# Lost Techniques



## detroitfan102

Currently, I'm learning Long Form 4, which includes a technique called Darting Leaves that apparently is no longer used in the system. I was wondering if anybody had a complete list of "lost techniques".


----------



## dubljay

As far as I know Darting Leaves was never a technique per se.  If you look at the first technique of Long 4, Protecting Fans, when you execute the eye poke and kick it is with the opposite hand and foot (left poke right kick).  In Darting Leaves it is same hand same foot (left poke left kick).  I belive this is more of a catagory competion than technique.  

 Like I said this is just as far as I know... I could be completely wrong.


 -Josh


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3

detroitfan102 said:
			
		

> Currently, I'm learning Long Form 4, which includes a technique called Darting Leaves that apparently is no longer used in the system. I was wondering if anybody had a complete list of "lost techniques".


Darting Leaves is not really a "lost technique" it's a category completion technique for the form. In the previous technique 'Protecting Fans' you did a kick + eye poke with opposite hand opposite foot. In "Darting Leaves" you do a kick + eye poke with the same hand and foot.

But a solid list of "lost techniques" could go:

1. Aggressive Twins -- taught in some places but not in Infinite Insights list.
2. Spreading Branch -- taught in some places but not in Infinite Insights list.
3. Intellectual Departure -- taught in some places but not in Infinite Insights list.
4. Broken Leaves -- Long 3 -- Category completion technique
5. Spiraling Ram -- 'What if' to the other ram techniques
6. Darting Leaves -- Form 4 -- Category completion technique
7. Pinning Wing -- Long 3 -- Category completion technique
8. Controlling Wing -- Long 3 -- Category completion technique
9. Hopping Crane -- Form 5 -- Category completion technique
10. Deflecting the Rod -- Form 6 first side of Twisted Rod is called this at times
11. Unfurling lance -- Form 6 -- Unfurling Crane modified for a knife
12. Clipping the Lance -- Form 6 -- Clipping the Storm modified for a knife.


----------



## dubljay

Very nice list sir.  Ahh good ol' Hopping Crane... Long 5 gives me fits to begin with but that part really shows my lack of coordination.  Just a question... where is the "what if" for the ram techniques presented?


----------



## KenpoDave

detroitfan102 said:
			
		

> Currently, I'm learning Long Form 4, which includes a technique called Darting Leaves that apparently is no longer used in the system. I was wondering if anybody had a complete list of "lost techniques".



Best I can tell from the responses, the technique in question is known as Praying Mantis in Tracy's, and is certainly not lost.  As a matter of fact, ALL of the techniques in Long #4 are in our green belt curriculum.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3

dubljay said:
			
		

> Very nice list sir. Ahh good ol' Hopping Crane... Long 5 gives me fits to begin with but that part really shows my lack of coordination. Just a question... where is the "what if" for the ram techniques presented?


'Spiraling Ram' was taught to me as a category completion/what if to the ram techniques that links into Back Breaker.  basically in the rams the opponent is *head towards us face down* and we try to _put them down that way_ in Charging ram, _keep them standing_ in broken ram, _turn them counter-clockwise face up_ in Intercepting the ram (some schools), so Spiraling Ram is taught as a _clockwise turn face up_ that leads into either Back Breaker or the end of piercing lance.


----------



## dubljay

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> 'Spiraling Ram' was taught to me as a category completion/what if to the ram techniques that links into Back Breaker. basically in the rams the opponent is *head towards us face down* and we try to _put them down that way_ in Charging ram, _keep them standing_ in broken ram, _turn them counter-clockwise face up_ in Intercepting the ram (some schools), so Spiraling Ram is taught as a _clockwise turn face up_ that leads into either Back Breaker or the end of piercing lance.


 

 Ohhhhhh... I have something new to play with.  Thank you _very_ much sir.


----------



## KenpoEMT

> I was wondering if anybody had a complete list of "lost techniques".


Here's something from Lamkin's site called Manual of the Lost Techniques: 
http://www.elite-fighters.com/store/products/lost_manual.htm
I've never seen this manual, so I can't comment on it. 

I've got some of their instructional material that I use in a supplement to my training. IMO everything they offer is pretty good as far as quality of information is concerned.

Good luck!


----------



## Flying Crane

I think what you are referring to as "lost techniques" are simply techniques that existed in the original Kenpo that Ed Parker was teaching in the 1950s and early 1960s.  The Tracy lineage has kept all of these techniques, while Ed Parker eliminated some and changed others in the process of creating his American Kenpo.  The Katas were created using these techniques, but apparently Mr. Parker never modified the katas to reflect the changes that he made in the technique curriculum. 

Tracys has 250 techniques, plus many variations, thru First Degree Black Belt, and 381 total, plus variations, thru Fifth Degree Black Belt, which is the complete list.  According to Tracys, if you count up all the formal variations, the total is a full 600, but I have never verified that count myself.

The breakdown is as follows: 10 techniques for Yellow belt; 30 techniques each for Orange, Purple, Blue, Green, 3rd Brown, 2nd Brown, 1st Brown, and 1st thru 4th Black.  Fifth Black has 41, most of which are actually additional variations to existing techniques.

I believe Yellow belt was a later addition to the program.  Not everyone includes this in their curriculum, and it probably depends on when the instructor received their training. 

Originally, when the Tracys were students of Mr. Parker, the techniques did not have names and were taught in whatever random order Mr. Parker felt inclined.  The Tracy's created names for the techniques, and organized them into the order in which they are now taught in their curriculum.  Mr. Parker used these names for a while, until making his modifications for American Kenpo, where many of the names were changed.  

Hope this helps.

Michael


----------



## Seabrook

I would argue that any "missing" techniques in EPAK aren't really missing just because they are not formally required for testing purposes. 

I know this may open up a can of worms, but the difference that I see behind Parker's Kenpo and Tracy's Kenpo is that the former is based more on logical principles. Also, I don't count a,b,c,d, and e version as seen in Tracy's Kenpo as 5 different techniques but one. We, in EPAK, would simply call that "what-if's" of the ideal phase techniques. 

