food item, when there're so many others to pick from as well.



You just had to use a buffet reference in a Kenpo thread... :lol:


----------



## MJS (Feb 8, 2010)

Carol said:


> You just had to use a buffet reference in a Kenpo thread... :lol:


 
Hey, how else are we Kenpoists supposed to maintain those Kenpo bellies. LOL.


----------



## Luther (Feb 9, 2010)

Adapting things as an individual does not seem to do much for evolving the art itself at the time, it is somewhat short term by nature. It tailors it to the individual quite well. Evolution comes over time as a result of these adaptations and their applications. "Sub level 4" is an evolution" of the kenpo way of thinking from what I can see in the videos. It is not an adaptation of ground fighting techniques to the existing style of kenpo as an example. kenpo jiu jitsu sounds like an adaptation. It is not a new kenpo way or new jiu jitsu per sey. So I think the distinction should be made that adapting to modern concerns is not necessarily evolving the art itself, it is more of an addition to what you already know and using the knowledge of modern times to act accordingly or something. Just watching the SL4 videos on youtube  you can see that evolution is much more than an adaptation to modern kenpo. And it sure looks really cool too. intense. I wish there was an SL4 school where I live. It looks like something I would really like to do with my Kenpo.


----------

