# Kenpo Forms



## tigdra

What use are kenpo forms?

I have taken kenpo for many years and every time I learn a new form or technique I ask myself what am I learning, more importantly what am I learning that is new? What am I getting out of this?

I know that forms teach you to have correct technique, flow from technique to technique, learning techniques on both sides but what do kenpo forms teach you aside from that? and how many forms do you need to go through to re-learn the same concepts. 


please correct my way of thinking because I have lost hope on kenpo forms


----------



## JTKenpo

The only person that can correct your way of thinking is you.  If you want to delve into your kata then do just that.  If you personally can't find any more lessons in your kata then find a teacher that can show you something new if that is what you are looking for.  But that is the question here, what do *you* want from your kenpo forms?  If the answer is knowledge then go seek it, it's out there.  If you are just looking to get people wriled up about the importance of kata then I have nothing for you.  Your forms are just that *your *forms.  My forms are my forms.  They may have the same movements they may not, they may teach the same lessons they may not.  Some days I learn volumes from them, other days I toss them out of my training for that day and look to them again tomorrow.  But then again thats me you have to find your own path.


----------



## IWishToLearn

*Waits for Professor Conatser or Doc to chime in*


----------



## marlon

in a word :  practice.  Forms are one of the few places you can go all out using full force and full movement.  The important point is to practice the principles as you do the forms.  A fight or interaction with another body will cause you to adjust things that may not necessarily need to be adjusted.  Forms help you to practice the basics of posture, breath, stance and timing "freely" if you will.  It is absolutely necessary to work with as partner otherwise the concepts will not make sense and be changed to suit your imagination.  Also, to learn something and to practice it is different.  All concepts need to be rte inforced and the best forms re -enforced many concepts over and over again.  So, this is what i see as thier benfit.  Also, i consider each form your own personal treasure box of techniques.  As your understanding and skill grows you will find many wonderful things in your forms that your instructor never "taught" you..and so you grow some more.
just my thoughts

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## tshadowchaser

forms help your speed and concentration. The help you develop a flow between techniques. They can improve you cardio-vascular, and muscles.
They may have the same techniques or the may have new ones but they make you move and you muscles and brain learn at the same time.
Some forms may not seem to have any meaning other than movement but in 5 or 10 years you may see them completely differently.


----------



## tigdra

....


----------



## tigdra

My main concern comes from this conclusion; there are a large percentage of kenpo masters that are over weight. 

Don't get me wrong they are super fast with their hands and all but they got this big belly going on, and yet you see kung fu masters and their majority are slim. Don't get me wrong I am not comparing asians to americans. I am comparing american people who practice kenpo vs american people that practice kung fu.

I am pretty sure I read this somewhere it stated that, parker was suggested to included forms into the kenpo system so to become more competitive or more legitimate. 

So if forms where put into kenpo for those reasons then why not create forms that would serve new gains. To excel certain areas that are lacking in kenpo.

You learn defense from your techniques, you work out and condition your body through your exercise classes then what do forms do? Do they teach you hidden concepts that you'll never learn from a technique? do they condition your body to perform moves to make you more agile? are they done for beauty?

I know my answer to this question but I would like to hear yours.


I don't know the shaolin kenpo forms but I do know these following kenpo forms.

short 1 2 3 4 5 
long 1 2 3 4 5 
Block set
book set (panther set)
tiger and crane
finger set
moving finger set 
mass attack
kung fu set
sword set 
staff set 
2 man set
2 man staff
tan tui
kicking sets
coordination sets
stance sets 
and a couple others....


----------



## tigdra

marlon said:


> ... few places you can go all out using full force and full movement. The important point is to practice the principles as you do the forms.......
> 
> Forms help you to practice the basics of posture, breath, stance and timing "freely" if you will....
> 
> re -enforced many concepts over and over again. Marlon


 

I agree with you marlon those are all great points, katas do those things, but couldn't you just practice your techniques by yourself to get those same benefits. I know you can go all out and perform a full movement in a form why not in technique practice. Couldn't I practice my posture, breath, stance and timing during my technique practice. and don't we reinforce concepts by learning other techniques that show use the same concept used in an other scenerio.

I know that it looks like I am critisizing you marlon, but I'm not. I am trying to get a deeper understanding of what I have learned.


----------



## tigdra

...


----------



## tigdra

quote=tshadowchaser;960321]1.forms help your speed and concentration. 

2. The help you develop a flow between techniques. 

3. They can improve you cardio-vascular, and muscles.

4. They may have the same techniques or the may have new ones but they make you move and you muscles and brain learn at the same time.

5. Some forms may not seem to have any meaning other than movement but in 5 or 10 years you may see them completely differently.[/quote]




True forms do help your concentration they could even be considered a form of meditation, but cant I do that with just one form, do I really need several forms to teach me concentration and cant I just learn to concentrate through regular deep breaths and meditation. In regards to speed cant I work my speed through the repetition and refinement of my techniques


Your absolutely right they do teach you flow from technique to technique but do I really need so many forms to teach me that concept. And if the response to my question is to expose an individual to a flow of many techniques, then why not scratch all techniques and just learn 30 forms with all the techniques in them. Wouldnt that be insane, the truth is that we can learn long or short 3 and understand that techniques can flow into each other. 


 I wish kenpo forms were a workout but their not, a basic kung fu form kicks almost all of the kenpo forms in regards to cardiovascular and muscular development. And anyways I can develop my cardiovascular and muscular system during class through complex and new exercises. 


But cant you get the same muscular and mental development through the practice of forms.


I have practiced kenpo for over 20 years and I have worked with many different MASTERS of the art. Big name people that anyone in the kenpo world would recognize. I have trained in many other different styles of martial arts and I understand goju ryu or tae kwon do their forms are practiced progressively as a form of tradition and also due to the fact that many of their schools dont have as many techniques as kenpo does. Or kung fu I see the function, you progressively push your body to more agile and limber movements with each form including a new stance and within them hidden techniques that are not taught so that you find their meaning through self discovery and not to mention the workout you get by going through their forms. But kenpo neither gives you a progressive cardiovascular or agility structure nor are they practiced for tradition, parker invented the large majority of them.

Tshadowchaser I mean no disrespect with my comments they are just my ideas in regards to your comments. I encourage your responses and those of the community, I love to talk about martial arts and especially when the topics meaningful.


----------



## kidswarrior

tigdra said:


> My main concern comes from this conclusion; there are a large percentage of kenpo masters that are over weight.
> 
> Don't get me wrong they are super fast with their hands and all but they got this big belly going on, and yet you see kung fu masters and their majority are slim. Don't get me wrong I am not comparing asians to americans.



Well, here's an Asian master who *practices* and teaches shuaijiao: one, and two (gotta watch the background very carefully). I just wish I could show how he really looks in the classic DVD, _Chinese Kung Fu Wrestling_, belly, coke bottle glasses and all. A lot like my old boxing coach from the 60s. He was 25 years out of fighting shape, but you wouldn't have wanted to fight him.


----------



## Hawke

Kata (from an EPAK point of view)

-record the techniques into your muscle memory (built in DVD)

-practice kenpo concepts (marriage of gravity, 3D Striking, Backup Mass, Purposeful Compliance).

-master key moves

-other meanings behind the moves (look at the move and see other applications for it)


----------



## marlon

tigdra said:


> I agree with you marlon those are all great points, katas do those things, but couldn't you just practice your techniques by yourself to get those same benefits. I know you can go all out and perform a full movement in a form why not in technique practice. Couldn't I practice my posture, breath, stance and timing during my technique practice. and don't we reinforce concepts by learning other techniques that show use the same concept used in an other scenerio.
> 
> I know that it looks like I am critisizing you marlon, but I'm not. I am trying to get a deeper understanding of what I have learned.


 

Never hesitate to criticize my, sir...
You could practice your techniques for the above benefits, however, i myself will go through a set of techniques and then need to stop to think of which technique next.  this interupts flow and cardio..i suppose one could just shadow box also.  However, the benefit of a set number of movements learned as one thing and designed to flow from one move to the next and from one set of concepts to the next (with considerable overlap) has an added benefit.  If you string together a bunch of your techniqes and insert logical transitions then that would be equal to forms practice...but then you would also have a form.  The breathing pattern in most forms also teach something that just practicing one technique after another does not address.  these are just some of my thoughts , and , fo course, i may be way off. i would like to read your response to your own question.

Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## marlon

many systems have one or very few forms.  With the amount of techniques we have, there may not be a necessity for so many forms.  Our forms are very short in comparisson to many other styles, strining them together can help that point though.  I am not so sure it would be a bad thing to teach the system with a limited number of forms and teach the needed techniques for each level through the form.  i have often thought of it myself.  People would focus on the basics more through the form and would develop a greater ability to look for and interpret meaning from movement and concepts from movement..they would use thier forms to fight, they would question more...Perhaps, it is because at one time and for many today there was no "karate: without kata.  This belief may have led to the creation of many forms.  SGM Parker was very focused when creating his techniques but i do not recall Doc discussing forms much,though...

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## kidswarrior

marlon said:


> I am not so sure it would be a bad thing to teach the system with a limited number of forms and teach the needed techniques for each level through the form.  i have often thought of it myself.  People would focus on the basics more through the form and would develop a greater ability to look for and interpret meaning from movement and concepts from movement..they would use thier forms to fight, they would question more.
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


A very good point, and one I've been chewing over myself for awhile now. One additional thought would be, the instructor could teach techs derived from previously learned forms, also, and students could continue to learn from their solo practice and resistance (partner) training with those previous forms as well.

I'd love to know what others thought about this.


----------



## kidswarrior

tshadowchaser said:


> you move and you muscles and brain learn at the same time.


Completely missed this important piece the first time I read it. As said on another thread, the higher (thinking) brain and the lower (muscle memory, or reactive/fight-or-flight part of the brain) _both _learn through forms, simultaneously.



> Some forms may not seem to have any meaning other than movement but in 5 or 10 years you may see them completely differently.


You said a whole lot here, brother. :asian:


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> What use are kenpo forms?
> 
> I have taken kenpo for many years and every time I learn a new form or technique I ask myself what am I learning, more importantly what am I learning that is new? What am I getting out of this?
> 
> I know that forms teach you to have correct technique, flow from technique to technique, learning techniques on both sides but what do kenpo forms teach you aside from that? and how many forms do you need to go through to re-learn the same concepts.
> 
> 
> please correct my way of thinking because I have lost hope on kenpo forms


 

Forms are just a small part of the entire puzzle.  Can fighting applications be taken from kata?  Yes.  Are there things in kata that you need to look for?  Yes.  But, IMHO, as I said, they're just one part.  I still feel that you need to spar/fight, and move in an alive fashion, in order to be complete.  

Now, some of the things kata teaches.  From the Parker forms:

Short 1: It contains strictly defensive moves, various stances and blocks.  It teaches peripheral vision, how to block while retreating and timing of hands and feet.  

You can find more breakdowns from the EPAK Infinite Insights books.  Now, can these things be learned without kata?  Sure.  Alot of what we do is drilling the various aspects. Some do it by kata, some do it thru shadow boxing, actual sparring, bag work, etc.  Again, its a simple drill.  

Now, you ask how many forms you need to learn the same concepts.  Well, are the concepts really the same?  What one learns at white, is going to be different from purple and different from brown.  Take Short 2.  More advanced stances, different methods of execution, etc.  If we look at boxing, there are the basic punches.  Now, a beginner isn't going to move or throw the punches like someone whos been boxing for 10yrs.  The same with BJJ.  A blue belt, purple and brown belt pretty much knows the same things a black belt does.  Difference is, the black belt is 10 times better at execution.  

Some arts doing have kata, so to speak, but if we look at kata, its a preset pattern.  The boxer has various punches to pick from, and during focus mit work, will throw a variety of combos.  They can be interchanged, but they're teaching a pattern so to speak...a drill.  Its up to the student to be able to pull things from that drill and apply them.

Mike


----------



## newGuy12

No one is going to say that they look wicked cool?  I will.


----------



## tigdra

Hawke said:


> Kata (from an EPAK point of view)





Hawke said:


> -record the techniques into your muscle memory (built in DVD)
> 
> -practice kenpo concepts (marriage of gravity, 3D Striking, Backup Mass, Purposeful Compliance).
> 
> -master key moves
> 
> -other meanings behind the moves (look at the move and see other applications for it)





Can't you record the techniques just by practicing them, and don't you learn concepts through techniques as well such as marriage of gravity in sword of destruction (basic technique) Don't you also practice key moves in techniques, finally can't you analyze techniques by themselves and find new meanings to them or do they really need to be in a form.

My question isn't what does a kata teach you? My question is what does kenpo katas teach you that a technique doesn't other than the obvious which is flowing from one technique to the other. (which in fact a technique does teach you such as escape from death and bear and the ram)


----------



## tigdra

.....


----------



## tigdra

MJS said:


> Short 1: It contains strictly defensive moves, various stances and blocks. It teaches peripheral vision, how to block while retreating and timing of hands and feet.





MJS said:


> Now, you ask how many forms you need to learn the same concepts. Well, are the concepts really the same? What one learns at white, is going to be different from purple and different from brown. Take Short 2. More advanced stances, different methods of execution, etc. If we look at boxing, there are the basic punches. Now, a beginner isn't going to move or throw the punches like someone whos been boxing for 10yrs. The same with BJJ. A blue belt, purple and brown belt pretty much knows the same things a black belt does. Difference is, the black belt is 10 times better at execution.
> 
> Some arts doing have kata, so to speak, but if we look at kata, its a preset pattern. The boxer has various punches to pick from, and during focus mit work, will throw a variety of combos. They can be interchanged, but they're teaching a pattern so to speak...a drill. Its up to the student to be able to pull things from that drill and apply them.
> 
> Mike


 

Do you not learn what a fighting stance or horse stance is through a technique? Dont you learn stepping back blocking settling your weight, timing and all that short 1 has to offer through techniques, yes. So what use is short 1 other than a repetition of concepts that you have already learned and will repeat constantly through you belts?

I have all of parkers infinite insights books and have read many web pages on the subject.

A boxers combinations and memorization of them have a function; it is a means to an end.

A kata also has a means to and end, but it is not the same as a boxers. The function of a form in a style which has no techniques is to create set patterns so that you can learn concepts, build muscle memory and everything else everyone is trying to say. The function of a form in a style which has techniques must be more than just the things mentioned above, especially for those who practice American kenpo or EPAK. Why? Because Parker was known for reforming old kenpo due to many factors, one being the fact that old school kenpo has too many repititions; it was too long and not marketable. 

Why dont most schools of Krav Maga have forms? Because it is a style developed for defense, and it is a proven functional self defense system. 


My main point is this (Bear and the Ram or Eagle Pin same technique different names depending on what type of kenpo you learn) is for two man attack which consists of two previously learned techniques teach you to flow from one technique to another. 

Now what function would serve if I created another technique, not a variation to an existing technique, such as bear and the ram and instead of hammer fisting the groin chopping the groin (everything else would stay the same) and calling it bear and the sheep. I would have two techniques that teach the same concepts and are identical except for the chop. What use is that, they both teach you the same concepts, except for the chop which you will eventually learn if not already.

Same applies to bjj would you want to lean an Americana and then learn the exact same submission with your thumb in an incorrect position and call it south Americana?

You execute a kick, punch, etc one way in white and another in black but that isnt because you practice your forms it is because you practice the techniques within the form which happen to be the same techniques you have already learned.


----------



## tigdra

marlon said:


> i would like to read your response to your own question.





marlon said:


> Respectfully,
> marlon




My Response to my own question Marlon, is I believe forms should teach you something new and should progressively make you push not only your mental and muscular (in regards to muscle memory) limitations but also push your physical limitations in regards to limberness, breath and agility. Forms are for beauty, fitness and conditioning not for self defense (which doesnt mean that something you learned in a form cant be used in street self defense, because a simple punch can be used for self defense). If a style is only made up of forms then self defense applications can be read into it, but it doesnt necessarily mean that performing this movement has god street applications. A back flip such as those done in kung fu can be used on the street but would you. Would you risk you life and do a back flip in a life or death situation, no. 

Now if the school your in is a self defense school which focuses on techniques then forms would serve no purpose, such examples are boxing, krav maga, bjj. 

But if you were a martial arts school which had techniques and still included katas then what function would a form take?

1.      Tradition: wanting to do forms for the sake of martial tradition such as those in a karate school
2.      Beauty and competition: you see you want to go to tournaments or you want your style to have a sense of artistic value.
3.      Fitness: You want to apply certain positions or movements that arent necessarily functional for street self defense but are excellent for overall body development

Most kenpo forms arent traditional, they arent beautiful and they dont make you more agile or physically fit (unless of course if you don them 50 times every day)

My personal belief after many years of taking kenpo is that most kenpo forms are useless unless if used for competition.


