# Mirroring Techniques



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 12, 2004)

As a requirement for second black, I am challenged to begin mirroring my techniques. I went back here on MT and read an interesting thread by tshadowchaser entitled - _left-right?_ and the thread debated the necessity of doing this. There were some interesting arguments on both sides. However, as this is a requirement for me I don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not it's something I'd like to do, or personally find necessary, although I'm hoping I will find benefits to doing this. 

For years now I've been training these techniques one sided and now have to rethink how I do them. To help me prepare for this I mirrored a few techniques in my personal form for my black belt. It was simply confusing - a major brain drain!  This is something that we are expected to learn on our own, and right now I think I'm dreading the process, and am already putting off starting it. I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.  

Thanks,
MJ :asian:


----------



## Shodan (Aug 12, 2004)

Well, you already have some of this going on if you know Long Form 3 and Long Form 4.  It seems very awkward at first to get this down, but with lots of practice, they become more smooth.  My first instructor used to always say: "Repetition is the key" and it really applies here.  Do them as much as you can in the air but also on the body as much as possible.......this way you will get to feel both ways and muscle memory will set in.  If you get the chance to teach a lot.......especially the lower ranks- start teaching them their techs facing them.  You do the tech on your left side for practice and they will mirror you on the right side to learn........we used to teach the kids' classes that way a lot cuz they'd try to mirror our moves so much they'd do it on the "wrong" side if we mirrored them doing the techs. on the right side.

  Hope some of that makes sense and helps........

  :asian:  :karate:


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 12, 2004)

A simple method to help you get the material down is to video tape yourself doing the techniques slowly on the second side.  Watch the tape and look for holes in your technique.  Every few times you practice the second side tape your self, you should start to see improvement.  The taping will help you find the things you have missed.

In no time you will be banging of techniques either side with out thought.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 12, 2004)

Shodan said:
			
		

> Well, you already have some of this going on if you know Long Form 3 and Long Form 4. It seems very awkward at first to get this down, but with lots of practice, they become more smooth. My first instructor used to always say: "Repetition is the key" and it really applies here. Do them as much as you can in the air but also on the body as much as possible.......this way you will get to feel both ways and muscle memory will set in. If you get the chance to teach a lot.......especially the lower ranks- start teaching them their techs facing them. You do the tech on your left side for practice and they will mirror you on the right side to learn........we used to teach the kids' classes that way a lot cuz they'd try to mirror our moves so much they'd do it on the "wrong" side if we mirrored them doing the techs. on the right side.
> 
> Hope some of that makes sense and helps........
> 
> :asian: :karate:


Shodan,

Yes Long Form 3 is one of my favorite and the techniques are very clear in both that and Long Form 4. The thing is it's just easier for me when I have someone to follow. I didn't even think about mirroring techniques in those forms I was just following my instructor's movement, but when I tried to do Returning Viper on my own for my personal form it was nutz  I did eventually get it but it was challenging and foreign. It's like I finally have them in an automatic state, and now I have to really think it through again. I'm also concerned that it will affect my reaction time in general. 

I really like the idea of teaching that way, but I think it will take a long time before I'm comfortable enough to do that. I don't like teaching things I'm not sure of, because I think unlearning is very difficult for a student and I don't want to confuse anyone. I have a friend who tells me all instruction in his school is done that way. Eventually being able to mirror teach techniques seems to be one really positive benefit of doing this.

Shodan or any of you who do this, do you think it's better to learn them over a period of time, like one at a time or try and run through them all or in chunks by belt level? What's the best way to start?

Thanks,
MJ :asian:


----------



## Kenpo Mama (Aug 12, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> As a requirement for second black, I am challenged to begin mirroring my techniques. I went back here on MT and read an interesting thread by tshadowchaser entitled - _left-right?_ and the thread debated the necessity of doing this. There were some interesting arguments on both sides. However, as this is a requirement for me I don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not it's something I'd like to do, or personally find necessary, although I'm hoping I will find benefits to doing this.
> 
> For years now I've been training these techniques one sided and now have to rethink how I do them. To help me prepare for this I mirrored a few techniques in my personal form for my black belt. It was simply confusing - a major brain drain!  This is something that we are expected to learn on our own, and right now I think I'm dreading the process, and am already putting off starting it. I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.
> 
> ...


Hey MaryJo,

I find that actually using the mirror to "mirror" techniques is the best way to learn the other side of the tech.  Break the tech down into segments, about 3 or 4 movements at a time, then watching yourself in the mirror do it on the other side.  Add a little more, then mirror, then go back to the beginning of the tech and start again, before you know it, you will be doing the tech fluidly.  

You will be amazed how many of the techs you actually know both sides of when you begin to analyze them in terms of what you have learned in form.  And pay close attention, it is not always necessary to learn all the techs from both sides.  I'm sure you will do fine.  I always use the joke from Ben Stiller's movie - Zoolander  "i can't go left"!   Try one a day and see how it goes!

Donna


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 12, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> As a requirement for second black, I am challenged to begin mirroring my techniques. I went back here on MT and read an interesting thread by tshadowchaser entitled - _left-right?_ and the thread debated the necessity of doing this. There were some interesting arguments on both sides. However, as this is a requirement for me I don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not it's something I'd like to do, or personally find necessary, although I'm hoping I will find benefits to doing this.
> 
> For years now I've been training these techniques one sided and now have to rethink how I do them. To help me prepare for this I mirrored a few techniques in my personal form for my black belt. It was simply confusing - a major brain drain!  This is something that we are expected to learn on our own, and right now I think I'm dreading the process, and am already putting off starting it. I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.
> 
> ...



As you start going through the techniques you may find you already know the left side of them and they will come easier than you think.

Like Crossing Talon and Crossed Twigs.

Run those one after the other and see what you find.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 12, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> A simple method to help you get the material down is to video tape yourself doing the techniques slowly on the second side. Watch the tape and look for holes in your technique. Every few times you practice the second side tape your self, you should start to see improvement. The taping will help you find the things you have missed.
> 
> In no time you will be banging of techniques either side with out thought.


Rob that is a great idea! I'm finally over "_the hate to be filmed thing" _and find it very useful in the analysis of my sparring. I will definitely give this a try!



			
				Kenpo Mama said:
			
		

> I find that actually using the mirror to "mirror" techniques is the best way to learn the other side of the tech. Break the tech down into segments, about 3 or 4 movements at a time, then watching yourself in the mirror do it on the other side. Add a little more, then mirror, then go back to the beginning of the tech and start again, before you know it, you will be doing the tech fluidly.


 Hey Donna,

I'll give this a shot at the studio! Are you mirroring at your school?

MJ :asian:


----------



## Storm (Aug 12, 2004)

I have been instructing tigers for a little while (5 - 10 y olds).  When facing the class you have to do everything oposite to them so they can follow.

If I was to put my right arm up in a block and tell them to do the same they would mirror my image and put uo their left, so I now say right but use my left.

I havent done all techniques as they are not all required for juniors and the older the child the less you have to do it oposite.  Some times I find that half of the move is ok but find the hand that should be checking is doing nothing. Then when I go to do it with the adults I cant remember which side is correct.

All very confusing, but like the others said, the more you do it the more it becomes natural to your body just as the first moves you learnt did. Thats what I am hoping anyway. :erg:


----------



## Kenpo Mama (Aug 12, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Hey Donna,
> 
> I'll give this a shot at the studio! Are you mirroring at your school?
> 
> MJ :asian:


I am mirroring many of the techs in my new forms and for my personal study, however it is not a requirement at my new school, at least not yet!  I can do close to 75 of the techs on both sides now, i do not think it is necessary to do all of the 230 techs on both sides however, i consider this more of a personal preference.

Donna :ultracool


----------



## loki09789 (Aug 12, 2004)

"Mirroring" or ambidextrous training is a great "brain trainer" to enhance your spacial and Kinesthetic awareness.  It stimulates a broader perspective.  Really good stuff.

I think coming from a weapons based system like an FMA helped because I did this from the beginning to avoid asymetrical muscle development as well.  I noticed that in my RyuKyu Kenpo program years back everything was off the same direction/lead and such and I noticed that my back/knees and such would get over worked on one side.  Also, being able to respond with either direction/side is an application of adaptability/translation.

Probably the simplest way to train this if you are new to it is to break the forms into 'segments' (each directional change is a simple way to go) and flipping it in pieces in these bits first, then put it all back together.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 12, 2004)

MisterMike said:
			
		

> As you start going through the techniques you may find you already know the left side of them and they will come easier than you think.
> 
> Like Crossing Talon and Crossed Twigs.
> 
> Run those one after the other and see what you find.


Thanks Mister Mike... I definitely think some will be easier than others.  I have Crossing Talon but I don't know Crossed Twigs, but even in Crossing Talon we at least go to the left and right.  This is one of the ones that may be easier.  I find everything on my left side to be a challenge though...drills, sparring etc.,  Since most of the techniques are right side dominant and I'm a righty the left side is harder to begin with. It's just so challenging tapping into the less dominant half of my brain, and the muscles are weaker on my left to start with.

MJ :asian:


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 12, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Thanks Mister Mike... I definitely think some will be easier than others.  I have Crossing Talon but I don't know Crossed Twigs, but even in Crossing Talon we at least go to the left and right.  This is one of the ones that may be easier.  I find everything on my left side to be a challenge though...drills, sparring etc.,  Since most of the techniques are right side dominant and I'm a righty the left side is harder to begin with. It's just so challenging tapping into the less dominant half of my brain, and the muscles are weaker on my left to start with.
> 
> MJ :asian:



Notice that crossing Talon is done primarily with the left hand? Kinda makes you wonder what the "right" side of Crossing Talon is, since Kenpo is a "right-handed" style.

If you have Short Form 3, you have Crossed Twigs - it follows Locked Wing.


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 12, 2004)

Another method of using video tape is to tape your self doing what you normally do.  When you watch it on the TV everything will be on teh opposite side.  Just follow the tape.  By doing exactly what you see you will be mirroring if you do not compensate for the image being reversed.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 12, 2004)

Storm said:
			
		

> I havent done all techniques as they are not all required for juniors and the older the child the less you have to do it oposite. Some times I find that half of the move is ok but find the hand that should be checking is doing nothing. Then when I go to do it with the adults I cant remember which side is correct.
> 
> All very confusing, but like the others said, the more you do it the more it becomes natural to your body just as the first moves you learnt did. Thats what I am hoping anyway. :erg:


Storm :erg: LOL I understand how you feel about which side is correct, because I also teach, and I now have to remember to separate in my mind which is the mirrored side and which is the original side, or the side the student needs to learn and know initially. 

I wish you luck in this as well!  


Ok Rob I'm in this mode right now :erg:, but I really think you may be onto something! :uhyeah: I'll give it a shot!

Donna  sounds like you've got it down!

MJ :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 12, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> "Mirroring" or ambidextrous training is a great "brain trainer" to enhance your spacial and Kinesthetic awareness. It stimulates a broader perspective. Really good stuff.
> 
> I think coming from a weapons based system like an FMA helped because I did this from the beginning to avoid asymetrical muscle development as well. I noticed that in my RyuKyu Kenpo program years back everything was off the same direction/lead and such and I noticed that my back/knees and such would get over worked on one side. Also, being able to respond with either direction/side is an application of adaptability/translation.
> 
> Probably the simplest way to train this if you are new to it is to break the forms into 'segments' (each directional change is a simple way to go) and flipping it in pieces in these bits first, then put it all back together.


Paul I learn well kinesthetically learner so hopefully this won't be as hard as it seems right now. I agree about the muscle development sometimes in Kenpo I think my right arm/leg look more developed and fit as a result of all the right side dominant training.

We learn our forms in small steps so this would make sense here too! 

Thanks,
MJ :asian:


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 12, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Ok Rob I'm in this mode right now :erg:, but I really think you may be onto something! :uhyeah: I'll give it a shot!
> 
> 
> MJ :asian:




I stumbled on to this by accident.  I once had a student who taped every lesson since she only did private lessons and only made it in to see me once a month since she lived about 6 hours away.  She would learn the techniques in the lesson, go home pop in video tape and start practicing.  She would do what she saw.  If she saw a hand move n the right hand of the screen she moved her right hand.  Luckily we caught the problema after only a couple lessons.  She then aimed the camera at the mirrors to catch what we were doing and everything seemed corrected to her.


----------



## pete (Aug 12, 2004)

MisterMike said:
			
		

> If you have Short Form 3, you have Crossed Twigs - it follows Locked Wing.


 that would be Shackle Break (B) to you and me...


----------



## Karazenpo (Aug 12, 2004)

Since fighting is all about balance and coordination, learning techniques mirror image can only enhance what you already developed. In Karazenpo, all combinations are to be 'perfected' mirror image at brown belt level. Let me throw this at you. I had this idea a long time ago (parallel thinking) and then I read somewhere, can't remember, but it may have been a martial artist who also teaches police and military personel, not sure though. Anyway, he gave this concept a name. It was called 'tactical techniques'. Tactical techniques are those that are initially learned favoring the right hand attack but can, with very little modification, be altered against a left hand attack, kick, grab, a one-two, club, etc. The entry is modified and the rest stays pretty much the same. I like the concept and here's why. No matter how you cut it, if you train right/left equally then you are dividing your training time 50/50 against coordinating your body against an attack that would happen the great 'minority' of the time. In other words, martial arts most definitely seems to favor the right hander in both attack and defense. Obviously, the old masters were right handed. Agreed, some systems' forms and techniques are more 'balanced' then others but the martial arts most definitely favors right handers. I like this concept because it allows a slight alterring of your initial move or entry according to the type of attack but your counter-attack remains pretty much the same, what you practice the vast majority of the time is what you train to use. Another way to explain this is Bill 'Superfoot' Wallace. He wasn't 'Superfoot' until he injured his right leg. Then he concentrated the vast majority if not all of his speed kicking to his left leg and look at the results. Again, I most definitely believe in mirror image to a point, it balances you off but I feel the vast majority of your combat training should be done using this concept. Just go through your techniques and find the one's that fit this idea. They should be the 'core' of your reality training. Hey, just my opinion and I'm sure others on this board have experienced the same thing. If not, give it a try, can't hurt! Respectfully submitted, Professor Joe Shuras


----------



## GAB (Aug 12, 2004)

Hello: 
The mirroring techs are very popular in the FMA with the double stick application of Kali. (Guro Dan Inosanto) First thing you learn is double baston (two stick) what you do with the right you do with the left, same with the feet,same with the hands.. 
Regards, gary


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 12, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> I stumbled on to this by accident. I once had a student who taped every lesson since she only did private lessons and only made it in to see me once a month since she lived about 6 hours away. She would learn the techniques in the lesson, go home pop in video tape and start practicing. She would do what she saw. If she saw a hand move n the right hand of the screen she moved her right hand. Luckily we caught the problema after only a couple lessons. She then aimed the camera at the mirrors to catch what we were doing and everything seemed corrected to her.


 Interesting Rob and some of the best ideas are found "by accident" or not quite on purpose. Didn't Ed Parker formulate ideas concerning motion by watching video of himself in reverse? 



			
				MisterMike said:
			
		

> Notice that crossing Talon is done primarily with the left hand? Kinda makes you wonder what the "right" side of Crossing Talon is, since Kenpo is a "right-handed" style.


I do think Kenpo does address the left side in techniques, but those are far outnumbered by the right sided ones, and right handed attacks are more highly represented as well. As far as Crossing Talon on the right LOL :lol: I'll have to work that one...it's confusing just to try and visualize it without the mirror or without movement, and I really think I'll need an uke at times to work it out as well. 



> If you have Short Form 3, you have Crossed Twigs - it follows Locked Wing.





			
				Pete said:
			
		

> that would be Shackle Break (B) to you and me...


 Got the visualization now thanks Pete and Mister Mike!



			
				Karazenpo said:
			
		

> Tactical techniques are those that are initially learned favoring the right hand attack but can, with very little modification, be altered against a left hand attack, kick, grab, a one-two, club, etc. The entry is modified and the rest stays pretty much the same.