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


----------



## Flying Crane

Seabrook said:
			
		

> I would argue that any "missing" techniques in EPAK aren't really missing just because they are not formally required for testing purposes.
> 
> I know this may open up a can of worms, but the difference that I see behind Parker's Kenpo and Tracy's Kenpo is that the former is based more on logical principles. Also, I don't count a,b,c,d, and e version as seen in Tracy's Kenpo as 5 different techniques but one. We, in EPAK, would simply call that "what-if's" of the ideal phase techniques.
> 
> Jamie Seabrook
> www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


I think you have some good points there.  The variations get to be tedious, and often, in my opinion, are unneccesary.  I am simply relaying how the Tracys count things, not making a statement about what is better.  

The Tracys simply felt it was better to keep all the original stuff as they learned it, and Parker decided to make changes for what he felt was the better.  This was one of the reasons for the Tracy's split from Mr. Parker.  I don't see it as a value judgement about which is better, simply an observation of what is different.  But I do think it is an answer to what some people may see as "missing techniques".  They are only "missing" from American Kenpo because Mr. Parker felt there was no reason to keep them.  In a similar way, Tae Kwon Do Kata are "missing" from Kenpo because nobody felt the need to incorporate them.  They still exist, people practice them, but they are not part of American Kenpo.

Michael


----------



## Kenpoist

I remember techniques like Four Fists and Hammerlock  (circa 1988) that I haven't seen in recent years.


----------



## Flying Crane

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> I remember techniques like Four Fists and Hammerlock (circa 1988) that I haven't seen in recent years.


 
Four Fists I know, but I don't remember Hammerlock.  I do remember Reverse Hammerlock...


----------



## DutchKenpo

Hello,

I have also heard of ducking dragon and persuing panther from the short form two.
Is there also a complete explanation on the above mentioned "lost techniques"  because I really like to know.

I know of smart or intellectual departure, btw great technique.

grtz, Bob Hessel


----------



## Flying Crane

DutchKenpo said:
			
		

> Hello,
> 
> I have also heard of ducking dragon and persuing panther from the short form two.
> Is there also a complete explanation on the above mentioned "lost techniques" because I really like to know.
> 
> I know of smart or intellectual departure, btw great technique.
> 
> grtz, Bob Hessel


 
For starters, see my post dated 09/22/05 in this thread.  Beyond that, what specific questions do you have?

You can go to Tracy's website where they list the names of all the techniques in each belt.  They don't include a description, but it is a start...


----------



## Doc

Seabrook said:
			
		

> I would argue that any "missing" techniques in EPAK aren't really missing just because they are not formally required for testing purposes.
> 
> I know this may open up a can of worms, but the difference that I see behind Parker's Kenpo and Tracy's Kenpo is that the former is based more on logical principles. Also, I don't count a,b,c,d, and e version as seen in Tracy's Kenpo as 5 different techniques but one. We, in EPAK, would simply call that "what-if's" of the ideal phase techniques.
> 
> Jamie Seabrook
> www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com


In my opinion you are correct sir with the exception Mr. Parker relied more on "concepts" to define his popular arts.


----------



## Doc

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Originally, when the Tracys were students of Mr. Parker, the techniques did not have names and were taught in whatever random order Mr. Parker felt inclined.  The Tracy's created names for the techniques, and organized them into the order in which they are now taught in their curriculum.  Mr. Parker used these names for a while, until making his modifications for American Kenpo, where many of the names were changed.
> Michael


I'm sorry sir, but the names of the techniques were created by Mr. Parker as per the tradition when he switched to the Chinese lineage under Ark Yuey Wong. The Tracy's took some of the names with them, changed some, and created others. Ultimately they changed just about everything for legal and personal reasons. They often have stated on many websites their historical perspectives after Mr. Parker's passing that, at best, have been questionable.


----------



## IWishToLearn

When did Jim Tracy stop being part of Tracy's Karate and left it all to Al?


----------



## Flying Crane

Doc said:
			
		

> I'm sorry sir, but the names of the techniques were created by Mr. Parker as per the tradition when he switched to the Chinese lineage under Ark Yuey Wong. The Tracy's took some of the names with them, changed some, and created others. Ultimately they changed just about everything for legal and personal reasons.


 
I did not know that.  Once again, I am making comments based on what I have read elsewhere.  I am not surprised to hear others dispute some of these claims.


----------



## Doc

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> I did not know that.  Once again, I am making comments based on what I have read elsewhere.  I am not surprised to hear others dispute some of these claims.


They had almost three decades to have their say, but didn't. They have written a lot of things since Mr. Parker's passing that apparently weren't very important while Parker lived, but seem to be important for everyone to know now.


----------



## Doc

IWishToLearn said:
			
		

> When did Jim Tracy stop being part of Tracy's Karate and left it all to Al?


Jim had some legal problems, and Will, well was just "out there." Don't ask me to put a time on it but most occurred after Mr. Parker's death.


----------



## IWishToLearn

Good enough response for my purposes, thanks again Dr. Chapel


----------



## hongkongfooey

I am learning Spreading Branch, Agressive twins, and Intellectual Departure all in  yellow belt.


----------



## Doc

hongkongfooey said:
			
		

> I am learning Spreading Branch, Agressive twins, and Intellectual Departure all in  yellow belt.


Not to rain on your parade, but those techniques were removed for a reason.


----------



## jonah2

Doc said:
			
		

> Not to rain on your parade, but those techniques were removed for a reason.


