# SKK Problem Techniques



## MJS

Its been a while since I've really gone over the SKK combos that I know.  I have other material that I'm currently working on (non SKK related) but from time to time, I will go back and run thru some of the old techniques.  

Thinking back, there were some that used to drive me crazy, when I'd work them on a partner.  Perhaps it was because I didn't have a good understanding of them or maybe I was just doing something wrong, and had I tweaked the tech. just a bit, maybe it would've worked better.

So...I thought I'd start this thread so we could discuss some of the problem techniques that some of us have run into.  There are alot of techs. so I'm sure that there must be at least one that used to be a PITA! 

For me, I'd have to say that one of them was #19.  Everything, IMHO, was fine right up until the part where you flip them over.  On a smaller person, sure, I could see this working, but on a large person...I'm just not seeing it.  Personally, after the elbow to the back, I'd rather drop a few more elbows or perhaps some knees to the head.

Well, thats a start!  Anyone have any that drove them crazy?


----------



## 14 Kempo

MJS said:


> Its been a while since I've really gone over the SKK combos that I know. I have other material that I'm currently working on (non SKK related) but from time to time, I will go back and run thru some of the old techniques.
> 
> Thinking back, there were some that used to drive me crazy, when I'd work them on a partner. Perhaps it was because I didn't have a good understanding of them or maybe I was just doing something wrong, and had I tweaked the tech. just a bit, maybe it would've worked better.
> 
> So...I thought I'd start this thread so we could discuss some of the problem techniques that some of us have run into. There are alot of techs. so I'm sure that there must be at least one that used to be a PITA!
> 
> For me, I'd have to say that one of them was #19. Everything, IMHO, was fine right up until the part where you flip them over. On a smaller person, sure, I could see this working, but on a large person...I'm just not seeing it. Personally, after the elbow to the back, I'd rather drop a few more elbows or perhaps some knees to the head.
> 
> Well, thats a start! Anyone have any that drove them crazy?


 
I know what you mean, Mike. We have modified this with the approval of various GMs of various styles. Rather than the 'flip' we finish same as combo #3. 

...
Step in with left foot, drop right elbow to the spine.
Reach over, grab opponents left shoulder.
Push down with your left, to back of opponents right shoulder, pull opponents left shoulder with your right hand.
Rotate clockwise, 180 degrees, pivoting on your left foot.
Finish with punch to face, driving them to the ground.


----------



## MJS

14 Kempo said:


> I know what you mean, Mike. We have modified this with the approval of various GMs of various styles. Rather than the 'flip' we finish same as combo #3.
> 
> ...
> Step in with left foot, drop right elbow to the spine.
> Reach over, grab opponents left shoulder.
> Push down with your left, to back of opponents right shoulder, pull opponents left shoulder with your right hand.
> Rotate clockwise, 180 degrees, pivoting on your left foot.
> Finish with punch to face, driving them to the ground.


 
Hmmm...thats interesting! I like that!  I'll have to give it a shot!   I'm sure once the elbow is dropped, thats going to take alot of steam out of the person, but the other way....just didn't go smooth for me.


----------



## 14 Kempo

MJS said:


> Hmmm...thats interesting! I like that! I'll have to give it a shot!  I'm sure once the elbow is dropped, thats going to take alot of steam out of the person, but the other way....just didn't go smooth for me.


 
I think you'll like it! I know I do.


----------



## marlon

MJS said:


> Its been a while since I've really gone over the SKK combos that I know. I have other material that I'm currently working on (non SKK related) but from time to time, I will go back and run thru some of the old techniques.
> 
> Thinking back, there were some that used to drive me crazy, when I'd work them on a partner. Perhaps it was because I didn't have a good understanding of them or maybe I was just doing something wrong, and had I tweaked the tech. just a bit, maybe it would've worked better.
> 
> So...I thought I'd start this thread so we could discuss some of the problem techniques that some of us have run into. There are alot of techs. so I'm sure that there must be at least one that used to be a PITA!
> 
> For me, I'd have to say that one of them was #19. Everything, IMHO, was fine right up until the part where you flip them over. On a smaller person, sure, I could see this working, but on a large person...I'm just not seeing it. Personally, after the elbow to the back, I'd rather drop a few more elbows or perhaps some knees to the head.
> 
> Well, thats a start! Anyone have any that drove them crazy?


 

for 19 i did not really learn to flip them over but rather role them. after the elbow to the spine the i slide my hand to thier neck with a good amount of pressure in the direction of thier groin.   while with the other hand i strike the groin and continue a circular motion cw (both arm moving this way) and step cw with the back leg (cw) getting out of the way.  the takedown pretty much takes care of itself. the pressure to the neck and to groin strike combines to bend the attacker in such a way that very little strength is needed.  Anytime a student tres to throw theperson or flip them it does not work b/c what your brain tells your body to do biomechanically usually does not work.  I tell the students to trust the movement and let the takedown take care of itself.  It seems to work for them.

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## MeatWad2

I have a problem with any of the combo's that you spin in front of the person


----------



## JTKenpo

MJS said:


> Its been a while since I've really gone over the SKK combos that I know. I have other material that I'm currently working on (non SKK related) but from time to time, I will go back and run thru some of the old techniques.
> 
> Thinking back, there were some that used to drive me crazy, when I'd work them on a partner. Perhaps it was because I didn't have a good understanding of them or maybe I was just doing something wrong, and had I tweaked the tech. just a bit, maybe it would've worked better.
> 
> So...I thought I'd start this thread so we could discuss some of the problem techniques that some of us have run into. There are alot of techs. so I'm sure that there must be at least one that used to be a PITA!
> 
> For me, I'd have to say that one of them was #19. Everything, IMHO, was fine right up until the part where you flip them over. On a smaller person, sure, I could see this working, but on a large person...I'm just not seeing it. Personally, after the elbow to the back, I'd rather drop a few more elbows or perhaps some knees to the head.
> 
> Well, thats a start! Anyone have any that drove them crazy?


 

For the end of 19 after the right dropping elbow I grab the back of the neck at the base of the skull and allow my left hand to slide under the right shoulder.  Then pushing down and to my left with my right hand and up with my left it turns the attacker over and drops them on their back.  To preserve the original technique I do not alter it in 6 kata.

Side note - glad to be back, my computer crashed and I just got it back.


----------



## 14 Kempo

JTKenpo said:


> For the end of 19 after the right dropping elbow I grab the back of the neck at the base of the skull and allow my left hand to slide under the right shoulder. Then pushing down and to my left with my right hand and up with my left it turns the attacker over and drops them on their back. To preserve the original technique I do not alter it in 6 kata.
> 
> Side note - glad to be back, my computer crashed and I just got it back.


 
Welcome back, JT, nice to have your input again.


----------



## Jdokan

I think the difficulty I've had is ...will the opponent really be there after certain strikes...in this case the elbow...I think in reality IF you planted a solid kick to the groin or lower triangle, then struck their neck with the cupping sword hand (continuing their bending motion) followed by a driving elbow directly onto the spinal column....at this poinnt they should have collapsted to the ground totally...in a heap of flesh...BUT we're practicing here......to the point....after I strike with the elbow I encircle the head with that right arm, getting good control over the head & neck. I now crank their neck (clockwise) as if I was going to do a #1 block....My left hand helps redirect their lower body by pushing up on their right shoulder.....They very easily and very cooperatively roll or risk snapping their neck. They land at a 3:00 position where I finish the technique....


----------



## 14 Kempo

Jdokan said:


> I think the difficulty I've had is ...will the opponent really be there after certain strikes...in this case the elbow...I think in reality IF you planted a solid kick to the groin or lower triangle, then struck their neck with the cupping sword hand (continuing their bending motion) followed by a driving elbow directly onto the spinal column....at this poinnt they should have collapsted to the ground totally...in a heap of flesh...BUT we're practicing here......to the point....after I strike with the elbow I encircle the head with that right arm, getting good control over the head & neck. I now crank their neck (clockwise) as if I was going to do a #1 block....My left hand helps redirect their lower body by pushing up on their right shoulder.....They very easily and very cooperatively roll or risk snapping their neck. They land at a 3:00 position where I finish the technique....


 
Very interesting. That is most definately nothing that I've ever seen before, but I can certainly picture it. I'll have to find some poor chap at the school to allow me to try that one. I'll make it one of the instructors and I'll fail to tell him what I'm doing, other than a variation of #19.


----------



## MJS

Jdokan said:


> I think the difficulty I've had is ...will the opponent really be there after certain strikes...in this case the elbow...I think in reality IF you planted a solid kick to the groin or lower triangle, then struck their neck with the cupping sword hand (continuing their bending motion) followed by a driving elbow directly onto the spinal column....at this poinnt they should have collapsted to the ground totally...in a heap of flesh...


 
Very true.  I think back to the Fight Quest Kajukenbo espisode, where Jimmy attempted a double leg on that guy he was sparring.  Guy did a sprawl and dropped an elbow right down on his back.  Needless to say, Jimmy was down for the count.




> BUT we're practicing here......to the point....after I strike with the elbow I encircle the head with that right arm, getting good control over the head & neck. I now crank their neck (clockwise) as if I was going to do a #1 block....My left hand helps redirect their lower body by pushing up on their right shoulder.....They very easily and very cooperatively roll or risk snapping their neck. They land at a 3:00 position where I finish the technique....


 
Another interesting variation. I"ll give it a shot.


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> I think the difficulty I've had is ...will the opponent really be there after certain strikes...in this case the elbow...I think in reality IF you planted a solid kick to the groin or lower triangle, then struck their neck with the cupping sword hand (continuing their bending motion) followed by a driving elbow directly onto the spinal column....at this poinnt they should have collapsted to the ground totally...in a heap of flesh...BUT we're practicing here......to the point....after I strike with the elbow I encircle the head with that right arm, getting good control over the head & neck. I now crank their neck (clockwise) as if I was going to do a #1 block....My left hand helps redirect their lower body by pushing up on their right shoulder.....They very easily and very cooperatively roll or risk snapping their neck. They land at a 3:00 position where I finish the technique....


 
i love this move...right out of honsuki, right!

marlon


----------



## kidswarrior

Jdokan said:


> I think the difficulty I've had is ...will the opponent really be there after certain strikes...in this case the elbow...I think in reality IF you planted a solid kick to the groin or lower triangle....


May I ask if the *Lower Triangle* is a term widely used? Haven't heard it myself, so am guessing as to meaning, but looks to have potential. :asian:


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> I think the difficulty I've had is ...will the opponent really be there after certain strikes...
> 
> this is true.  Thatis why while learning the techniques may be static doing them is dynamic.  Follow though with your strikes (without killing your partner) and then follow the body.  I find most techniques cover more grd.  Also itr depends on the depth of your strike as well.  I teach elbows to the spine but also teach that to hit with full force to the spine ,esp. downwards , can have serious implications so perhaps this is not an area to ever use full force unless lethality is an option. So sometimes the strikes are for pain and body movement / control
> 
> REspectfully,
> Marlon


----------



## LawDog

Most of the techniques that flowed from a hand pattern into a kick pattern would usually end up in the wrong zone for that particular kick..
The same held true when flowing from any impacting patterns into a jujitsu / judo technique, you would usually end up in the wrong location, or zone for the technique.


----------



## Mark L

I think 19 has an awesome flow to it. Think about the contiguous cw and ccw blocks/strikes near the end of Swift Tigers.   That's how I do 19 after the initial block and kick.  Left goes cw down on the back of the neck,  the right follows ccw with the elbow while the left circles cw up to the groin, the right elbow follows through the ccw path to push down the neck while the left follows the cw circle to rise up into the groin.  It's effortless, the roll (not a throw) simply happens.  I see a lot of folks get caught up with really emphasizing the elbow, when it is really a transition strike on the way to pushing down the head.  