Professor Joe Shuras,
Interesting thoughts...to see if I'm understanding you...are you saying you look especially for techniques to mirror that are adaptable (to be against for instance a left step through punch and then a right step through punch) so as to necessitate only a change in the initial move in a technique which then would allow the rest of the technique to remain unchanged rather than change the entire technique? If this is what you are saying I could see it working more with frontal attacks and rear attacks, but it's not as clear to me in side attacks. 



> Another way to explain this is Bill 'Superfoot' Wallace. He wasn't 'Superfoot' until he injured his right leg. Then he concentrated the vast majority if not all of his speed kicking to his left leg and look at the results.


 I do think it's a good idea to develop the muscles on both sides of the body, especially in the case where you might find yourself down a dominant weapon as in Bill Wallace's case.



> Again, I most definitely believe in mirror image to a point, it balances you off but I feel the vast majority of your combat training should be done using this concept. Just go through your techniques and find the one's that fit this idea. They should be the 'core' of your reality training. Hey, just my opinion and I'm sure others on this board have experienced the same thing. If not, give it a try, can't hurt!


 What you say makes sense. I think some techniques will lend themselves more practically to mirroring that is actually useful to me, however for my teacher's requirements I need to learn them all on the mirror side. Ultimately, I think just as I find some of my techniques to be favorites and more applicable in sparring and no mind situations, I think some of the mirrored techniques will become favorites as well. This is all a part of the debate I was referring to in the initial post of this thread. Here's the link. You might find it interesting. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2576&highlight=left


			
				GAB said:
			
		

> The mirroring techs are very popular in the FMA with the double stick application of Kali. (Guro Dan Inosanto) First thing you learn is double baston (two stick) what you do with the right you do with the left, same with the feet,same with the hands..


Hello Gary...Kali is an interesting art! Do you find it confusing to work with your less dominant side so much or do you think it develops it more?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

MJ :asian:


----------



## KenpoTex (Aug 13, 2004)

In the school where I train we have a comprehensive test at 3rd brown which includes being able to do all the techniques up to and including the 3rd brown list right and left handed.  The way I found that worked best for me (someone else already mentioned it) is to just pick one or two moves at a time and then do them with the other side.  Another way that I've seen it done is to use the "mirror concept" some of you mentioned in connection with teaching kids (I do this too btw), have a training partner do the technique "right-handed" and you face them and mirror it.  by doing the tech.'s slowly at first and taking turns with your partner you can pick them up pretty quickly.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

kenpotex said:
			
		

> Another way that I've seen it done is to use the "mirror concept" some of you mentioned in connection with teaching kids (I do this too btw), have a training partner do the technique "right-handed" and you face them and mirror it. by doing the tech.'s slowly at first and taking turns with your partner you can pick them up pretty quickly.


I like the idea of doing it with a training partner as opposed to initially starting out trying to use it to teach someone else...let them know it's more for my benefit to start. Thanks Kenpotex


----------



## MJS (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> As a requirement for second black, I am challenged to begin mirroring my techniques. I went back here on MT and read an interesting thread by tshadowchaser entitled - _left-right?_ and the thread debated the necessity of doing this. There were some interesting arguments on both sides. However, as this is a requirement for me I don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not it's something I'd like to do, or personally find necessary, although I'm hoping I will find benefits to doing this.
> 
> For years now I've been training these techniques one sided and now have to rethink how I do them. To help me prepare for this I mirrored a few techniques in my personal form for my black belt. It was simply confusing - a major brain drain!  This is something that we are expected to learn on our own, and right now I think I'm dreading the process, and am already putting off starting it. I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.
> 
> ...



Like Shodan said, standing IFO the student and doing the tech. is a great way to learn it on the other side.  While some are easier to do than others, the majority of them can be done with ease.  This is especially helpful when teaching children.  I had a hard enough time teaching them standing along side of them, but they picked up the tech. much easier if I was facing them.  

This is also a good drill to do during regular class time.  Many students are quick learners, so giving them a challenge by doing the techs. on the left, will keep the mind thinking.  At times during a tech. line, the student would often face an attack that they had not learned a defense for.  By learning the tech. on the opp. side, they just gained an extra tech.  IE- A left/right lapel grab or left/right punch--Delayed Sword.

Mike


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> This is also a good drill to do during regular class time. Many students are quick learners, so giving them a challenge by doing the techs. on the left, will keep the mind thinking. At times during a tech. line, the student would often face an attack that they had not learned a defense for. By learning the tech. on the opp. side, they just gained an extra tech. IE- A left/right lapel grab or left/right punch--Delayed Sword.
> 
> Mike


  Thanks Mike! 

I suppose that since they eventually need to learn it this way it's a good idea to get them thinking on it a little sooner than black. 

MJ :asian:


----------



## GAB (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah,
The reason for the drills are to assist you in the flow, the flow then comes.
Right-left, left-right, it will not matter after you are into training with both
sides with equal emphasis. I believe it will help both sides to become very efficent. 
What dictates what side will dominate, will be what the attacker or your opponent will do. Your training should rise to the occasion, if you have not trained to accomplish this then you are lacking. (my opinion) Regards, Gary


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

GAB said:
			
		

> mj-hi-yah,
> The reason for the drills are to assist you in the flow, the flow then comes.
> Right-left, left-right, it will not matter after you are into training with both
> sides with equal emphasis. I believe it will help both sides to become very efficent.
> What dictates what side will dominate, will be what the attacker or your opponent will do. Your training should rise to the occasion, if you have not trained to accomplish this then you are lacking. (my opinion) Regards, Gary


Gary when we work drills, like timing drills, we usually will start with the right side and then work also the left side. Making the switch to the left is always a challenge for me. I have to really stop and rethink the drill, but then with practice it does begin to flow, just not as quickly as on the right. I kind of agree about what dictates which side will dominate. If it is pure reaction than the action of the opponent will dictate the reaction, but if I meet their action with my own action than I think my dominant side usually will naturally take control. I hope this makes sense  ... Now I will say that perhaps training my left side more completely might change that, but I am not there yet to make a personal judgment on it.

Thanks for your thoughts!

MJ :asian:


----------



## MJS (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Thanks Mike!
> 
> I suppose that since they eventually need to learn it this way it's a good idea to get them thinking on it a little sooner than black.
> 
> MJ :asian:



You're welcome! :asian: 

I usually didnt introduce this until the middle ranks, due to the fact that the beginner has enough to worry about, without having to worry about now trying to do the tech. on the opp. side.  

Mike


----------



## MJS (Aug 13, 2004)

GAB said:
			
		

> mj-hi-yah,
> The reason for the drills are to assist you in the flow, the flow then comes.
> Right-left, left-right, it will not matter after you are into training with both
> sides with equal emphasis. I believe it will help both sides to become very efficent.
> What dictates what side will dominate, will be what the attacker or your opponent will do. Your training should rise to the occasion, if you have not trained to accomplish this then you are lacking. (my opinion) Regards, Gary



Lets keep in mind that the idea of this thread is taking a right side tech. and doing it on the left.  In the Kenpo system, there are techs. that address both left and right attacks.  

We need to crawl before we walk.  We need to walk before we can run.  The same can be applied to stick work in the FMA.  Take the basic disarms.  They are all done on the right side, so of course, its going to take time to get them on the left side.  

Mike


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> I usually didnt introduce this until the middle ranks, due to the fact that the beginner has enough to worry about, without having to worry about now trying to do the tech. on the opp. side.


Mike,
I was thinking that too...the confused :erg: look on a beginner's face is enough to tell you when they've had enough. I think the middle ranks are a good place to start, especially because of the concern of performing techniques on a belt test.  It's scary enough in the beginning without having to worry about which way to start.

MJ :asian:


----------



## Mark L (Aug 13, 2004)

We practice techniques on both sides starting at green belt.  As mentioned before, repetition is the key.  I'm comfortable doing the techniques either way.  That being said, I must agree with Prof. Shuras, my natural tendency is to react with the right sided response.  Recognizing that, we train the techniques on each side against both right and left attacks.  Naturally, some techniques are more amenable to this than others.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

Mark L said:
			
		

> We practice techniques on both sides starting at green belt. As mentioned before, repetition is the key. I'm comfortable doing the techniques either way. That being said, I must agree with Prof. Shuras, my natural tendency is to react with the right sided response. Recognizing that, we train the techniques on each side against both right and left attacks. Naturally, some techniques are more amenable to this than others.


  Thanks for sharing Mark! 

I've gotten lots of great ideas on this, but it's also very interesting to see how different people approach this task in terms of when they begin.  

MJ :asian:


----------



## GAB (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-h-yah,

You are welcome, since this is the time you have come upon this problem, would'nt it have been nice to have started this numerous years ago, before it is so entrenched that you are now a black belt, agonizing over it and feeling like a white, who is left handed and trying to do the stuff the way the righties do?

JKD and Guro Dans Kali are nice arts, you would like the information you will find in them, invest in a couple of books and a wealth of information will be at your disposal. You will never look at the Art of Kenpo in the same light. 

Regards, gary


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 13, 2004)

My last suggestion for learn the opposite side of things is to do mundane tasks around the house with your left hand instead of the right.  It wil seem awkward at first but once you get it, practicing the opposite side also becomes a little easier.


----------



## Brother John (Aug 13, 2004)

I feel that there are two essentials to this kind of work:
1. Persistance. Get at it and stay at it. Don't try to do too much at one time. Take three techniques and work at smoothing itheir execution in the "off" side for about 2 days, then take the next three for two days. Once you get an entire belt level of techs down...spend a week of going over every tech each day on its off side. Then move to the next belt...and so on.
BE persistant. Keep at it. Eventually you will really see some results.
2. Patience. This is HOW you stay persistant. 

I feel this process is very good. It takes you out of your comfort zone and makes you reevaluate what you already know...but on the flip side. 
I think you'll find that your ability will double.

You'll be glad you did.

Your Brother
John


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

GAB said:
			
		

> mj-h-yah,
> 
> You are welcome, since this is the time you have come upon this problem, would'nt it have been nice to have started this numerous years ago, before it is so entrenched that you are now a black belt, agonizing over it and feeling like a white, who is left handed and trying to do the stuff the way the righties do?
> 
> ...


So true Gary! I wonder how Kenpo impacts the left handed person. It would be interesting to see how many left handed people there are studying Kenpo and how they feel about it. I myself have taken it for granted being right handed. I think you and others may be onto something in terms of beginning this sooner. I'm still learning new techniques as well and need to balance the time I spend on the new things I'm learning with the time I spend on this task. I'm hoping it will be time well spent though as I think I'll learn more about the techniques in having to tear them apart to reverse them. 

What does JKD stand for? Also if you have any favorite references for either of these I'd be interested in having you post them. 

Thanks,
MJ :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> My last suggestion for learn the opposite side of things is to do mundane tasks around the house with your left hand instead of the right. It wil seem awkward at first but once you get it, practicing the opposite side also becomes a little easier.


Not a bad idea Rob, I might have to pin my right hand down though, and I think I'll leave the check writing to my right or no one will get paid :lol:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

Brother John said:
			
		

> I feel that there are two essentials to this kind of work:
> 1. Persistance. 2. Patience. This is HOW you stay persistant.


Thanks Brother John!  

I agree persistence and patience are key in learning anything. 

It does take you out of your comfort zone too. I think that's a great way to describe it!

MJ :asian:


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 13, 2004)

I had a groups of 7 people that stayed together throght the ranks of orange, purple, blue, and green 3 ladies and 4 gentleman.  They all tested on the same days, they always arranged to meet for extra practice together.  1 of the ladies and 2 of the gentlemen were left handed and Kenpo seemed more awkward to them for Yellow, Orange and Purple, but suddenly everythings seemd to click for them, and they seemd to pick up almost every technique effortlessly after that.  The trainied themselves to just do what was required of them and not think about what hand it was.  Once they started Long 3 later on they seemed to grasp teh material much faster the other four people.  You have t get past thinking you are doing it on the opposite side and just do the technqies.  Brother John was completely correct in saying don't do too much.  Do a few techniques at a time.

For doing mundane tasks with the opposite hand start of with things like sweeping and mopping dusting etc...


----------



## MJS (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> What does JKD stand for?



Jeet Kune Do

Mike


----------



## MJS (Aug 13, 2004)

GAB said:
			
		

> JKD and Guro Dans Kali are nice arts, you would like the information you will find in them, invest in a couple of books and a wealth of information will be at your disposal. You will never look at the Art of Kenpo in the same light.
> 
> Regards, gary



I agree with Gary on that one!!!  Since I've been training in the FMA, I've noticed an improvement in my Kenpo as well as the grappling.  It definately improves hand/eye coordination.

Mike


----------



## GAB (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah:
The information you are receiving from your fellow Kenpoist's is very good. 
Good luck in your art. Regards, Gary


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah:

 There was much discussion on this very same topic a couple of years ago as well.........

  My personal views can be found on page 2 post 29.  

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2576&page=1&pp=15

   Glad to see you expanding your physical prowess.. 

   :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> mj-hi-yah:
> 
> There was much discussion on this very same topic a couple of years ago as well.........
> 
> ...


Thanks Kato!  I read that entire thread the other day. It was interesting, but more of a debate on the topic rather than an exchange of what works for people, and since I need to do this now I thought I'd reopen the topic in a different way. I think your starting at purple (or at least earlier than black) as some have suggested was a better idea than waiting until black when it's all so ingrained.

Yes I need to expand my physical prowess to fight the dark side :duel: and you're right I'll hopefully be doing this for the rest of my life, so I might as well learn both sides...

Thanks,

MJ :asian:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> l'll be doing this for the rest of my life, so I might as well learn both sides...
> Thanks, MJ :asian:


 It can't hurt..... only can make you better....!


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 13, 2004)

Pete,

Thanks for pointing out Shackle Break B - I was up and doing that piece as I was reading the initial post with Crossed Twigs and wondering if I was lost!

MJ,

Ask Chris about being lefty and training in kenpo.
I've also noticed that when I teach the kids, they don't have any preconceptions of the "correct" side on which to do a tech - so a lot of times techs like Alternating Mace are done to the left - or Crossing Guard.  I think that using Donna's suggestion of the mirrors, and teaching left (which is what I do and was taught to do as a teacher) can only help 'right' your left!  (Easy for me to say.  Wait till I get there.)  KT


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> I've also noticed that when I teach the kids, they don't have any preconceptions of the "correct" side on which to do a tech


 That's always good advice ...think like a kid!  :boing2:


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> That's always good advice ...think like a kid!  :boing2:



If you can think like a kid and learn like a kid you, will be amazed at what you can learn.  Children have no preconceived notions, no prejudices, and a wonder when it comes to learning.  They are truly amazing.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 13, 2004)

MJ,
Sorry I'm late on this but havne't turned my cp on in a couple of days. Anyway, your body already has the movements. Your muscle memory has the basics locked up inside. You know when your in the horse and you hear punch etc. etc. you do it automatically. My suggestion is when you practice your techniques (probably at home at first) start at yellow and work your way up. Start at Delayed Sword do the right side then perform the left. The body will move. All you can do is improve on your basics. For example, D.S. step back left, block right, right front kick, right handsword (to sum it all up). Step back to natural D.S. step back right, block left, left front kick, left outward handsword. Get somewhat comfortable the move onto Aggressive Twins or whatever is next for you and do the same thing.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> . My suggestion is when you practice your techniques (probably at home at first) start at yellow and work your way up. Get somewhat comfortable the move onto Aggressive Twins or whatever is next for you and do the same thing.


Thanks Jason,

Since at first it won't be pretty, LOL :lol: at home at first is a very good idea! I think starting at the beginning is good advice too. I expect the lower belt moves to be much more easily adapted. I think the harder ones are some of the moves that were complicated for me to learn to begin with like Falcons of Force for example.  I can't even go there yet!  

MJ :asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 13, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> I think the harder ones are some of the moves that were complicated for me to learn to begin with like Falcons of Force for example.  I can't even go there yet!