----------



## Jdokan

I think you're asking the wrong question....you should be thinking: What don't I learn from forms?......Like Mama Celeste once said...."it's in there"


----------



## DavidCC

tigdra said:


> My Response to my own question Marlon, is I believe forms should teach you something new and should progressively make you push not only your mental and muscular (in regards to muscle memory) limitations but also push your physical limitations in regards to limberness, breath and agility. Forms are for beauty, fitness and conditioning not for self defense (which doesnt mean that something you learned in a form cant be used in street self defense, because a simple punch can be used for self defense). If a style is only made up of forms then self defense applications can be read into it, but it doesnt necessarily mean that performing this movement has god street applications. A back flip such as those done in kung fu can be used on the street but would you. Would you risk you life and do a back flip in a life or death situation, no.
> 
> Now if the school your in is a self defense school which focuses on techniques then forms would serve no purpose, such examples are boxing, krav maga, bjj.
> 
> But if you were a martial arts school which had techniques and still included katas then what function would a form take?
> 
> 1. Tradition: wanting to do forms for the sake of martial tradition such as those in a karate school
> 2. Beauty and competition: you see you want to go to tournaments or you want your style to have a sense of artistic value.
> 3. Fitness: You want to apply certain positions or movements that arent necessarily functional for street self defense but are excellent for overall body development
> 
> Most kenpo forms arent traditional, they arent beautiful and they dont make you more agile or physically fit (unless of course if you don them 50 times every day)
> 
> My personal belief after many years of taking kenpo is that most kenpo forms are useless unless if used for competition.


 
I think it's an intersting question that I am still trying to find a satisfactory answer to.  I don't do AK but my system is technique based and has forms.  I like the application of movements form forms as applications and the "cryptography" of that appeals to my intellecutal side.  However is it a valuable use of training time?  Is there something in there that is not also found in the techniques?

This is why I am more interested Sanchin and Yi Jin Jing over Pinan and Seisan.


----------



## Flying Crane

Many traditional arts from China, Okinawa, and Japan (the karate arts, at least) teach most, if not all, of the formal material thru kata.  This is the approach to teaching and training that these arts have taken.  They usually do not use a body of Self Defence techniques, the way Kenpo does.  If they do use them, it is not nearly to the same extent that kenpo uses them.

Instead, useful techs are interpreted from the kata itself, and it is left to the student, with guidance, to figure out how this material can be useful.  Of course then they practice together to use these ideas on each other, and develop skill.

So the approach that kenpo has taken in formulating the curriculum is somewhat unique.  Arguably, you could say that the forms that are built with the techs are redundant.  Of course not all kenpo forms (at least in the system that I study) are built out of the techs.  But many of them are.

I can see your point.  You could concentrate on the techs, and develop very useful ability and skill.  You could eliminate the redundant katas, and even eliminate all kata if you want.  It's your choice.  If you know and understand the techs very strongly, you perhaps don't need the kata.

Personally, I like kata.  that's just me, and it seems that you disagree.  Fair enough, many people also feel that way.  I feel that kata gives me a chance to work the techs another time, done in an "idealized" way.  It's a chance to nit-pick the details in a way that may not be possible with the tech alone, when you are working on a partner.  

Sure, it's an ideal rendition of the tech, and that often doesn't translate perfectly into reality.  But the more ideally that you practice it, the closer to that ideal it can be done, in reality.

It is also a way to catalog the techs, so that you can remember them when you are practicing by yourself, without a partner.  I find it easier to remember a list of techs in the context of a kata.  If a kata contains 15 techs, I can work thru the kata without having to deliberately think of the name of all 15 techs, to practice them individually.  I find that my brain simply works that way, and it's easier to remember a chunk of material in the context of a kata, rather than a pile of smaller bits of material, all floating around independently.

I'm in the Tracy system, which has a lot more techs than the later lineages have.  Many of our techs never made it into a kata.  Personally, I wish they all had.  That way, by practicing the kata, I would be practicing the entire system.  I wouldn't have to carry my list of techs with me, when I go to the gym.  I've even experimented in the past, with creating my own kata, simply to catalog those techs that didn't make it into another kata.


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> Do you not learn what a fighting stance or horse stance is through a technique? Dont you learn stepping back blocking settling your weight, timing and all that short 1 has to offer through techniques, yes. So what use is short 1 other than a repetition of concepts that you have already learned and will repeat constantly through you belts?
> 
> I have all of parkers infinite insights books and have read many web pages on the subject.
> 
> A boxers combinations and memorization of them have a function; it is a means to an end.
> 
> A kata also has a means to and end, but it is not the same as a boxers. The function of a form in a style which has no techniques is to create set patterns so that you can learn concepts, build muscle memory and everything else everyone is trying to say. The function of a form in a style which has techniques must be more than just the things mentioned above, especially for those who practice American kenpo or EPAK. Why? Because Parker was known for reforming old kenpo due to many factors, one being the fact that old school kenpo has too many repititions; it was too long and not marketable.
> 
> Why dont most schools of Krav Maga have forms? Because it is a style developed for defense, and it is a proven functional self defense system.
> 
> 
> My main point is this (Bear and the Ram or Eagle Pin same technique different names depending on what type of kenpo you learn) is for two man attack which consists of two previously learned techniques teach you to flow from one technique to another.
> 
> Now what function would serve if I created another technique, not a variation to an existing technique, such as bear and the ram and instead of hammer fisting the groin chopping the groin (everything else would stay the same) and calling it bear and the sheep. I would have two techniques that teach the same concepts and are identical except for the chop. What use is that, they both teach you the same concepts, except for the chop which you will eventually learn if not already.
> 
> Same applies to bjj would you want to lean an Americana and then learn the exact same submission with your thumb in an incorrect position and call it south Americana?
> 
> You execute a kick, punch, etc one way in white and another in black but that isnt because you practice your forms it is because you practice the techniques within the form which happen to be the same techniques you have already learned.


 
Umm...did you read my post?  I see that you only quoted parts of it, so thats why I ask.  Did you see when I said this:



> You can find more breakdowns from the EPAK Infinite Insights books. Now, can these things be learned without kata? Sure. Alot of what we do is drilling the various aspects. Some do it by kata, some do it thru shadow boxing, actual sparring, bag work, etc. Again, its a simple drill.


 
So, you either didn't read the entire post, or you did, but cherry picked certain parts.  Either way, I still stand by what I said.  Kata is a small part of the puzzle and as I said above, much of what we do in kata is drilling and you don't need kata to do it.  

Yes, you do learn similar things in self defense, that you'd also learn in kata, but keep in mind, that part of training and getting better in certain areas, requires you to isolate certain things.  It'd be no different if during sparring, I only worked defense, or only worked offense or just threw hands with an emphasis on hook shots to the body.  You're picking an area and working specifics.  With Short 1, yes, you're learning defense, just like in Attacking Mace, where you're also stepping back and blocking.  Again, the kata is simply isolating specific things.  

You said this:




> Why dont most schools of Krav Maga have forms? Because it is a style developed for defense, and it is a proven functional self defense system.


 
Now, does this mean that Kenpo isn't effective?  Kajukenbo has kata, yet I'd certainly say its a very effective art.  So, I'm not sure if you're basing what is/is not effective by whether or not it contains kata, but if you are, I think that you're mistaken, because Kenpo is effective, kata or not.  And as far as KM goes, AFAIK, no KM schools have kata.  KM is an effective art, so don't take this as me saying it isn't.

IMHO, you seem like you have your mind made up and no matter what anyone says, you won't change, and that is fine.  But, just because you don't find something effective or worthwhile, it doesn't mean that the next person won't have a different opinion.

Mike


----------



## Touch Of Death

tigdra said:


> My personal belief after many years of taking kenpo is that most kenpo forms are useless unless if used for competition.


Try a few more years.
Sean


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> My personal belief after many years of taking kenpo is that most kenpo forms are useless unless if used for competition.


 
2 questions for you.

1) How long have you been training Kenpo?

2) Usually when I hear comment like this, the first thing I think of is that the student really doesnt have a solid understanding of the katas.  

There was a time when I would do kata, and the person I was training under was not able to provide me with a clear cut explaination of what was happening in the kata.  Fortunately for me, I was able to move on and train with people who were able to provide me with details.  IMO, knowing what you're doing in the kata is very important.  If someone is going thru the moves, without any purpose, they're missing out on alot.

Mike


----------



## tigdra

Flying Crane said:


> I'm in the Tracy system, which has a lot more techs than the later lineages have. Many of our techs never made it into a kata. Personally, I wish they all had. That way, by practicing the kata, I would be practicing the entire system. I wouldn't have to carry my list of techs with me, when I go to the gym. I've even experimented in the past, with creating my own kata, simply to catalog those techs that didn't make it into another kata.



I too do mostly tracy system but 8 years ago I started venturing out into parker's system while still learning tracy curriculum. I know to well of the many techniques in the tracy system, to tell you the truth I dont mind but what does get me is that I learn windmill guard and then learn circling serpent which is the same technique except for an extra kick. Or even worse we learn crashing elbow for yellow and then learn guiding the staff for brown which happens to be almost the same technique yet the attack has changed. 

I dont mind learning tiger and crane even though it really doesnt look like the original fuhok from the hung gar system. 

But the thing that gets me the most is learning long two in blue and the applications to the techniques within it and yet again learning the applications somewhere in 3rd black

I get your point flying crane but to tell you the truth I dont want to eliminated forms from kenpo I just think kenpo needs better forms, forms that challenge you both mentally and physically.


----------



## Flying Crane

tigdra said:


> I too do mostly tracy system but 8 years ago I started venturing out into parker's system while still learning tracy curriculum. I know to well of the many techniques in the tracy system, to tell you the truth I dont mind but what does get me is that I learn windmill guard and then learn circling serpent which is the same technique except for an extra kick. Or even worse we learn crashing elbow for yellow and then learn guiding the staff for brown which happens to be almost the same technique yet the attack has changed.
> 
> I dont mind learning tiger and crane even though it really doesnt look like the original fuhok from the hung gar system.
> 
> But the thing that gets me the most is learning long two in blue and the applications to the techniques within it and yet again learning the applications somewhere in 3rd black
> 
> I get your point flying crane but to tell you the truth I dont want to eliminated forms from kenpo I just think kenpo needs better forms, forms that challenge you both mentally and physically.


 
I have wrestled with this very issue for a long time.  A few years ago I even began tinkering with the curriculum for my own use.  I was no longer affiliated with any particular school, I was just an independent guy who trained in Tracy Kenpo some 20 years prior.

I systematically went thru the system and identified techniques that I felt were redundant in some way.  I either eliminated some, or combined them into one master technique.  Other techs that I felt were simply poorly designed, I eliminated altogether.

As I eliminated these techs, I looked at the forms.  When a form had been made up of techs that I mostly had eliminated, I felt there was no longer any reason to keep the form.  So I dumped it.

I went thru a couple of revisions in this way, and ultimately ended up with a list of about 120 techs, and katas Short 1-3, and Long 1-2.  Nothing else.  I planned to create my own kata to catalog these techniques, but I never finished that part.

For a while, I felt it was a good thing, streamlining the method.  Gradually, I wondered about it.  I hadn't trained with a Tracy instructor in about 20 years, and had been very separated from the system for a long time.  I had been training in other arts during that time so I was certainly martially active, but I recognized that my kenpo was rusty, at best.  But kenpo was my roots in the martial arts, and I began looking for a Tracy Kenpo instructor nearby, so I could retrain and hopefully understand the entire system better, before I made a bunch of revisions.  After all, I might be revising a lot of stuff I didn't fully understand.

So I dumped my revisions, and was fortunate to find a very experienced and knowledgeable Tracy instructor nearby, one of the most senior in the Tracy system.  I've been training with him now for about a year and a quarter, relearning everything from the ground up.  I've almost finished working thru the material thru Shodan, which was the rank I held from before.

I came to see that my understanding of much of the material was incomplete.  While I knew the gross understanding of the material, there were lots of details that I either had forgotten, or my first instructors weren't experienced enough to understand and teach to me.  I also saw that many of the techs that I thought were redundant, were not.  So it's been a very eye-opening experience, and I'm very happy that I decided to do this.  It's a great group that I train with, and I have have a huge amount of respect for my teacher and classmates.

So, getting back to the topic.  

I still wish the tech list was not so long as it is.  It is just A LOT of material.  I do think that there are some techs that I doubt I will ever really be able to use.  Perhaps the system could use some streamlining, but I'm sure I'm not the one to do that.  

However, what I have seen in the huge curriculum is sort of a "forced creativity".  When I was paring down the curriculum, I felt that if the core bit of the tech was worked, then everything else was just subject to your own creativity.  CRASH OF THE ELBOW and DIVIDED SWORDS and FLASHING WINGS are a good example.  The base of the tech is similar, but how it is finished is different, so I felt why not combine this into one tech, drop the different endings, and expect to "get creative" with it.  But the system itself kind of entails that already.  Some people are very good at being creative on their own.  Many are not.  So the huge system sort of forces a certain level of creativity.  Sure, some things are redundant, but it's the creativity that is important.  After you have worked thru the system, you begin to recognize the creativity on your own.  But I believe that for most people, they need to experience this guided creativity for a while, before they are ready to be creative on their own.

I believe that eventually, you need to create your own short list of favorite techniques, the ones that speak to you and you are able and likely to actually use if needed.  Keep the whole system in tact, but recognize what is most useful and most likely to work, for you.  And really work on that stuff and get creative with it.

My wife has been training with us as well, she recently earned her Purple Belt.  Just the other day, we were talking about this idea of being creative with a limited amount of material, and I started pointing out how we could take CRASH OF THE EAGLE and apply it in many many ways that are not the choke from the rear that it is designed to be used against.  It could be used against a grab from the side, grab from the front, even a punch.  These movements can be applied all over.  Once you understand that, you can get a lot of mileage out of less material.  But I think most people need to go the miles first, before they really start to see this.

Compared to the Chinese arts that I have been fortunate to study, kenpo kata are not pretty.  The Tracy system does include several Chinese forms that have been incorporated into the system, such as Tiger/Crane, Panther, Tam Tui, and 18 Hands Punching Set.  These have Chinese origins outside of Kenpo, but within kenpo, these forms have been "kenpo-ized" so they fit within the kenpo methodology and tempo better.  Yes, they are different from the originals.  I have learned a version of Fu-Hok and Tam Tui from my Kung Fu sifu.  While you can certainly see similiarites and a common origin, they are definitely different.  I practice all versions.

But I see a lot of value in Kenpo kata as well.  The material is very much in the open.  You don't have to dig and search to understand how to use it.  And this gives you a head-start for when you learn the Chinese material.  You've already got a lot of experience in being able to interpret movement into useful technique.  It makes it easier to make sense out of the Chinese material, whether you learn it in kenpo, or from a Kung Fu sifu.

When I was studying Wing Chun, my sifu admitted that he did not have an interpretation for a portion of one of the forms.  And he had been practicing Wing Chun for about 35 years at that time.  I immediately pointed out a couple of possibilites, which he was impressed by and he actually thanked me for those suggestions.  I believe I was able to make these suggestions because of my experience with kenpo, and working with this huge body of techniques and kata.

Anyway, hope this helps...


----------



## tigdra

MJS said:


> Yes, you do learn similar things in self defense, that you'd also learn in kata, but keep in mind, that part of training and getting better in certain areas, requires you to isolate certain things. It'd be no different if during sparring, I only worked defense, or only worked offense or just threw hands with an emphasis on hook shots to the body. You're picking an area and working specifics. With Short 1, yes, you're learning defense, just like in Attacking Mace, where you're also stepping back and blocking. Again, the kata is simply isolating specific things.
> 
> Now, does this mean that Kenpo isn't effective? Kajukenbo has kata, yet I'd certainly say its a very effective art. So, I'm not sure if you're basing what is/is not effective by whether or not it contains kata, but if you are, I think that you're mistaken, because Kenpo is effective, kata or not. And as far as KM goes, AFAIK, no KM schools have kata. KM is an effective art, so don't take this as me saying it isn't.
> 
> IMHO, you seem like you have your mind made up and no matter what anyone says, you won't change, and that is fine. But, just because you don't find something effective or worthwhile, it doesn't mean that the next person won't have a different opinion.
> 
> Mike




MJS I mean no disrespect and I am not here to change anyones mind I respect and encourage everyones responses. My mind is set on the forms as are those of every one else. 

No I dont think kenpo is useless I merely made the comparison to KM because KM is just defense and it is a prove art yet there are no forms. So if KM has no forms and it works what would say that kenpo without forms wouldnt work. What could say that that kenpo without forms could not get the same results as bjj or KM which has no forms.  In regards to KM schools and not having forms my comments are based on the fact that I have not been to all the KM schools around the worls and I dont want to assume that every single school of KM has no forms.




MJS said:


> 2 questions for you.





MJS said:


> 1) How long have you been training Kenpo?
> 
> 2) Usually when I hear comment like this, the first thing I think of is that the student really doesnt have a solid understanding of the katas.
> 
> Mike




I have been studying Kenpo for 22 years

I have been taught and read up on explanations in both Tracy and Parker systems
I know the meaning of the techniques variations to those techniques, hand isolations, and many tracy and parker concepts

I am not inexperienced, neither have I been taught by incompetent individuals. Again I repeat I mean no disrespect, everyone is entitled to their opinion and I dont think that Mine is the only correct one. I know there are better, smarter and more experienced individuals around the world. I am not an arrogant person just a disillusioned one, in regards to most kenpo forms.