Sir, I would very much like an explanation of why these techniques were removed. Our yellow syllabus teaches both spreading branch and intellectual departure

jonah


----------



## Doc

jonah2 said:
			
		

> Sir, I would very much like an explanation of why these techniques were removed. Our yellow syllabus teaches both spreading branch and intellectual departure
> 
> jonah


It was determined the techniques required basics and skill not taught at that level, and generally beyond a beginner. Further "Spreading Branch" as presented only "works" with a cooperative atacker. "Aggressive Twins" is for an "attempted push." If you were aware a person was going to push you, he'd have to be so far away for this technique to work, it would be easier to do something else. If he's close enough, to actually push and elicit a reaction, then he's to close for the prescribed response. Especially, once again, for a beginner. "Intellectual Departure" has the greatest chance of success, but it is essentially a sparring mauevuer, not a self-defense technique.


----------



## jonah2

Doc said:
			
		

> It was determined the techniques required basics and skill not taught at that level, and generally beyond a beginner. Further "Spreading Branch" as presented only "works" with a cooperative atacker. "Aggressive Twins" is for an "attempted push." If you were aware a person was going to push you, he'd have to be so far away for this technique to work, it would be easier to do something else. If he's close enough, to actually push and elicit a reaction, then he's to close for the prescribed response. Especially, once again, for a beginner. "Intellectual Departure" has the greatest chance of success, but it is essentially a sparring mauevuer, not a self-defense technique.


Sir, Thankyou for the reply. I agree with you on the last two techs mentioned, but spreading branch?, I've always kind-a-got on with that one. I assume you are talking the initial grab/hold only not working - the rest of the tech seems to work well. If it is the grab hold, does that not negate the other techs of that defence. Glad to pick your brain.

jonah


----------



## Atlanta-Kenpo

Doc,

Do you think alternating maces is a better technique for the 2 hand push?

Also, why do some not teach sword & hammer any more.


----------



## Seabrook

Doc said:
			
		

> It was determined the techniques required basics and skill not taught at that level, and generally beyond a beginner. Further "Spreading Branch" as presented only "works" with a cooperative atacker. "Aggressive Twins" is for an "attempted push." If you were aware a person was going to push you, he'd have to be so far away for this technique to work, it would be easier to do something else. If he's close enough, to actually push and elicit a reaction, then he's to close for the prescribed response. Especially, once again, for a beginner. "Intellectual Departure" has the greatest chance of success, but it is essentially a sparring mauevuer, not a self-defense technique.


 
Well put Doc.


----------



## Doc

jonah2 said:
			
		

> Sir, Thankyou for the reply. I agree with you on the last two techs mentioned, but spreading branch?, I've always kind-a-got on with that one. I assume you are talking the initial grab/hold only not working - the rest of the tech seems to work well. If it is the grab hold, does that not negate the other techs of that defence. Glad to pick your brain.
> jonah


At the very bottom of the skill level, have someone bear-hug you from the rear with authority and intent to dump. AFTER that has occured, see if you can execute your technique. The technique does not teach, nor does it allow for attacker body momentum, or the loss of stability of your base to even begin to execute the prescribed counters.


----------



## Doc

Atlanta-Kenpo said:
			
		

> Doc,
> Do you think alternating maces is a better technique for the 2 hand push?


Taught properly with requisite irrefragable understanding of body mechanics and Body Indexing, Alternating Maces" is far superior and works within the confines of a more likely and realistic scenario. Alternating Maces, by design should be for an actual push, not an attempt as the commercial system usually teaches by necessity.

This is one of several techniques at this level that is supposed to teach a student how to recover his balance from different assaults that have already occured, (Survive the Initial Assault) and control the height and distance of an attacker, the way I was taught.


> Also, why do some not teach sword & hammer any more.


Good question!


----------



## celtic_crippler

What the heck is spreading branch!?! I guess at this point I'd have to go with Dr. Chapel reasoning since our schools don't even teach this techinque. The idea is to be effective. If at some point you determine a technique is not effective, why practice it?


----------



## Kenpodoc

Doc said:
			
		

> At the very bottom of the skill level, have someone bear-hug you from the rear with authority and intent to dump. AFTER that has occured, see if you can execute your technique. The technique does not teach, nor does it allow for attacker body momentum, or the loss of stability of your base to even begin to execute the prescribed counters.


I hated the technique when I learned it for that very reason. Now I find that if I purposefully take a couple of steps forward to absorb the momentum of the rear grab, I sometimes find spreading branch right there. Obviously it depends on the nature of the rear attack.

Jeff


----------



## Doc

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> What the heck is spreading branch!?! I guess at this point I'd have to go with Dr. Chapel reasoning since our schools don't even teach this techinque. The idea is to be effective. If at some point you determine a technique is not effective, why practice it?


It's an old bear-hug from the rear technique in the original "10 Child Yellow belt Series of techniques," removed from the commercial system decades ago when it was determined "everyone could have a yellow belt," and replaced. Spreading Branch, Intellectual Departure, Agressive Twins, and Grasp of Death were all replaced by other techniques, or modified as Grasp of Death was.


----------



## Doc

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> I hated the technique when I learned it for that very reason. Now I find that if I purposefully take a couple of steps forward to absorb the momentum of the rear grab, I sometimes find spreading branch right there. Obviously it depends on the nature of the rear attack.
> 
> Jeff


You're onto something there sir. It's all about how to absorb his body momentum, and the posture necessary to recover your balance, as well as controling his actions after the fact, that allow you to to retaliate under control while eliminating his options until you do. That's the way I teach it, as I was taught.


----------



## celtic_crippler

Interesting.....

Could someone please post the text book version of Spreading Branches? 
I'm unfamiliar with it. I'm all for being effective, but I have no idea as to what you guys are talking about! LOL. 

We still teach Aggressive Twins. I see the value of it. But, as Dr. Chapel noted, you must be able to anticipate the opponents attack for it to be effective. That's why we also teach sprawling techniques =) (Thank goodness I have a background in Jiu-Jitus eh!?) 

In order for me to make appropriate comments regarding the technique, I would need to know specifics. =) I've been studying Kenpo for almost 7 years and have, up to this point, never heard of this technique. Please elaborate.