Now, now, tisk, tisk  . I see your point but remember the self defense techniques are just basics put together in a specific sequence. If you need to practice one move at a time. Do the first move of the right side then do the left. Next add two movements then a third and so on. There's nothing to lose and will be time worth vested in the art. You will start to see gains in your knowledge and your abilities. Your spontaneous reactions will get better in time. Many things gained in my opinion.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 13, 2004)

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> Now, now, tisk, tisk  . I see your point but remember the self defense techniques are just basics put together in a specific sequence. If you need to practice one move at a time. Do the first move of the right side then do the left. Next add two movements then a third and so on. There's nothing to lose and will be time worth vested in the art. You will start to see gains in your knowledge and your abilities. Your spontaneous reactions will get better in time. Many things gained in my opinion.


 Ok I see your point here too  For those long crazy ones break them down into basics.  That makes sense!


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 14, 2004)

1. Learn the kenpo system that Mr. Parker left.

2. Look in the mirror when you practice.

3. Learn to dummy respectably.

4. Learn, and practice, the forms and the sets.

5. Learn, and practice, the forms and the sets.

6. Go back and look at a meditating horse stance, left over right (is THAT symmetrical?) and the rest of what you were taught and practiced.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 14, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> 6. Go back and look at a meditating horse stance, left over right (is THAT symmetrical?) and the rest of what you were taught and practiced.


 Sooooooooo what are you saying?:idunno:


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 14, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Sooooooooo what are you saying?:idunno:



Well sir, with all due respect. I believe we are embarking on one of those trivial threads where everyone will say why or why not we should train both sides of the techniques, forms, and sets. :asian: 
  Jason


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 14, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> ...I was just following my instructor's movement, but when I tried to do Returning Viper on my own for my personal form



Have not heard of it. What is the attack and basic sum of the technique. I'm not asking you to post your instructors technique from step 1 until completion but basic idea of the tech. :asian:


----------



## Brother John (Aug 14, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> 1. Learn the kenpo system that Mr. Parker left.
> 2. Look in the mirror when you practice.
> 3. Learn to dummy respectably.
> 4. Learn, and practice, the forms and the sets.
> ...


These are all very fine things to do, no matter your rank or time in the art, adherence to the fundamentals is very important.
But it's not all.
I think it's the IKKA Green Belt manual, which Mr. Parker put forward for instruction, that says that we should practice to perfect the execution of our art on both sides, the "on" and the "off" sides. 
This IS the art that Mr. Parker left us.

I have NO idea what the meditating horse stance has to do with executing on one side or both sides. No, it's not "symetrical". So, what's the point?

Your Brother
John


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 14, 2004)

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> Have not heard of it. What is the attack and basic sum of the technique. I'm not asking you to post your instructors technique from step 1 until completion but basic idea of the tech. :asian:


Jason the tech is against a step through right and is an extension of Windmill Guard. After the roundhouse kick you pivot and do an added right back kick. You pull to extend their right arm down on a 45 degree angle at the wrist with your right hand as you deliver the kick. If you don't know Windmill Guard let me know and I'll give you the whole shebang. 



			
				jfarnworth said:
			
		

> Well sir, with all due respect. I believe we are embarking on one of those trivial threads where everyone will say why or why not we should train both sides of the techniques, forms, and sets. :asian:


I can only say that I sincerely hope that that is not the case. :asian: This thread is intended to be an idea exchange for suggestions on how to accomplish mirroring techniques more effectively. As stated in the first post of this thread such a debate on the necessity, or lack there of, took place quite thoroughly on an existing thread and if anyone has more to add to the argument against mirroring techniques here's the link: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...&highlight=left
I respectfully request that this thread continue to focus on suggestions from instructors or students who utilize this training method. :asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 14, 2004)

I don't know of those 2 techniques.


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 14, 2004)

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> I don't know of those 2 techniques.


 Windmill Guard and Returning Viper are Tracy's techniques.  Windmill Guard is found in Purple Belt and Returning Viper in the Blue Belt


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

Sigh.

When you're in a meditating horse stance, facing an instructor--is she, or he, doing exactly what you're doing?

For that matter, are you doing with your left hand what you're doing with your right?

Looks like mirroring, but asymmetry, to me.

Some of my response is based on the fact that I simply don't understand why one would, "do techniques on both sides," as something special, when the forms already do precisely this.

Nor, I might add, do I think that the techniques are exactly the same on both sides. Right side stong but dumb; left side "weak," but wise. Right side tiger, left side dragon; right side brown belt, left side black belt, yes?

I have to note, too, that what I'm reading here looks like aspirations to short cuts to me. 

Why not just learn the system that Mr. Parker left?


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 15, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Why not just learn the system that Mr. Parker left?


 So... I gather from what you are implying  that if anyone is _*not *_doing exactly as you say/do.. they are *NOT* learning the  system that Mr. Parker left?

I find it unique that a statement like that is posted when  if you have read any of  Mr. Parkers works, he makes several references to "study" opposites  and reverses.   Not to mention that I personally had conversations with the man  on this specific topic on numerous occasions during my many as a direct student  of his and he encouraged the idea of practicing this way.

Oh well......:idunno:  have fun and keep practicing the Art whatever way you  want.


----------



## MJS (Aug 15, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> So... I gather from what you are implying  that if anyone is _*not *_doing exactly as you say/do.. they are *NOT* learning the  system that Mr. Parker left?
> 
> I find it unique that a statement like that is posted when  if you have read any of  Mr. Parkers works, he makes several references to "study" opposites  and reverses.   Not to mention that I personally had conversations with the man  on this specific topic on numerous occasions during my many as a direct student  of his and he encouraged the idea of practicing this way.
> 
> Oh well......:idunno:  have fun and keep practicing the Art whatever way you  want.



Well, I was going to comment but after reading this post, I realize that its my thoughts exactly!!!!  

Thank you Sir!!  This was well said!!! :asian: 

Mike


----------



## MJS (Aug 15, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> I have to note, too, that what I'm reading here looks like aspirations to short cuts to me.



How is this a shortcut???  This to me, sounds like another example that I always refer to.  Just because its not something that you may/may not do Robert, no need to make the person doing it sound like they're doing something wrong.  



> Why not just learn the system that Mr. Parker left?



We are doing the Parker system.  No changes in the techs. are being made, just simply doing them on the opp. side.  Regardless of if they are done in the forms or not, why can't someone do them outside of the forms???  Its just another way to keep the mind working!  

Oh....after reading my above post I said that I wasnt going to comment.  Oh well...I couldnt resist!!! :ultracool 

Mike


----------



## Brother John (Aug 15, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Sigh.
> When you're in a meditating horse stance, facing an instructor--is she, or he, doing exactly what you're doing?
> For that matter, are you doing with your left hand what you're doing with your right?
> Looks like mirroring, but asymmetry, to me.
> ...



&#8220;Yaaaawwwnnnn&#8230;&#8221;
The issue with the meditating horse stance is ridiculous. What does it matter? It&#8217;s completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. 
I agree with you on one part of what you said:


> &#8220;&#8230;I don&#8217;t understand why one would, &#8216;do techniques on both sides&#8230;&#8221;


I agree, you don&#8217;t understand. 
Then you said another thing that I agree with:


> &#8220;Nor, I might add, do I think that the techniques are exactly the same on both sides&#8221;


That&#8217;s right, they aren&#8217;t the same. That&#8217;s why working them on both sides makes us stretch and expand our skill/ability to be able to learn/do them on the other side. I think that&#8217;s why Mr. Parker told his students (refer back to Mr. Conatser&#8217;s replies), and others through his manuals, that it&#8217;s good to do this. 

Your bit about &#8220;Right strong&dumb / Left weak&wise&#8221;, &#8220;right tiger / left dragon&#8221; and &#8220;right Brown&left Black&#8221;; is also meaningless. _Quaint _ little sayings, but up for interpretation of meaning and worth.

Then your &#8220;note&#8221;. How the heck is *doubling* the number of techniques in the system an  





> &#8216;aspiration to short cuts&#8217;


? So doing twice the number of techniques in the system is a short-cut??  Wow. So if I drive 2X the number of miles from home to work, is that a short cut?? I think that some taxi drivers think like you, it would explain a lot.

Yes, a thorough study/practice of the forms will help us learn to use the &#8220;off-side&#8221;, but forms also teach us the &#8220;on-side&#8221;. So if we needn&#8217;t study doing the off side of a technique because forms teach us this, then why study the &#8220;on-side&#8221; of techniques&#8230;as forms teach us this too. Maybe we just need the forms? That would be a short cut in my book.

Robert, this thread isn&#8217;t about the merits of doing the techniques on one side or two&#8230;that&#8217;s your side-track (which I&#8217;ve now indulged in as well, both of which Mr. Farnsworth predicted we would do). What mj-hi-yah was asking was:


> &#8220;I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.&#8221;


 And she did say she appreciates both sides of this argument. So as this is something she *MUST* do as a *REQUIREMENT * for her next level then she needs to hear from people that believe in this way of doing things. If we want to know all about your dissention on this way, your sentiments are well documented  in almost all other related threads.  

Your Brother
John


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 15, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> Windmill Guard and Returning Viper are Tracy's techniques. Windmill Guard is found in Purple Belt and Returning Viper in the Blue Belt


Thank you Rob :asian: Do you have a listing of all of the Tracy technique names that are not included in the EPAK curriculum?  That would be very helpful to me in relating things here.  If you do, would you be willing to post it on the Tracy thread?

Thanks,
MJ


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 15, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> I have to note, too, that what I'm reading here looks like aspirations to short cuts to me.


Why do you feel so compelled to note this?  You are making an assumption here, and you simply assume too much. :asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 15, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Do you have a listing of all of the Tracy technique names that are not included in the EPAK curriculum?  That would be very helpful to me in relating things here.


Someone on this board posted a link of written tracy's techniques. It was quite a while ago but I will find it.  :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 15, 2004)

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> Someone on this board posted a link of written tracy's techniques. It was quite a while ago but I will find it. :asian:


Thanks Jason!


----------



## Kenpodoc (Aug 15, 2004)

I haven't learned most techniques on both sides.  I simply haven't the time.  However, it appears that Mr. Parker wanted us to learn them on both sides.  The forms tell us this.  Short three is the intro to the technique forms.  The techniques are on one side only.  After that the techniques are presented on both sides.  I think that this suggests that at an intermediate level that you should concentrate on one side only and get that side down strong fast and correctly.  As you advance the forms suggest that at least some techniques should be learned on both sides.  

At this stage in my training I've decided that this means that I should learn the techniques in the forms in an active manner on both sides.

There is more than one path to mastery.  Mr. Parker knew this, unfortunately too many people think that they know the "one true way."  

Respectfully,

Jeff


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 15, 2004)

Remember short forms at only one sided forms. The long forms use both sides.
As far as it goes Kenpodoc I think when were in a technique line we should perform the technique 3 times, switch sides, then perform the other side before we move onto the next tech. See 'ya tomorrow. :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 15, 2004)

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> There is more than one path to mastery. Mr. Parker knew this, unfortunately too many people think that they know the "one true way."


Kenpodoc, thank you for sharing your insights on this.  Your comment here is most inspiring! :asian:


----------



## KenpoDave (Aug 15, 2004)

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> Remember short forms at only one sided forms. The long forms use both sides.



Short 1 and Short 2 do both sides.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

KenpoDave said:
			
		

> Short 1 and Short 2 do both sides.


Yes, they do.  But both are skills forms and do not really employ any techniques in them.  [The point was made upthread that one doesn't start seeing techniques incorporated into forms until Short 3.]

I've never heard the dragon/tiger dichotomy referred to in quite this way.  My understanding was that the tiger represents the corporeal, or physical, side in martial arts, while the dragon represents the cerebral, or spiritual side.  

I'd also like to state that, in my opinion, you get out of your art what you put into it.  MSGM Parker left us a detailed outline which, in fact, seems to encourage experimentation with the ideas contained therein.  As to what's 'right' and 'wrong', if learning techs 'on both sides' helps the kenpo practitioner to better understand the tech and what it can and seeks to accomplish - what's more right than that?  KT


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 15, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Thank you Rob :asian: Do you have a listing of all of the Tracy technique names that are not included in the EPAK curriculum?  That would be very helpful to me in relating things here.  If you do, would you be willing to post it on the Tracy thread?
> 
> Thanks,
> MJ



That will be quite easy to do  essentially almost all of the Tracy's techniques are different from the EPAK versions.  The exceptions are very far few far between.  But I will compile a list tonight when I get back form the theatre.


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 15, 2004)

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> There is more than one path to mastery.  Mr. Parker knew this, unfortunately too many people think that they know the "one true way."
> 
> Respectfully,
> 
> Jeff



I really like this part of your post.  I think that Master Parker left us all the tools in his techniques, forsm & sets, books, and freestyle maneuvres.  After we have the base down with good strong and correct basics it is up to us to make the art fit us ididually.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> That will be quite easy to do essentially almost all of the Tracy's techniques are different from the EPAK versions. The exceptions are very far few far between. But I will compile a list tonight when I get back form the theatre.


Hey Rob.  Post where we can all benefit?  Thanks.  KT


----------



## pete (Aug 15, 2004)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> ...one doesn't start seeing techniques incorporated into forms until Short 3.


look at 'em a little closer and find the parts and pieces of Alternating Mace, Attacking Mace, Blocking the Kick, Thrusting Salute, Five Swords, Opening Cowl, Unfurling Crane, Striking Serpents Head, Pushing the Circle, Intercepting the Ram...

pete


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 15, 2004)

KenpoDave said:
			
		

> Short 1 and Short 2 do both sides.


I guess I should have made myself a little more clear by STATING the APPLICATION short forms are one sided tech. and the long forms are done BOTH sides. :asian: Now that I think about it maybe technically speaking I should have said the encyclopedia forms or the technique forms or maybe application form is just fine.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 15, 2004)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> ...But both are skills forms and do not really employ any techniques in them.  [The point was made upthread that one doesn't start seeing techniques incorporated into forms until Short 3.]



To elaborate more on what Pete said if you look at the first move of short 1; step back left, right inward block in a right neutral bow. He used the example of alternating maces. "Maybe" I might have said it's the first move of Attacking Mace on the opposite side...... Holy **** batman; did I say that outloud??????? Different people look at things in a different way.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

OK, fine.

1. It strikes me as peculiar that when the dogma of, "doing the techniques on both sides," gets pushed and I disagree, I immediately get accused of being dogmatic. How is it more blind to say that it isn't all that necessary, than it is to say that, "No, you absolutely have to do things on both sides?" How is it more dogmatic to write, "well, it looks like..." than it is to write, "this is in the books and I personally asked Mr. Parker, but go ahead, little mite," rather than to offer some sort of explanation of one's position?

2. If you'll actually read what I wrote, there's no argument against "learning both sides." There's an argument  about the best ways to do this. I think that dognmatically doing, say, Five Swords on both sides would be better handled by just learning the forms..like Short 2 and Long 2, which have modified versions of that very technique done ON BOTH SIDES right at the start.

3. Why is some of this a hunt for short cuts? Because when I read someone asserting that Short 1, 2, etc., are merely, "skills forms," so you have  to separately practice techniques on both sides, I take this as not merely a lack of understanding (which is what Mr. Farnsworth wrote, quite properly and very politely noting the relations linking yellow belt techniques and Short 1), of the forms, but a substitution of any search for that understanding with the multiplication of technique.

4. Sigh. When you face a student, or a teacher, and step out into a meditating horse stance, left over right, this is, "mirroring," in the sense that you're doing pretty much the same thing. However, a) because the orientation is different, each of you step in a different direction; b) neither figure is perfectly symmetrical, because the left hand and the right hand aren't doing the same things; c) each has different center lines; d) an observer won't see perfect symmetry; e) people are not stamped out with a cookie cutter, and their two sides don't match, so in actuality you have BOTH mirroring and asymmetry along two axes at least.

5. It is possible--look; I wrote POSSIBLE, which means that it MIGHT BE worth considering, not  that this is the only way to see it--it is POSSIBLE that in removing part of the system, or fiddling about with it, that we are removing something important. For example, PERHAPS (see? POSSIBLY I've got a point, possibly I don't) learning the techniques on the dominant side, then learning the, "weak," side through the forms, opens up the extent to which the techniques are not meant to be equally strong on both sides, though they are meant to be equally effective in different ways. Right hand tiger--strong but "stupid," right? left hand dragon--"weak," but smart, right? Maybe (it's a conditional, see?) the idea is to learn both a strong version AND a subtler one, and MAYBE when we go  rushing off for the same kind of strength on both sides, we're burying something.