----------



## diamondbar1971

I don't know about the rest of you, but as father time takes his toll, I for one am glad that I took the time to learn and understand the forms even though at times they did seem of not too much value at the time, except that they had to be learned and well executed in order to go to the next level, and now that I am pushing the big 60 in the next couple of years I have need to adjust the forms to fit my age, old otta shape bod and have the ability to either use or not use any part of a form, and change is not such a bad thing, there will be a time when everyone will have to adjust...Learn the forms for now and later you will be glad you did.


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> MJS I mean no disrespect and I am not here to change anyones mind I respect and encourage everyones responses. My mind is set on the forms as are those of every one else.




No worries.   Everyone is certainly going to have their opinions and thats fine. 




> No I dont think kenpo is useless I merely made the comparison to KM because KM is just defense and it is a prove art yet there are no forms. So if KM has no forms and it works what would say that kenpo without forms wouldnt work. What could say that that kenpo without forms could not get the same results as bjj or KM which has no forms. In regards to KM schools and not having forms my comments are based on the fact that I have not been to all the KM schools around the worls and I dont want to assume that every single school of KM has no forms.


 
Well, like I said, kata, IMO, is just a small part of the art.  Some may feel otherwise and thats fine too.   Some people may feel that without kata, you're not going to be able to fight.  For myself, I don't rely on kata to learn to fight, although it does have applicable applications, its not my sole tool.  I put on the gloves and spar.  

As far as KM goes...I havent seen every KM school in the world either, but from the ones that I have seen, either in person or on the web, I never saw any reference to kata.






> I have been studying Kenpo for 22 years





> I have been taught and read up on explanations in both Tracy and Parker systems
> I know the meaning of the techniques variations to those techniques, hand isolations, and many tracy and parker concepts
> 
> I am not inexperienced, neither have I been taught by incompetent individuals. Again I repeat I mean no disrespect, everyone is entitled to their opinion and I dont think that Mine is the only correct one. I know there are better, smarter and more experienced individuals around the world. I am not an arrogant person just a disillusioned one, in regards to most kenpo forms.


 
Thanks for your reply.   I think it would be safe to say that there are many people, not just ones that train in Kenpo, but any art, that at one point during their training, have been disillusioned, confused, etc.  Sometimes you need to see what else is out there.  

Mike


----------



## tigdra

Flying Crane said:


> I systematically went thru the system and identified techniques that I felt were redundant in some way.  I either eliminated some, or combined them into one master technique.  Other techs that I felt were simply poorly designed, I eliminated altogether.
> 
> As I eliminated these techs, I looked at the forms.  When a form had been made up of techs that I mostly had eliminated, I felt there was no longer any reason to keep the form.  So I dumped it.
> 
> I still wish the tech list was not so long as it is.  It is just A LOT of material.  I do think that there are some techs that I doubt I will ever really be able to use.  Perhaps the system could use some streamlining, but I'm sure I'm not the one to do that.
> .



I too have devised my shorter version of the curriculum but I tweaked it a little. I would really like to talk about this subject more, maybe at a later time. 

I too went to 4 different kenpo masters each having different insights into the techniques and forms, and I too went into different styles. At this present time I am taking northern shaolin kung fu, bjj and kenpo all at different schools.

I am presently working on my fourth black in kenpo and have gotten my third black through two different schools. 

Flying Crane I would really enjoy hearing your thoughts on some of my ideas.


----------



## tigdra

well thanks to everyone who responded we could continue this into further details if anyone would like. My opinions stay the same I enjoyed learning the forms but after 22 years of doing kenpo I still find kenpo forms won't help me. I don't have a problem remembering techniques and I find that kenpo forms just take up more storage space in my brain I would rather substitute those forms with other forms that would fill the void that I believe kenpo has.


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> well thanks to everyone who responded we could continue this into further details if anyone would like. My opinions stay the same I enjoyed learning the forms but after 22 years of doing kenpo I still find kenpo forms won't help me. I don't have a problem remembering techniques and I find that kenpo forms just take up more storage space in my brain I would rather substitute those forms with other forms that would fill the void that I believe kenpo has.


 
Sure, lets continue the discussion.   Question for you.  In this post, you said,

"I get your point flying crane but to tell you the truth I dont want to eliminated forms from kenpo I just think kenpo needs better forms, forms that challenge you both mentally and physically."

Could you go into more detail on this please?  What exactly would you change and why?

Mike


----------



## Ping898

tigdra said:


> Do you not learn what a fighting stance or horse stance is through a technique? Dont you learn stepping back blocking settling your weight, timing and all that short 1 has to offer through techniques, yes. So what use is short 1 other than a repetition of concepts that you have already learned and will repeat constantly through you belts?



What I think you assume is that just because you have learned them through the techniques is then everyone must have.  In my experience kata is just another method of learning that compliments the technique.  The reason you learn many many ways to do the same thing is you will never know what you will have to do exactly to defend yourself.  So if you know multiple ways to do the same thing, if will be easier for you to modify your knowledge on the fly to handle the situation you are presented with.  
The techniques are nothing more than suggestions.  In real life someone will never move exactly as your partner in class does when you are practicing, so you will have to constantly adjust and make changes, so though you may start with one technique, you may soon find yourself doing a 2nd or 3rd of 4th by the time you get done.
I was always taught if you are stuck on a desert island and all you ever do is practice kata, you will retain all your kenpo knowledge....
I would suggest maybe you reflect more on the repetition and why there is so much of it, cause it is there for a reason throughout all of kenpo.


----------



## tigdra

QUOTE=MJS;962071]Sure, lets continue the discussion.   Question for you.  In this post, you said,

"I get your eliminated forms from kenpo I just think kenpo needs better forms, forms that challenge you both mentally and physically."point flying crane but to tell you the truth I dont want to 

Could you go into more detail on this please?  What exactly would you change and why?

Mike[/QUOTE]

Personally I believe there is something lacking in kenpo. I believe that most kenpo individuals, due to a lack of well structured martial arts, key word art, arent very good with their legs. Sure their they are good with their legs but no where near as efficient as their arms or most tae kwon do individuals. 

However as a defensive system kenpo is complete. It has a large encyclopedia of movements, mostly, depending whether it is tracy or parker system, it concentrates on efficient moves to defends ones life.

But back to the important point as an art most of its forms, in my opinion lack leg conditioning and cardio. The upper body gets somewhat of a workout but the lower doesnt. 

My solution to this problem is to exchange the kenpo forms for forms that would serve its purpose. What I mean by this is that KM or BJJ dont have forms, using that as a basis, defensive system dont need forms. KM or BJJ isnt criticized as a defensive system or lacks efficiency or usefulness due to not having forms. 

Now seeing KM and BJJ in a artistic manner we could say that they do lack an aesthetic value which forms would fill. Seeing forms in this matter leads me to replace most kenpo forms with forms with excellent aesthetic value and whole body conditioning specifically targeting the lower body. 
My recommendation would be to include kung fu forms into kenpo, specifically northern forms, since they concentrate more on legs than they do arms.

I know for many tracy kenpoist or kenpoista, whatever, this isnt news. Tracy schools have Tiger & Crane, Panther (book set) and 18 hand set.

The first two forms are Hung gar like forms which is a southern kung fu style that primarily focus on their upper body rather than their lower. I say like because they are kenpo versions of the original hung gar forms. The third form is self-explanatory  

The only other Kung fu form that is worth bringing up is tracys tan tui, which is a severly bastardized excuse to its counterpart. Some of the movements are their but most of them have been so altered that they have lost all original applications and all basic conditioning. I say basic conditioning because while many kung fu schools teach tan tui as their first form kenpo teaches it as a black belt form.

I enjoy learning and teaching an art, so if I were to open my school I would teach kung fu forms. But if I was interested in teaching a defensive system then I would teach techniques w/o forms

MJS I hope this answers your question I could go into more detail I just didn't want to write too much.


----------



## tigdra

Ping898 said:


> I would suggest maybe you reflect more on the repetition and why there is so much of it, cause it is there for a reason throughout all of kenpo.



Learning mostly tracy but also parker, I have seen and done variations of the techniques, especially in tracy. I agree repitition is essential, I just find it a waste of time to say that I am learning some thing new and yet its a bunch of old things put together with little bridges that allows them to connect which usually is done by not completing the techniques. Seeing both tracy and parker have allowed me to fill in many gaps and has awnsered many questions. I enjoy forms, I just dont enjoy learning something all over again cutting a few things short adding a few alterations and naming it a form. Let me go into detail Short 1 instead of having it as it is I could add a snap/front kick with the foot that steps back and call it a whole new form. I could further say that you would be applying much more concepts into the form and that truthfully it may be similar to short one but there is more interpretation and complexity in it. Would you be excited to learn the form? I wouldnt.


----------



## Flying Crane

Tigdra, I do understand what you are saying.  I don't agree 100%, but neither do I disagree 100%. 

I've got to think about it a bit and see what I might say.

Thanks for bringing up some pointed and difficult issues.

I do believe that sometimes the kenpo world likes to view the art (whichever version one practices) as something akin to perfection.  I don't agree with that position.  I do believe that it is an excellent system (at least in my own experience), but even so, I realize it isn't the right system for everyone, or at least portions of it perhaps don't work well or make sense for some people.  I accept that about the art.  I make no apologies for it, and I would not expect everyone to embrace it as the right thing for them.  For many people, it is an excellent path to follow.  For others, not so much or not at all.  

I think it is worthwhile to examine these kinds of tough issues.


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> QUOTE=MJS;962071]Sure, lets continue the discussion.  Question for you. In this post, you said,
> 
> "I get your eliminated forms from kenpo I just think kenpo needs better forms, forms that challenge you both mentally and physically."point flying crane but to tell you the truth I dont want to
> 
> Could you go into more detail on this please? What exactly would you change and why?
> 
> Mike


 
Personally I believe there is something lacking in kenpo. I believe that most kenpo individuals, due to a lack of well structured martial arts, key word art, arent very good with their legs. Sure their they are good with their legs but no where near as efficient as their arms or most tae kwon do individuals. 

However as a defensive system kenpo is complete. It has a large encyclopedia of movements, mostly, depending whether it is tracy or parker system, it concentrates on efficient moves to defends ones life.

But back to the important point as an art most of its forms, in my opinion lack leg conditioning and cardio. The upper body gets somewhat of a workout but the lower doesnt. 

My solution to this problem is to exchange the kenpo forms for forms that would serve its purpose. What I mean by this is that KM or BJJ dont have forms, using that as a basis, defensive system dont need forms. KM or BJJ isnt criticized as a defensive system or lacks efficiency or usefulness due to not having forms. 

Now seeing KM and BJJ in a artistic manner we could say that they do lack an aesthetic value which forms would fill. Seeing forms in this matter leads me to replace most kenpo forms with forms with excellent aesthetic value and whole body conditioning specifically targeting the lower body. 
My recommendation would be to include kung fu forms into kenpo, specifically northern forms, since they concentrate more on legs than they do arms.

I know for many tracy kenpoist or kenpoista, whatever, this isnt news. Tracy schools have Tiger & Crane, Panther (book set) and 18 hand set.

The first two forms are Hung gar like forms which is a southern kung fu style that primarily focus on their upper body rather than their lower. I say like because they are kenpo versions of the original hung gar forms. The third form is self-explanatory 

The only other Kung fu form that is worth bringing up is tracys tan tui, which is a severly bastardized excuse to its counterpart. Some of the movements are their but most of them have been so altered that they have lost all original applications and all basic conditioning. I say basic conditioning because while many kung fu schools teach tan tui as their first form kenpo teaches it as a black belt form.

I enjoy learning and teaching an art, so if I were to open my school I would teach kung fu forms. But if I was interested in teaching a defensive system then I would teach techniques w/o forms

MJS I hope this answers your question I could go into more detail I just didn't want to write too much.[/quote]


Thanks for your reply.  From what I've seen in Kenpo, the kicks were never really high.  I don't recall ever hearing about or seeing Parker throw a jumping or head high kick. Usually the joke is, "Sure, I can kick someone in the head....once I kick them in the groin to bring their head down."   Did or could he throw them?  Don't know, as I, unfortunately, never met the man, so I can only go on what I've heard and see of him on clips.  Now, nothing wrong with high kicks.  I've thrown them in sparring, and I'm sure if someone was really good with them, they can be thrown to the head in RL with success.  But for me, considering I have a bunch of targets chest height and lower, why worry about trying to hit the head?  

As far as the lower body (leg) workout goes...I attribute this to when people say that they're in the arts to lose weight.  Sure, training does help, but again, for me, that is not my goal.  I have the gym for that.  I can do a wide variety of leg conditioning exercises, both with and without weights, so I don't need a form or kata for that.


----------



## Flying Crane

OK, I've had a bit of time to sleep on this and ponder a bit, let's see what I can come up with...



tigdra said:


> QUOTE=MJS;962071]
> Personally I believe there is something lacking in kenpo. I believe that most kenpo individuals, due to a lack of well structured martial arts, key word art, aren&#8217;t very good with their legs. Sure their they are good with their legs but no where near as efficient as their arms or most tae kwon do individuals.


 
ok, by "good with their legs" are you referring to kicks, footwork, both, or something else?

Kenpo has very effective footwork.  It's not fancy like capoeira or some kung fu systems, but it's definitely more complex than other kung fu systems like wing chun.  I think it's just effective and targeted.  Nothing unnecessarily fancy.  The footwork fits the purpose of the art: self defense.

As far as kicking goes, I think I systematically learned kicking better in kenpo, than I did when I trained capoeira, which is an art with a heavy focus on kicking.  My kenpo background definitely gave me an edge in learning capoeira in this regard.  I already knew how to kick well, and I could adapt what I knew to fit within the capoeira method as well.  So I guess from my own experience, I think kenpo has a very full range of kicking techniques.  It's just how much you choose to focus on it and develop those skills for yourself.



> However as a defensive system kenpo is complete. It has a large encyclopedia of movements, mostly, depending whether it is tracy or parker system, it concentrates on efficient moves to defends one&#8217;s life.


 
agreed.  And the body of self defense techniques found in most kenpo lineages gives plenty of good material to work with and be a very effective method of self defense.  I believe that even if the technique lists were reduced by 50%, maybe even more, there would still be plenty there to meet the needs of most anyone, as long as the reduction was well thought out.  Not everyone has the insight to make the right choices, however.



> But back to the important point as an art most of it&#8217;s forms, in my opinion lack leg conditioning and cardio. The upper body gets somewhat of a workout but the lower doesn&#8217;t.
> 
> My solution to this problem is to exchange the kenpo forms for forms that would serve its purpose. What I mean by this is that KM or BJJ don&#8217;t have forms, using that as a basis, defensive system don&#8217;t need forms. KM or BJJ isn&#8217;t criticized as a defensive system or lacks efficiency or usefulness due to not having forms.
> 
> Now seeing KM and BJJ in a artistic manner we could say that they do lack an aesthetic value which forms would fill. Seeing forms in this matter leads me to replace most kenpo forms with forms with excellent aesthetic value and whole body conditioning specifically targeting the lower body.
> My recommendation would be to include kung fu forms into kenpo, specifically northern forms, since they concentrate more on legs than they do arms.


 
OK, first off, I agree in that forms are not a requirement for a method to be good self defense.  KM and BJJ are arguably valid examples, and I do believe that if you removed the forms from kenpo, focused only on solid basics and the techniques, you could develop very good self defense skills.  I think you would be missing out on something by eliminating forms, but I can agree that forms in kenpo may not be absolutely critical in developing self defense skills.

Now, laying that idea aside for a moment, I think you need to decide what you want the forms for.  You have mentioned aesthetic purposes, as well as conditioning.  I will agree in so far that in my experiences with the Chinese arts, which includes Tibetan White Crane, elements of Shaolin Lohan, Wing Chun, and Taiji Chuan, I will say that in general, the Chinese forms do offer a greater degree of conditioning, as well as are generally more beautiful in a physical way.  

But I think you need to decide if these elements are appropriate or necessary in kenpo, given what kenpo generally claims to be: a very effective method of self defense.  So aesthetic value isn't necessary in forms, if you don't want to compete with them.  All that matters is that the techniques found within the forms are effective, and often that means they are ugly and not interesting or beautiful from the viewpoint of a spectator.  If you haven't seen them yet, take a look a the forms in Wing Chun.  There is nothing pretty about that system.  It's got this ugly squatty stance, these cramped in movements, it's ugly all the way around.  But it's got some terrifically effective methods and techniques, and that's what matters to people who do Wing Chun.  They don't care about pretty, because that's not the goal.

I will agree that conditioning is important.  That's my opinion, at least.  The White Crane and Lohan forms I practice are far more challenging in an aerobic way, than any of the kenpo forms, and they help maintain that kind of fitness.  I think that would be great if it was found more in kenpo.  However, you can get that in kenpo by working thru all the forms repeatedly, and in rapid succession.  I guess it's in how you train the material.  Aerobic conditioning can be there, if you choose to train for that.