----------



## Doc

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> Interesting.....
> 
> Could someone please post the text book version of Spreading Branches?
> I'm unfamiliar with it. I'm all for being effective, but I have no idea as to what you guys are talking about! LOL.
> 
> We still teach Aggressive Twins. I see the value of it. But, as Dr. Chapel noted, you must be able to anticipate the opponents attack for it to be effective. That's why we also teach sprawling techniques =) (Thank goodness I have a background in Jiu-Jitus eh!?)
> 
> In order for me to make appropriate comments regarding the technique, I would need to know specifics. =) I've been studying Kenpo for almost 7 years and have, up to this point, never heard of this technique. Please elaborate.


Specifics are always nice. Hopefully someone will post it. I would have to dig to find it in my archives. Haven't seen that technique in over thirty years.

By the way the "sprawl" is a temporary fix that guarantees you will end up  playing the grapplers game. There are other Kenpo ways that work quite well.


----------



## celtic_crippler

When I teach "sprawling" it involves regaining your footing. In most techniques involving sprawling, it ends with the attacker on the ground and the defender regaining thier footing and finishing them off. An example: 

*CRASHING HAMMERS #2*

DEFENSE: Direct low line tackle/Shoot attempt
STANCE: Natural
1) As opponent attempts to grab/tackle push drag reverse into a 45 degree right cat stance as you simultaneously execute double hammer fists down across opponents trapezius muscles (either side of neck) driving opponent to the ground
2) Execute a right side stomp kick to opponents head sandwiching it between your foot and the ground
3) Exit out with a right front reverse crossover


----------



## Doc

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> When I teach "sprawling" it involves regaining your footing. In most techniques involving sprawling, it ends with the attacker on the ground and the defender regaining thier footing and finishing them off. An example:
> 
> *CRASHING HAMMERS #2*
> 
> DEFENSE: Direct low line tackle/Shoot attempt
> STANCE: Natural
> 1) As opponent attempts to grab/tackle push drag reverse into a 45 degree right cat stance as you simultaneously execute double hammer fists down across opponent&#8217;s trapezius muscles (either side of neck) driving opponent to the ground
> 2) Execute a right side stomp kick to opponent&#8217;s head sandwiching it between your foot and the ground
> 3) Exit out with a right front reverse crossover


Sorry sir, that is not a "sprawl" in grappling terminology. The term derives its name from the posture that you are required to assume to change your center of gravity and to counter the attacker's angle and height relative to your lower extermities as you remove them from being within his reach. It necessitates a finish into a grappling manueveur.

I also respectfully suggest the technique you outlined, will in all probability fail for many reasons. Based on your description, you are moving your weight rearward on a "shoot" attack into a cat stance. That alone is not compatible with your objective. 

Then you are striking with your weight on your rear leg, forward and down in front of your body. You will achieve less than a maximum results. Even if we ignore all of the improper body mechanics, your scenario does not account for the body momentum of your attacker that exists whether your strikes are effective or not. His mass is going to collide with your lower body even if you were lucky enough to strike him in such a manner as to nullify the intentions of a directed threat as an example of its many flaws.

Based on your description, I would rethink this technique. I apoligize for being unabe to explain a better method on the internet. It requires proper basics first, and the execution of these basic skills in a concerted and directed manner. 

Dr. Crouch, who posts here from time to time is an old Kenpo, Gracie, Muey practitioner. He became a student when he came to visit me and I shared some methods with him over a couple of hours. He then taught his grappling buddies the next week and they spent the day trying to take each other down. 

No one was successful. Never take for granted the skill or tenacity of a seasoned grappler. It could be a life altering experience.  May I suggest you move out of your comfort zone and bring in some of your jiujitsu/grapplers from your previous experience to assist you in formulating technique(s) that would be more practical and functional. This would allow you to "test" your ideas in a more realistic, and less academic environment.


----------



## Atlanta-Kenpo

Doc,

You said that Grasp Of Death was changed?  What was id the difference between the old technique and the one now being taught?

By the way why in the heck were all the techniques changed anyhow?


----------



## Doc

Atlanta-Kenpo said:
			
		

> Doc,
> 
> You said that Grasp Of Death was changed?  What was id the difference between the old technique and the one now being taught?
> 
> By the way why in the heck were all the techniques changed anyhow?


"Grasp of Death" was formally known as "The Pincher." The technique relied on "pinching" a nerve in the rear of the knee for the takedown. Definitely out of place for a white belt teachnique much like the others that were changed. The Pincher does at least provide a historical reference to the fact the the use of "nerves" and pressure points were defintiely within the realm of Ed Parker's thinking and knowledge coming from the Chinese. It just couldn't be taught, just like many other things in commercial kenpo because of the specific knowledge and labor intensive instruction.


----------



## jfarnsworth

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> When I teach "sprawling" it involves regaining your footing. In most techniques involving sprawling, it ends with the attacker on the ground and the defender regaining thier footing and finishing them off. An example:
> 
> CRASHING HAMMERS #2
> 
> DEFENSE: Direct low line tackle/Shoot attempt
> STANCE: Natural
> 1) As opponent attempts to grab/tackle push drag reverse into a 45 degree right cat stance as you simultaneously execute double hammer fists down across opponents trapezius muscles (either side of neck) driving opponent to the ground
> 2) Execute a right side stomp kick to opponents head sandwiching it between your foot and the ground
> 3) Exit out with a right front reverse crossover


 
What style of Kenpo does this technique come from? No offense but when it comes down to saving your hide in a situation I can't imagine this can work.


----------



## arnisador

Cat stance against a tackle _does _seem like a questionable choice...even if you managed to get far enough back to avoid the tackle, or off-line, the front leg would be easy pickings for the grappler. He'd just grab it and go to some type of single-leg takedown.


----------



## jdinca

arnisador said:
			
		

> Cat stance against a tackle _does _seem like a questionable choice...even if you managed to get far enough back to avoid the tackle, or off-line, the front leg would be easy pickings for the grappler. He'd just grab it and go to some type of single-leg takedown.