But I wouldn't know. I don't get messages from On High.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

pete said:
			
		

> look at 'em a little closer and find the parts and pieces of Alternating Mace, Attacking Mace, Blocking the Kick, Thrusting Salute, Five Swords, Opening Cowl, Unfurling Crane, Striking Serpents Head, Pushing the Circle, Intercepting the Ram...
> 
> pete


Yes, Pete, I knew that when I posted you (or someone else) would point that out, and, technically (or techniquelly!) speaking, it's all there.  However, I also did state that both are mostly basic skills - blocks, stances, punches.  That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!  :uhyeah: KT


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

Robertson wrote:

3. Why is some of this a hunt for short cuts? Because when I read someone asserting that Short 1, 2, etc., are merely, "skills forms," so you have to separately practice techniques on both sides, I take this as not merely a lack of understanding (which is what Mr. Farnsworth wrote, quite properly and very politely noting the relations linking yellow belt techniques and Short 1), of the forms, but a substitution of any search for that understanding with the multiplication of technique.

I am entitled to my opinion the same as you are.  I view those forms as skills forms because I teach kids.  Kids aren't going to be analyzing forms for the techniques, nor do I expect the younger ones to do so.  

As to how I practice and what I get out of my forms and techniques, well - respectfully, that's my business, sir.  Excuse me if I don't have the time to analyze everything as carefully as you do.  Then again, I don't fully expect that I will get anywhere much past second black due to my age and lack of time and (apparently) as you have pointed out, talent for this.  

Some of us do martial arts for self defense.  Some for love of doing it.  Some, like me, for both.  KT


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 15, 2004)

Short Form 1, Long Form 1, Short Form 2 and Long Form 2 are called the Dictionary Sets.  If all my reading is correct these forms are ther to teach us about the basics and stringing them together.  If that understanding is correct tat is basis for the techniques. From Short Form 3 and up they are called the Encyclopedia Sets which are comprised of self defense techniques.  Personally I have learned a lot about grafting form these forms.  

As for learning about mirroring there are no short cuts, many of the things that I and others have suggested are ways of getting the brain not to keep what we have learned in a box.  None of the material is carved in stone, but many of us view it that way.


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 15, 2004)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> Robertson wrote:
> 
> 3. Why is some of this a hunt for short cuts? Because when I read someone asserting that Short 1, 2, etc., are merely, "skills forms," so you have to separately practice techniques on both sides, I take this as not merely a lack of understanding (which is what Mr. Farnsworth wrote, quite properly and very politely noting the relations linking yellow belt techniques and Short 1), of the forms, but a substitution of any search for that understanding with the multiplication of technique.
> 
> ...



Give him hell Girl!!!!


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

I can virtually guarantee that I am older, alas.

However, my argument was not that the forms have nothing to do with skills. Of course they do. 

My argument was that, especially given this context, it is simply incorrect to say that Short 1, 2, etc., are only "skills forms," which is what I read. Did I read incorrectly?

I also do not agree that it's all just a matter of opinion--and I suspect that you don't think this either. Certainly you wouldn't tell a kid student, "Well, if you want to do a neutral bow that way, that's fine, everybody's entitled to their own opinion," any more than I would. You would tell them, "That's good, and here's what I'd also like to see you doing," so that they'd learn a solid foundation for the day when they could  start consciously--and meaningfully-adding their own signature to the material.

I might add that part of what I am arguing is that learning the forms, and learning the techniques, in the way that the Parker manuals map out, is precisely an aid to analysis rather than repetition. 

Of course, it does indeed turn out that, "the Parker system," and its history, are a lot fuzzier and flakier than I'm letting on.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> Give him hell Girl!!!!


Rob,
Thanks for the support, both as quoted herein, and in your prior post regarding grouping of forms and sets.  I think what this comes down to is, as always, the different ways in which kenpo is taught and translated, if you will, for teaching.

From what I've been told, our master instructor teaches us Tracy until around Green belt, when it becomes a more 'modern' (and quote for a reason!) system.  There seem to be people in kenpo who are most militant about 'their' system being the 'right' one - and I stand by my previous statements that kenpo is ideas and meant to be interpreted to fit the practitioner.  That's why it's important to mirror the techs, in addition to the reasons outlined elsewhere in this thread.

Doc, Dark Lord of Kenpo, or GoldenDragon7, if you are reading this, it might be interesting to hear it "from the top".  Thank you.  KT


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

Mr. Broad:

While I see that you are taking the claim that the short forms are "dictionaries," and, "enclyclopedias," of movement from "Infinite Insights into kenpo karate," Book V, Chapter 3, page 11, it might be useful to quote the rest of the paragraph here:

"However, as previously indicated, lo learn a FORM without knowing its true meaning or intent is like learning how to spell or pronounce a word without ever learning its definition. If a FORM is practiced in this manner, how can its proper emphasis be placed where it belongs? When teaching a  FORM, explanation of its meaning and usefulness should be included so that the individual learning will know the exact purpose or purposes for which it was intended."

Mr. Parker goes on to remark that:

"...Most of our beginning kenpo FORMS are skeletal structures of SELF-DEFENSE TECHNIQUES."

Hm. It may be useful to recall that dictionaries and encyclopedias are indeed the beginnings of understanding, not research tools in themselves.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

Robertson said: "I also do not agree that it's all just a matter of opinion--and I suspect that you don't think this either. Certainly you wouldn't tell a kid student, "Well, if you want to do a neutral bow that way, that's fine, everybody's entitled to their own opinion," any more than I would. You would tell them, "That's good, and here's what I'd also like to see you doing," so that they'd learn a solid foundation for the day when they could start consciously--and meaningfully-adding their own signature to the material."

You suspect correctly insofar as basics are concerned. I explain the stances involved in any form, set, or technique as simply and as coherently as I can to the kids, taking into account to whom I'm explaining it. Each child has his own way of learning (the interpretation part), but it will, inevitably, come back around to be the proper stance done in the proper manner. I find that the kids are also very adept at adapting the techniques to left or right because there are no preconceived notions in their heads as to which is "correct".

I'd also like to say that, since I take Pete's classes regularly each week, I have the subtleties contained in the techs and so on pointed out and explained to me. I would love to be able to analyze and refine my knowledge of kenpo to the same degree as his, but -- see my little tirade above.

You have to learn to walk before you can run, and while there are pieces of techs contained, as you contend, within all forms and sets, they are, are they not, elaborations of the basics.  Each piece of kenpo builds upon itself.  That's the beauty of it - at least for me.  It all makes perfect sense and follows logically.

And, I meant my remarks in a more constructive and nicer tone than may have come across. (You obviously pushed one of my buttons.) My apologies. :asian: KT


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 15, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Mr. Broad:
> 
> While I see that you are taking the claim that the short forms are "dictionaries," and, "enclyclopedias," of movement from "Infinite Insights into kenpo karate," Book V, Chapter 3, page 11, it might be useful to quote the rest of the paragraph here:
> 
> ...



I just stated something I knew.  I don't live with my nose in the books.  I would prefer to read an idea here on Mt and get out my chair and put it to the test.  I have my computer in the basement, and just behind my chair is is an 8X8 area that I practice in.  I can see the base structure of techniques in the first 4 forms, but it is the forms after that really delve into the techniques.

Mr. McRobertson you have some good ideas but you just come off so antagonistic that people are willing do disregard anything you say.

This discussion is really about Mirroring techniques, it would be nice if we could get back onto the true topic, and that is methods of helping people learn how to work their offside.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

Mr. Broad:

In the first place, you yourself cited the books as an important source of knowledge on the previous page of this thread: no need to throw the, "you bookworm!," attack, nor to couple it with the suggestion that you--unlike me--actually practice.

In the second, I do not consider it appropriate to get into remarking upon the personality and character of people I've never met; I discuss their words, and what I think their ideas are.  Do I screw up? Sure--but at least I don't pass smug judgments. So, remove the beam from your own eye, there, duder...and after all, the simplest way to handle things is just explain your position and show the other guy why he's wrong. When you don't do that, it raises the suspicion that you can't. 

Perhaps I'm confused, but--especially after I noted it particularly--I thought I was posting on the issue of the best means for getting students to, "use both sides." You think it's essential to learn the techniques in isolated form on both sides, in part to develop equal power on both sides.

I think:
1. The system (whatever that is) that I learned already involves "both sides."

2. The context of a devaluation of sets and forms--which you certainly did not argue, but which seems very clear to me--is precisely what necessitates the extra "side," practice. If the forms and sets aren't devalued, it isn't necessary, though it is fun.

3. The human body isn't symmetrical, and kenpo is a right-sided system for better or for worse. The two sides are not the same.

4. The bases of kenpo in the various Chinese arts suggests very strongly, at least to me, that preserving this, "right-sidedness," is exactly what preserves the sort of "esoteric," material encoded into the left, "weaker," side of forms and sets. There may be problems with trying to bring the left side into perfect balance prematurely, since this may end up concealing the material coded into that other, "hidden," left side. 

5. There may be questions to be asked about the sexism of this right side/left side dichotomy: is it fact, or ideology?

Now. Ya wanna just discuss the ideas, or keep on with the doubtless absolutely fascinating topic of  my sterling character?


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

Robertson said:

"4. The bases of kenpo in the various Chinese arts suggests very strongly, at least to me, that preserving this, "right-sidedness," is exactly what preserves the sort of "esoteric," material encoded into the left, "weaker," side of forms and sets. There may be problems with trying to bring the left side into perfect balance prematurely, since this may end up concealing the material coded into that other, "hidden," left side."


I would imagine that there are also practical considerations as to why the left side is secondary to the right when a tech is taught. In fact, there are arguably, some techs which do not have a right or left side - nor a correct side, for that matter. 

For argument's sake, in a tech where you are using only your hands, such as Heavenly Ascent, practicing to the left side could have some value as follows: Your hands are pretty much interchangeable in this tech as you are orbiting through the strikes; therefore I would think that improving your left hand speed as well as power would be the reason for doing/practicing the tech to the left. (If you are left-handed, practicing the techs to the left could only be beneficial, since it is your strong side.)

It was also pointed out elsewhere that practicing the techs prone is a valuable drill.

To my way of thinking, goes to show the versatility of kenpo.

And Robert, I have to look at your public profile before conceding the age level to you! :wink2: KT

Just did - you list as much information as I do...


----------



## GAB (Aug 15, 2004)

Hi mj-hi-yah.

I backed off seeing so many of your kenpoist coming in and giving you some information but that was 20 posts ago and they have gotten off target.

If you need some ideas, again I would recommend to read these posts and see what they are telling you. 

Lots of differences of thought, that is good, take it and run with it.
The reason it is diffucult to come to a conclusive decision, is the very reason that is happening on this thread.

I still think if you read some of the information By Guro Dan Inosanto it will help you, he was very happy with what he learned with Ed Parker and Bruce Lee.

I (because I am looking from the outside in) find all of the post's to be very beneficial. 

Regards, Gary


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 15, 2004)

The bases of kenpo in the various Chinese arts suggests very strongly, at least to me, that preserving this, "right-sidedness," is exactly what preserves the sort of "esoteric," material encoded into the left, "weaker," side of forms and sets. There may be problems with trying to bring the left side into perfect balance prematurely, since this may end up concealing the material coded into that other, "hidden," left side."

After reading this a couple times something else came to mind.  It is only the last couple hundred years that left handedness has been acceptable.  It wasn't unheard of teh children showimg left handed tendencies were thought to be evil and put to death.  That could also be whey there is such a lack of left handednessin teh Chinese arts.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> The bases of kenpo in the various Chinese arts suggests very strongly, at least to me, that preserving this, "right-sidedness," is exactly what preserves the sort of "esoteric," material encoded into the left, "weaker," side of forms and sets. There may be problems with trying to bring the left side into perfect balance prematurely, since this may end up concealing the material coded into that other, "hidden," left side."
> 
> After reading this a couple times something else came to mind. It is only the last couple hundred years that left handedness has been acceptable. It wasn't unheard of teh children showimg left handed tendencies were thought to be evil and put to death. That could also be whey there is such a lack of left handednessin teh Chinese arts.


See definition of "sinister".  Good observation, Rob.  KT


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

I'm afraid that I don't think of techniques as ever using only the hands. 

I might also point out that Long 3 articulates very much the same moves and principles as this technique--in the "Thrusting Wedge," and "Blinding Sacrifice," sections of the form, though of course the trajectories of the strikes are at different angles. On both sides, too.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 15, 2004)

GAB said:
			
		

> Hi mj-hi-yah.
> 
> I backed off seeing so many of your kenpoist coming in and giving you some information but that was 20 posts ago and they have gotten off target.
> 
> ...


Gary,

Thanks again for posting! As you've noticed, and as I anticipated might happen, we have gone off track a bit. However, if as an outsider to Kenpo you are finding some value in it all than it's worth it I suppose. I have gotten some fantastic suggestions and I will look for the work of Guro Dan Inosanto when I finish the book I'm currently reading. 

Respectfully,
MJ :asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 15, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> 3. Why is some of this a hunt for short cuts? Because when I read someone asserting that Short 1, 2, etc., are merely, "skills forms," so you have  to separately practice techniques on both sides, I take this as not merely a lack of understanding (which is what Mr. Farnsworth wrote, quite properly and very politely noting the relations linking yellow belt techniques and Short 1), of the forms, but a substitution of any search for that understanding with the multiplication of technique.


I suppose your above comment could be taken one of two ways and I'm not sure which it is. If your saying I have a lack of understanding of kenpo then I'll say your probably damned right. What I know about kenpo is very little and I'm willing to post it here in front of everyone to say "I DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING". 
Now if your saying I gave a reference to some material to help people understand the movements of the beginning forms are in fact pieces of self-defense techniques, then cool. Maybe just maybe I may look at short 1 (first move) as a reference to five swords to have the "ability" to step backward instead of forward :idunno: . Short 2 obviously gives move info. on stepping forward and using the front hand with 2 strikes. Then long 2 gives the example of using economy of motion to further work on 5 swords. Then pick up the rest in long 4. Is there anymore info. in short 4 :idunno: ? I for one couldn't tell you 'cause I don't know it.


----------



## pete (Aug 15, 2004)

forms and techniques are 2 distinct tools we have within the system(s) mr. parker left us.  the forms are designed for solo practice, and techniques are meant to be practiced with an opponent.  while there is much to be learned from doing a form with a partner throwing the attacks, and learning the movements of a technique alone in front of a mirror, this is not the main purpose of these tools.  the forms will train you to internalize correct posture, stances, balance, fluidity,  rooting, and agility.  techniques will test all of the above, with emphasis on reaction, timing, distance, control, and targeting.

maybe, just maybe, the earlier forms are more similar to the chinese arts, where a student learns a form initially to learn how to move without understanding the full nature of the application.  then, as applications reveal themselves through the students development, it is realized that there are several applications contained in each sequence of the form when examined with different intents. 

perhaps, the some of the techniques we practice are just derived from those abstracts...and others are yet to be derived...

the later forms are more obvious in moving from one technique to the next, some with mirrored versions. but don't these forms still provide us with the same purpose and benefits as the earlier forms? are they there for us to internalize posture, stances, etc through solo practice? could this be a metaphor for the development of the art from being shrouded in asian secrecy to something more 20th century american?

through my eyes, as i see it today, practicing a mirrored technique is very different to practicing a form containing the movements of mirrored techniques.  i am right handed.  lucky, i guess, unless i have dreams of being a major league first-baseman.  i think there is something genetic that made me this way, and 43 years later it ain't changing.  i can work my forms to develop balance, agility, etc, but it's not going to make me left handed.  

so, given KT's example of Heavenly Ascent, why, under duress would i choose to react to a 2 hand choke "symetrical attack" using my less dominant side?  why do 5 Swords from the left when you can do Sword of Destruction or Unfurling Crane with the confidence of using the dominant side?  maybe its just me, and others more ambidextrous would... 

notice i said, "as i see it today"... i may reach a higher level and come to a different realization with more practice and time in the art...but for now, i use my forms to try and internalize the principles, and techniques to actualize them.

now, i've got some exceptions where the mirror techniques could come in handy. say you're grabbed around the waist from the rear, and your thinking Spiraling Wrist/Twig (depending on your nomenclature), and you look down and see fingers pointing to the left.  i'd think you'd want to go with it as the mirrored version.  same true for getting stuck with your left arm hammerlocked...it would help if you'd have trained those techniques.

so, do we pick and choose to see which ones are practical and which aren't needed to be mirrored? or do them all for completeness? well, i doubt it makes anything complete since symmetry can go beyond left/right mirroring (good reference to prone position tech training KT!)

sorry i don't have any direct answers here, just some thoughts based on where i am in my training today.  

pete


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

Liked the explanation, that you, "Pete, " gave.