Now, it's important to be careful about what kind of forms you might mix into a system.  Often, different systems are built upon a foundation that can be at odds with another system.  The techniques and methods are designed to work from that foundation, and they work very well in that way.  But if you mix techniques and try to build them on top of a different foundation, they often fail miserably because then you are trying to use them in a way that they were never designed for.  I know that the foundation of kenpo, wing chun, white crane, and capoeira are all VASTLY different.  Trying to throw even the basic punches of White Crane from a kenpo or wing chun foundation will make them pathetically useless, etc.  So there is more to it than simply introducing forms from other systems.  In order to do so, you really need to build the foundation of that system first, before you can accurately teach and practice those forms.  So in the middle of training your kenpo, you suddenly need to retool, start over to build the foundation of White Crane, for example, and then learn the White Crane forms.  But the two don't really mix well, because in addition to their foundations being different, their entire approach to combat is also very different.  This is why I always advise that if you want to train more than one system, do not blend them in training.  Always keep them separate from each other so that you get the benefits of what they have to offer for what they are.  

I believe this is also why the Chinese forms that have been borrowed into Tracy kenpo, like Tiger/Crane, Panther, Tam Tui, and 18 Hands, have been "kenpo-ized".  The foundation of the parent arts where these forms came from is different from kenpo.  So in borrowing these forms, they did need to be adapted in order to be workable within the kenpo system.  Otherwise we would have this problem of virtually trying to change from one style to another, mid-stride, and trying to make it all "kenpo" when it doesn't properly fit together.  



> I know for many tracy kenpoist or kenpoista, whatever, this isn&#8217;t news. Tracy schools have &#8220;Tiger & Crane&#8221;, &#8220;Panther (book set)&#8221; and &#8220;18 hand set&#8221;.
> 
> The first two forms are Hung gar &#8220;like&#8221; forms which is a southern kung fu style that primarily focus on their upper body rather than their lower. I say &#8220;like&#8221; because they are kenpo versions of the original hung gar forms. The third form is self-explanatory
> 
> The only other Kung fu form that is worth bringing up is tracy&#8217;s tan tui, which is a severly bastardized excuse to it&#8217;s counterpart. Some of the movements are their but most of them have been so altered that they have lost all original applications and all basic conditioning. I say basic conditioning because while many kung fu schools teach tan tui as their first form kenpo teaches it as a black belt form.


 
I've partially addressed this issue above, but have a couple more things to say.

Some forms, like Tiger/Crane, have become very popular and have been adopted by several different arts and schools, outside of the parent art (hung gar, in this case).  This form has been recognized as being an extremely well structured and thought-out form, with really solid technique and training methods.  So people have taken it and made it their own.  This form exists in many different versions, often differences even exist from one hung gar school to the next, and it's even more extreme when looking at versions that exist outside of hung gar.  Some versions are so different as to seem like it may be a completely different form.  Only certain segments seem similar, and the entire choreography of the form has been altered.  

This doesn't make it necessarily wrong.  It's just been adopted and changed.  Sure, it's different from the original.  Maybe in some cases that's a bad thing, but in others it's still good.  So this is just the reality of what often happens in the martial arts, material gets borrowed.  Sometimes it's appropriate, sometimes it's not.  Sometimes the end result is good, sometimes it's terrible.  But that is a big way in which systems change over the generations.

I practice a version of Tam Tui that I learned from my kung fu sifu, as well as the Tracy kenpo version.  They are definitely different, but very clearly came from the same source.  This is another form that has been widely adopted into many different arts, and numerous versions exist.  The most obvious difference is the 12 Row Buddhist version and the 10 Row Islamic version.  But even within these two generalities, there are variations.  It can be tempting to believe there must be one original, master version that is absolutely "correct", but I think that is not true.  These forms have travelled so much, and been changed so many times, that if there was a true original version, I believe it has been lost.  So now we simply have different versions, and they ought to all have value in their own way.



> I enjoy learning and teaching an art, so if I were to open my school I would teach kung fu forms. But if I was interested in teaching a defensive system then I would teach techniques w/o forms


 
You can do this, but keep in mind my points above, about different foundations.  If you teach some kung fu in addition to kenpo, teach them as separate and distinct arts, and build the proper foundation.  Do that for yourself, and for your students.  Not every student is capable of doing this, so I expect you need to be careful about who learns what.  

If you train several arts and then try to combine them, or somehow develop short cuts to condense the material, you may be successful for yourself with this method.  But often this doesn't work well for your students, and they have difficulty progressing beyond mediocrity, even if the teacher himself is quite good.  I believe this is because you had the benefit of studying the complete system(s) and developed a deeper understanding of them.  Once you have this, you can find the shortcuts and condensations, and blendings that work.  But you students don't get that benefit.  They also would need to experience the complete system(s), before they would be ready to understand and utilize the shortcuts and blendings and whatnot.  So keep that in mind, and don't short-change the students.


----------



## tigdra

MJS Your first point is absolutely noted. Lets say your wearing jeans and its been raining and you go to kick some guy in the head, splat, you hit the ground. I heard of your saying too, the one I heard was "if you want to kick his head, break his knee first" or "kicking his head is like punching his foot", But I also heard this one "if you can kick him with speed and power up here imagine how much faster and stronger you'll hit him down there".

Greater flexibility doesn't mean, wow I look cool, well maybe when your 6, but when your older flexibility equals a decreased probability of injury. Regardless of what height you kick you will always have 3 obstacles that hinder your speed and power.

1   Clothing: most loose fitting clothing would help your kicking and most tight fitting clothing would hinder your ability to even kick someone in the thigh

2   antagonistic muscles: When throwing a snap kick your quads contract, but a lack of flexibility in you gluts and hamstring would decrease the effectivness, speed  and power of front kicks. The same holds true with the groin muscles in regards to side kicks.

3        weather: could or rainy weather obviously limit your ability to kick to your best potential, while warm weather would make it easier to kick.


The first and the last are easy wear clothing that will help you during a life and death situation and try not to get into a fight in lousy weather, but if you do be very careful of throwing crazy strikes both with your hands or feet.

The second one is a little more difficult; one must stretch to lower the probability of injury and to increase the power and speed of your strikes.

Your second statement I respect your thoughts. But again stating as said before seeing kenpo as an art and in such a way realizing that forms are aesthetic, then why not get the most out of a form and include movements that challenge you instead of remind you.
I well aware of the benefits of weight training, and you are absolutely right one should supplement their martial arts training with weight training. Although weight training is excellent the benefits of a challenging form are much more evident. Forms won&#8217;t just increase muscle size, they will increase muscle endurance, flexibility and cardiovascular endurance.  I am not degrading weight training I am acknowledging the benefits of a good form. 

If I were just doing defense then I would severally encourage individuals to take up stretching, weight training, circuit training, running and body conditioning exercises. 
If I were teaching defense plus a progressive challenging form structure then I would only suggest weight training to enhance one&#8217;s abilities. 

So my thoughts stay they same if I wanted to put forms into a system then I would want it to be of more use than just aesthetic, and whatever more that may be I would want it to enhance my skills in a new way rather than a repetitive way, parker student really can identify with this due to the fact that parker acknowledge original kenpo as repetitive. Muscle confusion is a true concept and plateau effects do hinder individual&#8217;s results, progressive complex forms would fill this void by introducing new but more importantly awkward movements which would wake up new muscles. You don&#8217;t need forms for self defense and memory of a technique doesn&#8217;t ensure success. Your subconscious kicks in and movements that your body is comfortable doing happen. When you learn or teach techniques memorization of a technique isn&#8217;t enough repetition must be done to insure that you have programmed muscle memory. Repetition of this movements comes simply by doing your techniques over and over with and without a partner, variations to techniques are later experimented. The more knowledge you have the more you can search for alternatives to techniques.


----------



## tigdra

Flying Crane said:


> ok, by "good with their legs" are you referring to kicks, footwork, both, or something else?
> 
> Kenpo has very effective footwork. It's not fancy like capoeira or some kung fu systems, but it's definitely more complex than other kung fu systems like wing chun. I think it's just effective and targeted. Nothing unnecessarily fancy. The footwork fits the purpose of the art: self defense.
> 
> As far as kicking goes, I think I systematically learned kicking better in kenpo, than I did when I trained capoeira, which is an art with a heavy focus on kicking. My kenpo background definitely gave me an edge in learning capoeira in this regard. I already knew how to kick well, and I could adapt what I knew to fit within the capoeira method as well. So I guess from my own experience, I think kenpo has a very full range of kicking techniques. It's just how much you choose to focus on it and develop those skills for yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> agreed. And the body of self defense techniques found in most kenpo lineages gives plenty of good material to work with and be a very effective method of self defense. I believe that even if the technique lists were reduced by 50%, maybe even more, there would still be plenty there to meet the needs of most anyone, as long as the reduction was well thought out. Not everyone has the insight to make the right choices, however.
> 
> 
> 
> OK, first off, I agree in that forms are not a requirement for a method to be good self defense. KM and BJJ are arguably valid examples, and I do believe that if you removed the forms from kenpo, focused only on solid basics and the techniques, you could develop very good self defense skills. I think you would be missing out on something by eliminating forms, but I can agree that forms in kenpo may not be absolutely critical in developing self defense skills.
> 
> Now, laying that idea aside for a moment, I think you need to decide what you want the forms for. You have mentioned aesthetic purposes, as well as conditioning. I will agree in so far that in my experiences with the Chinese arts, which includes Tibetan White Crane, elements of Shaolin Lohan, Wing Chun, and Taiji Chuan, I will say that in general, the Chinese forms do offer a greater degree of conditioning, as well as are generally more beautiful in a physical way.
> 
> But I think you need to decide if these elements are appropriate or necessary in kenpo, given what kenpo generally claims to be: a very effective method of self defense. So aesthetic value isn't necessary in forms, if you don't want to compete with them. All that matters is that the techniques found within the forms are effective, and often that means they are ugly and not interesting or beautiful from the viewpoint of a spectator. If you haven't seen them yet, take a look a the forms in Wing Chun. There is nothing pretty about that system. It's got this ugly squatty stance, these cramped in movements, it's ugly all the way around. But it's got some terrifically effective methods and techniques, and that's what matters to people who do Wing Chun. They don't care about pretty, because that's not the goal.
> 
> I will agree that conditioning is important. That's my opinion, at least. The White Crane and Lohan forms I practice are far more challenging in an aerobic way, than any of the kenpo forms, and they help maintain that kind of fitness. I think that would be great if it was found more in kenpo. However, you can get that in kenpo by working thru all the forms repeatedly, and in rapid succession. I guess it's in how you train the material. Aerobic conditioning can be there, if you choose to train for that.
> 
> Now, it's important to be careful about what kind of forms you might mix into a system. Often, different systems are built upon a foundation that can be at odds with another system. The techniques and methods are designed to work from that foundation, and they work very well in that way. But if you mix techniques and try to build them on top of a different foundation, they often fail miserably because then you are trying to use them in a way that they were never designed for. I know that the foundation of kenpo, wing chun, white crane, and capoeira are all VASTLY different. Trying to throw even the basic punches of White Crane from a kenpo or wing chun foundation will make them pathetically useless, etc. So there is more to it than simply introducing forms from other systems. In order to do so, you really need to build the foundation of that system first, before you can accurately teach and practice those forms. So in the middle of training your kenpo, you suddenly need to retool, start over to build the foundation of White Crane, for example, and then learn the White Crane forms. But the two don't really mix well, because in addition to their foundations being different, their entire approach to combat is also very different. This is why I always advise that if you want to train more than one system, do not blend them in training. Always keep them separate from each other so that you get the benefits of what they have to offer for what they are.
> 
> I believe this is also why the Chinese forms that have been borrowed into Tracy kenpo, like Tiger/Crane, Panther, Tam Tui, and 18 Hands, have been "kenpo-ized". The foundation of the parent arts where these forms came from is different from kenpo. So in borrowing these forms, they did need to be adapted in order to be workable within the kenpo system. Otherwise we would have this problem of virtually trying to change from one style to another, mid-stride, and trying to make it all "kenpo" when it doesn't properly fit together.
> 
> 
> 
> I've partially addressed this issue above, but have a couple more things to say.
> 
> Some forms, like Tiger/Crane, have become very popular and have been adopted by several different arts and schools, outside of the parent art (hung gar, in this case). This form has been recognized as being an extremely well structured and thought-out form, with really solid technique and training methods. So people have taken it and made it their own. This form exists in many different versions, often differences even exist from one hung gar school to the next, and it's even more extreme when looking at versions that exist outside of hung gar. Some versions are so different as to seem like it may be a completely different form. Only certain segments seem similar, and the entire choreography of the form has been altered.
> 
> This doesn't make it necessarily wrong. It's just been adopted and changed. Sure, it's different from the original. Maybe in some cases that's a bad thing, but in others it's still good. So this is just the reality of what often happens in the martial arts, material gets borrowed. Sometimes it's appropriate, sometimes it's not. Sometimes the end result is good, sometimes it's terrible. But that is a big way in which systems change over the generations.
> 
> I practice a version of Tam Tui that I learned from my kung fu sifu, as well as the Tracy kenpo version. They are definitely different, but very clearly came from the same source. This is another form that has been widely adopted into many different arts, and numerous versions exist. The most obvious difference is the 12 Row Buddhist version and the 10 Row Islamic version. But even within these two generalities, there are variations. It can be tempting to believe there must be one original, master version that is absolutely "correct", but I think that is not true. These forms have travelled so much, and been changed so many times, that if there was a true original version, I believe it has been lost. So now we simply have different versions, and they ought to all have value in their own way.
> 
> 
> 
> You can do this, but keep in mind my points above, about different foundations. If you teach some kung fu in addition to kenpo, teach them as separate and distinct arts, and build the proper foundation. Do that for yourself, and for your students. Not every student is capable of doing this, so I expect you need to be careful about who learns what.
> 
> If you train several arts and then try to combine them, or somehow develop short cuts to condense the material, you may be successful for yourself with this method. But often this doesn't work well for your students, and they have difficulty progressing beyond mediocrity, even if the teacher himself is quite good. I believe this is because you had the benefit of studying the complete system(s) and developed a deeper understanding of them. Once you have this, you can find the shortcuts and condensations, and blendings that work. But you students don't get that benefit. They also would need to experience the complete system(s), before they would be ready to understand and utilize the shortcuts and blendings and whatnot. So keep that in mind, and don't short-change the students.




1. What I meant was efficiency, limberness, conditioning and agility in kicking. What I am trying to say is that a kenpoist can throw a flurry of punches, which in most cases, without breaking a sweat, getting sore and most importantly getting injured. Yet the same can&#8217;t be said with their legs, yes legs do take more energy away from you but tae kwon do individuals are able to pull this of *** efficiently as kenpo do their hands. Learning the punches and applying then at a point where one can say they have become proficient are totally different. It is very rare to see someone in kenpo proficient with their legs as well as they are with their legs. Again learning kicks doesn&#8217;t mean that you are performing them to the best possible extent. In regards to Capoeira I too did capoeira, so let me ask you, you state that you were proficient with your legs how long did it take your muscles to condition to the ever repetitive workout of jinga. Your muscles weren't so conditioned nor were the sole of your feet to the movements that capoeira and if you got into a intermediate state in capoeira how flexible was your back for macaco or ponte role. Capoeira is great and knowing kicks help but the all body flexibility response time and rebound spring action you get from capoeira is unlike many styles. If I could also teach what you learn in capoeira into kenpo I would. I enjoyed capoeira, and I still practice on my own for the great benefits but if I were to teach capoeira it would be in its own entity. But others have mixed it into their style such as some mma fighters from Brazil and some jujitsu schools such as quantum jujitsu. 

2. Very true, only someone who really understands a system can do changes in it. Being a Black belt even an 8th degree doesn&#8217;t guarantee that you can alter subject matter. Learning about physics to becoming a physician is very far from each other.  

3.You could get the same aerobic exercises once you have become proficient with your movements, and after by practicing for long periods of time and at a high intensity reaching closer to muscular pulls vs getting then same results by doing a complex form. It is like comparing speed walking to interval running. The benefits are so different yet your legs are going through similar motions. 

4. I totally agree trying to blend a style with another is not wise but teaching someone two styles isn&#8217;t a problem. If you systematically categorize a style by the name of their movements then sure styles are different but if you categorize movements by stokes and positions then you can learn both styles. A bow stance in kenpo is completely different than one in kung fu, but the same way you learn a soft from a hard bow is the same way you learn a Chinese bow from a karate bow. We can further illustrate this point by looking at our techniques, consider this, regular blocks are considered more linear approaches to defending oneself but later on in kenpo we are exposed to scoop blocks and circular blocks like those in &#8220;waterfalling&#8221; (tracy kenpo). Interchanging styles isn&#8217;t difficult if you understand the reason, and understand that there is no one correct way of executing a defense or attack. Lets take wing chun for example, I believed you mentioned it&#8217;s punches, although executed in a different manner most of their punches are vertical. You mentioned their stances, the methods in which they execute their forms are for training purposes such as kenpo, their forms depict an encyclopedia of their movements. Without wing chun forms you could still learn wing chun it would just need a set technique structure, but back to their stances, their stances are used for their style of counter attacks in close ranges. Learning a different method of response and shifting from one style to the next isn&#8217;t hard. Bruce Lee as we all know did the same thing he would go from savate to boxing to wing chun to wrestling to grappling. Take this into account would you or do you point fight spar the same way you execute your techniques, and would that manner be the same if you were competing in sanshou (sanda) and again would your style change if you were grappling. Even better example would you spar a martial artist that is more like a boxer the same way you spar a tae kwon do individual? No, strategy and stances would change. For one individual you would adopt a more shallow stance and for the other you would have a deeper. The strokes and strategy would change to adapt to the circumstances. I know that if I am going to compete in sanshou I adopt more of a boxers stance along with a similar mentality yet if I am point sparring I get in a side stance to create a little more distance, the same is true when you are doing two different styles, they are just two different ways of executing a defense or attack, but they don&#8217;t need to collide, they can coexist together side by side and can become interchangeable at any desired moment as long as you know what you are teaching then your ok. In some techniques we learn to step to the outside and on another we learn to step on the inside. I have learned that in kenpo there is a constant &#8220;breaking of rules&#8221; as you progress you sometimes break the rules of prior belts and techniques.