 
It would all depend on the speed of your kick and the speed of the grappler. Cat stance wouldn't be my first choice here either.


----------



## Michael Billings

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> Interesting.....
> 
> Could someone please post the text book version of Spreading Branches?
> I'm unfamiliar with it. I'm all for being effective, but I have no idea as to what you guys are talking about! LOL.
> 
> We still teach Aggressive Twins. I see the value of it. But, as Dr. Chapel noted, you must be able to anticipate the opponents attack for it to be effective. That's why we also teach sprawling techniques =) (Thank goodness I have a background in Jiu-Jitus eh!?)
> 
> In order for me to make appropriate comments regarding the technique, I would need to know specifics. =) I've been studying Kenpo for almost 7 years and have, up to this point, never heard of this technique. Please elaborate.


 [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]*17. SPREADING BRANCH* (rear bear hug, arms pinned)[/SIZE][/FONT] 
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]1. With your feet together shift your right foot back to 8 o'clock (into a left forward bow) to buckle opponent's left knee (from inside out.)  Simultaneously have your left hand pin both of your opponent's arms as you execute a right back hammer fist strike to opponent's groin.[/SIZE][/FONT] 
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]2. With your opponent reacting to your groin strike, thus releasing his grasp, have both of your arms grab back of opponent's neck and deliver a right knee kick to opponent's face as both of your arms pull down, therefore increasing the force of your knee kick. (Possible back knuckle and neck break)[/SIZE][/FONT] 
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]3. As you plant your right foot forward toward 1:30 o'clock, have your left hand push down on opponent's head while your right arm circles counter clockwise.[/SIZE][/FONT] 
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]4. As you plant your right foot (employing Gravitational Marriage) and in coordination with the foot plant, conclude your counter clockwise motion by executing a right inward overhead elbow strike to upper spine of opponent.[/SIZE][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]This is close to the one that was used.  An erect posture is essential with a solid base being "found" if pushed when grabbed.  It is found in lots of extensions later on, but is difficult for beginners for a number of reasons.  I have it in my Purple Belt curriculum.[/SIZE][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]http://kenpo-texas.com/techpurple.html[/SIZE][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]See technique #17[/SIZE][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]-Michael
[/SIZE][/FONT]


----------



## Doc

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]*17. SPREADING BRANCH* (rear bear hug, arms pinned)[/SIZE][/FONT]
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]1. With your feet together shift your right foot back to 8 o'clock (into a left forward bow) to buckle opponent's left knee (from inside out.)  Simultaneously have your left hand pin both of your opponent's arms as you execute a right back hammer fist strike to opponent's groin.[/SIZE][/FONT]
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]2. With your opponent reacting to your groin strike, thus releasing his grasp, have both of your arms grab back of opponent's neck and deliver a right knee kick to opponent's face as both of your arms pull down, therefore increasing the force of your knee kick. (Possible back knuckle and neck break)[/SIZE][/FONT]
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]3. As you plant your right foot forward toward 1:30 o'clock, have your left hand push down on opponent's head while your right arm circles counter clockwise.[/SIZE][/FONT]
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]4. As you plant your right foot (employing Gravitational Marriage) and in coordination with the foot plant, conclude your counter clockwise motion by executing a right inward overhead elbow strike to upper spine of opponent.[/SIZE][/FONT]
> 
> 
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]This is close to the one that was used.  An erect posture is essential with a solid base being "found" if pushed when grabbed.  It is found in lots of extensions later on, but is difficult for beginners for a number of reasons.  I have it in my Purple Belt curriculum.[/SIZE][/FONT]
> 
> 
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]http://kenpo-texas.com/techpurple.html[/SIZE][/FONT]
> 
> 
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]See technique #17[/SIZE][/FONT]
> 
> 
> [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]-Michael
> [/SIZE][/FONT]


In the immortal words of Bill Cosby, "Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!"


----------



## jfarnsworth

To be quite honest if someone were to actually "sprawl" during the intital move most likely one will be picking their teeth up off of the ground. On the way down during the sprawl said individual will have their chin on top of the attackers head trying to get in this double hammerfist strike :idunno: in? Executing a cat stance while trying to strike down with both hands can't have any type of power. Maybe one might have something but 2?


----------



## Doc

Doc said:
			
		

> In the immortal words of Bill Cosby, "Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!"


Sorry this comment was put in the wrong sleep deprived position. It was meant to go under the technique description for the "sprawl."


----------



## Michael Billings

Doc, I laughed anyway, if only because I remember old, old Bill Cosby records, (yes those black round things that made music on a turntable).  Loved em back in the late 60's Rrrrriiiiiggghhhtttt!!!!

-MB


----------



## Doc

Michael Billings said:
			
		

> Doc, I laughed anyway, if only because I remember old, old Bill Cosby records, (yes those black round things that made music on a turntable).  Loved em back in the late 60's Rrrrriiiiiggghhhtttt!!!!
> 
> -MB


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigt! What's a cubit?


----------



## celtic_crippler

How long can you tread water? LOL 

Anyway, thanks for posting the specifics. Sounds like a good technique. 

A cat stance can be useful against an attempted shoot if accompanied by an effective maneuver. For instance: 

*DESCENDING HAMMERS *

DEFENSE: Direct low line tackle/Shoot attempt
STANCE: Right Neutral Bow
1)      As opponent attempts to grab/tackle push drag reverse into a 45 degree right cat stance as you simultaneously execute double hammer fists down across opponents trapezius muscles (either side of neck) driving opponent to the ground
2)      Execute a right side stomp kick to opponents head sandwiching it between your foot and the ground
3)      Cover out.