Why'd I like the explanation? because it let uncertainty in.

IT IS NOT JUST A MATTER OF DOING THE SAME THING ON BOTH SIDES.

Thanks for the discussion, as it helped me to articulate some things.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 15, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Liked the explanation, that you, "Pete, " gave.
> 
> Why'd I like the explanation? because it let uncertainty in.
> 
> ...


First of all, let me say that "Pete" is Pete - no ifs, ands, or buts.  No artifice, as you can tell from his posts.  That's why he's such a good person to train with - and I'm lucky he allows me to do so!

Secondly, isn't your third statement what we've all been saying, perhaps a bit less articulately than you'd like?  KT


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 15, 2004)

Dear "Kenpo Tiger:"

Nope.

Sincerely,
"Robert"


----------



## Kenpomachine (Aug 16, 2004)

pete said:
			
		

> so, given KT's example of Heavenly Ascent, why, under duress would i choose to react to a 2 hand choke "symetrical attack" using my less dominant side? why do 5 Swords from the left when you can do Sword of Destruction or Unfurling Crane with the confidence of using the dominant side? maybe its just me, and others more ambidextrous would...


 You'll use whatever feels the most appropriate after the block. It well may be 5 swords instead of sword of destruction if you've trained the techniques both sides.

 As you said, is a matter of confidence. Not a matter of using the dominant side, though. So maybe training both sides gives you the confidence lacking?

 I don't know, because the only times I've trained techniques both sides were because I had an injure preventing me from working the _right_ side. Well, there weren't the only times, because with a guest instructor we once trained both sides of each technique, and you could only guess which was the dominant side by which side he was teaching first. 

 The one who said (sorry, I don't remember who) "*Learn as a child, so you won't have prejudices about which side is right*" was soooo right.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Aug 16, 2004)

pete said:
			
		

> forms and techniques are 2 distinct tools we have within the system(s) mr. parker left us. the forms are designed for solo practice, and techniques are meant to be practiced with an opponent. while there is much to be learned from doing a form with a partner throwing the attacks, and learning the movements of a technique alone in front of a mirror, this is not the main purpose of these tools. the forms will train you to internalize correct posture, stances, balance, fluidity, rooting, and agility. techniques will test all of the above, with emphasis on reaction, timing, distance, control, and targeting.
> 
> maybe, just maybe, the earlier forms are more similar to the chinese arts, where a student learns a form initially to learn how to move without understanding the full nature of the application. then, as applications reveal themselves through the students development, it is realized that there are several applications contained in each sequence of the form when examined with different intents.
> 
> ...


This force is becoming strong with this one LOL.     Much wisdom and knowledge has been gained.

DarK LorD


----------



## MJS (Aug 16, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> OK, fine.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## MJS (Aug 16, 2004)

GAB said:
			
		

> I backed off seeing so many of your kenpoist coming in and giving you some information but that was 20 posts ago and they have gotten off target.



Actually Sir, this got off target when Robert got involved, with his one-sided views.  If you'll notice, hes thrives on constantly disagreeing with EVERYTHING that is said if its different than the way he trains.  

Mike


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 16, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Actually Sir, this got off target when Robert got involved, with his one-sided views. If you'll notice, hes thrives on constantly disagreeing with EVERYTHING that is said if its different than the way he trains.
> 
> Mike


This certainly seems to be the case. The thing is we all have thoughts and ideas concerning the effectiveness of this type of training. I have many of my own on this, and had I desired to share them I could have expressed them in appropriate thread: _left-right?_ The topic of this thread is how best to accomplish this task, not whether or not it should be attempted. I realize sometimes we can't help ourselves but to express our ideas even when we understand a request. I suppose it is unavoidable at times. However, there are some who would argue a point for the sake of arguing, and that does paralyze the process. It is difficult to see productivity in that, and then when I see the following it boggles my mind and tells me we've gone too far off...I find it interesting to see here in this thread that what Robert accuses others of doing, he turns around and does to KT himself. Perhaps Robert you do not always get the explanations you desire because you do not always bother to give them yourself. Courtesy works both ways.






			
				rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> How is it more dogmatic to write, "well, it looks like..." than it is to write, "this is in the books and I personally asked Mr. Parker, but go ahead, little mite," rather than to offer some sort of explanation of one's position?


 


			
				rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Dear "Kenpo Tiger:"
> 
> Nope.
> 
> ...






At any rate, I appreciate the sincere and positive suggestions from those of you who gave them, and as GAB suggests I shall run with them as I begin this task this week, and I want to say thanks for all of your help and for sharing your experience and knowledge! :asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 16, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Actually Sir, this got off target when Robert got involved, with his one-sided views.  If you'll notice, hes thrives on constantly disagreeing with EVERYTHING that is said if its different than the way he trains.


Agreed! :asian:  Now if there's an all high and mighty way of doing things please let me know so I can start immediately.


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 16, 2004)

What's really going to bake your noodle is "There is no technique."


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 16, 2004)

MisterMike said:
			
		

> What's really going to bake your noodle is "There is no technique."


LOL :rofl:


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 16, 2004)

MisterMike,

You really need to learn how to cut through rhetoric to the chase, doncha?

MJ is correct here in that it's supposed to be a discussion, not a harangue by one party who thinks he's an expert.  BTW, Robertson, I seem to remember seeing a precis of your academic credentials.  Have you ever listed, or would you care to list, your kenpo/ma credentials for us?  Inquiring minds want to know.  [And don't turn it around on me. I've done so plenty of other places on MT even though it doesn't appear in my profile.]
As to the topic at hand, I think what we've all pretty well agreed upon is that mirroring the techs has its value for practice, for confidence in doing the tech, and just simply because it's a good exercise.  I attended a school where I had to learn all the forms from the end to the beginning so that I would know exactly where to pick up if asked a question when teaching them.  Now, that may sound pretty dumb and a waste of time to some people, but it was a teaching tool - as is mirroring - and had its place in that particular system, which doesn't have a structured set of techs as kenpo does.  As to whether we're "looking for shortcuts", I don't think so.  Anyone who decides to follow the kenpo path knows what they're committing to insofaras time spent and knowledge to be learned and internalized.  Mirroring can help some learn more easily -- SEE THE THREAD ON TYPES OF LEARNING (emphasis added).

In sum, whatever works for you in your training.  KT


----------



## Brother John (Aug 16, 2004)

> Perhaps I'm confused, but--especially after I noted it particularly--I thought I was posting on the issue of the best means for getting students to, "use both sides." You think it's essential to learn the techniques in isolated form on both sides, in part to develop equal power on both sides.


Your first guess was the best guess, 
you are confused.
The issue isn't your twist, 'using both sides'...but the fact that mj-hi-ya's instructor set her the asignment of executing all of her techniques on the "off side". Let me help your memory here:


> As a requirement for second black, I am challenged to begin mirroring my techniques.
> For years now I've been training these techniques one sided and now have to rethink how I do them.
> I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.


THAT is the 'issue'. Becoming proficient on both sides of your body isn't the issue, it's executing her techniques on the opposite side. 
Pretty much the only person talking about forms and sets is YOU.
BTW: learning to, and then making a practice of, executing the techniques on their 'off-side' has NOTHING to do with any form of "devaluation" of forms or sets or their benefit to making our 'left' side work well. Practicing the off sides of techniques doesn't mean you don't get all the good from the forms that you can.


> 1. The system (whatever that is) that I learned already involves "both sides."


Again: not the issue. Of course it 'involves both sides', anything that didn't would be *very rediculous*.  We aren't talking about that, you are. We are talking about


> As a requirement for second black, I am challenged to begin mirroring my techniques.


THAT.


> The context of a devaluation of sets and forms--which you certainly did not argue, but which seems very clear to me--is precisely what necessitates the extra "side," practice. If the forms and sets aren't devalued, it isn't necessary, though it is fun.


I believe you are wrong.
What You read  into it  was the devaluation of forms, which I think you did because that fits your preconcieved notions and is an easy way for you to explain it away; because it doesn't fit the doctrine you've been handed.
Our forms do not contain *ALL * of the self defense techniques.
In training the forms we experience the techniques differently than we do when we are working with a training partner/attacker. Therefore experiencing the techs in the off side is very different than gleening the 'off-side action' from sets and forms. ((otherwise all we would need would be the forms themselves as they would give us the on and off sides of everything and give us all the experience with these that we need....and while the forms sure are 'chock-full O' Goodness', they don't do this)) This is the hole in the hull of your "devaluation of forms" theory.


> Now. Ya wanna just discuss the ideas, or keep on with the doubtless absolutely fascinating topic of  my sterling character?


This thread isn't about these ideas of yours, which have been discussed and discussed, and again....
 :deadhorse 
as the initial post, and subsequent replies, states...there is a place to go to "disuss the ideas"


> I went back here on MT and read an interesting thread by tshadowchaser entitled - left-right? and the thread debated the necessity of doing this.


So we don't need to be treated like the one who got off subject and need to get back to 'discussing the ideas'. That's condescending.

Your Brother
John


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 16, 2004)

Oh dear. I see that we WOULD rather discuss my sterling character than the ideas and arguments. Personally, I take this as symptomatic, but wotthell..and anyway, I refuse to get into this kind of personal nonsense. The problem isn't that, anyway--it's that ya don't like what I'm saying, and ya find it inconvenient to discuss.

I will note, only in passing, that my "kenpo credentials," are at least as solid as my academic ones. And why exactly would one think that a belt rank would make the ideas more valid?

As for mirroring techniques, well, I don't see this as really having much to do with, "doing techniques on both sides." The, "challenge," comes up frequently, it seems, and I still haven't seen a clear, coherent explanation for it. And no, saying that it helps your ambidexterity isn't clear and coherent. And oh yes...when I teach, I try to come up with things that fit the particular student, when I go outside the written curriculum. Is that what's at stake here?

I'd been interested to see to what extent people's experience of learning the extensions has helped their, "both-sidedness," especially given the extent to which the extensions radically changed my understanding of what was going on with the other guy, on the other side of the mirror.


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 16, 2004)

Well since this is in the General Kenpo section and not the EPAK section it might go to say that MJ Hi-Yah's school doesn't follow the curriculum laid out by SGM Parker.  We actually know that her school doesn't do the curriculum laid out by SGM Parker since she makes reference to 2 Tracy techniques and later states that they use Tracy material up to Green Belt.

This discussion was not about the benefits of being able to work your offside.  It is about ways of being able to learn how to do it.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 16, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> It is about ways of being able to learn how to do it.


I also might add; All she was looking for were ways to better her kenpo.  :asian:


----------



## Brother John (Aug 16, 2004)

Good Golly!
I couldn't care less about your character and don't care to discuss it. Character isn't displayed or revealed in an internet forum, no matter how much we type (mind you, You type a LOT....but you probably deal with the "publish or perish" type of needs at work). 


> Personally, I take this as symptomatic


Seems like you say things like this a lot, that when others state opinions that contradict yours you find it symptomatic or indicative of problems or flaws. I think you may be a little too close to the patient to make an unbiased diagnosis. It's an easy way to dismiss a line of reasoning outright without having to face it's validity.  


> The problem isn't that, anyway--it's that ya don't like what I'm saying, and ya find it inconvenient to discuss.


Don't tell me what my problem is. I have discussed it, and I've given coherent/rational reasons that support my opinion. Whereas you've come up with some stuff thats fundamental but irrelevent and other stuff that's...well
...something about a meditating horse stance, weak tigers and strong dragons and mystical sounding tripe about 'esoteric' embedded messages w/in the forms.
I find it all too convenient  to discuss with you, and I have here and other places. (if you haven't noticed, I don't tend to shy away from debate) Actually I'm sorry I've followed you down this side-corridor you've built off of mj-hi-ya's original purpose for this thread... not sorry because my points/reasons don't hold their own (they do) but because it's a huge side-track.
Sorry mj and all.


> I still haven't seen a clear, coherent explanation for it.


Yes you have...just not one that you will accept.

Your Brother
John


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 16, 2004)

Brother John said:
			
		

> Sorry mj and all.


No need to apologize for what you've found to be true :asian: besides it's raining in NY today, and it's been interesting in an unexpected way.  Anyway, I think it best for me to leave it all here. I've taken the best of it and learned a lot! 

Thanks Brother John!


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 16, 2004)

kenpo tiger said:
			
		

> MisterMike,
> 
> You really need to learn how to cut through rhetoric to the chase, doncha?



My appologies. I meant: "What's really going to bake your noodle is would you be searching for a left side if I never told you there was a right?"


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 16, 2004)

MisterMike said:
			
		

> My appologies. I meant: "What's really going to bake your noodle is would you be searching for a left side if I never told you there was a right?"


Hmmm.

Okay.  GUILTY!!  I was the one who asked for Robertson's kenpo credentials - so it's my fault, Brother John.  Inquiring minds need to know.  Sorry for the digression, but, since Robertson LOVES to digress...

And, you all, our school (MJ's and mine) teaches the extensions once we pass green belt, so I guess that's going to obfuscate the issue even more.  We don't follow the rules, according to Robertson.  Truth to tell, having trained elsewhere prior to kenpo, I find what I'm learning thought provoking, exceptionally practical, and --- dare I say it -- FUN.  It's a challenge to figure out the techs to the other side - and our master instructor has set us this task in order to make us think about it now -- not when it becomes necessary to do the tech differently than it appears in the book, i.e. in the street.

MJ is also fortunate that our school is supportive of everyone  - regardless of what level of training they have attained.  We all help each other, and if she wants to practice Crashing Elbows against a left punch, well, I'll gladly do it for her, as she would for me.  KT


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 16, 2004)

Here's a little digression I wrote about six months back, that may eventually go up on the LTKKA website. Of course, it has nothing to do with mirrors. Oh, and there's a Part II, which specifically discusses another famous essay on subjectivity and mirrors--Lacan's, "The Mirror-Stage," but it has nothing to do with mirrors and mirroring either. Nothing whatsoever. Please feel free to take whatever pot-shots seem necessary, but please note that it is my writing and  I retain any and all rights to it.

What Is the Mirror For?

If dojos, gymnastics training rooms, dance studios,  aerobics classes and fencing schools share anything, it is mirrors. Big, wide, tall, floor-to-ceiling mirrors. Lots of them. Their presence is a little enigmatic for the new guy, who can see the reason for the mat (its martial arts...you might fall down), those hanging bags (its martial arts...you should hit something), the weapons (its martial arts...you should learn to stab something), the locker room (its martial arts...special clothes), without trouble. Its easier to handle the idea of the rail on one wall, since the new guy probably wont even see that--but what are all the mirrors for?

After we start, were told over and over that, what the mirrors are for, is to get us to see what were really doing. In fact, mirrors start appearing everywhere in our training. We mirror our attackers in techniques like Triggered Salute, we imitate skilled opponents while were sparring, we try to do what we see the black belts doing. Those of us studying American kenpo even learn to think about that third, outsiders viewpoint that has the truth, and to put a mirror outside all our conflicts. 