You see the same kind of thing in Kwai-Sun, Kata Set 2, and Combination Form from Kara-Ho Kempo.

I can't believe I'm about to say this, but it's just a simple as "Wax on, wax off" (or I am confusing it with "Sand the Deck").


----------



## Jdokan

marlon said:


> i love this move...right out of honsuki, right!
> 
> marlon


 
Yes..


----------



## Jdokan

kidswarrior said:


> may i ask if the *lower triangle* is a term widely used? Haven't heard it myself, so am guessing as to meaning, but looks to have potential. :asian:


hip / hip/ groin


----------



## Mark L

#26, I do the elbow and the groin strike simultaneously.  It makes sense to me to do it that way, but my instructor insists that the elbow should lead the groin strike.  I get what he is saying, getting my arms swaying (like a monkey), but I really like a simultaneous high/low strike on the center line.  It has a stunning effect and it leaves the BG vulnerable for the sweep ...


----------



## kidswarrior

Jdokan said:


> hip / hip/ groin


So, an _inverted _triangle then? Is there a corresponding upper triangle? Thanks. Just haven't heard it put this way before.


----------



## MJS

JTKenpo said:


> For the end of 19 after the right dropping elbow I grab the back of the neck at the base of the skull and allow my left hand to slide under the right shoulder. Then pushing down and to my left with my right hand and up with my left it turns the attacker over and drops them on their back. To preserve the original technique I do not alter it in 6 kata.


 
Interesting variation.  If I'm reading it right, it sounds similar to 14Kempos version.




> Side note - glad to be back, my computer crashed and I just got it back.


 
Welcome back!


----------



## marlon

LawDog said:


> Most of the techniques that flowed from a hand pattern into a kick pattern would usually end up in the wrong zone for that particular kick..
> The same held true when flowing from any impacting patterns into a jujitsu / judo technique, you would usually end up in the wrong location, or zone for the technique.


 
could you explain this more, please?  I have seen this problem with students who do not touch thier partner, but if you do and step accordingly everything should match up.  Combo #39 is a great example of this.

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## LawDog

Marlon,
Most of the early impacting presets were done in a way that put you outside the power curve of a strike or kick. This did cause some of the problem for proper follow up moves. 
The real problem was the footwork that was being used was not properly combined with the proper width SKK stance. The footwork used did not match the zones that are required for all strikes, kicks, jujitsu and judo moves. These zones, when properly applied, will keep you in the power curves for all types of impacting. They will also keep you within the "throwing boxes" for your Judo. They will also keep you within the proper range so that your motion will match your opponents motion, this is a must when a jujitsu move is applied.
When footwork is used if the width of the stance is changed it will change the distance that you travel.
Ex. When appling a shuffle, if you use a standard neutral stance then use the really wide "Kung Fu" stance the distance that you travel will be different.
When many presets were being developed the footwork and stance width were not properly matched.
:ultracool


----------



## JTKenpo

MJS said:


> Interesting variation. If I'm reading it right, it sounds similar to 14Kempos version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome back!


 

Yeah, I read it and thought the same thing.  It just makes the technique so much easier to apply.

Thanks.


----------



## Jdokan

kidswarrior said:


> So, an _inverted _triangle then? Is there a corresponding upper triangle? Thanks. Just haven't heard it put this way before.


 Another triangle we use is shoulder/shoulder/navel...


----------



## DavidCC

We have a technique we know as "Knife #9".  Atack is a slashing attack to the leg or lower body.

step fwd with right foot, using a scissor block to trap the attacking right arm (right arm low, left high).  Guide their arm upwards ccw, as their arm passes their neck, strike down on the back of the neck with knife hand as you kick their right leg up and out, the combined motion sweeping them to the ground on your right side.  Continue the leg motion into an axe kick to the left ribs.  

that kick is a nightmare


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> We have a technique we know as "Knife #9". Atack is a slashing attack to the leg or lower body.
> 
> step fwd with right foot, using a scissor block to trap the attacking right arm (right arm low, left high). Guide their arm upwards ccw, as their arm passes their neck, strike down on the back of the neck with knife hand as you kick their right leg up and out, the combined motion sweeping them to the ground on your right side. Continue the leg motion into an axe kick to the left ribs.
> 
> that kick is a nightmare


 
I like the base of the tech but I have two questions.  1st I'm not seeing the scissor block stopping a slash, could you expound on that (could just be having a bad day)?  2nd how do you control the knife and where is the disarm (wrist flex with the right hand?)?
Ok I lied, three questions, when I follow the technique they land on my left side?


----------



## DavidCC

JTKenpo said:


> I like the base of the tech but I have two questions. 1st I'm not seeing the scissor block stopping a slash, could you expound on that (could just be having a bad day)? 2nd how do you control the knife and where is the disarm (wrist flex with the right hand?)?
> Ok I lied, three questions, when I follow the technique they land on my left side?


 
The block is like a "V", right arm low, straight, left arm bent and intersecting, so the slashing arm is caught mid-forearm ideally.  Then controlling their arm circling it clockwise (I mis-typed that in my orig post) to your right side.  No disarm just control of the weapon arm.

I think the CW/CCW disrepancy might answer question 3


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> The block is like a "V", right arm low, straight, left arm bent and intersecting, so the slashing arm is caught mid-forearm ideally. Then controlling their arm circling it clockwise (I mis-typed that in my orig post) to your right side. No disarm just control of the weapon arm.
> 
> I think the CW/CCW disrepancy might answer question 3


 
Yup CW puts him on my right.  Good tech, I would personally use the block against a thrusting knife (straight in attack) but would then have to change the footwork too.


----------



## RevIV

This is a great thread and its killing me that i do not have the time to respond to anything yet but the 12 hour karate days are killing me this week.  so keep this one going and then i will be the johnny come lately and respond to the first post -- as long as it is not about combo #6


----------



## JTKenpo

RevIV said:


> This is a great thread and its killing me that i do not have the time to respond to anything yet but the 12 hour karate days are killing me this week. so keep this one going and then i will be the johnny come lately and respond to the first post -- as long as it is not about combo #6


 

Aaahhh sounds like someone is running summer camp.


----------



## RevIV

JTKenpo said:


> Aaahhh sounds like someone is running summer camp.


 
oh yes,  and my favorite day is still 3 away... Friday we head to Water Country.  def. not as many people doing the camp this year.  in the past we have had 50 kids, this year only 10.


----------



## DavidCC

JTKenpo said:


> Yup CW puts him on my right. Good tech, I would personally use the block against a thrusting knife (straight in attack) but would then have to change the footwork too.


 
I do like the arm work in this tech but that leg-hock-to-axe-kick is no friend of my 42 year old hip joints :/


----------



## JTKenpo

RevIV said:


> oh yes, and my favorite day is still 3 away... Friday we head to Water Country. def. not as many people doing the camp this year. in the past we have had 50 kids, this year only 10.


 

Yeah, I decided to take this summer off from camp.  I'm sure I will do it back up next year.


----------



## marlon

LawDog said:


> Marlon,
> Most of the early impacting presets were done in a way that put you outside the power curve of a strike or kick. This did cause some of the problem for proper follow up moves.
> The real problem was the footwork that was being used was not properly combined with the proper width SKK stance. The footwork used did not match the zones that are required for all strikes, kicks, jujitsu and judo moves. These zones, when properly applied, will keep you in the power curves for all types of impacting. They will also keep you within the "throwing boxes" for your Judo. They will also keep you within the proper range so that your motion will match your opponents motion, this is a must when a jujitsu move is applied.
> When footwork is used if the width of the stance is changed it will change the distance that you travel.
> Ex. When appling a shuffle, if you use a standard neutral stance then use the really wide "Kung Fu" stance the distance that you travel will be different.
> When many presets were being developed the footwork and stance width were not properly matched.
> :ultracool




thanks.  i found that footwork was left out of my early kempo training and i really developed it when i started teaching and had to answer questions that i guess i was too slow to ask for myself when i started.  Shihan I is very good with footwork so along with drawing from my other martial arts background i have his knowledge as well.  How did you develpo your footwork.  I think it is an essential part of kempo training and  i thank you for pointing it out

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## RevIV

MJS said:


> For me, I'd have to say that one of them was #19. Everything, IMHO, was fine right up until the part where you flip them over. On a smaller person, sure, I could see this working, but on a large person...I'm just not seeing it. Personally, after the elbow to the back, I'd rather drop a few more elbows or perhaps some knees to the head.
> 
> Well, thats a start! Anyone have any that drove them crazy?


 
So like I said, i will start from here.  after the elbow down we just grab onto the guy and throw them backwards,..  get the idea of the old west and someone getting thrown out of a salloon.  We work this tech. off of being backed into a wall and when we bend them over from the bladder kick we grab on and put their head through the wall.


----------



## RevIV

MeatWad2 said:


> I have a problem with any of the combo's that you spin in front of the person


 
so we have, 12,  and then 38,  are you refering to 21 and 26 where you go to the side, kindof in front?


----------



## RevIV

Mark L said:


> #26, I do the elbow and the groin strike simultaneously. It makes sense to me to do it that way, but my instructor insists that the elbow should lead the groin strike. I get what he is saying, getting my arms swaying (like a monkey), but I really like a simultaneous high/low strike on the center line. It has a stunning effect and it leaves the BG vulnerable for the sweep ...


 
I agree with your instructor,  its a timing issue on when you are going to scoop out the leg and with how much momentum of the left arm scooping that ankle.


----------



## RevIV

marlon said:


> could you explain this more, please? I have seen this problem with students who do not touch thier partner, but if you do and step accordingly everything should match up. Combo #39 is a great example of this.
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


 
Marlon, does your #39 have a kick in it? mine does not?  your qoute was in question of Lawdogs kicking distance.


----------



## RevIV

JTKenpo said:


> Yeah, I decided to take this summer off from camp. I'm sure I will do it back up next year.


 
My 6 week old baby told me she wanted a car so i had to run the camp to start putting money away..hahah


----------



## JTKenpo

RevIV said:


> My 6 week old baby told me she wanted a car so i had to run the camp to start putting money away..hahah


 

Yeeaaaaahhh.......


----------



## Jdokan

RevIV said:


> My 6 week old baby told me she wanted a car so i had to run the camp to start putting money away..hahah


Remember the mantra from your black belt test: "it's only the beginning".....
Car, pony, faster car, bigger pony, new phone.....new dresses, hairdo's nails...AGHHHHHHHHHHHHH..
All worth it though....
My youngest has decided to move home to continue college locally....(after being away)...and though it probably means additional cash outlay....I am stoked that she'll be home......girls are special.....


----------



## RevIV

Jdokan said:


> Remember the mantra from your black belt test: "it's only the beginning".....
> Car, pony, faster car, bigger pony, new phone.....new dresses, hairdo's nails...AGHHHHHHHHHHHHH..
> All worth it though....
> My youngest has decided to move home to continue college locally....(after being away)...and though it probably means additional cash outlay....I am stoked that she'll be home......girls are special.....


 
Def. great--
So back to problem tech...  I do not like 14,  maybe its just my problem but i do not like it.
Also combo #5 block i am not a fan of either.  Chicken wrist knife hand simo.


----------



## JTKenpo

RevIV said:


> Def. great--
> So back to problem tech... I do not like 14, maybe its just my problem but i do not like it.
> Also combo #5 block i am not a fan of either. Chicken wrist knife hand simo.


 
When I look at 5 I see alternatives.  Off beat timing on the knife hand and chicken wrist so that the knife blocks and the cw hyperextends the arm.  Sort of hidden technique so to speak.