5. In regards to &#8220;tiger and crane&#8221; I too acknowledge that it is good to branch out and borrow forms but one must be careful in altering it. It must make sense when you alter it and if something is altered then there must be a proper explanation to its change. Let take for example &#8220;tiger&#8221; section you just stood up from kneeling (crouching) you execute a couple of movements and you get to the section were you are stepping away from the front wall and elbowing, then you cross step away and elbow with the opposite arm. When explained this technique is just an elbow but if you look at the hung gar version you see that this isn&#8217;t an elbow but a movement designed to dislocate your opponent&#8217;s neck. In fact this precise technique is one of the ten fundamental techniques that wong fei hung was famous for and had altered the original form for. It is ok for aesthetic value to change a form&#8217;s movements but you loose a lot of important material when doing so. It reminds me of the story I believe I heard about Professor Chow. His older brother was taught the style while he was sent to do kung fu and he would spy on his brother and mimic the movements. I am sure that no matter how gifted you are a lot of details are going to be lost in the interpretation.  

6.True there are different versions of tan tui but most of them alter by small amounts while still holding true to basic stances. The shaolin monks added the two extra lines and altered a few things but the alterations aren&#8217;t huge most lines look similar. If you take cha chuan&#8217;s version of tan tui and compare it to dr yang jwing ming&#8217;s version there are differences but their not that huge or compare them to the jingwu version and again the differences are minute. But kenpo has added new lines deleted some that almost everyone else does and some of the lines they do are so altered that it makes no sense. For example I believe it is line 4 or 6 where you hidden step and punch, the next movement should be a leg sweep stepping out of cross step towards the opponent and palming to the opposite wall yet kenpo teaches it to step away from the opponent nullifying the purpose of the movement.

7.Thank you for the tips, I have though this through as well and I have made adjustments and preparations to allow certain things. I know not everyone gets into martial arts for the whole experience and even though it would be great to see hundreds of students learning martial arts for both defense and art I am realistic and have created separate curriculums and certificates to indicate the purpose of their training and their ability to teach which type of material. See your going to get the parents that want their kids to get a black belt, and your going to get the one&#8217;s that want to defend themselves, but in rare cases you will get someone that wants to learn an art and a way of life those are the individuals that would receive all I have to offer while the the others receive exactly what they want.


----------



## DavidCC

Since when is BJJ an example of a good self defense system?


----------



## IWishToLearn

DavidCC said:


> Since when is BJJ an example of a good self defense system?



Heh...I agree...but thems fightin words lol.


----------



## Flying Crane

DavidCC said:


> Since when is BJJ an example of a good self defense system?


 
well that is certainly a point that is debated, and I didn't feel like getting into the debate yet again, so I was simply willing to accept the statement and let it go.  It's simply an example of a system that does not make use of kata in the way that many other arts do, and nobody would deny that the method is useful under the right circumstances.

It is a method that I believe can be useful in self defense, depending on the circumstances, and depending on what techniques are utilized.  Not all of it needs to go straight to the ground.  It's my understanding that there are stand-up techniques in BJJ that are more self-defense oriented.  The sporting aspect of the art has overshadowed much of this, but I believe it does exist.  I personally would never deliberately go to the ground in self-defense.

Anyway, I hope this doesn't turn into another debate over BJJ as a sport vs. self defense art.


----------



## DavidCC

No I am tired of that debate as well 

However I think it is no argument that MOST bjj schools train HEAVILY on the sport side.  What % of bjj students sign up thinking "I really need to learn to defend myself" vs. "I want to learn to cage fight"

Not that one is better or worse, just different goals.

Maybe the opposite of kempo schools, where SD is primary and competition may also be done but not the core, and some don't do it at all.


----------



## Flying Crane

DavidCC said:


> What % of bjj students sign up thinking "I really need to learn to defend myself" vs. "I want to learn to cage fight"


 
I think many people believe this is the same thing.  There are overlapping skills, but it's not the same thing.


----------



## Flying Crane

tigdra said:


> 1. What I meant was efficiency, limberness, conditioning and agility in kicking. What I am trying to say is that a kenpoist can throw a flurry of punches, which in most cases, without breaking a sweat, getting sore and most importantly getting injured. Yet the same cant be said with their legs, yes legs do take more energy away from you but tae kwon do individuals are able to pull this of *** efficiently as kenpo do their hands. Learning the punches and applying then at a point where one can say they have become proficient are totally different. It is very rare to see someone in kenpo proficient with their legs as well as they are with their legs. Again learning kicks doesnt mean that you are performing them to the best possible extent.




yet in my experience, the full range of kicks do exist in kenpo, and you can choose to develop them to a high level.  That's where your own self-discipline and motivation come into the picture.  If you want it, work on it and make it happen.  

Not all arts focus heavily on kicks, and they do very well without them.  Wing Chun is an example.  Kicks are few, simple, and low.  As a system, they feel that is plenty.  Bagua is another method that doesn't focus heavily on kicks, but I've met some bagua people who are absolutely fierce.  You simply do not want to mess with them.  They are very very very good at what they are doing, kicks or no kicks.  Different strokes for different folks...



> In regards to Capoeira I too did capoeira, so let me ask you, you state that you were proficient with your legs how long did it take your muscles to condition to the ever repetitive workout of jinga. Your muscles weren't so conditioned nor were the sole of your feet to the movements that capoeira and if you got into a intermediate state in capoeira how flexible was your back for macaco or ponte role.




Of course.  When you train one particular method, you develop strength, flexibility, and stamina that is fairly specific to that method.  It doesn't necessarily transfer over into another method.

Example:  In high school, my brother was a State level competitor in running.  He competed successfully in Cross Country and Track and Field.  Then, he decided to try competitive swimming.  He was a competent swimmer, but had never trained to do it competitively.  He figured, "hey, I can run for miles and miles, how tough could this swimming be?"  Then he jumped into the pool on the first night, and thought he was gonna drown from exhaustion in the middle of the pool.  His conditioning from running just didn't translate into swimming.  He needed to develop specific strength and stamina for that sport.  Ultimately, he competed at State level for swimming as well.

So my point is, whatever method you begin to train, you will need to develop strength and stamina for that method.  What conditioning you have done before may, or may not, translate well into the new method.

When I was training capoeira like a maniac, I was in the best physical shape of my life.  I don't do that much anymore, and I can tell, in my conditioning, altho I practice a lot of very demanding Chinese forms.



> I enjoyed capoeira, and I still practice on my own for the great benefits but if I were to teach capoeira it would be in its own entity.




in my opinion, this is how it ought to be done.



> But others have mixed it into their style such as some mma fighters from Brazil and some jujitsu schools such as quantum jujitsu.


 
I don't know much about mma fighters, I really don't pay much attention to them.  But I suspect whatever they may have taken from capoeira is very little.  Perhaps a few specific techniques.  But many things just don't translate well if you try to do them outside of capoeira's base.  

Sure, some of the techniques look cool, the XMA guys have taken a lot of the acrobatics, but that's a good example to examine.  Those XMA guys throw that stuff out there for the "WOW" affect on the audience.  They are, afterall, mainly interested in performance.  But it's absolutely out of context and holds no purpose other than a visual affect.  They are in the middle of their creative performance kata and then they throw a beija-flor, or an s-dobrado or macaco or something.  They don't understand how the technique can actually be useful beyond the simple visual affect.  And it looks forced and out of place as well, just a neat trick being done by a trained monkey.  

But a capoeirista can use these same techniques within the roda to further develop the game and the flow and the physical dialogue, and often can even use them to escape attacks, and even utilize them as attacks themselves.



> 4. I totally agree trying to blend a style with another is not wise but teaching someone two styles isnt a problem.




again, I believe that in the teaching and the training of more than one system, the key is to simply keep them separate.



> Learning a different method of response and shifting from one style to the next isnt hard. Bruce Lee as we all know did the same thing he would go from savate to boxing to wing chun to wrestling to grappling...


 
again, I agree, when it comes time to use it, you can switch as necessary to adapt to the circumstance.  But it goes back to the training: keep them separate when you train, so you understand each art completely from foundation on up.



> 5. In regards to tiger and crane I too acknowledge that it is good to branch out and borrow forms but one must be careful in altering it. It must make sense when you alter it and if something is altered then there must be a proper explanation to its change...




I'm actually in the middle of learning the Tracy version of this form for the first time.  I hadn't learned this the first time I went thru the system.  I was taught a version that attempted to be closer to a hung gar version, but I ultimately decided it probably wasnt' taught well to me so I dumped it years later.  Since I haven't finished learning the Tracy version, I won't be able to comment with many specifics here.



> In fact this precise technique is one of the ten fundamental techniques that wong fei hung was famous for and had altered the original form for.




having never made a formal study of hung gar, I am not familiar with this, and did not know that Wong Fei-Hung was famous for ten specific techniques.  I shall have to mention this to my sifu and see what he says.  He is not a Hung Gar specialist, but he did study it at one time and he is quite knowledgeable about Chinese martial arts in general.  At any rate, perhaps this is taught in any hung gar school?  I would be interested in knowing your source of info here.



> It is ok for aesthetic value to change a forms movements but you loose a lot of important material when doing so.




true, it can be a problem, if someone makes changes without really knowing what they are doing.



> 6.True there are different versions of tan tui but most of them alter by small amounts while still holding true to basic stances.  The shaolin monks added the two extra lines and altered a few things but the alterations arent huge most lines look similar. If you take cha chuans version of tan tui and compare it to dr yang jwing mings version there are differences but their not that huge or compare them to the jingwu version and again the differences are minute. But kenpo has added new lines deleted some that almost everyone else does and some of the lines they do are so altered that it makes no sense. For example I believe it is line 4 or 6 where you hidden step and punch, the next movement should be a leg sweep stepping out of cross step towards the opponent and palming to the opposite wall yet kenpo teaches it to step away from the opponent nullifying the purpose of the movement.


 
I believe the stances for the most part are the same.  I've learned the Jingwu version from my sifu, so that is the basis of my comparison.  I was actually learning them at the same time, from two different instructors.  

Yes, there are definitely differences between the two.  They are both still new enough to me that I don't feel competent to comment much on application.  I just view them as two versions of the same form, and I continue to practice both.



> 7.Thank you for the tips, I have though this through as well and I have made adjustments and preparations to allow certain things. I know not everyone gets into martial arts for the whole experience and even though it would be great to see hundreds of students learning martial arts for both defense and art I am realistic and have created separate curriculums and certificates to indicate the purpose of their training and their ability to teach which type of material. See your going to get the parents that want their kids to get a black belt, and your going to get the ones that want to defend themselves, but in rare cases you will get someone that wants to learn an art and a way of life those are the individuals that would receive all I have to offer while the the others receive exactly what they want.


 
I hear what you are saying, and like I said, I don't agree nor disagree 100% on any of it.  I think you've raised some interesting points for discussion, things that I have certainly thought about myself.

The system is what it is, and I accept it for that.  I don't expect it is perfect for everyone.  Nothing is, and I don't apologize for it.  I have my kung fu background as well, and that gives me satisfaction in ways that my kenpo doesn't, and vice-versa.  Do with it what you will.  After all, all of this stuff was just developed by people, not deities.  They were not infallible and it's not sacred, and ultimately you need to make the material your own, so it is right for you.


----------



## tigdra

Yeah first I would like to apologize to everyone about the bjj as a defensive system it is a lousy example. I will come up with a better one. Kind of press for time so I will respond more later.


----------



## donald

tigdra said:


> My question isn't what does a kata teach you? My question is what does kenpo katas teach you that a technique doesn't other than the obvious which is flowing from one technique to the other.
> 
> 
> 
> I think your question/questions have been answered in regards to the above, but here I go. I think katas in general are meant to help the practioner, well practice. There may be some attempt at something on other than a physical level in some of the more traditional "eastern" systems, but I think EPAK forms are meant to work the physical side of things period. Like most endeavors you are going to get out what you put in. If you go strong, and hard through your forms practice you are going to work your body from the ground up, endurance, etc.. I think the "difference" between forms practice, and tek work is to give continuity to your movement. To gap the starting, and stopping that comes between techniques. I know you have probably gotten much deeper answers to your questions here, but the bottom line is forms are not meant to re-invent the wheel, but maybe to tweek it a little.
> 1stJohn1:9


----------



## jaybacca72

this is in response to tigdra about forms the forms that you know are not epak forms and if you knew epak long form 4 and did it with speed and power with proper timing then you would definitely get a great workout from it for your muscles and breath. it all depends on how YOU train it and how you were taught it when it comes to showing you new things. the forms in epak are the encyclopedia of the system and show you man things the techniques do not by themselves and i am referring to the motion kenpo for you doc supporters. if you wanna learn plenty about the forms check out the huk planas series for kenpo forms you will not find a better forms teacher out there.
later
Jason


----------



## tigdra

donald said:


> tigdra said:
> 
> 
> 
> . I think the "difference" between forms practice, and tek work is to give continuity to your movement. To gap the starting, and stopping that comes between techniques. I know you have probably gotten much deeper answers to your questions here, but the bottom line is forms are not meant to re-invent the wheel, but maybe to tweek it a little.
> 1stJohn1:9
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes you learn how to flow from a technique to an other which has been selected for you, you build a fluidity between the two techniques such as in long 3 which in tracy kenpo you go from "2 headed serpent" into " "rising elbows" or for those in parker's system "destructive twins" to "crashing wings".
> 
> But let us analyze this in a simplistic manner, a dancer learns a set of movements a,b,c, and d, and she practices here heart out. just because she builds muscle memory and fluidity from a to b, b to c, and c to d, does not mean she can do the same with movements c to a.
> 
> Learning a pattern of techniques doesn't make you better at going from every technique to every technique it helps you to go from technique a to technique b.
Click to expand...


----------



## Flying Crane

jaybacca72 said:


> this is in response to tigdra about forms the forms that you know are not epak forms and if you knew epak long form 4 and did it with speed and power with proper timing then you would definitely get a great workout from it for your muscles and breath. Jason


 

actually, the Tracy forms Short 1-3 and Long 1-5 are very very close to later Parker lineages of the same forms.  There are minor variations, but they can be considered identical.  The Chinese forms we have been discussing however, have not been maintained in the later Parker lineages.


----------



## Flying Crane

tigdra said:


> But let us analyze this in a simplistic manner, a dancer learns a set of movements a,b,c, and d, and she practices here heart out. just because she builds muscle memory and fluidity from a to b, b to c, and c to d, does not mean she can do the same with movements c to a.
> 
> Learning a pattern of techniques doesn't make you better at going from every technique to every technique it helps you to go from technique a to technique b.


 

Yes, but you would need an almost infinite number of forms to cover a transition from every tech to every other tech.  Not realistic, and not necessary.  At a certain point, you ought to be able to simply respond creatively.  The forms and techs shouldn't be relied upon as covering every single possibility or necessity.  They are simply tools for training, not a magic formula with and index of every possible answer.


----------



## tigdra

Flying Crane said:


> Yes, but you would need an almost infinite number of forms to cover a transition from every tech to every other tech. Not realistic, and not necessary. At a certain point, you ought to be able to simply respond creatively. The forms and techs shouldn't be relied upon as covering every single possibility or necessity. They are simply tools for training, not a magic formula with and index of every possible answer.



That is my exact point you would need an infinite amount of forms to be able to say that kenpo forms teach you how to flow between techniques. You could however say that the forms teach you the theory of flowing between techniques; an example of how you should be ideally, but one thing is a theory with examples and another is actually being capable to go beyond basic pattern and almost instinctively go from one technique to another. 

So this goes back to my main point, if we have techniques like Whirling Blades or Escape from Death which teach you the theory of flowing from one technique to another, then what use do forms have aside from them being pretty. And the 2 examples above arent the only examples of this theory I would have to go back to my notes on the parker system but for the tracy system a lot of techniques are bits and pieces of other techniques, especially in the high belts. I was told this by a high ranking tracy black belt and have looked into it and confirmed. Cyclone is a good example, some where in brown belt and it is a mixture of small pieces of seven swords and another technique. I will post the name once I remember.


----------



## marlon

kidswarrior said:


> A very good point, and one I've been chewing over myself for awhile now. One additional thought would be, the instructor could teach techs derived from previously learned forms, also, and students could continue to learn from their solo practice and resistance (partner) training with those previous forms as well.
> 
> I'd love to know what others thought about this.