Mirrors, mirrors everywhere, but they dont really tell us much. For one thing, what does it mean to think of ones mirrored image as the place where the truth about what were doing lies hidden? For another, why are so many of us so reluctant to look closely at that image in the mirror? I distinctly recall preferring to stare at the sign on the door to the womens locker room while I was sweating my way through class, rather than having to take one more look at the sight of my own beet-red, sweating face perched on top of a slumping, wobble-legged fat self. And Im not the only one. It takes forever for students to learn that pretty much all the answers they are desperately seeking are right there, hanging, only a few feet in front of them. Or to quote one or two of my first instructors: Look in the mirror, dammit! Thats where the problem is! I am fascinated by the way that students will not, will not if you stick them with a red-hot pin, look at their own image. 

Im not trying to say that everythings all simple. Im not even arguing that martial arts students, those dummies, just need to look and see whats right in front of them. (I do have a sneaking admiration for the Zen teacher who, when asked to write his own epitaph, came up with, My whole life...selling buckets of water on the banks of the river!) Instead, I want to say a few things about what I think those mirrors are for. I want to take the contradiction between those unavoidable mirrors and the way that we avoid them as a clue to whats really going on. I want to argue, in fact, is that our use of the mirror goes right to the heart of one of the most debatable issues in martial arts training: are martial arts all about learning how to fight, or is learning self-defense just a means to a completely different end?

To explain, I need to make a bit of a detour into psychoanalysis--specifically, I need to go through one of Sigmund Freuds weirdest ideas, and then into a really annoying essay by one of the most-annoying of Freuds followers, Jacques Lacan. Yes, I know how much Freud gets laughed at these days. Yes, I know that this sort of thing can easily turn into one more way of ducking out on getting your gi on, and risking getting out on that big blue mat thingy with other wacky guys and gals. 

Id point out one thing about Freud--like it or not, he stuck us with a whole world of vocabulary for discussing questions about how we see ourselves, how we develop, how we understand our relations with others, and how we might be cured of what ails us. If Freud wrote about anything useful, it was the development of the ego and its place in psychic life. Somewhere in there, I would think, are the concerns of martial artists.

To Freud, then. Specifically, to a famous little incident he relates in his book, Beyond the Pleasure Principle. Its usually called the, fort-da, episode (the here/there episode, if you prefer), it tells a story about kids, and the punch line is kind of thrown in as an afterthought. Basically, Freuds been discussing the ways little children deal with loss and with the fear of loss, more or less by learning to make substitutions for the things, or the people, that they inevitably lose as they grow up. Think of Linus blanket. Think of the way nearly every kid has a favorite toy that youd better plan on bringing if you want them to go anywhere. Personally, I think of a little boy I met years ago, whose dad was a carpenter and away from home a lot. Many horrors ensued. One day, the kid saw a PBS special on elephants who were used by builders in India. He went completely elephant crazy, and did fine from then on--except, of course, there was a two-year period in which he refused to take off the plastic elephant trunk hed gotten during a trip to the zoo. You dont want to ask what the trunk looked like. 

And thats what Freud observed in his grandson. The little boy, very attached to his mother, learned to deal with her absence by playing a little game with a spool of cotton thread. When she was away, hed hang onto one end and throw the reel away, saying, ooohhh! (a version of the German word, fort, or gone), then hed pull the reel back in with a happy, da! which means, there! In other words, he learned to cope. He just confused his mom with a little reel, substituted a game he could control for one that was completely beyond him. 

Now beyond the general fact that martial arts training involves a lot of anxiety  on the long slow road to the acquisition of control, and a certain creepy resemblance of the game Freuds grandson plays to the old, silk-reeling, exercise used to strengthen the wrists, what is the world has this got to do with mirrors in martial arts? The connection is actually pretty direct--but as I mentioned, Freud sort of tucks it away. A footnote says that the game his grandson played got more sophisticated a few months down the road. The boy played the same game with a mirror that happened to be in his nursery. Crouching down low beneath the mirror, hed say, oooohhh!--and a second later, hed pop up, look at his own image, and chortle da! He was playing peekaboo, with himself. 

So first his mom came and went. Then he needed a substitute, and he devised a game with a reel of thread. Then that game ran dry, and he began to play with his own image. What this suggests to me is that: a) at its deepest, the game we play with the mirror in martial arts rests on an anxiety about losing something precious, and trying to put off finding substitutes; b) our increasing ability to look, and to recognize what we see in the mirror is a translation of something deeper; c) theres something profoundly childish about the martial arts--if you do them right.

I realize, of course, that for some people, learning the martial arts, means learning to kick *** as soon as possible. I think this haste usually reflects a fantasy that actually endangers the student. But here, I want to point out a couple of things about applying Freuds explanation of the fort-da game to the problems we encounter in training. Most importantly, I think, its a matter of understanding what we are trying to do, when we learn to look in the mirror: we are trying to invent a better image of ourselves, modeling what we want to see upon what we think we see in our teachers and in better, martial artists. Dont we all say things like, Well, I dont know...my technique kinda comes and goes on its own?


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 16, 2004)

Ah Robertson.  What of those dojos in which the mirror plays little or no role in one's learning?

As for spouting Freud, please do.  At least we can agree on that.  KT


----------



## Kenpodoc (Aug 16, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> As a requirement for second black, I am challenged to begin mirroring my techniques. I went back here on MT and read an interesting thread by tshadowchaser entitled - _left-right?_ and the thread debated the necessity of doing this. There were some interesting arguments on both sides. However, as this is a requirement for me I don't have the luxury of deciding whether or not it's something I'd like to do, or personally find necessary, although I'm hoping I will find benefits to doing this.
> 
> For years now I've been training these techniques one sided and now have to rethink how I do them. To help me prepare for this I mirrored a few techniques in my personal form for my black belt. It was simply confusing - a major brain drain!  This is something that we are expected to learn on our own, and right now I think I'm dreading the process, and am already putting off starting it. I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.
> 
> ...


 
Unfortunately, I don't think that there is an easy way to do this.  I wouldn't call it painful to learn new movements, I just remind myself that we learn everything in little bits.  Our brain is not symmetrical and so we do not learn symmetrically.  Enjoy the process and do not worry about the destination.

I took a seminar with Paul Dye  which helped me a lot with this process.  In the seminar he talked about regulating techniques and changing the majors and the minors.  When mirroring a technique remember that your skills are not symetrical  and that the mirror version will have similar movements but different feel and effect.  (Sort of like finding different Bunkai in Kata.)  Thus when a technique is mirrored, frequently the Minors become majors and visa versa. 

Respectfully,

Jeff

PS This is a good question.  I'm embarassed I responded so late.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 16, 2004)

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, I don't think that there is an easy way to do this. I wouldn't call it painful to learn new movements, I just remind myself that we learn everything in little bits. Our brain is not symmetrical and so we do not learn symmetrically. Enjoy the process and do not worry about the destination.
> 
> I took a seminar with Paul Dye which helped me a lot with this process. In the seminar he talked about regulating techniques and changing the majors and the minors. When mirroring a technique remember that your skills are not symetrical and that the mirror version will have similar movements but different feel and effect. (Sort of like finding different Bunkai in Kata.) Thus when a technique is mirrored, frequently the Minors become majors and visa versa.
> 
> ...


Thanks Kenpodoc I'll keep this all in mind. This is the first time I've seen reference to majors and minors. It's an interesting way to view it all really! Also you're not too late I haven't even started. I'll make my first attempt tomorrow. My usual motto for everything btw is to enjoy the journey :boing1: so I'll remind myself of that again here! 


Thanks, 
MJ :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

:wavey: Just wanted to let you know I'm off to a great start! During my private lesson today I went over the first _five_ techniques with my instructor. He had me do them regular first and then the off side, and it went very well! Yeah!!!  The hardest one was Sword of Destruction. I had to think about it a bit, but doing the regular way first and breaking it down into smaller pieces as some of you suggested really helped. 

Thanks! 

MJ


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 17, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> :wavey: Just wanted to let you know I'm off to a great start! During my private lesson today I went over the first _five_ techniques with my instructor. He had me do them regular first and then the off side, and it went very well! Yeah!!! The hardest one was Sword of Destruction. I had to think about it a bit, but doing the regular way first and breaking it down into smaller pieces as some of you suggested really helped.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> MJ


One of the blessings and curses of dyslexia...mirroring. My early kenpo classes always consisted of learning & drilling both sides of a SD technique, which I personally believe set the stage for good globalization of application...generally.  The disadvantage was this: I have a hard enough time remembering technique names (they remain for me, mostly, "the one against a 2-hand lapel grab with the hoopdy thingy at the end")...mirroring added the problem of not knowing which side was the correct "regular" side. Made tests a bit hard.  Mirroring, however, was an integral part of testing in my particular vein of Chinese Kenpo: Each technique had to be demonstrated 4 times on each side...once slow speed, articulating the moves as you go; once medium speed putting it together in motion; once at break-neck speed to show "combat readiness", and then again at break-neck speed on a human to show placement and control...both of self, and uke.

It was hard for me to go back to doing techs on one side, but now it's certainly easier to not get tripped up during foot maneuvers.

D.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> (they remain for me, mostly, "the one against a 2-hand lapel grab with the hoopdy thingy at the end")...


 LOL :lol: I sympathize with you on the tech names! :erg: We could probably start a thread on the different mnemonics we use as memory hooks to try and discriminate between them all. 



> mirroring added the problem of not knowing which side was the correct "regular" side.


This was my first question to my instructor today. How do you distinguish between them once you learn them? He assures me I will not get tripped up, and he's always right but I still have that concern. I think I might actively say in my mind _Delayed Sword off side_...etc., I think ones like Alternating Mace will be confusing eventually because OMG I already sometimes forget which side steps back. It's just one of those things for me I think. 



> Made tests a bit hard. Mirroring, however, was an integral part of testing in my particular vein of Chinese Kenpo: Each technique had to be demonstrated 4 times on each side...once slow speed, articulating the moves as you go; once medium speed putting it together in motion; once at break-neck speed to show "combat readiness", and then again at break-neck speed on a human to show placement and control...both of self, and uke.


Sounds like a really long test!



> It was hard for me to go back to doing techs on one side,


I think I'm concerned more from a teaching standpoint. I'd hate to confuse someone else... 




> but now it's certainly easier to not get tripped up during foot maneuvers.


 Good to hear there are benefits! Thanks Dr. Dave!


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 17, 2004)

Actually learning your off side will make you a better instructor.  You will now know it iwll be like for a left handed student to learn the art.  You will also have a greater understanding of the mechanics of motion.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 17, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> Actually learning your off side will make you a better instructor. You will now know it iwll be like for a left handed student to learn the art. You will also have a greater understanding of the mechanics of motion.


Robert had an interesting quote earlier in the thread about losing some of the subtleties (okuden?) by switching to off-sides too soon. What are your thoughts on the idea that most folks probably never even catch the subtleties the first time around, much less miss them on the second pass?

D


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 17, 2004)

Actually I think that by exploring the off side that practioner might pick up some the subtleties that they had previously missed.  Especially if they are trying to figure out how and why things work on one side and not on the other.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> Actually I think that by exploring the off side that practioner might pick up some the subtleties that they had previously missed. Especially if they are trying to figure out how and why things work on one side and not on the other.


I think this is a good point. Sometimes we will work a technique for an entire class and really tear the technique apart, and during these times I learn the most and always seem to come away with a deeper understanding. In working the off side today especially say for Sword of Destruction, I had to really engage in the process of breaking the technique down and be able to think about the technique in order to execute it on the other side. If nothing else, it forced me to check my form, and helped reinforce the positioning on the "regular" side as well. I am also beginning to see now that doing this will give me options that I had not considered using before. :asian:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 17, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> When we work a technique for an entire class and really tear the technique apart, I learn the most and always seem to come away with a deeper understanding.


  Well, see there..... another testimonial with a positive reason to support the practice!!!   Keep it up!



			
				mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> In working the off side say for Sword of Destruction, I had to really engage in the process of breaking the technique down and be able to think about the technique in order to execute it on the other side.


  Yes, very good,  I call this *isolation* training, where you have to focus down on particular sections of the technique to study the movements.



			
				mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> If nothing else, it forced me to check my form, and helped reinforce the positioning on the "regular" side as well.


 
   Another good benefit!!




			
				mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> I am also beginning to see now that doing this will give me options that I had not considered using before.


 Bravo.... mission accomplished!  Now all you have to do is continue to participat in what I  call "*The** Process*"

:asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> Well, see there..... another testimonial with a positive reason to support the practice!!! Keep it up!
> 
> Yes, very good, I call this *isolation* training, where you have to focus down on particular sections of the technique to study the movements.
> 
> ...


Thanks Goldendragon! I'll stick with it, because...... :rofl: I think _The Force_ may be rubbing off on me!!! :jedi1: I like your terminology too! Thanks! MJ:asian:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 17, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Thanks Goldendragon!


 :lookie:  
 :wink2:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> :lookie:
> :wink2:


     :lol:


----------



## pete (Aug 17, 2004)

ok, now that the thread has moved safely into a discussion of benefits of doing the techs on both sides (the why), and away from the tips to enhance learning them (or, the how),  logic and forum etiquette should now allow the whens and why nots to be explored.  

ive already posted upstream why practicing a mirrored tech is very different from practicing a form containing the movements of mirrored tech.  i also gave examples of some mirrored techs that seem to be practical in self-defense situations, and others that when mirrored may be redundant with existing techs.  not that redundancy is necessarily bad, but time, commitment, and at what expense begs the question when?  

the kenpo that i practice is based on consistent patterns and principles.  those patterns and principles are exemplified in the forms and techniques and when I say techniques, i speak of base plus extensions.  while id agree that exploration of mirrors might reveal principles to some students who may not have grasped it first time out, id be hard pressed to say that there is anything new to be learned from them.  time may better be spent learning the originals with better understanding.

so then, if i follow with when?  i understand from reading this very interesting thread that ed parker said that techs should be learned in left/right mirrored versions but not when?  

i also understand that ed parker was also fascinated with reverse motion, and Ive heard tales of him training his students to learn forms and techs in reverse motion but not when?  

ive also heard that the kenpo techniques can be applied to ground fighting and done from a prone position but not when?

yes i would like to train for a headlock with the attacker standing to my right, and a rear bear hug with the attackers left hand on top, but also see the value in applying Thrusting Prongs or Heavenly Ascent from the ground, and maybe a bit curious about reverse motion. but when?

ill safely say that my when will be after I, personally, have a much better understanding and ability with the techniques, extensions, forms, and sets

pete.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

Interesting questions Pete I'll leave it to the experienced...


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 17, 2004)

Those are great questions Pete.  They will have my brain playing for hours now.  I alomst see this as the point where a new post should be started, because we are branching off into other territorries with such great questions.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> Those are great questions Pete. They will have my brain playing for hours now. I alomst see this as the point where a new post should be started, because we are branching off into other territorries with such great questions.


Go for it Rob!


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 17, 2004)

Pete:

I'll bite.  Take the 1st coupla moves from 5-swords. I was taught that the inward block has a raking/sliding movement along the radial edge of the attacking/offending limb, which is then looped like a figure-8 immediately into the outward handsword, then palm heel or 2-finger spear to eyes (depending on level), the uppercut, etc.  Say you are mounted on top of a guy, and he is trying to press you off by applying pressure to the chest. If it's with his right hand, standard side 5/7 swords (at least the first coupla moves). If with the opposite side, sam ting, just mirrored.

Thrusting prongs from under a mount?  Good luck. I think you'll just piss the guy off whose mounted you, and invite a tantrum of downward thrusting punches to a head with nowhere to go.

If you train both sides of a tech everytime you learn them, you will already have an answer for the headlock.

The kenpo I practiced contained Universal elements of motion, indicating application from a number of positions. I was taught that SD techs did not so much represent a pre-programmed response to an attack, as much as introductions to applications of the vocabulary of motion from any odd number of positions. I (and any kenpo practitioner with a mind to) can pop a guy with pretty much any part of my body from any number of funky positions, whether the guy is in front of me, off to the side, behind me, etc....I don't need him to be located directly in front of me so I can assail him from my front stance with a reverse punch.  Of course, not so big a deal for a forum full of kenpoka. 25 years ago, however, this was all but unheard of in the world of karate. Karate was Shotokan, Wado-Ryu, Shito-Tyu, TKD, Hapkido, etc., much of which contend with attacks from the front, most of which were other karate or classic budo attacks (lotsa defenses against reverse punches, not that many against side club attacks or 2-hand lapel grabs).