----------



## marlon

RevIV said:


> Marlon, does your #39 have a kick in it? mine does not? your qoute was in question of Lawdogs kicking distance.


 
my 39 does not have a kick, Jesse.  What i was refering to in Lawdog's post was timing and distance for the "next" strike not specifically a kick.or perhaps i misunderstood.  I was using 39 as an example b/c if you do not touch and move the person your footwork will not work..and if you are touching and moving the person with your strikes there is a lot of foot work.

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## 14 Kempo

RevIV said:


> Def. great--
> So back to problem tech... I do not like 14, maybe its just my problem but i do not like it.
> Also combo #5 block i am not a fan of either. Chicken wrist knife hand simo.


 
We do these two techniques with variations. 

#14: 
- Move right foot back to left foot forward fighting stance
- #2 open hand block
- Right front thrust kick to midsection
- Step back to left foot forward fighting stance.
- Left back kick to second opponent
(we also practice this technique in its original format)

#5
- Turn CCW 90 degrees to left foot forward cat stance
- #3 outward block/strike to opponents arm
- Step down on left foot, step into hrse stance with right foot into opponents center
- Back two knuckle punch
- Right leg replacement side kick
(we also practice this technique in its original format)


----------



## RevIV

14 Kempo said:


> We do these two techniques with variations.
> 
> #5
> - Turn CCW 90 degrees to left foot forward cat stance
> - #3 outward block/strike to opponents arm
> - Step down on left foot, step into hrse stance with right foot into opponents center
> - Back two knuckle punch
> - Right leg replacement side kick
> (we also practice this technique in its original format)


 
Did you mean #2 outward block?  
I have hands on gaurd, L step blocking with LT knife hand block close to the body then thrusting out, catching and then doing a chicken wrist / upward ridge hand strike above elbow, then finish tech. same with back punch/backfist side kick


----------



## Mark L

RevIV said:


> Also combo #5 block i am not a fan of either.  Chicken wrist knife hand simo.


We don't do that block anymore, but substitute a circular block with the right then left ...

But I do like the original.  I was taught that it was a wrist trap/break rather than a push.  Imagine the knife hand forcing the metacarpals to point down while the chicken wrist drives up under the wrist towards 10:30.  The left captures the outside of the hand and rotates it inward while the right drops a backfist straight down on the inside of the wrist.  It's supposed to be a double break.  It sounds goofy and is hard to visualize, but it works.


----------



## LawDog

Marlon,
I discovered that the neutral width stances, when applied to footwork, measured out properly,(zones), to always bring you to the main balance point for your kicks and knees. This will also bring you into proper range for all of your elbow and hand stikes.
The key was to set up, (bench mark), the starting point for the zones. This starting point is set by an individuals forward arm reach. Once this personalized location is known the footwork simply falls into place.
:ultracool


----------



## marlon

LawDog said:


> Marlon,
> I discovered that the neutral width stances, when applied to footwork, measured out properly,(zones), to always bring you to the main balance point for your kicks and knees. This will also bring you into proper range for all of your elbow and hand stikes.
> The key was to set up, (bench mark), the starting point for the zones. This starting point is set by an individuals forward arm reach. Once this personalized location is known the footwork simply falls into place.
> :ultracool


 

thanks Lawdog,
in my experience i find not enough people 'follow' the attacker once contact is initiated. in that they do not realistically take into account the way the strikes will change the body positioning and spacial positioning of the attacker. and in many cases there is a lack of footwork for such adjustments.  I like thwe way you you describe the measuring out, i would like to add (although i am sure you meant it) that this is an active process and not statically defined from the initial contact position.
Again this is an excellent point you have brought up and something easily neglected in teaching. 
Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## DavidCC

marlon said:


> thanks Lawdog,
> in my experience i find not enough people 'follow' the attacker once contact is initiated. in that they do not realistically take into account the way the strikes will change the body positioning and spacial positioning of the attacker.


 
If you are actually moving your partner with your strikes and manipulations, how can you NOT take these things into account?

After watching kenpoJoe's karazenpo videos I asked him why his attacker was not reacting to the strikes; he said it was to preerve the way the techs were historically taught.  :/


----------



## marlon

DavidCC said:


> If you are actually moving your partner with your strikes and manipulations, how can you NOT take these things into account?
> 
> After watching kenpoJoe's karazenpo videos I asked him why his attacker was not reacting to the strikes; he said it was to preerve the way the techs were historically taught. :/


 
unfortuneately what kenpojoe did for a video is what many instructors do and call it teaching.  Many people do not move thier partner when practicing therefore many never see that there is anything more to take into account.  And then many practice with a overly cooperative partner and this sucks also.  It does not help kempo's reputation much when people teach and practice this way.  I know at least that Master Dwire, master Hatch, and master Barnes in the East train in a truthful manner and represent kempo effectively..../It seems that Lawdog does also!



Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## DavidCC

marlon said:


> Many people do not move thier partner when practicing therefore many never see that there is anything more to take into account. And then many practice with a overly cooperative partner and this sucks also.


 
Even in super-slow motion with littel or no contact I prefer to simulate the reactions even at the earliest stage of learning.  Dr Crouch once wrote about pushing the weapon into the target - it's less painful but still can generate the reactions.


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> If you are actually moving your partner with your strikes and manipulations, how can you NOT take these things into account?
> 
> After watching kenpoJoe's karazenpo videos I asked him why his attacker was not reacting to the strikes; he said it was to preerve the way the techs were historically taught. :/


 
David, that video was done strictly for historical purposes on the difference of the technique as originally done.  I did not give reactionary positioning due to the fact that this video was not done to teach the technique to someone who did not already have the skk version.


----------



## JTKenpo

marlon said:


> unfortuneately what kenpojoe did for a video is what many instructors do and call it teaching. Many people do not move thier partner when practicing therefore many never see that there is anything more to take into account. And then many practice with a overly cooperative partner and this sucks also. It does not help kempo's reputation much when people teach and practice this way. I know at least that Master Dwire, master Hatch, and master Barnes in the East train in a truthful manner and represent kempo effectively..../It seems that Lawdog does also!
> 
> 
> 
> Respectfully,
> marlon


 

Marlon I can assure you that I train dilegently and with plenty of contact, but words are words and look forward to training with you at the next seminar or workout we attend together.


----------



## marlon

JTKenpo said:


> Marlon I can assure you that I train dilegently and with plenty of contact, but words are words and look forward to training with you at the next seminar or workout we attend together.


 

JT first i am not anyone that you need to explain to at all.  my post had nothing to do with anyone specifically on the forum and certainly was not directed at you.  If i have something to say i am usually very direct.  from all the discussions i have seen you involved in you seem top be a very respectable martial; artist.  I understand and agree with Kenpojoe's reasoning for the video and the historical perspective.  My criticism is about a different kind of practice.  Regardless, i look forward to trainign with you and fully expect it to be fun, educational and bruising!!!  

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon

DavidCC said:


> Even in super-slow motion with littel or no contact I prefer to simulate the reactions even at the earliest stage of learning. Dr Crouch once wrote about pushing the weapon into the target - it's less painful but still can generate the reactions.


 
agreed.


----------



## Jdokan

RevIV said:


> Def. great--
> So back to problem tech... I do not like 14, maybe its just my problem but i do not like it.
> Also combo #5 block i am not a fan of either. Chicken wrist knife hand simo.


 Same here (#5) I have a different block:...take the right hand wrist block from the front of the left sword and place it behind the sword....flip it up to a plam ....or palm....ALmost fortress like....
With the original way I learned 5 (same as yours??) we stopped the attacking with a hard striking block then did the backfist side kick throat...
What I do now is lift hands as if I got caught off guard and I make soft contact...keeping his weight coming towards me...then I finish the technique...


----------



## JTKenpo

marlon said:


> JT first i am not anyone that you need to explain to at all. my post had nothing to do with anyone specifically on the forum and certainly was not directed at you. If i have something to say i am usually very direct. from all the discussions i have seen you involved in you seem top be a very respectable martial; artist. I understand and agree with Kenpojoe's reasoning for the video and the historical perspective. My criticism is about a different kind of practice. Regardless, i look forward to trainign with you and fully expect it to be fun, educational and bruising!!!
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


 
I do understand that some may not study "truthfully" as you put it, but I don't think it is unique to east coast or skk.  I have met 10th dans that if they didn't have a belt on I would guess them for brown belts and I have met yellow belts that look like black belts.

Hopefully there will be a good turn out for all of us at Master Hatch's in August.....


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> Same here (#5) I have a different block:...take the right hand wrist block from the front of the left sword and place it behind the sword....flip it up to a plam ....or palm....ALmost fortress like....
> With the original way I learned 5 (same as yours??) we stopped the attacking with a hard striking block then did the backfist side kick throat...
> What I do now is lift hands as if I got caught off guard and I make soft contact...keeping his weight coming towards me...then I finish the technique...




soft contact such as this i use quite a bit.  i love having someone run into my strikes!!

respectfully,
marlon


----------



## Jdokan

I never liked #21 always felt I was walking into the punch....


----------



## JTKenpo

Jdokan said:


> I never liked #21 always felt I was walking into the punch....


 
How do you start?  The way I was given 21 starts identical to 26.  Left knife block into right leopards paw under the bicep.


----------



## Jdokan

Sorry messed up I ment #20.....left outward sword/driving right sword to their right collarbone....
my 21 is okay dropping twist stance..


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> Sorry messed up I ment #20.....left outward sword/driving right sword to their right collarbone....
> my 21 is okay dropping twist stance..


 

20 is great the simultaneous block and  driving strike to the collar bone is a fairly secure move.  what about do you not like?

marlon


----------



## Jdokan

I remember a faster punch than my block and it slid up arm into my face....I changed the block from outward sword to a more forward....then movin' in with my attack once I had CONTROL of the attacking arm...Hence all my techniques now start the same way: " get control of the attack then......


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> I remember a faster punch than my block and it slid up arm into my face....I changed the block from outward sword to a more forward....then movin' in with my attack once I had CONTROL of the attacking arm...Hence all my techniques now start the same way: " get control of the attack then......


 
i see what you are saying...however, this combo does have lean / shift away before the step in with both hands raised (one blocks the other attacks) and this simultaneaous block attack is a signature kempo thing. and once the attacker has thier positioning disturbed then it is the best time to 'get control'.  but perhaps i need to see your way done.

marlon


----------



## KENPOJOE

marlon said:


> unfortuneately what kenpojoe did for a video is what many instructors do and call it teaching. Many people do not move thier partner when practicing therefore many never see that there is anything more to take into account. And then many practice with a overly cooperative partner and this sucks also. It does not help kempo's reputation much when people teach and practice this way. I know at least that Master Dwire, master Hatch, and master Barnes in the East train in a truthful manner and represent kempo effectively..../It seems that Lawdog does also!
> 
> 
> 
> Respectfully,
> marlon