 

Hi Kidswarrior,
i am not sure what you mean by teaching techniques from ..previously.. learned forms.  Do you mean teach the form first then the techniques or are you speaking of switching over to a curricullum of techniques frfom forms only and thereby teaching techniques from the forms the student already have?  Which forms would you pick and for which belt levels?

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon

tigdra said:


> That is my exact point you would need an infinite amount of forms to be able to say that kenpo forms teach you how to flow between techniques. You could however say that the forms teach you the theory of flowing between techniques; an example of how you should be ideally, but one thing is a theory with examples and another is actually being capable to go beyond basic pattern and almost instinctively go from one technique to another.
> 
> 
> 
> i am not so sure this is correct since there are principles to flowing between techniques one would not need an infinite amount of forms, just enough to develop the concepts and principles into the student's way of moving and responding.
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


----------



## marlon

to the comment about kicks and kempo.  i find kempo practitioners vbery efficient with thier legs...however this does not mean kicking only and i am very happy that kempo does not emphasize high kicks.  to be on one leg (imo) for overlong is inherently unstable also, for the most part kicks above the waist do not end confrontations.

just my thoughts

marlon


----------



## tigdra

Marlon that is what I said, it wouldnt be practical to learn an infinite amount of forms especially when you get the same concepts from techniques. A concept is a concept truthfully it only needs to be defined once, but if someone likes they could repeat a variation or another example of the same concept. Fire burns, this is a concept you really dont need to burn your hand on the stove more than once to learn that, well some kids it take two times. But it is that knowledge that fire burns that makes your brain work and say let me not get too close to it next time. The mind can take a concept and expand upon it without needing to be spoon fed. After you get burned you dont need someone to be there to tell you see burning yourself hurts, so dont get close to it, you fear pain and learn not to get close to it. The same goes with any concept your mind can think for itself, if and only if you make it important enough for your brain to work. The lazy way is easy Timmy now that you know what 1+1 is now what is 1+1+1 response I dont know. Timmy is thinking about Nintendo not math, he really doesnt care to learn, he is comfortable being spoon fed. Question everything and have your own thoughts on every subject, even if your incorrect you will eventually get more out of it

Marlon did you not read my response in regards to kicking? I agree with you kicking high isnt good in a fight but the ability to kick high = less percentage of accidents as well as faster and stronger kicks to waist and below kicks.


----------



## marlon

tigdra said:


> Marlon that is what I said, it wouldnt be practical to learn an infinite amount of forms especially when you get the same concepts from techniques. A concept is a concept truthfully it only needs to be defined once, but if someone likes they could repeat a variation or another example of the same concept. Fire burns, this is a concept you really dont need to burn your hand on the stove more than once to learn that, well some kids it take two times. But it is that knowledge that fire burns that makes your brain work and say let me not get too close to it next time. The mind can take a concept and expand upon it without needing to be spoon fed. After you get burned you dont need someone to be there to tell you see burning yourself hurts, so dont get close to it, you fear pain and learn not to get close to it. The same goes with any concept your mind can think for itself, if and only if you make it important enough for your brain to work. The lazy way is easy Timmy now that you know what 1+1 is now what is 1+1+1 response I dont know. Timmy is thinking about Nintendo not math, he really doesnt care to learn, he is comfortable being spoon fed. Question everything and have your own thoughts on every subject, even if your incorrect you will eventually get more out of it
> 
> Marlon did you not read my response in regards to kicking? I agree with you kicking high isnt good in a fight but the ability to kick high = less percentage of accidents as well as faster and stronger kicks to waist and below kicks.


 
ok so too many forms..i can see your point.  as for kicking though, i dso not think that the ability to kick high has those benefits.  Flexibilty can add to overall health but not more.  Many chinese forms focus on "martial spirit" rather than practical fighting application.  But, then again there is nothing wrong with that, is there.

back to forms. not every student will question early in thier training the things that will make the kempo forms redundant...sk has very different forms from ak...so they do serve the function of re enforcement of things that may not be picked up by other studentsd the way you have.  almost a paradox, the redundancy is necessary until the student realizes they are not necessary through the work they put into the forms and training...

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## tigdra

marlon said:


> ok so too many forms..i can see your point.  as for kicking though, i dso not think that the ability to kick high has those benefits.  Flexibilty can add to overall health but not more.  Many chinese forms focus on "martial spirit" rather than practical fighting application.  But, then again there is nothing wrong with that, is there.
> 
> back to forms. not every student will question early in thier training the things that will make the kempo forms redundant...sk has very different forms from ak...so they do serve the function of re enforcement of things that may not be picked up by other studentsd the way you have.  almost a paradox, the redundancy is necessary until the student realizes they are not necessary through the work they put into the forms and training...
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon



You my not think that flexibility has those benefits, and it's your choice to ignore facts; no one is telling you what to believe, you have the right. 

Back to the forms , I believe I made it clear that I was including tracy's and parker's kenpo. It is a shame tt I have not been exposed to enough shaolin kenpo to be able to comment. As for the forms I still feel that some things aren't needed and specifically in regards to the style of kenpo which we have been talking about, the forms in my opinion do nothing that our techniques can't do.


----------



## tigdra

jaybacca72 said:


> this is in response to tigdra about forms the forms that you know are not epak forms and if you knew epak long form 4 and did it with speed and power with proper timing then you would definitely get a great workout from it for your muscles and breath. it all depends on how YOU train it and how you were taught it when it comes to showing you new things. the forms in epak are the encyclopedia of the system and show you man things the techniques do not by themselves and i am referring to the motion kenpo for you doc supporters. if you wanna learn plenty about the forms check out the huk planas series for kenpo forms you will not find a better forms teacher out there.
> later
> Jason



This one is just for jaybacca

Well even if epak forms were only in epak then I would still continue with my question. The forms are made up of the techniques and since your talking about "motion kenpo" the theory is that epak kenpo is made up of certain theories of motion that can be infinatly arranged to overwhelm an individual. If epak techniques teach you these concepts, following your theme of doc supporters, and the concepts are constantly being repeated then what use is to repeat them yet again in a form. Why in a conceptual art that teaches theories of motion through its techniques would you need forms that are identical to the techniques you have already learned.  I have the huk planas dvds thanks.


----------



## marlon

I never said that flexability did not have health benefits, did i?
anywho, i have re read this thread and did my best to put aside any knee jerk reactions i may have had.  To be fair most kempo forms do not contain the kempo self defense techniques, the higher forms include leg sweeps from the ground, jumping kicks and challenging stances and a generally different flavour than the numbered self defense techniques. Therefore i think i can get a much more varied insight and trainig from my forms than you seem to see in the epak forms. So, i am coming from a much diffeent place than you are.  The pinan forms are really not kempo at all and perhaps do not belong in the system, even kempo-ized. The forms i enjoy the most are the animal based forms and the ones i really 'get into' are the ones from the founders and top masters of the chow lineage kempo.  Yang long form , Fu hok sun li from hung gar ,Naihanchi from Chkoi Mutobu, Two Man Fist set from SGM Parker, Circle of Tiger from GM Cerio, Sho tung kwa from GM Villari, Hon suki form master Willian Chun Sr. because i am looking for what they 'saw' that made them so good and creative and innovative and of course great fighters.  I am looking to grow.  I still would like to learn the quintessential form of Gm Parker and GM Emarado.  This is my reason for learning and teaching forms.  I concede that these people were really good and perhaps i can get a taste of the essence of what made them good through the forms they created or dedicated themselves to, perhaps i can grow and get as good as them or that perhaps one of my students will...it is a way to touch thier genious.  Aside from this you may well be on to something...throw out the forms...work the techniques as line drills and  with partners or as shadow boxing...perhaps one or two forms to teach and focus on the basics of stances and transitions and balance and timing  and posture...Or go the other way and teach / study more forms based for the reasons i mentioned earlier.  So in the end i think i much more agree with you than disagree.  However, adding forms just for more physical challenges etc...your own criticism of forms critizes this in a way.  You can jump and do gymnastics and stretching..and ..taibo and get those things without adding them to the system.  I think the addition might beg the qwuestion of the self defense focus of all chow related arts...although i think Sam Kahoa went that way and used his taikwondo training to create more...athletic .. forms for his kempo.  Enough rambling for me ...for now.  thanks again for the provocation of thought.

Respectfully,
Marlon

BTW can anyone confirm that SGM Parker dedicated practice to his forms...do what they DID not what they said


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> MJS Your first point is absolutely noted. Lets say your wearing jeans and its been raining and you go to kick some guy in the head, splat, you hit the ground. I heard of your saying too, the one I heard was "if you want to kick his head, break his knee first" or "kicking his head is like punching his foot", But I also heard this one "if you can kick him with speed and power up here imagine how much faster and stronger you'll hit him down there".




Environment and target availability dictate your technique.  That being said, if the ground is wet, why risk a move like a high kick?  As I said, this is my preference.  If someone is capable of pulling off a high kick, great.  But for myself, I'd rather not put myself in an awkward position if at all possible.




> Greater flexibility doesn't mean, wow I look cool, well maybe when your 6, but when your older flexibility equals a decreased probability of injury. Regardless of what height you kick you will always have 3 obstacles that hinder your speed and power.





> 1 Clothing: most loose fitting clothing would help your kicking and most tight fitting clothing would hinder your ability to even kick someone in the thigh
> 
> 2 antagonistic muscles: When throwing a snap kick your quads contract, but a lack of flexibility in you gluts and hamstring would decrease the effectivness, speed and power of front kicks. The same holds true with the groin muscles in regards to side kicks.
> 
> 3 weather: could or rainy weather obviously limit your ability to kick to your best potential, while warm weather would make it easier to kick.




Agree.  So IMHO, all the more reason to be practical, especially if your life is on the line.  






> Your second statement I respect your thoughts. But again stating as said before seeing kenpo as an art and in such a way realizing that forms are aesthetic, then why not get the most out of a form and include movements that challenge you instead of remind you.





> I well aware of the benefits of weight training, and you are absolutely right one should supplement their martial arts training with weight training. Although weight training is excellent the benefits of a challenging form are much more evident. Forms wont just increase muscle size, they will increase muscle endurance, flexibility and cardiovascular endurance. I am not degrading weight training I am acknowledging the benefits of a good form.




I suppose one thing we should be looking at is...if a change is made, is it going to take away from the original intent of the form?  I honestly don't know, as I really don't make changes to the forms I do.




> If I were just doing defense then I would severally encourage individuals to take up stretching, weight training, circuit training, running and body conditioning exercises.





> If I were teaching defense plus a progressive challenging form structure then I would only suggest weight training to enhance ones abilities.
> 
> So my thoughts stay they same if I wanted to put forms into a system then I would want it to be of more use than just aesthetic, and whatever more that may be I would want it to enhance my skills in a new way rather than a repetitive way, parker student really can identify with this due to the fact that parker acknowledge original kenpo as repetitive. Muscle confusion is a true concept and plateau effects do hinder individuals results, progressive complex forms would fill this void by introducing new but more importantly awkward movements which would wake up new muscles. You dont need forms for self defense and memory of a technique doesnt ensure success. Your subconscious kicks in and movements that your body is comfortable doing happen. When you learn or teach techniques memorization of a technique isnt enough repetition must be done to insure that you have programmed muscle memory. Repetition of this movements comes simply by doing your techniques over and over with and without a partner, variations to techniques are later experimented. The more knowledge you have the more you can search for alternatives to techniques.


----------



## DavidCC

marlon said:


> To be fair most kempo forms do not contain the kempo self defense techniques ...
> 
> The pinan forms are really not kempo at all and perhaps do not belong in the system ...
> 
> Naihanchi from Chkoi Mutobu ...
> 
> I still would like to learn the quintessential form of Gm Parker and GM Emarado


 
there are 2 types of forms used in kempo - those that are composed of techniques, and those that are composed of techniques that we have numbers for 

SKK "kata" contain some of the numbered techniques, perhaps more if you can strip away layers of changes in both the kata and the technqiues?  They were created at the same time and by the same people (more or less...)

I don't know how you can dismiss pinan as not kempo but include naihanchi.  Well, I should say I do know how but I think that is an arbitrary line.  I have video of Oyata doing both and his style is kempo.  If Villari created SKK and he wanted them in there (having been taught them by Nick Cerio) then by definition they "belong in the system".  However I do think that they either need to be taught in much greater depth than they typically seem to be.  For example I never found a decent explanation for the "C guard" until I talked to a Tang Soo Do guy 

I think if you map it out, the form that both Emperado and Parker learned from their common root, is Naihanchi.  But I don't know if that is "quintessential".  It is certainly bad-*** though.


----------



## JTKenpo

there are 2 types of forms used in kempo - those that are composed of techniques, and those that are composed of techniques that we have numbers for 

David, absolutely great point here.

I don't know how you can dismiss pinan as not kempo but include naihanchi. Well, I should say I do know how but I think that is an arbitrary line. I have video of Oyata doing both and his style is kempo. If Villari created SKK and he wanted them in there (having been taught them by Nick Cerio) then by definition they "belong in the system". However I do think that they either need to be taught in much greater depth than they typically seem to be. For example I never found a decent explanation for the "C guard" until I talked to a Tang Soo Do guy
Not, to speak for Marlon but what I believe he is saying is the pinans are not rooted in kempo as they are without question Shotokan forms. With the exception of two pinan which is a form created by Prof. Cerio to incorporate some of the things he learned from Chow. Just because we as Kempo practitioners practice, learn and or teach a particular kata or technique doesnt make it Kempo. I teach an Aikido four directions through off of a punch does that make it Kempo? If you say because I am a Kempo teacher and I teach this technique then yes, but is this technique rooted in Kempo, NO. Now why is Naihanchi Kempo, Chokei Mutobu. If you believe your lineage to be that of Mitose to Chow to Master so and so then you have to take Mutobu as Mitoses teacher (Even though there are quite a few people on this board who heard from the mouth of Chosei Matobu that Mitose never was a student of his father, another post..) As for the in depth teaching or lack there of of the pinans I think that has a lot to do with masters not passing on there secrets until you reach 8th dan (or pay a little extra in the mean time). Then again that is why people like us on message boards like this discuss the applications and principles of the forms they study and teach.

I think if you map it out, the form that both Emperado and Parker learned from their common root, is Naihanchi. But I don't know if that is "quintessential". It is certainly bad-*** though.

As far as I know neither Emperado nor Parker ever taught Naihanchi as part of there system. Parker has Short 1,2,3 and Long 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8 as well as various sets. Emperado teaches Palamas sets 1-14 and I am sure he has various sets to go with that as well. These are the only katas I have ever heard of in these two systems. 

Then again, no matter what system of Kempo you look at there are many outside influences Shotokan, Tae Kwon Do, Hung Gar and many Chinese Arts and that is just the Parker, Emperado, Cerio, Villari, and Chow arts as a starting point. Now once you go down three and four generations from these masters (which is where most of us are now) influences of other arts are even more prevalent. So are we really asking what is TRUE Kem/npo? That I believe is an unanswerable question. Do you want to throw away something that may hold the answer to someone elses question? Not me, Ill keep practicing my forms, learn from everyone I can and teach those who want to listen. I still believe in the benefits of my forms.


----------



## DavidCC

JTKenpo said:


> there are 2 types of forms used in kempo - those that are composed of techniques, and those that are composed of techniques that we have numbers for
> 
> David, absolutely great point here.
> 
> I don't know how you can dismiss pinan as not kempo but include naihanchi. Well, I should say I do know how but I think that is an arbitrary line. I have video of Oyata doing both and his style is kempo. If Villari created SKK and he wanted them in there (having been taught them by Nick Cerio) then by definition they "belong in the system". However I do think that they either need to be taught in much greater depth than they typically seem to be. For example I never found a decent explanation for the "C guard" until I talked to a Tang Soo Do guy
> Not, to speak for Marlon but what I believe he is saying is the pinans are not rooted in kempo as they are without question Shotokan forms. With the exception of two pinan which is a form created by Prof. Cerio to incorporate some of the things he learned from Chow. Just because we as Kempo practitioners practice, learn and or teach a particular kata or technique doesnt make it Kempo. I teach an Aikido four directions through off of a punch does that make it Kempo? If you say because I am a Kempo teacher and I teach this technique then yes, but is this technique rooted in Kempo, NO. Now why is Naihanchi Kempo, Chokei Mutobu. If you believe your lineage to be that of Mitose to Chow to Master so and so then you have to take Mutobu as Mitoses teacher (Even though there are quite a few people on this board who heard from the mouth of Chosei Matobu that Mitose never was a student of his father, another post..) As for the in depth teaching or lack there of of the pinans I think that has a lot to do with masters not passing on there secrets until you reach 8th dan (or pay a little extra in the mean time). Then again that is why people like us on message boards like this discuss the applications and principles of the forms they study and teach.


 
I included Naihanchi, not because supposedly Motobu taught Mitose - but because Mitose taught it! 

I think it is impossible that Motobu was Mitose's teacher in Japan anyways. My guess is that Mitose's teachers and anyone who knew them were all killed in the Nagasaki atmoic bombing.