When to train mirrors? In my mind, ALWAYS!.  I get my best training in the park at 1-2 AM, because there are no distractions, and I can tinker with reversing a form or mirroring techs, taking my time, thoughtfully picking my way through the daisies. Class time in a studio doesn't really afford that, but there is no good reason Snapping Twig can't be drilled on both sides during class.

Kenpo grappling...some of the jujutsu/chin-na stuff is built in if you've an eye as to where to look for it, and some have a better eye for it than others (ref: Doc, and his uncanny ability to identify and twist things in directions they shouldn't oughtta be twisted). That being said, I still have not discovered a "how to side-pass the guard while maintaining the opponent in a pinned position and not get sucked into a heel-lock, triangle, collar choke, sleeve-wheel choke, or arm-bar" tech in reverse of a form or tech. Some stuff is just "different animal". Anybody in the forum see an upa dismount hidden in Short 3 somewhere?

Excellent questions, though. Look forward to seeing others' responses.

D.


----------



## MJS (Aug 17, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> :wavey: Just wanted to let you know I'm off to a great start! During my private lesson today I went over the first _five_ techniques with my instructor. He had me do them regular first and then the off side, and it went very well! Yeah!!!  The hardest one was Sword of Destruction. I had to think about it a bit, but doing the regular way first and breaking it down into smaller pieces as some of you suggested really helped.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> MJ



Good job MJ!!  Keep up the hard work!!  Don't let the negative words of certain people get you down.  With time, you'll be flying through the techs. with ease!!

Mike


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 17, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Go for it Rob!



I will let someone else post these questions.  Possibly Pete or yourself could start appropriate threads.


----------



## MJS (Aug 17, 2004)

pete said:
			
		

> ok, now that the thread has moved safely into a discussion of benefits of doing the techs on both sides (the why), and away from the tips to enhance learning them (or, the how),  logic and forum etiquette should now allow the whens and why nots to be explored.
> 
> ive already posted upstream why practicing a mirrored tech is very different from practicing a form containing the movements of mirrored tech.  i also gave examples of some mirrored techs that seem to be practical in self-defense situations, and others that when mirrored may be redundant with existing techs.  not that redundancy is necessarily bad, but time, commitment, and at what expense begs the question when?
> 
> ...



If I'm reading this correctly, you're asking when to begin do the techs. on the opp. side??  If thats the case, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but IMO, I feel that its important to get the base techs. down first, and then go on to doing the opp side.  The same can be said for the extensions.  

As for doing the techs. from the ground.  I've talked with Clyde about this, and after discussing a few, have actually applied them on the ground while grappling.  However, slight mods. need to be made, but they can be done.

mike


----------



## GAB (Aug 17, 2004)

Hi, I see this topic is still going, pretty impressive.

I was reading some of the last posts and it reminded me of when my youngest son (he was in his late 20's at the time) taught a lot and was very good at the ability to mirror while teaching. 

He would tell the students to move the way he was moving and not look into the mirrors just to concentrate on him, he would be doing the Kata or tech in front of them, only doing it in the obverse of the kata, when he was teaching in this method his students learned quite rapidly, especially the younger ones.

He was doing it for himself as much as he was to teach the class, it became a challenge to do it just the opposite. He gradually got to where he did everything, that he could do on the one side, as well on the other. 

Try it, it is very diffucult and time consuming for most people, so they will make up reasons not to do it. He felt it was a way to assist the students and to keep it enjoyable for himself. 
Parents and spectators were always telling him how they respected his teaching abilities, while other practitioners of the various Martial Arts that he taught were (and are) in awe, myself included, talk about going to a different level.

Regards, Gary


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Good job MJ!! Keep up the hard work!! Don't let the negative words of certain people get you down. With time, you'll be flying through the techs. with ease!!
> 
> Mike


Thanks Mike!


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

GAB said:
			
		

> Hi, I see this topic is still going, pretty impressive.
> 
> I was reading some of the last posts and it reminded me of when my youngest son (he was in his late 20's at the time) taught a lot and was very good at the ability to mirror while teaching.
> 
> ...


Wow GAB  I see you have a lot of experience - 44+ years :asian:  I'm glad to see your son was so successful!  It's good to know  that the results of his hard work in this area paid off. Thanks for sharing your story!

MJ :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> .
> I get my best training in the park at 1-2 AM, because there are no distractions, and I can tinker with reversing a form or mirroring techs, taking my time, thoughtfully picking my way through the daisies. Class time in a studio doesn't really afford that, but there is no good reason Snapping Twig can't be drilled on both sides during class.


An important point you make here Dr. Dave. I agree you really have to make the time to do this. Class time really does not afford this, especially when you factor in the teaching time as well which cuts into your own training time a bit. I'm not sure 2 am in the park will work for me zzzzzzzzzz, but it certainly is creative! Certain techniques could be drilled this way in class. 

Thanks for sharing all of your thoughts on this!

MJ :asian:


----------



## cblaze230 (Aug 17, 2004)

MJ.

another fantastic challenge after the shodan test!!!  I was fortunate enough that during my review phase before my BB test my instructor had me mirroring everything at brown belt working backwards and up to my current ikkyu level on the techs, katas, forms, etc.  I wish i could have seen the look on my face when he suggested that i begin doing it RIGHT NOW before my next test so that i was capable of defending from any attack on any line or angle during the test and in the street.  after months of feeling like i couldn't walk let alone actually do delayed sword on both sides like i meant it the extra practice paid off big time during teaching and the test.  stick with it..like someone mentioned earlier your brain already has been wired for the motion you just have to flick the switches in a different order. you will get it and recall it correctly. in a few months you'll be just as good on the weak side as the strong side and you'll find the flow gets better.  cheers good luck, have fun.  CB


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 17, 2004)

cblaze230 said:
			
		

> I was fortunate enough that during my review phase before my BB test my instructor had me mirroring everything at brown belt working backwards and up to my current ikkyu level on the techs, katas, forms, etc. I wish i could have seen the look on my face when he suggested that i begin doing it RIGHT NOW before my next test so that i was capable of defending from any attack on any line or angle during the test and in the street.


LOL I would like to have seen that look on your face too!  



> after months of feeling like i couldn't walk let alone actually do delayed sword on both sides like i meant it the extra practice paid off big time during teaching and the test.


 That's excellent to hear!



> stick with it..like someone mentioned earlier your brain already has been wired for the motion you just have to flick the switches in a different order. you will get it and recall it correctly. in a few months you'll be just as good on the weak side as the strong side and you'll find the flow gets better. cheers good luck, have fun.


 Yes the part about being wired for the motion is interesting. I think there is some truth to that. I find that to be true even of new moves I learn, as many of them are extensions of things I've already learned. They do come easier.

Thanks for the encouragement CB! 

MJ :asian:


----------



## pete (Aug 19, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> I feel that its important to get the base techs. down first, and then go on to doing the opp side.  The same can be said for the extensions.


  yep, dats what i'm thinking, mike... get a full understanding and ability to execute the techniques with their extensions first, be able to move within the principles, graft, activate, insert, delete, prefix, suffix... plus invest time and energy into the internal aspects of the forms to benefit from what solo practice has to offer... then move on to exploring mirrors, ground applications, and reverse motion.  

or, is this too close to what robert was saying?



			
				Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Thrusting prongs from under a mount? Good luck.


 ahh, you see i am not there yet, but can see how this might be a good candidate for ground application, as might Heavenly Ascent.  Your 5-Swords sounds good too...



			
				Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> If you train both sides of a tech everytime you learn them, you will already have an answer for the headlock.


 i used that as a specific example, 'cause i do secretly play with grip o' death, spiraling wrist, and flight to freedom, and maybe a coupla more.  same as i'd like to play with a coupla techs from the ground, but can't say i'd want to do all of them until i explore other things, like...



			
				Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> chin-na stuff is built in if you've an eye as to where to look for it, and some have a better eye for it than others


.. developing that eye, and "feel" for it.  i wouldn't feel complete with my techniques until i can develop that feel for where the control points are in each application.  learning tai chi under Master William Ting, and Chin Na in seminars with Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming to develop the sensitivity and feel for it.

but, heck this is just me and what i am looking to get out of my training at this point in time.



			
				Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> I get my best training in the park at 1-2 AM


 do you use actual muggers...

pete


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Aug 19, 2004)

pete said:
			
		

> do you use actual muggers...


Most midnite muggers leave alone the crazy karate guys beating on trees well after the bars close.


----------



## GAB (Aug 19, 2004)

Dr. Dave, 

Sounds like a story I heard about about "Uncle Bill" a Dutch Indonesian Silat practitioner. Beating bark with his bare hands and denting large trash containers in the early morning hours... Everytime I hear a story like you are talking about I think of him, Tough to the bone. I always laugh and chuckle. Regards, Gary


----------



## Doc (Aug 24, 2004)

It's all busy work and has nothing to do with proficiency in a well taught system.


----------



## GAB (Aug 24, 2004)

Hi Doc, 
I see we are on the same topic but a different page (I am on 10 you are on 11). 
I am now a supporting member and am much more inclined to have a good informative talk, have you been dodging me? Or are you just very busy? 
I have posted a few times with questions in mind for you. As you have said, "was up"?

I figured since our last time talking on the board, you were not so inclined. 
I have posted my profile so maybe we can have a good disscussion? What do you think. 

I am not as narrow minded as some have said, (other board) I am not as gullible as others, who seek wisdom without proper guidence. 

I do believe hard work and proficiency go hand in glove. I would think any system has its good, bad and ugly techniques. Some just have more of one then the other.

Lots of choreography out in the schools, not that it is all bad in the earlier teachings, but it sure looks bad when in the higher learning aspects we still feel like explaining, how someone will act to a certain punch based on all the mysterious positions they have got to be in to move the way we feel they should... 

If you are inclined to observe the actual combat of the art of fighting, it will quickly dispel much of the aguements.

I feel the real test is the person who has been there and done it. We both fall into that pot. I enjoy your posts, most of them anyway, rhetoric sure turns people into someone seeking office.

How about it Doc are you going to answer some of my threads or just skirt them?   

Regards, Gary


----------



## ReturningThunder (Oct 20, 2004)

i like mirroring techniques beacuse that way you can work out both sides of your body


----------



## tsunami (Oct 20, 2004)

For several years now my intructor has had us doing all forms through six on both sides. It was tough at first but now we do it quite naturaly. Sometimes we run the line lefty also. I feel it is good to work the muscle memory on both sides makes flowing easier and cuts down on brain lock during spontainous attack drills. 

works for me, George


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 21, 2004)

Uh--the forms already ARE always done on both sides. By everybody who learns them.


----------



## tsunami (Oct 22, 2004)

O.K. you got me, I should have stated that we do all the forms starting normaly and then continue form to do the opposite side starting. Mirroring the entire form not just each tech within. If this is how everybody learns all of the forms, than I have been missing out on something. Also, you do not mirror techs when doing short 3 without doing left side starting to pick up the missing angle of 9:00.

Take it easy, George


----------



## rmcrobertson (Oct 22, 2004)

Man, I dunno how you're doing Short 3, but I'm doing both sides since about 1997, and so is everybody else I know who's got that far.

As for the 9 o'clock deal, well, there's orientation of the hands and then there's orientation of stances.


----------



## Seig (Oct 22, 2004)

Robert,
Quite simple what he is talking about is the same thing we do in the IKKO, once you have done the form, you come back to the beginning and do it opposite side of how it started.


----------



## John Bishop (Oct 23, 2004)

Just a small reminder for some of the members. Not all of our members read all the posts here.  If you direct a question to a particular member, please do not be offended if you don't get an immediate answer.  In fact you may not get any answer at all, if that member misses your post or has no opinion he/she wishes to share on it.  And please, do not bait any members in a attempt to bring them into the discussion.  Constant participation is not required of any members here.  

Back to the discussion


----------



## Hand Sword (Oct 28, 2004)

Does training the weaker side to try to do the tech's as the stronger side does really accomplish anything. I 've seen people try relentlessly to do so, but, never reach proficiency with the weaker side. Should the weaker side have the focus of performing speacialized tech's, such as the function of a jab, hook, etc.? From my experiences, that seems to get better results, or as some of my kali/escrima friends said when they brought up the use of the stick with both hands to instructors, and got the answer: better to be 100% effective in one side, than to be 50/50.


----------



## Doc (Oct 28, 2004)

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Does training the weaker side to try to do the tech's as the stronger side does really accomplish anything. I 've seen people try relentlessly to do so, but, never reach proficiency with the weaker side. Should the weaker side have the focus of performing speacialized tech's, such as the function of a jab, hook, etc.? From my experiences, that seems to get better results, or as some of my kali/escrima friends said when they brought up the use of the stick with both hands to instructors, and got the answer: better to be 100% effective in one side, than to be 50/50.


Sir, this has beed discussed here before, however unable to find the previous discussion, I will paste a previously published article.

Excerpts from the Diary of a "Mad"  Kenpo Scientist
The Ambidexterity Myth
By
Ron Chapél, Ph.D.

Over the years there have been significant misconceptions regarding the efficacy of right and left side training. A great deal of discussion exists relative to whether forms performances, and self-defense techniques are or should be right, left, or balanced in teaching and training execution.

The simple truth is all are correct in certain respects, and the confusion like many other topics, comes from the progenitor himself. Mr. Parker spent a considerable amount of time looking into the concept and reached some rather interesting conclusions in our own research and discussions.

As a forms example, in most versions of Ed Parkers Short Form Two, it does indeed include the physical left side in its right side  presentation. But, it is still considered, by Ed Parkers definition as explained to me, to be the right side, or what he quietly called right side brain dominant.  However you do not reverse the synaptic and cerebellar pathway responsibilities for movement until the actual mirror image  is performed. 

This is what Parker meant by left side.  The physical left is only motion or movement, but the true left side is an opposite or reversal of brain dominance and control. Thus all forms encompass in some manner right and left side, but to begin from the opposite side or mirror image reverses all mental functions and changes muscle response significantly enough to have significant influence on function.

Whether this is necessary in teaching is dependent on how you teach or train. Ed Parker created a series of conceptually right-handed techniques. He himself was not ambidextrous, nor was he working to become that way. His goal was physical competency in the physical interaction of the activity. And those who borrow sport concepts like cross training seem to put more value into ambidexterity than those who concentrate on self-defense as he did. 

Although in his commercial schools he encouraged left & right training for a variety of reasons, he recognized in self defense, competence was more important than performing left and right equally well. He knew that practicing both sides can yield benefits, but he also knew right & left would never be equal. Either way the operative phrase is mirror image execution,  to activate both sides of the brain to create balance in any kind of physical training.

In Ed Parkers self-defense philosophy however, training should be based on a curriculum of well thought out systematically principled and progressive techniques. The mechanisms inherent in the process are designed to emphasize situational effectiveness with ambidexterity irrelevant to function. Movements should be performed on both sides to demonstrate effective basic skills generated by both sides of the brain with their own unique synaptic pathways. But, self-defense techniques are about competence and effectiveness within the sequence first, and emphasis must be place there as a top priority.

Of course basic skills should be raised to an acceptable level of effectiveness, but the goal of balance in the execution of self-defense techniques in their mirror image is unnecessary, time consuming, and not physically possible when it comes to equity.

The teachers who preach this both sides technique execution  perspective themselves are not equally proficient on both sides. Most traditional styles and disciplines and even western boxing have techniques and moves used only from the left or right side. Most styles promote a left side forward to allow use of the right (strong) hand and leg from the rear. Even when the techniques change they still favor the right side. Even in those schools that promote equal side proficiency it is never, nor is it possible to be actually achieved.

The reasons it is not possible are physiological involving a mental interaction with the bodys ability to perform. Each side of the body is controlled by opposite sides of the brain. For example, when learning a left kick, a synaptic pathway must be created or established through the right side of the brain and vice versa. No matter how you train, the left and right pathways will never be identical in function. Even though the two sides of the brain function together, they do not have identical ways of performing the same function. They may produce identical physical movement, but how the movements are produced and controlled from the brain are very different.