 
Hi folks!
Dear Marlon,
I was made aware of this post by several people making me awre of it. They felt I should "say something" about your statements/comments. 
First of all, why do you seem to be under the impression that what i've shown via my video is not considered "teaching"?
To clarify several points:
1. in the "ideal phase" of a given technique [I use parker kenpoi terminology because shaolin kempo does not have sufficent terminology to describe many of the aspects of the art they teach], you have the attacker execute a halfmoon foot amnver forward while executing a "front two knuckle" punch at head height level. Because it was one of the first combinations that students learned in that given art.  It is designed to show a BEGINNER in a STUDIO atmosphere to insure that a given student can practice the combination safely at a slow pace and prperly learn the "embryoic state" of the actions contained within said technique.
2. Initially, the student is claerly told NOT to make contact with the opponent because both are beginners and in the past, they[instructors] were concerned about the safety of students & recently because of concerns about losing students if they "touched" each other [this was an actual statement nmade to me by an alleged "kempo" instructor]. obviously, in hawaii in the "good old days", the opposite was "true" and contact was a staple of training.
3. The very point you are trying to make i've made on innumerable occasions on this board as well as others. The objective was to demonstrate on a rudimentary level ,select techniques from the karazenpo goshinjutsu lineage. I purposely did not have my opponent "react" to my strikes nor did i make substancial contact. Because, I was "teaching" the technique [although you don't consider it as such]. 
4. Unfortunately, many shaolin kempo studios do not teach the "What if" phase of techniques [another parker kenpo term] and I know for a fact that in many of the original USSD locations, it was borderline discouraged!
When I teach these techniques to my students, you can sure as shimola bet they get contact and understand reactionary positioning. Being "co-opperative" during a given technique sometimes saves you from getting a full power blow/strike during the course of said techniques. 
5. the use of a "ghost image" is obtained by proper timing and "reading" your opponent's action & commitment so as to slip the punch without the opponet "following" your evasion. However, because many white belt beginners did the movement slowly the attacker would follow  the moving head of the defending student, so a checking hand was added [wow! checks in shaolin kempo! what a rarity! {i wasn't being sarcastic there}]
I read this post and I couldn't help but laugh...
Marlon, as you said earlier in this post, I'll tell you what "sucks" is the fact that apparently you are unaware that I have taught seminars for all the people you mention in your post! I've sat on their testing boards,assisted them in any capacity I could, studied and researched those arts, spoke to first generation students and masters of those arts & all things considered, have a good friendship or relationship with them. That.sire. is the "truth"
I can just see it now.."ok,little johnny, now slip the punch and F2K square in the jimmy! Don't worry if you rupture his testicles! He doesn't use them much anyway! LOL! A little higher and you'll smack the urinary bladder and burst it! no biggie,urine will get in his bloodstream and poison his organs,but hay, he won't die right away and and we can say he did it at kiddie football practice!Now yank that arm down and blast him with B2K to the temple and make him a drooling vegatable! oh, he's only 6,he still drools anyway..."
ROFLMAO!!!
THAT'S SOME FUNNY STUFF RIGHT THERE!
I hope that I was of some service,
KENPOJOE
PS:Let me assure you, I teach "effectively"


----------



## KENPOJOE

DavidCC said:


> If you are actually moving your partner with your strikes and manipulations, how can you NOT take these things into account?
> 
> After watching kenpoJoe's karazenpo videos I asked him why his attacker was not reacting to the strikes; he said it was to preerve the way the techs were historically taught. :/


 
Hi folks!
Dear David,
The intent of the video was to demonstrate the technique on a basic level to demonstrate the technique. I actually did that to show later generations who were not in the art back then how the technique was introduced to students. I realize that people like yourself were not in kenpo karate/shaolin kempo at that time,So, i thought you would actually might like someone demonstrating those techniques. Sorry if I was mistaken on your part. But, as you can read on the previous post, I clearly explain my reason and rationale.
If you don't like that..no biggie! 
BEGOOD,
KENPOJOE


----------



## marlon

KENPOJOE said:


> Hi folks!
> Dear Marlon,
> I was made aware of this post by several people making me awre of it. They felt I should "say something" about your statements/comments.
> First of all, why do you seem to be under the impression that what i've shown via my video is not considered "teaching"?
> To clarify several points:
> 1. in the "ideal phase" of a given technique [I use parker kenpoi terminology because shaolin kempo does not have sufficent terminology to describe many of the aspects of the art they teach], you have the attacker execute a halfmoon foot amnver forward while executing a "front two knuckle" punch at head height level. Because it was one of the first combinations that students learned in that given art. It is designed to show a BEGINNER in a STUDIO atmosphere to insure that a given student can practice the combination safely at a slow pace and prperly learn the "embryoic state" of the actions contained within said technique.
> 2. Initially, the student is claerly told NOT to make contact with the opponent because both are beginners and in the past, they[instructors] were concerned about the safety of students & recently because of concerns about losing students if they "touched" each other [this was an actual statement nmade to me by an alleged "kempo" instructor]. obviously, in hawaii in the "good old days", the opposite was "true" and contact was a staple of training.
> 3. The very point you are trying to make i've made on innumerable occasions on this board as well as others. The objective was to demonstrate on a rudimentary level ,select techniques from the karazenpo goshinjutsu lineage. I purposely did not have my opponent "react" to my strikes nor did i make substancial contact. Because, I was "teaching" the technique [although you don't consider it as such].
> 4. Unfortunately, many shaolin kempo studios do not teach the "What if" phase of techniques [another parker kenpo term] and I know for a fact that in many of the original USSD locations, it was borderline discouraged!
> When I teach these techniques to my students, you can sure as shimola bet they get contact and understand reactionary positioning. Being "co-opperative" during a given technique sometimes saves you from getting a full power blow/strike during the course of said techniques.
> 5. the use of a "ghost image" is obtained by proper timing and "reading" your opponent's action & commitment so as to slip the punch without the opponet "following" your evasion. However, because many white belt beginners did the movement slowly the attacker would follow the moving head of the defending student, so a checking hand was added [wow! checks in shaolin kempo! what a rarity! {i wasn't being sarcastic there}]
> I read this post and I couldn't help but laugh...
> Marlon, as you said earlier in this post, I'll tell you what "sucks" is the fact that apparently you are unaware that I have taught seminars for all the people you mention in your post! I've sat on their testing boards,assisted them in any capacity I could, studied and researched those arts, spoke to first generation students and masters of those arts & all things considered, have a good friendship or relationship with them. That.sire. is the "truth"
> I can just see it now.."ok,little johnny, now slip the punch and F2K square in the jimmy! Don't worry if you rupture his testicles! He doesn't use them much anyway! LOL! A little higher and you'll smack the urinary bladder and burst it! no biggie,urine will get in his bloodstream and poison his organs,but hay, he won't die right away and and we can say he did it at kiddie football practice!Now yank that arm down and blast him with B2K to the temple and make him a drooling vegatable! oh, he's only 6,he still drools anyway..."
> ROFLMAO!!!
> THAT'S SOME FUNNY STUFF RIGHT THERE!
> I hope that I was of some service,
> KENPOJOE
> PS:Let me assure you, I teach "effectively"


 
Kenpojoe,
i think that i have always demonstrates and stated that i have a high regard for your knowledge and all the work you do teaching.  I have not seen said video and was responding to a comment made by someone who apparently had seen it.  I in no way disparage your teaching ability.  I assumed that in the video you demonstrated the technique in the ideal phase 'only' and did not discuss or demonstrate more because (as someone else said) it was more of a historical document).  My 'unfortunately' comment is about some schools that never go beyond the ideal phase , i do not include you in this category in the least.  I remember being hit by you once in a discussion of ...i do not remember what...so i kow something of your power.  Please remember, everyone who knows me, who i am and do not take somethings wriiten here out of context of who i am.  It is difficult to take the time to writethings out in such a manner that no one is offended and that everything it COULD mean is clearly addrssed.  I hope you get to read this Kenp[ojoe or the others who informed you of things said previously let you know of this post as well.  Once again for the record, i respect your knowledge and i believe you to be a skilled teacher.  nor have i ever seen that video...BTW i still have and use the dvd i have from you on honsuki and await the nexty one which i have emailed you about.  you are a source i respect sir!!

marlon


----------



## LawDog

There are two ways to instruct material,
1 - Ideal Phase,
2 - Actual response,
both are correct.
Actual response is when your impacting strikes / kicks are in their proper power curve when one point of impact meets the other point of impact. The amount of control used for the impacting will depend on the instructors line of thought.
:ultracool
p.s.
KenpoJoe, where have you been latley?


----------



## Jdokan

How about 43????  my version is a hopping, skipping Peter rabbit thing (that I do practice) I may have the technique wrong....doubt it but maybe.....
Inside double block.....r/palm to face jump/spin CCW land back to man L/elbow to spleen....JUmp again CCW: r/palm back of head, jump/spin again L/elbow spine... spin again....r/palm to spine.....
jump/spin to the thirteenth power...........seems more kung phooey (Villari) than Kenpo.....


----------



## marlon

marlon said:


> JT first i am not anyone that you need to explain to at all. my post had nothing to do with anyone specifically on the forum and certainly was not directed at you. If i have something to say i am usually very direct. from all the discussions i have seen you involved in you seem top be a very respectable martial; artist. I understand and agree with Kenpojoe's reasoning for the video and the historical perspective. My criticism is about a different kind of practice. Regardless, i look forward to trainign with you and fully expect it to be fun, educational and bruising!!!
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


 

Kenpojoe and others, please re read the above post which clearly states that i am not attacking Master Rebelo or his students!  This is so frustrating!!!!
Again, MY CRITICISM IS ABOUT A DIFFERENT KIND OF PRACTICE!!!!

respectfully,
marlon
lurking is so much safer...i know why Doc takes so much time to carefully craft answers.


----------



## JTKenpo

Jdokan said:


> How about 43???? my version is a hopping, skipping Peter rabbit thing (that I do practice) I may have the technique wrong....doubt it but maybe.....
> Inside double block.....r/palm to face jump/spin CCW land back to man L/elbow to spleen....JUmp again CCW: r/palm back of head, jump/spin again L/elbow spine... spin again....r/palm to spine.....
> jump/spin to the thirteenth power...........seems more kung phooey (Villari) than Kenpo.....


 

WOW, my 43 is VERY different.  In fact it is simply an advanced version of #3.  Left brush block (palm block) and grab the shoulder, right punch to kidney then temple, open right hand and grab attackers chin (inverted tiger claw or crab claw I believe some call it), take down by rolling attackers head back and counter clockwise, finish with jumping axe kick to solor plexus while attacker is down.


----------



## JTKenpo

marlon said:


> Kenpojoe and others, please re read the above post which clearly states that i am not attacking Master Rebelo or his students! This is so frustrating!!!!
> Again, MY CRITICISM IS ABOUT A DIFFERENT KIND OF PRACTICE!!!!
> 
> respectfully,
> marlon
> lurking is so much safer...i know why Doc takes so much time to carefully craft answers.


 
Hi Marlon, I don't know if you recieved a pm from any one but your reply to me squashed any concerns I had so don't sweat the small stuff.  I'll give you a call.  No worrys mate.


----------



## DavidCC

KENPOJOE said:


> Hi folks!
> Dear David,
> The intent of the video was to demonstrate the technique on a basic level to demonstrate the technique. I actually did that to show later generations who were not in the art back then how the technique was introduced to students. I realize that people like yourself were not in kenpo karate/shaolin kempo at that time,So, i thought you would actually might like someone demonstrating those techniques. Sorry if I was mistaken on your part. But, as you can read on the previous post, I clearly explain my reason and rationale.
> If you don't like that..no biggie!
> BEGOOD,
> KENPOJOE


 
I read the email you sent me after I posted my same opinion on the YT video, and I understand why you wanted to record it that way.  And I do find value in looking at how techniques have evolved over time.

And while I am still new to martial arts I do understand some things.  One thing I know about kempo is that it takes advantage of predictable, elicited responses from the attacker, reactions caused by your actions - strikes, manipulations etc.  Therefore I don't think it is a useful teaching method to ignore the reactions of the other guy, even when teaching at the most basic level.  
I think you could have just as clearly (or even better) made your point with NO body standing there instead of a body that showed NO reaction to your actions.  When I teach, children and adults, I spend as much time describing the actions and reactions of the attacker as I do the actions of the student - because the goal is to control the attacker, the goal is not to perform a technique. 