> I think if you map it out, the form that both Emperado and Parker learned from their common root, is Naihanchi. But I don't know if that is "quintessential". It is certainly bad-*** though.
> 
> As far as I know neither Emperado nor Parker ever taught Naihanchi as part of there system. Parker has Short 1,2,3 and Long 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8 as well as various sets. Emperado teaches Palamas sets 1-14 and I am sure he has various sets to go with that as well. These are the only katas I have ever heard of in these two systems.


 
I mis-understoood I guess. I thought you were looking for the key to how they got to be so good, not what they taught to their students.




> Then again, no matter what system of Kempo you look at there are many outside influences Shotokan, Tae Kwon Do, Hung Gar and many Chinese Arts and that is just the Parker, Emperado, Cerio, Villari, and Chow arts as a starting point. Now once you go down three and four generations from these masters (which is where most of us are now) influences of other arts are even more prevalent. So are we really asking what is TRUE Kem/npo? That I believe is an unanswerable question. Do you want to throw away something that may hold the answer to someone elses question? Not me, Ill keep practicing my forms, learn from everyone I can and teach those who want to listen. I still believe in the benefits of my forms.


----------



## JTKenpo

"I mis-understoood I guess. I thought you were looking for the key to how they got to be so good, not what they taught to their students."

Again, I'm not trying to speak for Marlon.  i don't know what anyone else believes made these Masters great. Some were just generally all around tough guys that could rip your head off and they happen to find Kempo.  Others were scientific in there approach to what they were taught and brought it to the next level.  I do not believe they were great because of a certain form they were taught though.


----------



## donald

tigdra said:


> Learning a pattern of techniques doesn't make you better at going from every technique to every technique it helps you to go from technique a to technique b.


 
Ok, so what is your point? Are you saying forms can't teach you spontaneous response? If so I gotta say that I disagree. In EPAK, dancing, whatever, enough PROPER practice, and you should begin to learn to reply without too much thought. Whether it be on the dance floor, and your partner throws you an unfamilar step, or on the mat/street, and your confronted with the surprise attack. You should be learning enough movement through practice to eventually go from basic addition to more complex situations. That just seems to be logical progression to me. I hope this makes sense, and maybe can be helpful. I am guessing you have heard all this before, but for some reason you don't accept it. I hope you can have fun with this again. May The Lord Jesus bless, and keep you, and yours.

1stJohn1:9


----------



## HKphooey

Go do Form 4 10 times and tell me about your heart rate.  

Learning to deal with angles and transitions are very important to your training.


----------



## MJS

tigdra said:


> Yes you learn how to flow from a technique to an other which has been selected for you, you build a fluidity between the two techniques such as in long 3 which in tracy kenpo you go from "2 headed serpent" into " "rising elbows" or for those in parker's system "destructive twins" to "crashing wings".
> 
> But let us analyze this in a simplistic manner, a dancer learns a set of movements a,b,c, and d, and she practices here heart out. just because she builds muscle memory and fluidity from a to b, b to c, and c to d, does not mean she can do the same with movements c to a.
> 
> Learning a pattern of techniques doesn't make you better at going from every technique to every technique it helps you to go from technique a to technique b.


 


donald said:


> Ok, so what is your point? Are you saying forms can't teach you spontaneous response? If so I gotta say that I disagree. In EPAK, dancing, whatever, enough PROPER practice, and you should begin to learn to reply without too much thought. Whether it be on the dance floor, and your partner throws you an unfamilar step, or on the mat/street, and your confronted with the surprise attack. You should be learning enough movement through practice to eventually go from basic addition to more complex situations. That just seems to be logical progression to me. I hope this makes sense, and maybe can be helpful. I am guessing you have heard all this before, but for some reason you don't accept it. I hope you can have fun with this again. May The Lord Jesus bless, and keep you, and yours.
> 
> 1stJohn1:9


 
I quoted tigdras post as a reference, but I have to agree with Donalds reply.  Just because we learn a kata from move a to b to c, etc., does not mean that we can't pick out a move from the middle or the end.  Like I said a few times...IMO, the forms are simply drills that build a foundation, just like a technique.  Hell, just today during my private lesson, I was going thru a bunch of techniques with my inst.  We did the technique in the ideal phase, and then moved on to the what if.  There were times when a move, when done the textbook way, would normally be delivered to the ribs, but due to body position, resistance, etc., I had to alter my response to fit what was happening at that time.  

This, IMHO, is the ultimate goal....to be able to just react without having to think.  



HKphooey said:


> Go do Form 4 10 times and tell me about your heart rate.


 
Exactly!!


----------



## marlon

one problem i have is with grammer in these posts...i do not know how to make a paragraph break.  So, when i mentioned that the pinans are really not kempo and then seemed to bring up taiji and naihanchi...well there should have been a paragraph break.  The pinans are taught because GM Cerio fell in love with the Okinawan influence, however they do not move like skk...in fact NCK does not move like skk...imo.  I am not discussing what is better, just observing a fact...interestingly GM Cerio's earlier footage looks more like skk (what GM Villari learned) than his later stuff.  The pinans are not at all kempo.  they are very interesting and worthwhile forms but they do not improve ones kempo, simply because they are not kempo and the differences are too great.  they work certain basics very well however, but generic basics as far as skk trainign goes.  they are very beneficial to any Okinawan style martial arts.  Please notre the last point to avoid \unnecessary confusion and confrointation.  As for the other forms i mentioned  (in the place where a paragraph break should be) they are about touching something of what those masters found and learned and presumably wanted to share.  Motobu's art was different from other Okinawan arts and in many ways shared a similar philosophy of fighting and teaching fighting with our kempo.  The forms i mentioned are more about my personal preferences and goals and not specifically about teaching kempo per se.  But then again how does one escape who one is...and why would you want to?  Hopefully this clarify the comments from my other post and gets us back to the topic proper.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon

JTKenpo said:


> "I mis-understoood I guess. I thought you were looking for the key to how they got to be so good, not what they taught to their students."
> 
> Again, I'm not trying to speak for Marlon. i don't know what anyone else believes made these Masters great. Some were just generally all around tough guys that could rip your head off and they happen to find Kempo. Others were scientific in there approach to what they were taught and brought it to the next level. I do not believe they were great because of a certain form they were taught though.


 

Thanks JT.  I do not believe they were great because of a form they were taught.  Yet if these exceptionmal fighters and martial artists picked a certain form to dedicate more time and thought and energy to..it is worth looking at more deeply to my thinking.  If one of these created a form as thier signature form or quinessential form (at least NC and FV and YCFdid) then i am going to focus on it as a means to 'seeing' some of what they s'saw' and growing myself and my art and my ability and my understanding.  This is my reason for loving froms in general and some specifically. As Tigda said the rest we could get elsewhere or at least with much less forms.

Rerspectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon

DavidCC said:


> there are 2 types of forms used in kempo - those that are composed of techniques, and those that are composed of techniques that we have numbers for
> 
> 
> 
> All form have techniques, i agree and most of our forms do not contain the numbered combinations as different from what i understand of the AK forms which are composed of mainly named AK techniques
> 
> 
> 
> SKK "kata" contain some of the numbered techniques, perhaps more if you can strip away layers of changes in both the kata and the technqiues? They were created at the same time and by the same people (more or less...)
> 
> can you explain this point a little more please?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know how you can dismiss pinan as not kempo but include naihanchi. Well, I should say I do know how but I think that is an arbitrary line. I have video of Oyata doing both and his style is kempo. If Villari created SKK and he wanted them in there (having been taught them by Nick Cerio) then by definition they "belong in the system". However I do think that they either need to be taught in much greater depth than they typically seem to be. For example I never found a decent explanation for the "C guard" until I talked to a Tang Soo Do guy
> 
> 
> I have a decent explaination for most things in my forms  (although i have difficulties finding very interesting things in Invincible Wall).  I still find new things regularly some more mundane than others but i learn constasntly from my forms...and do what i can to teach my students to dio the same...i have no desire to clone myself
> 
> I think if you map it out, the form that both Emperado and Parker learned from their common root, is Naihanchi. But I don't know if that is "quintessential". It is certainly bad-*** though.


 

I think i did not make things clear enough in my early post.  I hope i havee done a better job today.  
Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon

donald said:


> Ok, so what is your point? Are you saying forms can't teach you spontaneous response? If so I gotta say that I disagree. In EPAK, dancing, whatever, enough PROPER practice, and you should begin to learn to reply without too much thought. Whether it be on the dance floor, and your partner throws you an unfamilar step, or on the mat/street, and your confronted with the surprise attack. You should be learning enough movement through practice to eventually go from basic addition to more complex situations. That just seems to be logical progression to me. I hope this makes sense, and maybe can be helpful. I am guessing you have heard all this before, but for some reason you don't accept it. I hope you can have fun with this again. May The Lord Jesus bless, and keep you, and yours.
> 
> 
> 
> 1stJohn1:9


 

Forms can give you the tools to practice the proper body mechanics to respond to "surprises" and in that sense can help with spontaneaity. yet in and of themselves forms do not teach this, in my opinion...teachers do, should, can...  Forms can be a great training tool.  the points mentioned above can be taught without forms or without as many forms as kempo has in the system using the techniques and drills

Respectfully,.
Marlon


----------



## DavidCC

> SKK "kata" contain some of the numbered techniques, perhaps more if you can strip away layers of changes in both the kata and the technqiues? They were created at the same time and by the same people (more or less...)
> 
> can you explain this point a little more please?


 
I believe the kata were created by Sonny Gas back in the days after he split with Kaju, and he created the combos at the same time.  My guess is at that time you could find many of those combos within those kata.  Perhaps only GM Pesare can tell us for sure today (somebody email him and ask ).  

Over time I think that the kata have undergone many changes, small but they add up; and the combos have undegone many changes or even just been replaced, what with all the guys between Gascon and Villari not to mention USSD and everyone who split from Villari or USSD.  So now there are not identifiable if they are even still there.

For example in K3 : we have a different combo 14 than most schools, in K3 where you do 14 we do our 14 not the traditional 14.


----------



## 14 Kempo

Victor "Sonny" Gascon will be in San Diego in July of this year. I will certainly ask him about the forms and combinations and their respective origins.


----------



## tigdra

Mjs I agree with you in a street confrontation I would never throw a high kick, especially on a wet floor. Hell I wouldn't throw a high kick if the the mats in the gym were wet. I too agree that kicking high in the street is not wise.


----------



## tigdra

donald said:


> Ok, so what is your point? Are you saying forms can't teach you spontaneous response? If so I gotta say that I disagree. In EPAK, dancing, whatever, enough PROPER practice, and you should begin to learn to reply without too much thought. Whether it be on the dance floor, and your partner throws you an unfamilar step, or on the mat/street, and your confronted with the surprise attack. You should be learning enough movement through practice to eventually go from basic addition to more complex situations. That just seems to be logical progression to me. I hope this makes sense, and maybe can be helpful. I am guessing you have heard all this before, but for some reason you don't accept it. I hope you can have fun with this again. May The Lord Jesus bless, and keep you, and yours.
> 
> 1stJohn1:9



katas do teach spontaneous response but so do techniques, so why do the katas? I am in totally agree but techniques show you the same things the katas do, so what the use of them.


----------



## tigdra

HKphooey said:


> Go do Form 4 10 times and tell me about your heart rate.
> 
> Learning to deal with angles and transitions are very important to your training.



So your suggesting that I do long 4, 10 times in a row. I pretty sure you would have to do it fast to get your heart rate up. I would do long 4, 10 timesin a row but that would be too time consuming especially when I could do a *more challenging form just twice and still yet reap better cardiovascular and muscular benefits.

Angles are also taught in the techniques so are the transitions, hence techniques like "escape from death" and "whirling blades", but lets just say for the sake of argument that techniques didn't teach you these things. Do you really need 10 or so forms to teach you a concept that only one or two would.*


----------



## tigdra

MJS said:


> the forms are simply drills that build a foundation, just like a technique.



Exactly, just like a technique.


----------



## SK101

Can't you record the techniques just by practicing them, and don't you learn concepts through techniques as well such as marriage of gravity in sword of destruction (basic technique) Don't you also practice key moves in techniques, finally can't you analyze techniques by themselves and find new meanings to them or do they really need to be in a form.

  I would say the only true differance between a form and doing techniques by themselves is trasition so yes you could learn everything from technique that you learn in a form you are merely adding in transition to the equation. If you have techniques that attack with different transitions such one person attacks from 12:00 then you have to turn to face 3:00 to another attacker then yes you have everything in the form covered via technique, but you could argue it the other way also, if you have someone attack you while doing your form do you need techniques?


----------



## SK101

I get your point flying crane but to tell you the truth I dont want to eliminated forms from kenpo I just think kenpo needs better forms, forms that challenge you both mentally and physically.

That may be the give and take of having a standardized system. You know you won't overlook something since you have an exact order, but the ideal for teaching would to be to vary material by each individual student. When you do teach and you wander it is very easy to find your students doing all the stuff way above their level rather than what they may actually need, but there definately is an argument to be made that every student is different and needs variation in structure to accommidate there personality, body style, and just as importantly what motivates them (maybe that should be under personality).


----------



## Flying Crane

SK101 said:


> That may be the give and take of having a standardized system. You know you won't overlook something since you have an exact order, but the ideal for teaching would to be to vary material by each individual student. [/quote]
> 
> very good point here.  Most of the kenpo that I have any familiarity with is very standardized.  In many ways this is a good thing and it works very well.  But I think this is a fairly new development in the arts.  I believe that back in the day, say a few generations ago, people learned whatever they could from whomever they could, and they passed that on to their own students.  There were no belts, and the codified system was less prevalent.  Whatever 'system' one taught was just the result of what he picked up over the years from various sources.
> 
> I'm not a historian so I cannot state this with true authority, but I suspect it is true, or true in many cases.


----------



## tigdra

SK101 said:


> but you could argue it the other way also, if you have someone attack you while doing your form do you need techniques?





I made a similar comment earlier on this thread stating that as well and few other individuals also made similar comments. I agree we should keep one or the other but not both seeing that both give you the same benefits. 

In regards to transitions I also made a comment that unless you practice all possible transitions then your really just learning a theory. Being able to apply that theory comes with years of practice but more importantly with a higher sense of reaction.

Learning the techniques will make your odds better in regards to defending your life but they don't guarantee that you will be able to when the time comes. I have seen students that you scream out a technique name and they will do it without flaw, they are able to tell you all the specifics of a technique; their like a "walking bible" of kenpo techniques, yet they wouldn't be able to fight themselves out of a paper bag. 

So what I am getting at is if an individual has a good amount of knowledge and good reaction time with proper technique then, yes their odds of defending themselves will sufficiently increase. But technique alone, I believe, is not enough. 

So although some people prefer to keep forms and argue that a least it teaches transitions, I find that techniques themselves also teach you transitions. So unless a person is willing to spend there life training from every technique to every other technique, I find that transitions is more of a theory rather than a skill. An example of what I mean is that even though you can jump and even though you may kick doesnt mean you good at a jump kick, unless if you practice jump kicking. Yes you may be fast and precise at transitioning through techniques of katas in a certain order, but speed, precision and reaction timing will sufficiently decrease if you do a transition you have never worked at, especially if a simple step doesnt get you into position to your next attacker.


----------



## tigdra

SK101 said:


> That may be the give and take of having a standardized system. You know you won't overlook something since you have an exact order, but the ideal for teaching would to be to vary material by each individual student. When you do teach and you wander it is very easy to find your students doing all the stuff way above their level rather than what they may actually need, but there definitely is an argument to be made that every student is different and needs variation in structure to accommodate there personality, body style, and just as importantly what motivates them (maybe that should be under personality).



Well most kung fu systems have a standardized system and yet their forms build your body, mind and technical vocabulary progressively. 

Of course every student is different and there are going to be students with disabilities and weakness in certain areas and of course you tailor defenses to increase their odds of defense. 

Not all forms need to be done at high speeds with high kicks to reap its benefits, take tai chi as an example.  

In regards to them learning things before they should, if I wanted to merge jujitsu into kenpo, I would be able to teach a yellow belt the guard position without it conflicting with his kenpo techniques. You could take physically demanding forms from wushu, kung fu or whatever and implement it into kenpo without it conflicting with their kenpo.

Last I agree with you not everyone is looking for an art, some people want defense so then why teach them forms when all the need is to defend themselves, a small dictionary of techniques with proper mental training such as krav maga would suite them great.  

I have also taken these factors into consideration and I have made accommodations to my system to suite the needs of many, but not all, that is impossible. I wouldnt begin to assume that I know what the best way to defend yourself if you were handicap and in a wheelchair. I would be able to offer some insights and recommend a secondary weapon such as a firearm.


----------



## MeatWad2

tigdra said:


> What use are kenpo forms?
> 
> I have taken kenpo for many years and every time I learn a new form or technique I ask myself what am I learning, more importantly what am I learning that is new? What am I getting out of this?
> 
> I know that forms teach you to have correct technique, flow from technique to technique, learning techniques on both sides but what do kenpo forms teach you aside from that? and how many forms do you need to go through to re-learn the same concepts.
> 
> 
> please correct my way of thinking because I have lost hope on kenpo forms



The only way for you to correct your way of thinking is by learning how to practice differently.   Apply your forms to partner drills.  How?  Take your forms apart and start thinking "How many different ways can I adapt this part of the form and apply it to sparring (fighting, whatever)?"  When you are able to take apart the forms and practice your form applications against different types of attacks, then you'll start to think of them differently.