----------



## jfarnsworth

I'm sorry to say again that a double hammerfist to someone's traps aren't going to be enough to stop them. Have you ever tried to train with a grappler? When someone has it on their mind they are going to take you down by shooting in on your legs, chances are you are going down. That is just my opinion. Keep in mind as well, when someone who knows what they are doing attempts a takedown there's always an alternative when "possibly" blocked. For instance sweeping to the side, changing angles then driving straight in, trips, and other traps. Just a thought, grab a body and try these things. 

You still didn't answer my question on what style kenpo it is you do.:asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> How long can you tread water? LOL
> 
> *DESCENDING HAMMERS *
> 
> DEFENSE: Direct low line tackle/Shoot attempt
> STANCE: Right Neutral Bow
> 1) As opponent attempts to grab/tackle push drag reverse into a 45 degree right cat stance ...


The thing here is that you still have your leg forward?????


----------



## celtic_crippler

It's not the double hammer fists that stop them...it's the stomp kick to the head. LOL The double hammer fists simply serve to redirect the attackers path and direct them face first onto the ground (not to mention it hurts). A simular principle is utilized when doing what grapplers call "sprawling." 

This is not an actual EPAK technique. Know where it came from? Experience. I wrote it down after actually successfully using it against another student who was also a GA all-state high school wrestler (only difference is I didn't actually stomp his head in afterward, it just seemed like a natural follow up at the time.) He attempted a shoot and this is basically how I naturally reacted to it. =) True, it may not be effective for you. We're all different and what works for me may not necessarily work for you. 

The footwork and positioning used in Kenpo can get complicated. Indeed, your right leg is still forward, but if you're familiar with the stance you know that in order to transition from a neutral bow stance into a cat stance you have to drag your leg BACK; in this case away from the attacker. You also create additional distance by executing a maneuver called a "Push drag reverse." Basically, you push off with the front leg moving towards 6:00. Couple that with the 45 degree cat stance and you can create what is called a "zone of sanctuary" where you are out of range of your attackers weapons (in this case their hands.) 

I just thought I'd give you a legitimate example of how a cat stance can be used against a shoot. =) Of course, as I stated previously, it may not work for you or you may simply decide it is complete BS and that I'm completely insane for even suggesting it would work! LOL It won't hurt my feelings either way. =)

oh yes....in answer to your question: American Kenpo Karate. My organizations lineage stems from the late Jay T. Will. I would think my avatar would have given that away. ROFL. 

Peace!


----------



## jfarnsworth

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> . I would think my avatar would have given that away. ROFL. Peace!


Anyone can claim whatever they want to. Yes I seen the avatar, yet I had to ask the question because I had never seen those two techniques in the curriculum. If you made them up, fine. I could care less. However my doubts still loom over the cat into downward double hammerfists. To each his own. I give you a tip of the hat for thinking of more varied techniques.

Also, I am familiar with the terms you are using in your above post. I'm not new to kenpo however I don't have as much experience as others. 



> My organizations lineage stems from the late Jay T. Will.


I thought his lineage came from the Tracy's?


----------



## arnisador

Doc said:
			
		

> Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigt! What's a cubit?



[Bill Cosby's son cannot explain how he got his unexpected haircut:]
"Son...was your head with you all day today?"


----------



## celtic_crippler

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> I thought his lineage came from the Tracy's?


 
Unfortunately, I never had the honor of meeting Mr. Will, but according to our organizations president (a student of Mr. Will), he was one of SGM Parkers black belts. I believe that is also the way he's listed under the Kenpo family tree at kenponet. (Of course they could be wrong. After all they have me listed as one of Brint Berry's black belts when I was actually a student of Wade Wilbourn. Wade is one of Brint's black belts and Brint also signed my certificate, but it was Wade that promoted me. lol) 

I'm a notetaker and usually have a pen and pad nearby during class or when practicing. Whenever I or another student discover something new or different worth keeping I write it down. Sometimes it's a new "technique." We don't implement it into the syllabus, but we'll sometimes use them for drills the whole class can do that's not limited to rank. The hard part with these is naming them. LOL. All the good names are taken! (as evidences by my previous posts...I discovered there was all ready a technique with the same name so changed it. DOH!) I'm going to start using more modern terms to name techniques I think. Perhaps names like "Natural Selection," "Devastating Punk Out," "Don't Gimme No Lip," or "Busting the Grill." ROFL.


----------



## Doc

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> It's not the double hammer fists that stop them...it's the stomp kick to the head. LOL The double hammer fists simply serve to redirect the attackers path and direct them face first onto the ground (not to mention it hurts). A simular principle is utilized when doing what grapplers call "sprawling."
> 
> This is not an actual EPAK technique. Know where it came from? Experience. I wrote it down after actually successfully using it against another student who was also a GA all-state high school wrestler (only difference is I didn't actually stomp his head in afterward, it just seemed like a natural follow up at the time.) He attempted a shoot and this is basically how I naturally reacted to it. =) True, it may not be effective for you. We're all different and what works for me may not necessarily work for you.
> 
> The footwork and positioning used in Kenpo can get complicated. Indeed, your right leg is still forward, but if you're familiar with the stance you know that in order to transition from a neutral bow stance into a cat stance you have to drag your leg BACK; in this case away from the attacker. You also create additional distance by executing a maneuver called a "Push drag reverse." Basically, you push off with the front leg moving towards 6:00. Couple that with the 45 degree cat stance and you can create what is called a "zone of sanctuary" where you are out of range of your attackers weapons (in this case their hands.)
> 
> I just thought I'd give you a legitimate example of how a cat stance can be used against a shoot.


"Riiiiiiiight! Am I on Candid Camera?"


----------



## Kalicombat

Jay T. Will was a blackbelt under Al Tracy. His association, or at least the one that he founded, teaches the Tracy curriculum, at least it did a few years ago. Celtic, what curriclum does the AKKO teach? Is it EPAK or Tracy's. Also, how many techniques per belt level?

Gary C.