"Ideal Phase" in no way implies or denotes that the attacker should just stand still with their arm extended while you execute your moves.  Ideal Phase refers to one part of the overall process of analyzing situations and scenarios, wherein the actions of the attacker and student are defined and prescribed specifically and studied without deviation. Once the Ideal Phase of actions and reactions is understood, then the student should start to analyze variables in the attacker's behavior or the influence of other factors such as their own limitations or environmental considerations. I don't believe there is ANY phase of the situational analysis wherein the reaction of the attacker to your actions is ignored.

=============

As for Marlon's post, I think he was generalizing from your specific: if using that format accomplishes a specific goal (of showing how it was taught some years ago), it is unproductive to teach that way all the time, and those that do are not doing their students a service.  I didn't understand him to be saying that Kenpojoe teaches that way all the time.


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> I read the email you sent me after I posted my same opinion on the YT video, and I understand why you wanted to record it that way. And I do find value in looking at how techniques have evolved over time.
> 
> And while I am still new to martial arts I do understand some things. One thing I know about kempo is that it takes advantage of predictable, elicited responses from the attacker, reactions caused by your actions - strikes, manipulations etc. Therefore I don't think it is a useful teaching method to ignore the reactions of the other guy, even when teaching at the most basic level.
> I think you could have just as clearly (or even better) made your point with NO body standing there instead of a body that showed NO reaction to your actions. When I teach, children and adults, I spend as much time describing the actions and reactions of the attacker as I do the actions of the student - because the goal is to control the attacker, the goal is not to perform a technique.
> 
> "Ideal Phase" in no way implies or denotes that the attacker should just stand still with their arm extended while you execute your moves. Ideal Phase refers to one part of the overall process of analyzing situations and scenarios, wherein the actions of the attacker and student are defined and prescribed specifically and studied without deviation. Once the Ideal Phase of actions and reactions is understood, then the student should start to analyze variables in the attacker's behavior or the influence of other factors such as their own limitations or environmental considerations. I don't believe there is ANY phase of the situational analysis wherein the reaction of the attacker to your actions is ignored.
> 
> =============
> 
> As for Marlon's post, I think he was generalizing from your specific: if using that format accomplishes a specific goal (of showing how it was taught some years ago), it is unproductive to teach that way all the time, and those that do are not doing their students a service. I didn't understand him to be saying that Kenpojoe teaches that way all the time.


 

Opinion well noted, now could you possibly post a link to a video that we could all watch you teach or move?


----------



## RevIV

Jdokan said:


> How about 43???? my version is a hopping, skipping Peter rabbit thing (that I do practice) I may have the technique wrong....doubt it but maybe.....
> Inside double block.....r/palm to face jump/spin CCW land back to man L/elbow to spleen....JUmp again CCW: r/palm back of head, jump/spin again L/elbow spine... spin again....r/palm to spine.....
> jump/spin to the thirteenth power...........seems more kung phooey (Villari) than Kenpo.....


 
I cannot stand 43. I have gone and tried 3 different versions and they were all bad.  My original stays on your feet and keeps spinning and somehow you end up behind them,, which does not make sense unless you are not hitting them.  Demasco's version i believe jumps in the air during the spins and strikes at a downward angle.  I learned another version from a 6th dan out of TokyoJoe's and it is nothing even close to ours.  I liked it but then realized that everything after 40 in the tokyojoe's system was made up by someone else and not done the Villari way.


----------



## RevIV

JTKenpo said:


> WOW, my 43 is VERY different. In fact it is simply an advanced version of #3. Left brush block (palm block) and grab the shoulder, right punch to kidney then temple, open right hand and grab attackers chin (inverted tiger claw or crab claw I believe some call it), take down by rolling attackers head back and counter clockwise, finish with jumping axe kick to solor plexus while attacker is down.


 

you are going to have to teach me that one


----------



## RevIV

I am reading these posts and seeing some people's belts getting a little tight.  I am glad some of you made nice on PM's but lets remember these are forums and no one wants to get together in August if anyone thinks they need to prove something.  I put on the list for one thing that we should go over at our get together - #43--  also i know what is coming next, and i do not know what is the best time to get together.. it may not be until after the summer from what some people are saying to me in emails.


----------



## DavidCC

JTKenpo said:


> Opinion well noted, now could you possibly post a link to a video that we could all watch you teach or move?


 
recording some video has been on my mind lately, especially some of the techs we do differently from the "standard" SKK.  When I have time I have nobody to work with (late at night); when I have people to work with I don't have time to video it (class time), so that's a catch-22 I am still trying to work out...  maybe I could post some video of me struggling to learn some SL-4 from Doc Chapel, that might be good for a laugh LOL.


----------



## JTKenpo

RevIV said:


> I am reading these posts and seeing some people's belts getting a little tight. I am glad some of you made nice on PM's but lets remember these are forums and no one wants to get together in August if anyone thinks they need to prove something. I put on the list for one thing that we should go over at our get together - #43-- also i know what is coming next, and i do not know what is the best time to get together.. it may not be until after the summer from what some people are saying to me in emails.


 
I will happily reiterate that I have no issue with anyone on this board near or far that goes beyond occasional disagreements and specifically Marlon clarified what he was saying and that is good enough for me...

I think 43 is an interesting discussion and work out.  The spins in your technique sound some what like what I have for 49 (I think its 49).  left hammer to wrist with right knife to bicep to block then right back fist, left palm to face *spin *under the attacking arm with right elbow to ribs and execute right hip throw.  The finish is a little silly with flowing punches to backfists while attacker is on the ground.

Jesse are there any dates floating about yet?


----------



## KENPOJOE

marlon said:


> Kenpojoe,
> i think that i have always demonstrates and stated that i have a high regard for your knowledge and all the work you do teaching. I have not seen said video and was responding to a comment made by someone who apparently had seen it. I in no way disparage your teaching ability. I assumed that in the video you demonstrated the technique in the ideal phase 'only' and did not discuss or demonstrate more because (as someone else said) it was more of a historical document). My 'unfortunately' comment is about some schools that never go beyond the ideal phase , i do not include you in this category in the least. I remember being hit by you once in a discussion of ...i do not remember what...so i kow something of your power. Please remember, everyone who knows me, who i am and do not take somethings wriiten here out of context of who i am. It is difficult to take the time to writethings out in such a manner that no one is offended and that everything it COULD mean is clearly addrssed. I hope you get to read this Kenp[ojoe or the others who informed you of things said previously let you know of this post as well. Once again for the record, i respect your knowledge and i believe you to be a skilled teacher. nor have i ever seen that video...BTW i still have and use the dvd i have from you on honsuki and await the nexty one which i have emailed you about. you are a source i respect sir!!
> 
> marlon


 
Hi folks!
Dear Marlon,
Thank you for the phone call on sunday! I'm glad we could clear this up and as you could tell from my reaction over the phone, It was no big deal! I haven't been on Martial Talk in awhile [got the "We miss you" email from Martialtalk to substanciate that!]. The only reason I even knew about this post was because 4 different people from different parts of the country called me about it! Glad to have this all cleared up! BTW, I've had fun with Marlon the times we've met and he's a real nice guy! I take no personal umburage regarding your post and glad we got a chance to chat! it's been ages since we chatted last!!!
BEGOOD,
KENPOJOE


----------



## DavidCC

Hi KenpoJoe, I just want to re-iterate that I do fully understand why you made that video that way; and it did exactly meet that goal!     I look forward to seeing more karazenpo video.

-David


----------



## marlon

RevIV said:


> I cannot stand 43. I have gone and tried 3 different versions and they were all bad. My original stays on your feet and keeps spinning and somehow you end up behind them,, which does not make sense unless you are not hitting them. Demasco's version i believe jumps in the air during the spins and strikes at a downward angle. I learned another version from a 6th dan out of TokyoJoe's and it is nothing even close to ours. I liked it but then realized that everything after 40 in the tokyojoe's system was made up by someone else and not done the Villari way.


 

although 43 is not my favorite i do find it workable. there is a great deal of footwork involved to do so...which begs the question why do so much footwork....
resepectfully,
Marlon


----------



## RevIV

marlon said:


> although 43 is not my favorite i do find it workable. there is a great deal of footwork involved to do so...which begs the question why do so much footwork....
> resepectfully,
> Marlon


  do you end up in front of the person at the end of the technique # 43 or behind them?  As taught to me I end up behind them which does not work for me when i actually hit the person. JTKenpo I do my #49 off of the left punch, blocking to the outside of the arm, step in right double palms, LT to ribs, RT to face, Left upward ridge to throat, step behind with left foot, hip throw and the flowy and thing at the end like you said.


----------



## JTKenpo

RevIV said:


> do you end up in front of the person at the end of the technique # 43 or behind them? As taught to me I end up behind them which does not work for me when i actually hit the person. JTKenpo I do my #49 off of the left punch, blocking to the outside of the arm, step in right double palms, LT to ribs, RT to face, Left upward ridge to throat, step behind with left foot, hip throw and the flowy and thing at the end like you said.


 
Sorry I forgot that the 40's are taught lefty.  I always require students know their #'d combos left and right so it never made sense to me to teach the 40's (or remember that they were taught) lefty.  The block to the outside of the arm is definately different though.


----------



## 14 Kempo

JTKenpo said:


> Sorry I forgot that the 40's are taught lefty. I always require students know their #'d combos left and right so it never made sense to me to teach the 40's (or remember that they were taught) lefty. The block to the outside of the arm is definately different though.


 
If you noticed, or maybe it's just in my style, the upper 40s are not just left handed, they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.

We, too, do all techniques right and left handed. In the past, we were asked at brown to black belt to do all techniques left handed. In my new school, I ask my students at all levels to do their previous rank material left handed as they learn their current material right handed.


----------



## DavidCC

14 Kempo said:


> We, too, do all techniques right and left handed. In the past, we were asked at brown to black belt to do all techniques left handed. In my new school, I ask my students at all levels to do their previous rank material left handed as they learn their current material right handed.


 
Our requirement is that we work the material 2 belts below you on the left side.

But I would rather just have techniques that address left punches directly instead of making them a special case of a right punch defense.


----------



## 14 Kempo

DavidCC said:


> Our requirement is that we work the material 2 belts below you on the left side.
> 
> But I would rather just have techniques that address left punches directly instead of making them a special case of a right punch defense.


 
... and thus the upper 40s, you in a right handed stance, them in a left stance, punching left handed. I agree.


----------



## marlon

RevIV said:


> do you end up in front of the person at the end of the technique # 43 or behind them? As taught to me I end up behind them which does not work for me when i actually hit the person. JTKenpo I do my #49 off of the left punch, blocking to the outside of the arm, step in right double palms, LT to ribs, RT to face, Left upward ridge to throat, step behind with left foot, hip throw and the flowy and thing at the end like you said.


 

 with the sequence of high -low strikes as Shihan taught me i do end up behind the person even when i hit them...however the footwork to do so is a bit onerus.  My 49 starts like 18 in that i move to a catstance at 4:30 with a lt downward palm block and a rt tiger mouth tothe throat...step in with the rt leg with double downward blocks to the head then left elbow to the head and rt ridge to the temple lt crane strike to the neck hook it and sweep the back leg with my left pivot cw with a spinning axe kick to back of the head....love it!!

marlon


----------



## Jdokan

14 Kempo said:


> they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.
> 
> 
> Do people practice ALL their techniques (combo's) against both open & closed stances??  We were never taught this...we did lefty/righty for each....It wasn't until I broke away on my own that we started doing the open/closed stance work.....Something I find that really ensures you must be open to adaptation....What was the line Clint used: adapt, improvise, overcome...