Additionally the human body is not mathematically symmetrical in the true sense of the term. It is normal in human anatomy for one leg or arm to be longer than the other, and even different in diameter. Every muscle, tendon, cartilage, and even hair growth varies from side to side. World-class athletes do not stride, jump, throw, or move the same on both sides of the body. What is even more interesting is when an athlete is trained to be exactly symmetrical in their execution; it has been shown that physical performance actually declines overall. The body may be visually aesthetically symmetrical, but not precisely physically or mathematically. 

Most have unreasonable expectations with regard to weak side  performance. If we anticipate we can train the weak side to perform equally with the strong, we are mistaken. Because of how the brain works, you cannot attain the exact same degree of skill on both sides. It would be like attempting to teach yourself to write equally as well with both hands. You may achieve an acceptable level on the weak side but the strong will always be better and dominant. 

Human beings have a natural physical preference to have a dominant side that is predetermined at birth. Even in cases where a person has activity dedicated dominance,  they are always opposite of each other. I have a student who writes on one side, throws on the other, and still in baseball, bats opposite his dominant throwing side. But these activities are still functionally dedicated. He cant write, bat, or throw equally with both. This dominance is so strong in human behavior; it cannot be overcome by external training.  

In the Chinese Martial Sciences, students are taught opposite most other later martial art disciplines with the strong side forward for practicality. In examining the basic idea of most techniques, they can be executed on the prescribed side or they can be executed in what Mr. Parker, called Half Mirror Image.  That is a technique may be designed for one side attacking, however just because the attacker uses the other side or "mirror"  doesnt mean you have to react in kind with a "mirrored"  response. 

The self-defense techniques Thrusting Salute  and Buckling Branch  as kicking defenses are both interchangeable whether the right or left kick is used in the attack. In "Thrusting Salute" the attack is a front kick with the right leg, and you respond with the prescribed Default Solution to that particular assault. When the attack of a left front kick is used in "Buckling Branch," the attacker is now using the Mirror Image Assault of Thrusting Salute. However if you respond with the Default Solution to Thrusting Salute, you are in a Half Mirror Image Solution  response. These attacks, although mirror opposites of each other, can be responded to with the same right handed response. 

This type of training only requires one side be developed significantly to be functional. The opposite side can and will also be developed, but performing a different function. In another example, in the attack for "Delayed Sword"  (a right hand), you defend by stepping back with the left foot and executing with your front (right) hand.  "Attacking Mace"  (again an attacking right hand), does just the opposite, defending by stepping back with the right foot. Both techniques are developed independent of each other on opposite sides of the body, but they both function quite well with either right or left side dominance. Although all of Parkers interpretations of his art tend to be right-handed,  students with left-handed dominance can, and do flourish.

But no matter how well you perform in symmetrical forms, the dominant side will always be more coordinated and controlled. However, in a fight or confrontation of significant stress, and given the choice, you will always have a preference for one side over the other.

In closing, remember all interpretations of Ed Parkers American Kenpo should be about self-defense first. Many, specifically in America, have confused through clever marketing, sport training  with self-defense training. Cross training  and symmetrical performance borrowed from sport training and tradition-laden disciplines, must take a back seat to practical function and applications in reality. 

For the same reasons of symmetrical dominance, with the addition of mechanical efficiency, please consider any passive  non-action while opposite body parts are moving are dysfunctional in human anatomical movement, and violate this balanced  perspective of anatomical movement as well. 

The Ed Parker Slap check  (or pak sao in Chinese), and all its many subcategories and functions are always in some manner active. To achieve certain balanced skills, it is imperative that both sides of the body be active and functional at all times, and never ever passive. 

True ambidexterity is a myth and although it is worthy of pursuit, it should not overshadow the quest for practical application first. They dont fight  in tournaments they compete.  On the street, right or left is irrelevant to survival. You should be capable of using both sides of your body, but not necessarily the same nor equal. Ed Parker was right handed, and so are the systems he created and influenced.



Over the years there have been significant misconceptions regarding the efficacy of right and left side training. A great deal of discussion exists relative to whether forms performances, and self-defense techniques are or should be right, left, or balanced in teaching and training execution.

The simple truth is all are correct in certain respects, and the confusion like many other topics, comes from the progenitor himself. Mr. Parker spent a considerable amount of time looking into the concept and reached some rather interesting conclusions in our own research and discussions.

As an example in the execution of "forms," in most versions of Ed Parkers Short Form Two, it does indeed include the physical left side in its right side  presentation. But, it is still considered, by Ed Parkers definition, to be the right side, or what he quietly called right side brain dominant.  However you do not reverse the synaptic and cerebellar pathway responsibilities for movement until the mirror image is performed.

This is what Parker meant by left side. The physical  left is only motion or movement, but the true left side is an opposite or reversal of brain dominance and control.  Thus all forms encompass in some manner right and left side, but to begin from the opposite side or mirror image  reverses all mental functions and changes muscle response enough to have significant influence on function.

Whether this is necessary in teaching is dependent on how you teach or train. Ed Parker created a series of conceptually right-handed techniques. He himself was not ambidextrous, nor what he working to become that way. His goal instead was  physical competency  in the physical interaction of the activity. And those who borrow sport concepts like cross training  seem to put more value into ambidexterity than those who concentrate on self-defense as he did.

Although in his commercial schools he encouraged left & right training for a variety of reasons, he recognized in self defense, competence was more important than performing left and right equally well. He knew that practicing both sides can yield benefits, but he also knew right & left would never be equal. Either way the operative phrase is mirror image execution,  to activate both sides of the brain to create balance in any kind of physical training.

In Ed Parkers self-defense philosophy however, training should be based on a curriculum of well thought out systematically principled and progressive techniques. The mechanisms inherent in the process are designed to emphasize situational effectiveness with ambidexterity irrelevant to function. Movements should be performed on both sides to demonstrate effective basic skills generated by both sides of the brain with their own unique synaptic pathways. But, self-defense techniques are about competence and effectiveness within the sequence first, and emphasis must be place there as a top priority.

Of course basic skills should be raised to an acceptable level of effectiveness, but the goal of balance in the execution of self-defense techniques in their mirror image is unnecessary, time consuming, and not physically possible when it comes to equity.

The teachers who preach this both sides technique execution  perspective themselves are not equally proficient on both sides. Most traditional styles and disciplines and even western boxing have techniques and moves used only from the left or right side. Most styles promote a left side forward to allow use of the right (strong) hand and leg from the rear. Even when the techniques change they still favor the right side. Even in those schools that promote equal side proficiency it is never, nor is it possible to be actually achieved.

The reasons it is not possible are physiological involving a mental interaction with the bodys ability to perform. Each side of the body is controlled by opposite sides of the brain. For example, when learning a left kick, a synaptic pathway must be created or established through the right side of the brain and vice versa. No matter how you train, the left and right pathways will never be identical in function. Even though the two sides of the brain function together, they do not have identical ways of performing the same function. They may produce identical physical movement, but how the movements are produced and controlled from the brain are very different.

Additionally the human body is not mathematically symmetrical in the true sense of the term. It is normal in human anatomy for one leg or arm to be longer than the other, and even different in diameter. Every muscle, tendon, cartilage, and even hair growth varies from side to side. World-class athletes do not stride, jump, throw, or move the same on both sides of the body. What is even more interesting is when an athlete is trained to be exactly symmetrical in their execution; it has been shown that physical performance actually declines overall. The body may be visually aesthetically symmetrical, but not precisely physically or mathematically.

Most have unreasonable expectations with regard to weak side  performance. If we anticipate we can train the weak side to perform equally with the strong, we are mistaken. Because of how the brain works, you cannot attain the exact same degree of skill on both sides. It would be like attempting to teach yourself to write equally as well with both hands. You may achieve an acceptable level on the weak side but the strong will always be better and dominant.

Human beings have a natural physical preference to have a dominant side that is predetermined at birth. Even in cases where a person has activity dedicated dominance,  they are always opposite of each other. I have a student who writes on one side, throws on the other, and still in baseball, bats opposite his dominant throwing side. But these activities are still functionally dedicated. He cant write, bat, or throw equally with both. This dominance is so strong in human behavior; it cannot be overcome by external training. 

In the Chinese Martial Science, students are taught opposite most other later martial art disciplines with the strong side forward for practicality. In examining the basic idea of most techniques, they can be executed on the prescribed side or they can be executed in what Mr. Parker, called Half Mirror Image.  That is a technique may be designed for one side attacking, however just because the opponent uses the other side or mirror,  doesnt mean you have to react in kind with a mirror  response. 



The self-defense techniques Thrusting Salute and Buckling Branch as kicking defenses are both interchangeable whether the right or left kick is used in the attack. In Thrusting Salute the attack is a front kick with the right leg, and you respond with the prescribed Default Solution to that particular assault. When the attack of a left front kick is used in Buckling Branch, the attacker is now using the Mirror Image Assault of Thrusting Salute. However if you respond with the Default Solution to Thrusting Salute, you are in a Half Mirror Image Solution  response. These attacks, although mirror opposites of each other, can be responded to with the same right handed  response.

This type of training only requires one side be developed significantly to be functional. The opposite side can and will also be developed, but performing a different function. In another example, in the attack for Delayed Sword  (a right hand), you defend by stepping back with the left foot and executing with your front (right) hand.  Attacking Mace  (again an attacking right hand), does just the opposite, defending by stepping back with the right foot. Both techniques are developed independent of each other on opposite sides of the body, but they both function quite well with either right or left side dominance. Although all of Parkers interpretations of his art tend to be right-handed,  students with left-handed dominance can, and do flourish.

But no matter how well you perform in symmetrical forms, the dominant side will always be more coordinated and controlled. However, in a fight or confrontation of significant stress, and given the choice, you will always have a preference for one side over the other.

In closing, remember all interpretations of Ed Parkers American Kenpo should be about self-defense first. Many, specifically in America, have confused through clever marketing, sport training  with self-defense training. Cross training  and symmetrical performance borrowed from sport training and tradition-laden disciplines, must take a back seat to practical function and applications in reality.

For the same reasons of symmetrical dominance, with the addition of mechanical efficiency, please consider any passive non-action while opposite body parts are moving, as dysfunctional in human anatomy. This too violates the balanced  perspective of anatomical movement as well.

The Ed Parker Slap check  (or pak sao in Chinese), and all its many subcategories and functions are always in some manner active. To achieve certain balanced  skills, it is imperative that both sides of the body be active and functional at all times, and never ever passive.

True ambidexterity is a myth and although it is worthy of pursuit, it should not overshadow the quest for practical application first. They dont fight  in tournaments they compete.  On the street, right or left is irrelevant to survival. You should be capable of using both sides of your body, but not necessarily the same nor equal. Ed Parker was right handed, and so are the systems he created and influenced.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord (Oct 28, 2004)

Jumpin' Jeeehhoossaaphat, I wholeheartedly agree, agree, agree.   Finally, some sense to this mess, THANK YOU.    I wonder why it is so hard  for many to see this fact Ron, it's just too logical I suppose.

DarK LorD


----------



## 5 hand swords (Nov 14, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> A simple method to help you get the material down is to video tape yourself doing the techniques slowly on the second side. Watch the tape and look for holes in your technique. Every few times you practice the second side tape your self, you should start to see improvement. The taping will help you find the things you have missed.
> 
> In no time you will be banging of techniques either side with out thought.


VERY USEFUL - NEW use of a now (modern="cheap magic trick") for basic training.

Use it or lose it, I just know which way it went.
Grasp New Things


----------



## 5 hand swords (Nov 14, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> It's all busy work and has nothing to do with proficiency in a well taught system.


Except good lefty's or tricks and that really makes it busywork? lol.
I don't think so, can be a weak area no problem though but happens. 
Hey! Do you think Leonardo (and I dont mean the Turtle MA) with the entire mirror Latin Diarys etc to his credit could have got this down ?

Practice


----------



## rmcrobertson (Nov 14, 2004)

Seig--this reads like exactly what I was saying; in Short 3, first one steps forward with the right foot into the "destructive twins," beginning moves, runs through the right side of the form, then having returned to the horse stance steps forward with the left into the, "destructive twins," beginning moves....

So it's the same thing. What I can't seem to figure out are the arguments that a) after doing this, you STILL haven't done the "other side," of the form in Short 1, Long 1, and Short 3; b) there's some "other side," still to be done of forms such as Short 2, Long 3, Long 4, Long 5 & 6, even though these forms intertwine both sides from the start.

There only seems to be one form in which this would make the slightest sense, Long 2, which I've always liked but always found the weirdest form in kenpo.

As for the whole sidedness debate, I can't help but wonder why it is that folks can't figure out that if both Ron Chap'el and Larry Tatum are saying fundamentally the same thing about sidedness, there's a very good chance that that's the way to do it--given that if you add them up, you've got pretty much the span from 1960 or so to the present covered, including around twenty-five years or so of experience with Mr. Parker....

I mean, I realize that this isn't the only way in the world to see things, but in terms of kenpo...


----------



## clapping_tiger (Nov 19, 2004)

I came in late on this thread and quite honestly did not have time to read all the pages in this thread, so if this has been posted I apologize. And I don't think the original question was whether it is practical or not, 





			
				mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> I'm wondering if anyone who teaches this or has self taught technique mirroring has any insights, ideas, suggestions, or recommendations on how to make this process a little less painful.
> 
> Thanks,
> MJ :asian:


but by reading the last few pages it looks like the debate has taken that turn. Different schools and different instructors have different ideas on what has value and we should respect that. Anyway, we are required by our school to do the techniques on both sides right from the start. I don't see anything wrong with that. Something that may be helpful, and this goes along with the video taping method, is to video tape yourself doing the techniques as you normally would. Then when you watch the video, facing the TV, copy your movements and they should be on the opposite side. Do this until you are comfortable with it. The opposite side thing is quite a mental challenge at first but with some work it becomes just as easy as the base side. 

Another helpful technique is to break each technique down into 3 or 4 segments. Then do 1 segment on the base side and mirror it on the opposite side, then do 1 and 2, then 1,2,3 and so on. This not only forces you to break down the technique and analyze it more, but gives your brain a challenge as well.


----------



## clapping_tiger (Nov 19, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> Sir, this has beed discussed here before, however unable to find the previous discussion,


Is this the one?
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5951


----------



## Doc (Nov 19, 2004)

clapping_tiger said:
			
		

> I came in late on this thread and quite honestly did not have time to read all the pages in this thread, so if this has been posted I apologize. And I don't think the original question was whether it is practical or not, but by reading the last few pages it looks like the debate has taken that turn. Different schools and different instructors have different ideas on what has value and we should respect that. Anyway, we are required by our school to do the techniques on both sides right from the start. I don't see anything wrong with that. Something that may be helpful, and this goes along with the video taping method, is to video tape yourself doing the techniques as you normally would. Then when you watch the video, facing the TV, copy your movements and they should be on the opposite side. Do this until you are comfortable with it. The opposite side thing is quite a mental challenge at first but with some work it becomes just as easy as the base side.
> 
> Another helpful technique is to break each technique down into 3 or 4 segments. Then do 1 segment on the base side and mirror it on the opposite side, then do 1 and 2, then 1,2,3 and so on. This not only forces you to break down the technique and analyze it more, but gives your brain a challenge as well.



Well now as opinion go, let me express mine in another way. If an individual feels the need and has the time to do techniques on both sides, then they have learned very little on either. Conceptually some interpretations by design include busy work because of a lack of understandings needed to teach more in-depth material, or to maintain a standard conducive to commercial and financial success. Of course all of these things are relative, and I've already stated my definitve case earlier in the thread for those who do not find it too long or in-depth to read. I recognize the superficial approach runs rampant and accept that what some have experienced and accept as in-depth material is in fact quite shallow. But, shallow is what some want and are very satisfied with. Just don't try and sell it to those who know better.

"Busy work is the distraction that keeps you from realizing that you are learning very little." - Ron Chapél

"If you can't dazzle them with science, blind them with bulls**t." - Ed Parker Sr.


----------