----------



## celtic_crippler

Kalicombat said:
			
		

> Jay T. Will was a blackbelt under Al Tracy. His association, or at least the one that he founded, teaches the Tracy curriculum, at least it did a few years ago. Celtic, what curriclum does the AKKO teach? Is it EPAK or Tracy's. Also, how many techniques per belt level?
> 
> Gary C.


 
I don't have access to my syllabus at the moment (at work) but the number varies per level. All together we require about 150+ through 3rd degree black. Each belt level is divided into basic and advanced due to the amount of material required (basically 2 tests per belt level.) For basic level requirments pretty much revolve around basics, forms, and defining principles. The advanced level is mostly self-defense techniques and being able to show or explain the application of principles. 

That's interesting about Jay T. Will being related to the Tracy's. I'll have to bring that up to my instructor. The president of the EKKS, Brint Berry, studied under Jay T. Will and was also under LTKKA at one time. I don't have specific details, but I do know that what we do is referred to as White Dragon Martial Science. Our syllabus is a culmination of knowledge obtained by Mr. Berry through his studies under those organizations, instructors, and military experience. 

All the techniques and forms in EPAK are included in the syllabus to my understanding (Parker Forms 1-8, standard techniques, etc) but has been *added* to over the years to include things taught by Jay T. Will and the UKKA as well as some of Larry Tatum's techniques and some of Brint Berry's as well (we require forms called moving-sets developed by Mr. Berry for example.) 

I hope that answers your question. =)


----------



## jfarnsworth

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> ...I hope that answers your question. =)


In some aspects, yes.


----------



## jfarnsworth

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> IThat's interesting about Jay T. Will being related to the Tracy's. I'll have to bring that up to my instructor. The president of the EKKS, Brint Berry, studied under Jay T. Will and was also under LTKKA at one time.


Now that I think about it for a moment Kalicombat hit the nail on the head with his statement. Do some more research on your lineage. Check various web sites of their curriculum vs. your own curriculum. I'm not trying to put you down but I think you may need to check out your history more indepth.


----------



## bayonet

. 



> All the techniques and forms in EPAK are included in the syllabus to my understanding (Parker Forms 1-8, standard techniques, etc) but has been *added* to over the years to include things taught by Jay T. Will and the UKKA as well as some of Larry Tatum's techniques


Celtic, Having trained at Mr. Tatum's Pasadena school I was unaware he had any "new" techniques. As to my understanding Mr. Tatum teaches the 24 technique cirriculum, EPAK.


----------



## celtic_crippler

Not to offend anyone, but I didn't post here to get involved in politics. I don't believe politics have any place in Kenpo and only serve to detract from the advancement of the system. 

I have no reason to doubt Master Berry's training nor do I have any reason to doubt that of my immediate instructor or my own skills for that matter. I've seen both of their credentials and on top of that, really could care less as to whether Jay T. Will studied under the Tracy's or not. It's not that important to me at this point. The past belongs in the past. I'm more concerned with the evolution of the system at this point. That is where I prefer to focus my energies. Feel free to pursue your own agenda. 

I've been more than generous in answering your questions concerning my training and background. I did not register in these forums to play political games with you. If you so wish, simply ignore my responses, otherwise how about getting back to the subject of this thread.


----------



## Flying Crane

Kalicombat said:
			
		

> Jay T. Will was a blackbelt under Al Tracy. His association, or at least the one that he founded, teaches the Tracy curriculum, at least it did a few years ago. Celtic, what curriclum does the AKKO teach? Is it EPAK or Tracy's. Also, how many techniques per belt level?
> 
> Gary C.


 
According to the Family Tree of Blackbelts that was published with Mr. Parker's _Infinite Insights Into Kenpo, Volume I_, Jay T. Will is listed as both a student of Mr. Parker and the Tracys.  Seems that he studied under both, but in which order or whether or not he went back and forth more than once, I cannot tell from the Tree.  Of course the Tree doesn't indicate what system or program he ultimately settled on or whether he made his own changes.

Al Tracy's website also lists Mr. Will as 8th Degree Black Belt in their own family tree.


----------



## Doc

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> According to the Family Tree of Blackbelts that was published with Mr. Parker's _Infinite Insights Into Kenpo, Volume I_, Jay T. Will is listed as both a student of Mr. Parker and the Tracys.  Seems that he studied under both, but in which order or whether or not he went back and forth more than once, I cannot tell from the Tree.  Of course the Tree doesn't indicate what system or program he ultimately settled on or whether he made his own changes.
> 
> Al Tracy's website also lists Mr. Will as 8th Degree Black Belt in their own family tree.


Jay was a Tracy black belt.


----------



## Flying Crane

Doc said:
			
		

> Jay was a Tracy black belt.


 
Doc,  did Mr. Will study at all with Mr. Parker?  The Tree lists him as a Parker Blackbelt.  Is this incorrect?


----------



## jfarnsworth

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> I have no reason to doubt Master Berry's training nor do I have any reason to doubt that of my immediate instructor or my own skills for that matter. I've seen both of their credentials and on top of that, really could care less as to whether Jay T. Will studied under the Tracy's or not. It's not that important to me at this point..


No one is or have been attacking you or your training. I have no beef with you nor do I care to get into any keyboard wars. I don't think that anyone here wants to play any political games either. 

The only question I have is about Mr. Berry in general. There was a lengthy thread about him on here somewhere and he actually even registered but never commented or posted once. It appears as he has been with many many organizations over the years. My main question is the man claims an 8th degree and he is only a few years older than me. Who promotes him? How does he put in enough seasoning in his rank to advance to another rank? Be weary under your lineage and ask questions.
:asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth

Celtic_Crippler

Happy reading

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11724&highlight=ekks
Post #9 gives a good description of the question about the relationship of Mr. Will and Parker/Tracy. 