----------



## 14 Kempo

Jdokan said:


> 14 Kempo said:
> 
> 
> 
> they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.
> 
> 
> Do people practice ALL their techniques (combo's) against both open & closed stances?? We were never taught this...we did lefty/righty for each....It wasn't until I broke away on my own that we started doing the open/closed stance work.....Something I find that really ensures you must be open to adaptation....What was the line Clint used: adapt, improvise, overcome...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I try to do so, not always however. We try to do all our techniques both right and left handed, also at three levels, beginner, imtermediate and advanced. Beginner: block then strike. Intermediate: block and strike simultaneously. Advanced: forget the block, hit 'em. We find some don't work all the various ways and yet others need to be reverse engineered, so that blocking is applied. Working open and closed stances can make a major difference on many of our techniques as it will change the leg positiion and therefore eliminate various sweeps, leg hocks and leg checks. Now that you bring it up, I need to work this aspect uch more.
Click to expand...


----------



## JTKenpo

14 Kempo said:


> If you noticed, or maybe it's just in my style, the upper 40s are not just left handed, they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.
> 
> We, too, do all techniques right and left handed. In the past, we were asked at brown to black belt to do all techniques left handed. In my new school, I ask my students at all levels to do their previous rank material left handed as they learn their current material right handed.


 
Just to clarify, I encourage my under brown students to try the techniques opposite side, it is required at brown belt level.  By open stance I believe you mean that the strike more resembles a boxers cross, am I understanding that correctly?


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> Our requirement is that we work the material 2 belts below you on the left side.
> 
> But I would rather just have techniques that address left punches directly instead of making them a special case of a right punch defense.


 
I don't see it as a special case of a right punch, but that your goal should to become ambidexturous (I know that must be spelled wrong).  Because the majority of people are right handed the dominant time in training would be to start with the right side but when you become more fluint you would want to consentrate on the opposite side as well.  This point is actually were I personally find fault in the AK system as techniques are taught against precise attacks.  Now that isn't to say that these techniques can't be used against various attacks (hey isn't there a thread about this) but they are taught against specific attacks.  Where in sk we say here is the lowest common denominator now go have fun exploring.


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> 14 Kempo said:
> 
> 
> 
> they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.
> 
> 
> Do people practice ALL their techniques (combo's) against both open & closed stances?? We were never taught this...we did lefty/righty for each....It wasn't until I broke away on my own that we started doing the open/closed stance work.....Something I find that really ensures you must be open to adaptation....What was the line Clint used: adapt, improvise, overcome...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> could you clarify what you mean by open and closed stances?
> 
> marlon
Click to expand...


----------



## 14 Kempo

JTKenpo said:


> Just to clarify, I encourage my under brown students to try the techniques opposite side, it is required at brown belt level. By open stance I believe you mean that the strike more resembles a boxers cross, am I understanding that correctly?


 
Yes, that is one way to look at it. 

An open stance is that one fighter is in a right fighting stance, left foot forward, the other fighter is in a left fighting stance, their right foot forward.  So the left side of one fighter is nearest the right side of the other fighter.

A closed stance, both fighters are in a right stance, or both fighters are in a left stance. Both fighters have their left foot forward, or both fighters have their right foot forward.

Does that make sense?

In our style, combos in the high forties are done from an open stance.


----------



## DavidCC

JTKenpo said:


> I don't see it as a special case of a right punch, but that your goal should to become ambidexturous (I know that must be spelled wrong). Because the majority of people are right handed the dominant time in training would be to start with the right side but when you become more fluint you would want to consentrate on the opposite side as well. This point is actually were I personally find fault in the AK system as techniques are taught against precise attacks. Now that isn't to say that these techniques can't be used against various attacks (hey isn't there a thread about this) but they are taught against specific attacks. Where in sk we say here is the lowest common denominator now go have fun exploring.


 
In AK, at least according to the people I have learned from, the training of techniques agaisnt specific un-varying attacks is only the earliest stage of learning.

The process of training the left side and right side, internally in the brain, does not indicate that there is any efficiency in learning the mirror-image of a series of movements.  That is, if you can do combo X on the right, you cannot expect there to be any shorter learning curve to learn X on the left.  In fact it could take longer if you are right-handed to learn the lefty technique.

My thoughts on this are that I am a right-hand dominant person (like most people) so what do I have to gain from trying to make my left as dextrous as my right?  (Other than preparing for the unlikely case that my right will be disabled when I need it)  So why should I be switching to my least-capable mode (left-dominant) in response to a left punch or kick?  I think it makes a lot more sense to learn right-dominant responses to attacks from either side, from any angle.

Ironically "Go Have Fun Exploring" is actually one of my main complaints about SKK!  yes that is necessary at some point but I want to be taught things that I could not discover on my own.


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> In AK, at least according to the people I have learned from, the training of techniques agaisnt specific un-varying attacks is only the earliest stage of learning.
> 
> The process of training the left side and right side, internally in the brain, does not indicate that there is any efficiency in learning the mirror-image of a series of movements. That is, if you can do combo X on the right, you cannot expect there to be any shorter learning curve to learn X on the left. In fact it could take longer if you are right-handed to learn the lefty technique.
> 
> My thoughts on this are that I am a right-hand dominant person (like most people) so what do I have to gain from trying to make my left as dextrous as my right? (Other than preparing for the unlikely case that my right will be disabled when I need it) So why should I be switching to my least-capable mode (left-dominant) in response to a left punch or kick? I think it makes a lot more sense to learn right-dominant responses to attacks from either side, from any angle.
> 
> Ironically "Go Have Fun Exploring" is actually one of my main complaints about SKK! yes that is necessary at some point but I want to be taught things that I could not discover on my own.


 

....and now we are right back to the original meaning of the thread about skk combos and various attacks.  We were trying to explore the standard combo against a different attack i.e. #2 proper against a left punch, now you have your right dominant side against a left punch and all you have to do is vary the targets ever so slightly and it all works....but wait didn't you also complain that there shouldn't be techniques that were one hand dominant.....also training your opposite side starts the process of learning about opposites and reverses....and if you have trained in AK then you DO have right dominant defenses against left hand attacks...???


Don't take this as an attack David its just hard to see where you are coming from at times


----------



## RevIV

marlon said:


> with the sequence of high -low strikes as Shihan taught me i do end up behind the person even when i hit them...however the footwork to do so is a bit onerus. My 49 starts like 18 in that i move to a catstance at 4:30 with a lt downward palm block and a rt tiger mouth tothe throat...step in with the rt leg with double downward blocks to the head then left elbow to the head and rt ridge to the temple lt crane strike to the neck hook it and sweep the back leg with my left pivot cw with a spinning axe kick to back of the head....love it!!
> 
> marlon


 
thats different,  Did he make that up or is it how he was taught -  The version i do is taught the same by Jim Bryant, Bob Nohelty, Demasco - and i know they were pretty high up when they left Villari -- or is this one of the cases that involves the 12 rings of Villari Combo's?  heehee


----------



## RevIV

14 Kempo said:


> Yes, that is one way to look at it.
> 
> An open stance is that one fighter is in a right fighting stance, left foot forward, the other fighter is in a left fighting stance, their right foot forward. So the left side of one fighter is nearest the right side of the other fighter.
> 
> A closed stance, both fighters are in a right stance, or both fighters are in a left stance. Both fighters have their left foot forward, or both fighters have their right foot forward.
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> In our style, combos in the high forties are done from an open stance.


 
Your left / rights confused me.  A right figthing stance the way i was taught meant right foot forwards, Left would be left forward, but thank you for clarifying that.


----------



## 14 Kempo

RevIV said:


> Your left / rights confused me. A right figthing stance the way i was taught meant right foot forwards, Left would be left forward, but thank you for clarifying that.


 
I can see that, but where I come from a right handed person will fight with his powerhand, right in the rear and thus the left foot forward. Vice versa for a left-handed person. As in any boxing match, you'll see an orthodox fighter with his left foot forward (right-handed) and an unorthodox fighter with his right foot forward (left-handed). Simply symantics. Maybe it is that I'm saying right fighting stance, rather than right-handed fighting stance.


----------



## DavidCC

JTKenpo said:


> ....and now we are right back to the original meaning of the thread about skk combos and various attacks. We were trying to explore the standard combo against a different attack i.e. #2 proper against a left punch, now you have your right dominant side against a left punch and all you have to do is vary the targets ever so slightly and it all works....but wait didn't you also complain that there shouldn't be techniques that were one hand dominant.....also training your opposite side starts the process of learning about opposites and reverses....and if you have trained in AK then you DO have right dominant defenses against left hand attacks...???
> 
> 
> Don't take this as an attack David its just hard to see where you are coming from at times


 

LOL no prob man  heck my wife talks to me in person every day and she says the same thing.  (And worse, she can make a Marine blush with her creative use of 4-letter words.)

I think there is a difference between "one-hand domaint" techs (like the traditional #2 - where one hand is "doing all the work" ) and training with one side being predominant and the other hand being subordinate (and then considering the mirror image).

Which is making me think here as I type about what it even means for a technique to be right handed or left handed.  Is it that the power strikes are delivered with that dominant side?  That's probalby close enough definition for now.

I am totally behind the idea that movements can have different applications - inward block inside a right or outside a left punch for example.  I think this is far better than using a right inward block to go inside a rt punch and a left inward block to go inside a left punch, and then calling it the "same" technique in mirror image.

In SL-4 for example at their yellow belt level, 2 techs "sword of destruction" and "sword of doom".  One for right punch and one for left.  The initial block is either right inward block to inside of attacking right arm with your right, or right extended outward block to inside of left arm again with your right.  after that the two techs are almost identical (certain angles of execution are slightly different but the sequence of strikes and manuevers is basically the same).  Right block, right knife-hand, right kick.  The left is far from idle but it is the "Supporting Actor" not the star.  

besides, my SKK curriculuum doesn't contain the idea of opposites and reverses LOL.  it is very short it says "go like this and hit him hard right there".

So in summary, I like both hands to have important jobs to do but my right hand is the Star of the show.  Until we get to grappling, then the left finds a lot more Oscar-worthy roles.


----------



## DavidCC

14 Kempo said:


> I can see that, but where I come from a right handed person will fight with his powerhand, right in the rear and thus the left foot forward. Vice versa for a left-handed person. As in any boxing match, you'll see an orthodox fighter with his left foot forward (right-handed) and an unorthodox fighter with his right foot forward (left-handed). Simply symantics. Maybe it is that I'm saying right fighting stance, rather than right-handed fighting stance.


 
We train right side forward when you have the time to adopt a fighting stance.  My best weapon (and best defense) closest to the targets (and incoming weapons).  Plus it confuses boxers.

However mostly we train for situations where you do NOT have an opportunity to adopt a prepatory stance at all.

We don't use the open/closed terminology.  We use "right / right" "right / left" "left / right" and "left / left".


----------



## RevIV

DavidCC said:


> besides, my SKK curriculuum doesn't contain the idea of opposites and reverses LOL. it is very short it says "go like this and hit him hard right there".
> .


 
Sweet,, nice and simple.... And for the first time I think Here you go.


----------



## RevIV

RevIV said:


> Sweet,, nice and simple.... And for the first time I think Here you go.


 
Damn i tried to put one of those smiley faces at the end of it for some fun.


----------



## RevIV

14 Kempo said:


> I can see that, but where I come from a right handed person will fight with his powerhand, right in the rear and thus the left foot forward. Vice versa for a left-handed person. As in any boxing match, you'll see an orthodox fighter with his left foot forward (right-handed) and an unorthodox fighter with his right foot forward (left-handed). Simply symantics. Maybe it is that I'm saying right fighting stance, rather than right-handed fighting stance.