----------



## tigdra

MeatWad2 said:


> The only way for you to correct your way of thinking is by learning how to practice differently. Apply your forms to partner drills. How? Take your forms apart and start thinking "How many different ways can I adapt this part of the form and apply it to sparring (fighting, whatever)?" When you are able to take apart the forms and practice your form applications against different types of attacks, then you'll start to think of them differently.


 

thanks for the tips


----------



## Flying Crane

MeatWad2 said:


> The only way for you to correct your way of thinking is by learning how to practice differently.


 
I don't know that I agree he needs to "correct" his thinking.  I don't think he is wrong in his position.  I actually agree to an extent with much of what he has said and I see the sense in his points.  Ultimately I disagree with his conclusions, I do see the value in kenpo forms and I keep them as part of my practice.  But I don't think he is objectively or absolutely wrong in his thinking.  Our final conclusions just differ, that's all.


----------



## marlon

tigdra said:


> My main concern comes from this conclusion; there are a large percentage of kenpo masters that are over weight.
> 
> Don't get me wrong they are super fast with their hands and all but they got this big belly going on, and yet you see kung fu masters and their majority are slim. Don't get me wrong I am not comparing asians to americans. I am comparing american people who practice kenpo vs american people that practice kung fu.
> 
> I am pretty sure I read this somewhere it stated that, parker was suggested to included forms into the kenpo system so to become more competitive or more legitimate.
> 
> So if forms where put into kenpo for those reasons then why not create forms that would serve new gains. To excel certain areas that are lacking in kenpo.
> 
> You learn defense from your techniques, you work out and condition your body through your exercise classes then what do forms do? Do they teach you hidden concepts that you'll never learn from a technique? do they condition your body to perform moves to make you more agile? are they done for beauty?
> 
> I know my answer to this question but I would like to hear yours.
> 
> 
> I don't know the shaolin kenpo forms but I do know these following kenpo forms.
> 
> short 1 2 3 4 5
> long 1 2 3 4 5
> Block set
> book set (panther set)
> tiger and crane
> finger set
> moving finger set
> mass attack
> kung fu set
> sword set
> staff set
> 2 man set
> 2 man staff
> tan tui
> kicking sets
> coordination sets
> stance sets
> and a couple others....


 

so i have re read this thread and i think that i may not be able to understand your point completely because in many ways the shaolin kempo forms do have a progression although they are still much shorter that kung fu forms.  Leaving out the pinans we have
1 kata : straight kicks and punches not many angles
2 kata: moving backwards while defending / countering...more angles 2 kicks with the same leg without touching the ground
3 kata : joint locks 3 kicks without stepping down   open hand techniques a jumping kick spining elbow
4 kata:...not so fancy
5 kata :shifting attacks from forward to back and new stance jumping kick new kick
6 kata :explores the combinations longer than other forms..new blocking
statue of the crane : animasl form, many moves off of one leg, balance on one leg, strikes to the ground, a formal throw in the form chain punching, double striking
then we begin with the more complex forms with a more kung fu flavour

Shotungkwa:  continuous movement, the essesnce of shaolin kempo, jumping kicks, spining kicks, attacking in two directions simultaneously, many angles and directional shifts, scorpion kick, rapin up and down the centerline striking, a sweep, locks

honsuki:  rapid striking sequences up and down the center line, elbows, sweeps, throws, breathing exercise, perennium strike, honsuki fist

Nengli north and south:  very kung fu in its movements for a kempo form, evasion by jumping, snake kick, leg sweep, defending / attacking while backing up, many angles, limb breaks, lower body striking as the upper body strikes, drawing in the opponet to attacks, new stances, woundeed tiger strike, trapping, attacking from behind

swift tigers:  animal form, tearing of muscle, high kick angles of attack off a line position,torque punch, throws/ rolling opponents, limb breaks, shifting leaning stances, advancing through opponents, developing power off of a stationary wieght and waist shift rather that through stepping

Invincible wall:  i don't get it fully yet, but full weight shift into strikes, attacking the opponents back, taking out the knees

Five Dragons Face the Four Winds:  coming up while striking/ striking from below, trapping and countering with the legs, striking while opponent is on the ground, many angles, fighting from the ground, different thr4ows longer form covers a lot of ground..more than the nengli forms, striking power in multiple directions simultanteaously.

Branches of the Falling Pine:  do not know this one too well but animal form, striking with both arms at the same time, balance disruption, striking while seeming to move away from target, spinning moves, jumping attacks, spinal manip[ulation

then there are the weapons forms which challenges us in different ways with spnis, jumps, defending from the ground, shifting angles and all in the contecxt of the added concentration necessary to manuipulate with skill a sword, bo , jo , sais, nunchucks. broadsword, daggers...


so my experince with forms in kempo i thing is very different than yours Tigdra.  Have you tried making a form to suit your needs.  you certainly sound like you have the experience and vision to do so?  Do your techniques meet the needs you express as missing fro mthe forms in your system?  If they do then perhaps you ccan make a form out of them ...going outside your system to graft something on can be difficult because other styles may essentially be at odds with the philosophy of fighting and defense involved in your kenpo.  just some thjoughts

Respectfully,
Marlon

btw i am no master so my insiughts on the kempo forms may be way off and others more knowledgeable than me are more thatn welcome to share and correct.  i am here to learn

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## tigdra

My point in the most simplistic fashion falls into two possibilities.

1.) 

If kenpo is a defensive system

Then techniques show you the tools to defend one self, such as concepts and correct execution of strikes

And sparring and partner exercises should give you the ability such as timing, distance etc.

But kenpo forms only repeat concepts.

So kenpo forms become a repetition of concepts, and in many cases a repetition of what you have already learned just put together in a different order. In other words my belief is that in a defense system, such as kenpo, katas dont at this time serve a sufficient purpose. This is where I make reference to defense systems such as krav maga, which happens to be very successful, proven, and efficient defensive system.


2.)

Now if you believe that kenpo is a martial art then techniques teach you concepts and technique to execute your art in a correct manner.

Fighting challenges the students to explore sport defensive tactics and fine tune timing, distance etc.   

And forms should increase stamina, conditioning and flexibility, But kenpo forms as an art dont do this. 

(first form in kenpo usually is short one) and unless you do 20 times super fast, you arent going to get any stamina, conditioning or flexibility. The shaolin kenpo kata 1 that I saw neither shows much cardiovascular, stamina, etc. The form I saw wouldnt get me sore just by doing it 5 times fast or slow, yet I know a basic kung fu form (first form in many shaolin kung fu schools) that weather you do it fast or slow 5 times the next day you are going to be sore and yet it is only consisted of 4 techniques repeated on both sides equaling 8 techniques.

So if you think kenpo is an art then it extremely lacks and artistic, aerobic, flexibility, etc. system of forms such as many kung fu schools. 


*******One side note for those who dont read the entire thread, there are styles such as shotokan and goju ryu which consist of mostly forms and some basic techniques. Some people consider these styles art and others consider them defense either way these style justify having their forms due to the lack of techniques, hence learning your techniques through your forms.*********


----------



## marlon

tigdra said:


> My point in the most simplistic fashion falls into two possibilities.
> 
> 1.)
> 
> If kenpo is a defensive system
> 
> Then techniques show you the tools to defend one self, such as concepts and correct execution of strikes
> 
> And sparring and partner exercises should give you the ability such as timing, distance etc.
> 
> But kenpo forms only repeat concepts.
> 
> So kenpo forms become a repetition of concepts, and in many cases a repetition of what you have already learned just put together in a different order. In other words my belief is that in a defense system, such as kenpo, katas dont at this time serve a sufficient purpose. This is where I make reference to defense systems such as krav maga, which happens to be very successful, proven, and efficient defensive system.
> 
> 
> 2.)
> 
> Now if you believe that kenpo is a martial art then techniques teach you concepts and technique to execute your art in a correct manner.
> 
> Fighting challenges the students to explore sport defensive tactics and fine tune timing, distance etc.
> 
> And forms should increase stamina, conditioning and flexibility, But kenpo forms as an art dont do this.
> 
> (first form in kenpo usually is short one) and unless you do 20 times super fast, you arent going to get any stamina, conditioning or flexibility. The shaolin kenpo kata 1 that I saw neither shows much cardiovascular, stamina, etc. The form I saw wouldnt get me sore just by doing it 5 times fast or slow, yet I know a basic kung fu form (first form in many shaolin kung fu schools) that weather you do it fast or slow 5 times the next day you are going to be sore and yet it is only consisted of 4 techniques repeated on both sides equaling 8 techniques.
> 
> So if you think kenpo is an art then it extremely lacks and artistic, aerobic, flexibility, etc. system of forms such as many kung fu schools.
> 
> 
> *******One side note for those who dont read the entire thread, there are styles such as shotokan and goju ryu which consist of mostly forms and some basic techniques. Some people consider these styles art and others consider them defense either way these style justify having their forms due to the lack of techniques, hence learning your techniques through your forms.*********


 

ok i understand your thoughts better now.  thanks for reading my post..btw standing in a low horse stance for 30 - 60 minutes will leave you sore and your heart rate up.  It sounds to me that you are saying the purpose of your doing kung fu forms is aerobic exercise and stretching (correct me if i am wrong...actually you do not need to) and that is your choice.  If this is what you are looking for in forms and that a defensive system such as kempo is non artistic in your view then i can see why you would eliminate the kenpo forms.  It is not what i understood from this discussion in the past.  Thanks for clearing it up.

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon

[

But kenpo forms only repeat concepts.

So kenpo forms become a repetition of concepts, and in many cases a repetition of what you have already learned just put together in a different order. In other words my belief is that in a defense system, such as kenpo, katas dont at this time serve a sufficient purpose. 

repetition is the mother of all teaching.

respectfully,
marlon


----------



## tigdra

marlon said:


> [
> 
> repetition is the mother of all teaching.
> 
> respectfully,
> marlon



Yes, repetition is the mother of all teaching but learning the exact same thing over again and giving it another name becomes redundant. 

If you take into considration that parker created most of the kenpo forms, then you would realize that the kenpo forms are actually contrary to what parker did in changing traditional kenpo into American kenpo. 

Parker saw repitition, too much of it in the original system and hence eliminated or merged many of the techniques to make a more condensed and shorter system. 

One example of this is tackle technique those in the tracy system know this technique. This technique has 4-5 variations and instead of keeping all the variations parker grabed all the variations and put them into one technique.

Parker was upset with learning windmill guard and then circling serpent then realizing that the only difference between the two is an extra wheel kick. 

In fact I remember reading somewhere that parker wasnt going to add forms into American kenpo until someone told him that it would make his style more marketable.

I dont mind repitition but I do mind learning delayed sword and then learning a whole other technique that is exactly then same. Such as learning a technique called delayed fist and yet it is exactly the same as delayed sword with the only exception that the last strike would be a backfist instead of a chop. This kind of repetition is nonsense.


----------



## tigdra

marlon said:


> ..btw standing in a low horse stance for 30 - 60 minutes will leave you sore and your heart rate up.  It sounds to me that you are saying the purpose of your doing kung fu forms is aerobic exercise and stretching (correct me if i am wrong...actually you do not need to) and that is your choice.  If this is what you are looking for in forms and that a defensive system such as kempo is non artistic in your view then i can see why you would eliminate the kenpo forms.  It is not what i understood from this discussion in the past.  Thanks for clearing it up.
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon



I appreciate the tip in regards to working out but standing in a horse stance for 30 - 60 minutes is the equivalent to walking at a slow pace for 8 hours. I know that getting in a horse for that long will give me a workout and in regards to workout I know that I would get more out of a deep horse in comparison to the forms. (especially since many masters agree that deep stances in kenpo are incorrect) Walking for 8 hours in a slow pace would give you great benefits; low impact, minimum muscle loss, sufficient calories burnt. But the truth is that I could do so many more things in that amount of time. If I would do a kung fu form for 30 -60 minutes I would get a better workout as well as more benefits that a deep horse. 

The purpose of forms are for limberness, coordination, proper technique practice, exercise, conditioning, and in some systems it is a form of learning self defense concepts. 

I do find some aspects of kenpo artistic, but it isnt its forms and I too find some defensive qualities in kenpo. I dont mind learning or teaching both a defense and an art but there must be a clear understanding of what is art and what is defense. Forms are an artistic portion of many styles and techniques are the defensive, but learning forms that re-teach technical concepts for the purposes of defense is the same as learning self defense techniques that include back and front flips. Both can be done but why would you want to learn defense techniques that teach you artistic movements or artistic movements that repeat mechanical movements which have already been learned in you defense techniques.

Take this as an example, judo is recently considered a sport but it would be ignorant to deny that some if not most of its techniques would be applicable in a street confrontation. Taking this into consideration how would you feel about an all throw form in judo. Doing all the throws you learned previously in a consecutive manner and calling it Oh summo 1, doesnt sound too exciting. Well neither does learning techniques in a certain order and calling it short 1

Again these thoughts do no include the styles that primarily do only forms, as these styles read defense applications from their forms and not from techniques


----------



## marlon

there are forms in judo

marlon


----------



## marlon

tigdra said:


> Yes, repetition is the mother of all teaching but learning the exact same thing over again and giving it another name becomes redundant.
> 
> If you take into considration that parker created most of the kenpo forms, then you would realize that the kenpo forms are actually contrary to what parker did in changing traditional kenpo into American kenpo.
> 
> Parker saw repitition, too much of it in the original system and hence eliminated or merged many of the techniques to make a more condensed and shorter system.
> 
> One example of this is tackle technique those in the tracy system know this technique. This technique has 4-5 variations and instead of keeping all the variations parker grabed all the variations and put them into one technique.
> 
> Parker was upset with learning windmill guard and then circling serpent then realizing that the only difference between the two is an extra wheel kick.
> 
> In fact I remember reading somewhere that parker wasnt going to add forms into American kenpo until someone told him that it would make his style more marketable.
> 
> I dont mind repitition but I do mind learning delayed sword and then learning a whole other technique that is exactly then same. Such as learning a technique called delayed fist and yet it is exactly the same as delayed sword with the only exception that the last strike would be a backfist instead of a chop. This kind of repetition is nonsense.


 

again, i do not know AK so my experience is different and perhaps my participation in this thread is not useful.

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## tigdra

marlon said:


> there are forms in judo
> 
> marlon



I know that traditional judo schools have forms, what I ment was that sport judo didn't have forms, most people have taken it out because they are focusing on sport and not on art or tradition. I know that many judo schools have forms categorizing their throws, manipulations etc. but it is for that same reasonn that most sport judo schools have eliminated they aren't necessery for acheiving an olympic metal, which is one way to measure your proficiency in judo.


----------



## marlon

tigdra i do not know epak and my experience is not your experience.  i will leave things here.


marlon


----------



## Jdokan

tigdra said:


> My point in the most simplistic fashion falls into two possibilities.
> 
> 1.)
> 
> If kenpo is a defensive system
> 
> Then techniques show you the tools to defend one self, such as concepts and correct execution of strikes
> 
> And sparring and partner exercises should give you the ability such as timing, distance etc.
> 
> But kenpo forms only repeat concepts.
> 
> So kenpo forms become a repetition of concepts, and in many cases a repetition of what you have already learned just put together in a different order. In other words my belief is that in a defense system, such as kenpo, katas dont at this time serve a sufficient purpose. This is where I make reference to defense systems such as krav maga, which happens to be very successful, proven, and efficient defensive system.
> 
> 
> 2.)
> 
> Now if you believe that kenpo is a martial art then techniques teach you concepts and technique to execute your art in a correct manner.
> 
> Fighting challenges the students to explore sport defensive tactics and fine tune timing, distance etc.
> 
> And forms should increase stamina, conditioning and flexibility, But kenpo forms as an art dont do this.
> 
> (first form in kenpo usually is short one) and unless you do 20 times super fast, you arent going to get any stamina, conditioning or flexibility. The shaolin kenpo kata 1 that I saw neither shows much cardiovascular, stamina, etc. The form I saw wouldnt get me sore just by doing it 5 times fast or slow, yet I know a basic kung fu form (first form in many shaolin kung fu schools) that weather you do it fast or slow 5 times the next day you are going to be sore and yet it is only consisted of 4 techniques repeated on both sides equaling 8 techniques.
> 
> So if you think kenpo is an art then it extremely lacks and artistic, aerobic, flexibility, etc. system of forms such as many kung fu schools.
> 
> 
> *******One side note for those who dont read the entire thread, there are styles such as shotokan and goju ryu which consist of mostly forms and some basic techniques. Some people consider these styles art and others consider them defense either way these style justify having their forms due to the lack of techniques, hence learning your techniques through your forms.*********


Kata 1 (Villari) like any form can & should be done in such it is a stamina workout, ie dynamic tension or speed/extension striking...Kata 1 I think is an awesome fighting form.....simple, effective and technical.....

But I can also see your point....once you've made a decision that something no longer has value....dump it and move on.....find that new something that you feel does develop you in the things that are near & dear to you.....
something my grandfather told me and it took along time before I understood...."not all grass-eaters eat the same thing" thank goodness for that...
peace,
j.


----------