 
Thats a simple enough answer.  We were told right side fighting stance just meant right foot forward.   But I def. understand the reference to the hands for boxing.


----------



## marlon

14 Kempo said:


> Yes, that is one way to look at it.
> 
> An open stance is that one fighter is in a right fighting stance, left foot forward, the other fighter is in a left fighting stance, their right foot forward. So the left side of one fighter is nearest the right side of the other fighter.
> 
> A closed stance, both fighters are in a right stance, or both fighters are in a left stance. Both fighters have their left foot forward, or both fighters have their right foot forward.
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> In our style, combos in the high forties are done from an open stance.


 
so the discription of the stance is relational to the opponent then, if i understand correctly.
marlon


----------



## marlon

RevIV said:


> thats different, Did he make that up or is it how he was taught - The version i do is taught the same by Jim Bryant, Bob Nohelty, Demasco - and i know they were pretty high up when they left Villari -- or is this one of the cases that involves the 12 rings of Villari Combo's? heehee


 

 Could be ring 13 even!!1  Shihan says this is exactly how he learn it from Villari, though.  Demasco broke from Villari pretty soon after he tested Shihan I for 4th...The last thing i learned from Shihan Nohelty was 42 and 43 and he gave those to me a rank early
respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## DavidCC

RevIV said:


> Damn i tried to put one of those smiley faces at the end of it for some fun.


 
like this? 

:wuguns:


----------



## Jdokan

40 is one that I have to re-evaluate as I learned it.....It seems weak at the opening....Once moving is fine..here's how I have it...(though as I stated earlier about my memory)...against a right punch...step left to 10 o'clock, left palm cross block with a slight downward redirection...the right hand circles from the inside behind the blocking hand....it delivers an inverted palm to the side of the head followed immediately by a left inverted palm to the head...continue the motion and throw a right foot whipping hook or wheel kick to their head....

Anybody have anything similar...???

My concern is the first strike..I tend to like a more debilitating strike...I know there are 2 quick palms to the face......but....I tend to like the shock therapy of one good hard strike that I KNOW will shock him enough to not be able to throw the opposite hand....


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> 40 is one that I have to re-evaluate as I learned it.....It seems weak at the opening....Once moving is fine..here's how I have it...(though as I stated earlier about my memory)...against a right punch...step left to 10 o'clock, left palm cross block with a slight downward redirection...the right hand circles from the inside behind the blocking hand....it delivers an inverted palm to the side of the head followed immediately by a left inverted palm to the head...continue the motion and throw a right foot whipping hook or wheel kick to their head....
> 
> Anybody have anything similar...???
> 
> My concern is the first strike..I tend to like a more debilitating strike...I know there are 2 quick palms to the face......but....I tend to like the shock therapy of one good hard strike that I KNOW will shock him enough to not be able to throw the opposite hand....


 

i have more of a hop to 10:00, my palm does not circle downwards.  i havea rt thrust punch to the temple with simultaneaous rt blade kick to the back of the knee;rt hammer tothe kidney, then a lty palm check tothe shoulder blade rt cross hammer to the medulla .  the blade kick brings the attacker to thier knee

marlon


----------



## JTKenpo

marlon said:


> i have more of a hop to 10:00, my palm does not circle downwards. i havea rt thrust punch to the temple with simultaneaous rt blade kick to the back of the knee;rt hammer tothe kidney, then a lty palm check tothe shoulder blade rt cross hammer to the medulla . the blade kick brings the attacker to thier knee
> 
> marlon


 
Thats pretty close to the way I was taught also.  In looking to other systems for similarities and "answers" this technique is very similar to leaping crane in epak.


----------



## marlon

JTKenpo said:


> Thats pretty close to the way I was taught also. In looking to other systems for similarities and "answers" this technique is very similar to leaping crane in epak.


 
True, i remember seeing that epak technique once and thinking that it had similarities to 40 also


----------



## Jdokan

marlon said:


> i have more of a hop to 10:00, my palm does not circle downwards. i havea rt thrust punch to the temple with simultaneaous rt blade kick to the back of the knee;rt hammer tothe kidney, then a lty palm check tothe shoulder blade rt cross hammer to the medulla . the blade kick brings the attacker to thier knee
> 
> marlon


 You know I think I meant 45.....I went over the technique in my head and still wrote the wrong number..............

40 is as you stated...though my last strike is a trigger behind the ear...


----------



## MeatWad2

My 40 has a backfist to the neck


----------



## Jdokan

Originally mine had the trigger to the backside of the neck....I didn't like that so I moved the strike a few inches forward to strike the "balloon" spot....I like your  backfist though...more effective I think than what I'm doing now.....


----------



## Jdokan

Jdokan said:


> *Corrected # 45* is one that I have to re-evaluate as I learned it.....It seems weak at the opening....Once moving is fine..here's how I have it...(though as I stated earlier about my memory)...against a right punch...step left to 10 o'clock, left palm cross block with a slight downward redirection...the right hand circles from the inside behind the blocking hand....it delivers an inverted palm to the side of the head followed immediately by a left inverted palm to the head...continue the motion and throw a right foot whipping hook or wheel kick to their head....
> 
> Anybody have anything similar...???
> 
> My concern is the first strike..I tend to like a more debilitating strike...I know there are 2 quick palms to the face......but....I tend to like the shock therapy of one good hard strike that I KNOW will shock him enough to not be able to throw the opposite hand....


 
Now that I corrected this...anybody have any input?  I'd like to know what others may be doing....


----------



## RevIV

Jdokan said:


> Now that I corrected this...anybody have any input? I'd like to know what others may be doing....


 
on reference to #45 -- no nothing similiar.  I am going to cut and paste from Matts webpage what I do.

*We have two versions of #45* 
*45* - (off of a Left straight punch) Step right to 3 oclock, downward left knife block. Step to side of opponents body with left foot. Spin CW right foot going behind left, right knife hand to neck, left thrust to floating ribs (facing opponents side here), spin again CW, right back elbow to spine, left palm to back of head (occipital ridge). You should be in a right half moon behind the opponent, after a left palm grab to the shoulder, pull back and left sweep to persons right leg. When the opponent falls, turn CW dropping the left knee on the opponents right clavicle, left palm to heart and if you can reach right back punch to Femoral Artery (groin if you cant reach).(Courtesy of Jesse Dwire IV) 

*45* - Left parry to the outside of the arm right, downwards circluar block to the outside of the attacking arm (maybe rake the eyes on the way ) and a right roundhouse to the groin or shin roundhouse to the right inner thigh. Place the right leg behind ukes right ankle with a right elbow to the head. Turn ccw into a side horse with a left elbow to the ribs. Pivot into a forward / fighting stance facing 12:00 with a right palm to the head as you step through with the right leg and then step back with the left leg into a side horse facing 9:00 (still ccw turn) while delivering a left elbow to the spine. the left arm comes up to give a ridge hand strike to the throat and the drop your right knee to the ground pulling the attacker down. fininshg with a left palm between the legs and a right palm to the bladder.(Courtesy of Marlon Wilson)


----------



## DavidCC

We recently changed the way we end SDM #3.

Previously we ended with, after dropping him using the shoulder twist, a left straight punch to the solar plexus or face.  

We have changed that to be a left kick to the face, if needed.  This must be done with discretion because this could in some circumstances put us over the line form 'defending myself" to 'attacking a helpless person' from a legal perspective.

Which highlights another area we are changing. We are emphasizing the tactics of the situation.  Does the throw sufficiently incapacitate the attacker? Then no kick.  is he trying to get back up to continue his attack - kick him.  It's part of a  bigger "strategic" enhancement we are trying to incorporate, which I will try to write more about later but I still have lots of thinking to do on it and it's still undergoing development too.


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> We recently changed the way we end SDM #3.
> 
> Previously we ended with, after dropping him using the shoulder twist, a left straight punch to the solar plexus or face.
> 
> We have changed that to be a left kick to the face, if needed. This must be done with discretion because this could in some circumstances put us over the line form 'defending myself" to 'attacking a helpless person' from a legal perspective.
> 
> Which highlights another area we are changing. We are emphasizing the tactics of the situation. Does the throw sufficiently incapacitate the attacker? Then no kick. is he trying to get back up to continue his attack - kick him. It's part of a bigger "strategic" enhancement we are trying to incorporate, which I will try to write more about later but I still have lots of thinking to do on it and it's still undergoing development too.


 
I was originally taught throw him to the ground THEN hit him as well.  It was Prof Rebelo who pointed out the legal implications and explained how to hit him on the way down (once down he becomes the attacked instead of the attacker).  I imagine you are switching to a kick to also keep yellow belts from bending over at the waist to strike a downed oponent, leaning their whole body over rather then just bending the knees and keeping back straight?  When ever I have trouble breaking some one of that habit I have them perform the tech and when they bend over to hit me I grab their arm, gi, hair, whatever and pull them into a forward roll over the top of me allowing me to use that momentum and end up in the mount position on top.  That normally cures that nasty bad habit.


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> We recently changed the way we end SDM #3.
> 
> Previously we ended with, after dropping him using the shoulder twist, a left straight punch to the solar plexus or face.
> 
> We have changed that to be a left kick to the face, if needed. This must be done with discretion because this could in some circumstances put us over the line form 'defending myself" to 'attacking a helpless person' from a legal perspective.
> 
> Which highlights another area we are changing. We are emphasizing the tactics of the situation. Does the throw sufficiently incapacitate the attacker? Then no kick. is he trying to get back up to continue his attack - kick him. It's part of a bigger "strategic" enhancement we are trying to incorporate, which I will try to write more about later but I still have lots of thinking to do on it and it's still undergoing development too.


 
Do you allow someone options at the end?  ie you could kick this way OR drop your height zone and punch that way?  It was originally taught this way but I have seen other ke?po people do it this other way....

Obviously I don't mean all for the beginner but somewhere along the line, or is it this is the ONLY way to do it in this school?


----------



## marlon

yup, i was think what JT said.  the kick variation means that they are already on the ground when you strike.  Although we teach it take them tyo the ground then strike the application ai have has always been hit them on their way down..into the ground

respectfully,
marlon


----------



## JTKenpo

JTKenpo said:


> Do you allow someone options at the end? ie you could kick this way OR drop your height zone and punch that way? It was originally taught this way but I have seen other ke?po people do it this other way....
> 
> Obviously I don't mean all for the beginner but somewhere along the line, or is it this is the ONLY way to do it in this school?


 

David, I would be very careful of trying to conform too much to the legal implications of self defense.  I understand that it is a huge concern for all martial artists but at the end of the day in that dark alley where your or someone you love has their life on the line you shouldn't be thinking this guy might sue me if I take his eyeball out of his head.


----------



## 14 Kempo

JTKenpo said:


> David, I would be very careful of trying to conform too much to the legal implications of self defense. I understand that it is a huge concern for all martial artists but at the end of the day in that dark alley where your or someone you love has their life on the line you shouldn't be thinking this guy might sue me if I take his eyeball out of his head.


 
I agree, what's that corny old saying, "Better to be judged by twelve, then carried by six" ... yeah, that's it.


----------



## JTKenpo

14 Kempo said:


> I agree, what's that corny old saying, "Better to be judged by twelve, then carried by six" ... yeah, that's it.


 
Yup thats the one.  It may be corny but it comes out of my mouth atleast once a week.


----------



## DavidCC

We're not going to teach the punch any more.

We always address the legal implications, which are even more important in weapons defenses.  if you take a gun away from someone and shoot them, you better be aware of how the County prosecutor is going to see that.  Unarmed defenses have some concerns but are much less likely to result in prosecution.  So for this kick, we want our students to be aware that kicking a helpless person makes THEM the attacker and if a police officer rounds the corner behind you just as you kick, you are the "bad guy".  We aren't so much concerned with a mugger suing us as we are the testimony of witnesses LOL 

But I am not disagreeing with you guys, good points all around, just pointing out that this is part of a bigger picture...  of course the priority is to get home safe.  

Most of our adults have this memorized more or less: "I'm not sure what happened, he attacked me, it's all kindof blurry after that; I just Thank God he didn't kill me, I was afraid for my life." 

www.steinerama.com


----------



## JTKenpo

DavidCC said:


> We're not going to teach the punch any more.
> 
> We always address the legal implications, which are even more important in weapons defenses. if you take a gun away from someone and shoot them, you better be aware of how the County prosecutor is going to see that. Unarmed defenses have some concerns but are much less likely to result in prosecution. So for this kick, we want our students to be aware that kicking a helpless person makes THEM the attacker and if a police officer rounds the corner behind you just as you kick, you are the "bad guy". We aren't so much concerned with a mugger suing us as we are the testimony of witnesses LOL
> 
> But I am not disagreeing with you guys, good points all around, just pointing out that this is part of a bigger picture... of course the priority is to get home safe.
> 
> Most of our adults have this memorized more or less: "I'm not sure what happened, he attacked me, it's all kindof blurry after that; I just Thank God he didn't kill me, I was afraid for my life."
> 
> www.steinerama.com


 
When specifically talking about gun defense I always stress to students that you do not want to use an attackers gun against them, well thats not true either I should say you don't want to try and shoot their gun.  Unless you have a plethera of knowledge on hand guns you may not know the intricacies of said gun and worse it might just blow up in your face.  You don't know where this idiot got it, could be from grandpas collection that still has a chambered bullet but is rusted to hell.  Of course any handgun works great if you hit em with it.  

I do understand your point about the legalities, just offering some food for thought since you guys are in that stage, know what I mean.


----------



## 14 Kempo

I have to agree with you somewhat David. I do talk to my students about legal implications and they need to be aware, but it always comes back to "do what you gotta do, deal with the consequences" ... if you think about it, dealing with the consequences can be much more beneficial than being in a wheelchair for life, or even worse, a coffin ... at least you survived.


----------



## graychuan

In dealing with armed attackers, specifically guns i can only offer one realistic suggestion...


Any modern day martial artist that wants to seriously address self-defense, should just go ahead and get a concealed/carry deadly weapon license. This will lend insight to a couple of pertinant issues...

1. I know for a fact that in the state of Kentucky the law is only on your side with firearms and lethal force if it is justified. Wrenching the gun from an assailant then shooting them with it may seem appropriate but as soon as you do this they will be unarmed and you will have the gun. The law will not be on your side. However if you have your own gun then you will be ok...as long as you shoot first.:shooter:
2. In Kentucky, the concealed carry law covers any _*legally obtainable*_ _*weapon*_, including *bladed weapons*. So you only need a gun to pass the firearm part of the test to get the certification... but you still have a choice if you dont want to carry a gun. %-} So if your state recognizes your right to carry then my opinion is that you are only exercising your rights as a tax-paying citizen to get the license whether you own a gun or not.

#3. In Kentucky small self-defense weapons such as spiked batons or spiked keychains are also considered concealed deadly weapons. I believe any blade over 3" long is considered deadly weapon. So any female martial artists or just anyone who isnt licensed but carries one of these for self defense then you are probably on the wrong side of the law. So In keeping with point #2...rent or borrow a gun. Pass the test. Then get rid of the gun and carry what you are comfortable with.


This is a big thread and I didnt read all of it so if these options have already been adressed then sorry to rehash it.

Love, Peace & Chitlin Grease

~Cg~


----------



## Jdokan

DavidCC said:


> We recently changed the way we end SDM #3.
> 
> Previously we ended with, after dropping him using the shoulder twist, a left straight punch to the solar plexus or face.
> 
> We have changed that to be a left kick to the face, if needed. This must be done with discretion because this could in some circumstances put us over the line form 'defending myself" to 'attacking a helpless person' from a legal perspective.
> 
> Which highlights another area we are changing. We are emphasizing the tactics of the situation. Does the throw sufficiently incapacitate the attacker? Then no kick. is he trying to get back up to continue his attack - kick him. It's part of a bigger "strategic" enhancement we are trying to incorporate, which I will try to write more about later but I still have lots of thinking to do on it and it's still undergoing development too.


 We've also changed #3...the opening up through the backpunch has remained (for the most part), the right hand still drops a "heavy" cranes' wing to the neck grabbing their L/shoulder...I was taught pull into a L/driving elbow to the spine...


----------



## JTKenpo

Jdokan said:


> We've also changed #3...the opening up through the backpunch has remained (for the most part), the right hand still drops a "heavy" cranes' wing to the neck grabbing their L/shoulder...I was taught pull into a L/driving elbow to the spine...


 

Do I understand correctly that you are not turning them over but pulling them forward (like #18) in order to deliver the elbow to the spine?


----------



## Jdokan

Correct...your right arm is laying parallel to their shoulders.  The elbow acting as a pivot point as you pull with the hand....What I do is to hook my fingers (monkey) into the carotid area...this helps to ensure they pivot nicely..they rotate CCW..once they turn their back enough that's when I deliver the elbow to the spine...


----------



## marlon

Jdokan said:


> Correct...your right arm is laying parallel to their shoulders. The elbow acting as a pivot point as you pull with the hand....What I do is to hook my fingers (monkey) into the carotid area...this helps to ensure they pivot nicely..they rotate CCW..once they turn their back enough that's when I deliver the elbow to the spine...


 

VEry cool technique but why call it combination #3.  This is one of the ones there is no 12 cirles of madness confusion about.  why not drop it as 3 and call it something else.  otherwise i think it will just add to skk confusion.

Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## 14 Kempo

marlon said:


> VEry cool technique but why call it combination #3. This is one of the ones there is no 12 cirles of madness confusion about. why not drop it as 3 and call it something else. otherwise i think it will just add to skk confusion.
> 
> Respectfully,
> marlon


 
I would agree here. Basically it is a variation of combination #3, which is actually a kempo technique, or least that's how we look at things like this.


----------



## JTKenpo

14 Kempo said:


> I would agree here. Basically it is a variation of combination #3, which is actually a kempo technique, or least that's how we look at things like this.


 

There is also the option of A, B, C type of deal.  Combo 3A and 3B as an option.  Just another option.


----------



## 14 Kempo

JTKenpo said:


> There is also the option of A, B, C type of deal. Combo 3A and 3B as an option. Just another option.


 
Yes, we use that as well. Usually when we use the terms A or B, they are slight variations of the original.

Our method of teaching allows for students to mold the combinations and kempo techniques into something that will better fit their body type, size, etc. What we demand is that our instructors teach the combinations as closely to the original as possible. That will allow each students to grow it, over time, into their own, without loosing the concepts of the original.

As an example, if I personally make changes to a technique to better suit the way I move, it is great for me, but I'm 5' 10" and about 245 lbs, mainly muscle. If I'm teaching the technique to a female that is 5' 2" and less than 100 lbs, the technique may not be the same as if I'm doing it. They need to be taught the original method and allowed, over time, to grow it into something that works for them, at their size and utilizing their strengths.

As with the variation that brought this discussion forward, I would see the driving elbow to the spine as a possiblilty for me, but for a 100# woman against a 200# pound man, well, I'd question its effectiveness. Not that it couldn't be effective, just that I'd question it. JMHO


----------



## Jdokan

marlon said:


> VEry cool technique but why call it combination #3. This is one of the ones there is no 12 cirles of madness confusion about. why not drop it as 3 and call it something else. otherwise i think it will just add to skk confusion.
> 
> Respectfully,
> marlon


 
 You bring up an excellent point!  Over time (as part of the {original} USSD meltdown) a considerable number of our combinations changed...to the point the name changed: combinations= ping te's...The style of what we were slowly started to morph into what is currently being taught...Since I have left I also have modified movements to what fits me.  I retain the numbering sequence for my own usage and nothing else...

For me to re-invent a numbering sequence to reflect what I have done is beyond any value to me.  I don't try to compare my material with any other SSK people other than discussion purposes....  

Even some of the material I've had for years was done differently when compared to some of the other schools....did it mean that my numbers should have be called something else?  To me my #4 was #4 even if the boys from some other school/state, etc did something else.....

Right now my #6 is nothing of the SSK ways, (you wouldn't recognize 8,9, 10 & a few others...nothing like the old days) but it is still my #6....
make sense to anybody else or is it just me??....[or is my wife once again right...that though is another thread....(typically she's always right!!  LOL...)]
PEACE,
j,


----------



## JTKenpo

Jdokan said:


> You bring up an excellent point! Over time (as part of the {original} USSD meltdown) a considerable number of our combinations changed...to the point the name changed: combinations= ping te's...The style of what we were slowly started to morph into what is currently being taught...Since I have left I also have modified movements to what fits me. I retain the numbering sequence for my own usage and nothing else...
> 
> For me to re-invent a numbering sequence to reflect what I have done is beyond any value to me. I don't try to compare my material with any other SSK people other than discussion purposes....
> 
> Even some of the material I've had for years was done differently when compared to some of the other schools....did it mean that my numbers should have be called something else? To me my #4 was #4 even if the boys from some other school/state, etc did something else.....
> 
> Right now my #6 is nothing of the SSK ways, (you wouldn't recognize 8,9, 10 & a few others...nothing like the old days) but it is still my #6....
> make sense to anybody else or is it just me??....[or is my wife once again right...that though is another thread....(typically she's always right!! LOL...)]
> PEACE,
> j,


 
Makes sense to me (although that may not be much comfort  ).  I have changed some of the #techs as well, my reasoning being that they were extensions of kempo techs taught at earlier ranks OR they were category completion techs of kempo techs taught at earlier ranks.  This allowed me to bring in techs from other styles and use them as # techs.  Could I have used these other techs from other systems as named kempo techs, sure and in some cases I did.

I think I'm rambling, anyway on techs I have altered, replaced or scrapped I always give the example of the original tech and why I changed from it.


----------



## RevIV

Jdokan said:


> You bring up an excellent point! Over time (as part of the {original} USSD meltdown) a considerable number of our combinations changed...to the point the name changed: combinations= ping te's...The style of what we were slowly started to morph into what is currently being taught...Since I have left I also have modified movements to what fits me. I retain the numbering sequence for my own usage and nothing else...
> 
> For me to re-invent a numbering sequence to reflect what I have done is beyond any value to me. I don't try to compare my material with any other SSK people other than discussion purposes....
> 
> Even some of the material I've had for years was done differently when compared to some of the other schools....did it mean that my numbers should have be called something else? To me my #4 was #4 even if the boys from some other school/state, etc did something else.....
> 
> Right now my #6 is nothing of the SSK ways, (you wouldn't recognize 8,9, 10 & a few others...nothing like the old days) but it is still my #6....
> make sense to anybody else or is it just me??....[or is my wife once again right...that though is another thread....(typically she's always right!! LOL...)]
> PEACE,
> j,


 

No your wrong...
haha - just kidding.  Heading off the "Blunt Force Trauma" tonight in Manchester NH.  One of my good friends owns a Kempo school and has 5 fighters going into the cage tonight and he asked me to be his corner man.  www.cagefightmma.net


----------



## Jdokan

RevIV said:


> No your wrong...
> haha - just kidding. Heading off the "Blunt Force Trauma" tonight in Manchester NH. One of my good friends owns a Kempo school and has 5 fighters going into the cage tonight and he asked me to be his corner man. www.cagefightmma.net


 nice.....jealous....


----------