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20808&highlight=ekks


----------



## Sapper6

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> No one is or have been attacking you or your training. I have no beef with you nor do I care to get into any keyboard wars. I don't think that anyone here wants to play any political games either.
> 
> The only question I have is about Mr. Berry in general. There was a lengthy thread about him on here somewhere and he actually even registered but never commented or posted once. It appears as he has been with many many organizations over the years. My main question is the man claims an 8th degree and he is only a few years older than me. Who promotes him? How does he put in enough seasoning in his rank to advance to another rank? Be weary under your lineage and ask questions.
> :asian:


 
i wonder if your beef is with Berry or celtic crippler...?  dunno.  kinda sounds like your taking your dislike for Mr. Berry out on CC, a contributing member of this forum.  i think if you got a problem, you need to take it up with the person you've got a problem with, not a student.  how ****ing mature is that?


i see alot of mistakes happening here in this thread.  the biggest one being that celtic_crippler mentioned that Brint Berry is in his lineage.  i don't believe that anyone will take this guy's posts at MT serious, just because of this fact.  is it fair?  nope.  but it's the American Kenpo politics bull **** in it's finest.

you EPAK people are real honorable.


----------



## jfarnsworth

I don't have any beef with anyone. I don't know Mr. Berry whatsoever and I wasn't trying to take anything out on Celtic_Crippler. 



> Oringally posted by *Sapper6*
> ..how ****ing mature is that?


Um, whatever.

If you seen one of my other posts I did say that I gave him a tip of the hat for coming up with new ideas on techniques. Whether you seen it or not :idunno:  I could care less. I don't post anywhere near as much as I used to because of the ******it. Now Celtic_Crippler made reference to the techniques in his curriculum and so on. I was pointing out questions to so some claims. It would have been nice if Mr. Berry would have contributed to the thread when he registered but hey what can you do. Lastly, I'm concerned with my own training and no one elses.


----------



## Sapper6

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> I don't have any beef with anyone. I don't know Mr. Berry whatsoever and I wasn't trying to take anything out on Celtic_Crippler.
> 
> 
> Um, whatever.
> 
> If you seen one of my other posts I did say that I gave him a tip of the hat for coming up with new ideas on techniques. Whether you seen it or not :idunno: I could care less. I don't post anywhere near as much as I used to because of the ******it. Now Celtic_Crippler made reference to the techniques in his curriculum and so on. I was pointing out questions to so some claims. It would have been nice if Mr. Berry would have contributed to the thread when he registered but hey what can you do. *Lastly, I'm concerned with my own training and no one elses.*


 
my bad...if i'm mistaken, but from an outside point of view, i sense a little hostility toward crippler for being associated with Berry.  Mr Berry hasn't posted in this thread, so of course, it would have "been nice" for him to answer your concerns.  if you're that worried about it, you should call him up.  

celtic_crippler's techniques he's described and the manner of which they were taught to him seem to be held against him, simply because of the man that taught them to him.

so what if we all feel they don't work.  it doesn't matter to us.

your statement in bold, i believe in that.  i think that you do as well.  if only we practiced that statement.


----------



## Doc

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> i wonder if your beef is with Berry or celtic crippler...?  dunno.  kinda sounds like your taking your dislike for Mr. Berry out on CC, a contributing member of this forum.  i think if you got a problem, you need to take it up with the person you've got a problem with, not a student.  how ****ing mature is that?
> 
> 
> i see alot of mistakes happening here in this thread.  the biggest one being that celtic_crippler mentioned that Brint Berry is in his lineage.  i don't believe that anyone will take this guy's posts at MT serious, just because of this fact.  is it fair?  nope.  but it's the American Kenpo politics bull **** in it's finest.
> 
> you EPAK people are real honorable.


I'm sorry sir but I must take issue with your assertion. While it is true there were questions about the gentleman's lineage, I believe they were generated by previous threads and discussions on the topic, as well as the posters own interpretations of what he studies which appears to be limited in his own understanding.

Then to cast such a broad brush and suggest that all EPAk people are some how "political" because of a disagreement about techniques and lineage questions is, to say the least, inappropriate.

Personally I am in the Ed Parker Sr. lineage and have his son in mine, however I could care less what anyone's lineage is when it comes to discussing the arts. I know many with "legitimate" lineage who are as ill-informed and incompetent as they come. At least as far as most of us here are concerned, the poster will have to live and die at his own keyboard defending his own position without his instructor or the lack thereof, being a factor one way or another.

Politics? Yes, and what art doesn't, but please direct your inquiries, suggestions, and concerns toward individuals and not an entire board in a more courtious and productive manner. It is illconceived to come to an Ed Parker kenpo forum and disparage all of its members and expect to remain cordial and polite in continued postings.

Thanks a lot sir.


----------



## Doc

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Doc,  did Mr. Will study at all with Mr. Parker?  The Tree lists him as a Parker Blackbelt.  Is this incorrect?


I was there when the tree was created, and in some cases I actually edited and removed some people and added others. If you notice J.T. Will is listed in more than one place. Mr. Parker always co-promoted black belts with their instructor. This is why everyone claims to be a "Parker Black Belt." In a sense they are but most are actually second generation and beyond. On many occasions they "dropped" their instructor and "claimed" only Parker as their teacher without truly studying with him. As an example, Larry Tatum promoted a large number of well known black belts before he quit the IKKA, however almost universally they all claim to be Ed Parker students. Look at the tree and all of the first generation students and in most cases they are listed only under Ed Parker in the middle of the chart. But even that is not a 100 percent tell. Some actually did switch to first generation so are listed alone, others did the same but because of the prominance of their actual teacher, had to be listed in both places. I myself started outside of the Kenpo Lineage under Ark Wong where Parker also studied and then switched, so even I switched Chinese generations so it can get pretty convoluted. Dennis Conatser did the same but is also only listed under Parker as an example.

Another way to check is to look at the diplomas. If someone claims to be a Parker student look at their diploma. If Ed Parker's signature is on the right, he claimed them as students. If's its only on the left, he quietly did not and their instructor signed on the right. J.T. Will was actually a Tracy student and as such is listed on the tree twice. Once under the Tracy's and once under Parker indicating the previous mentioned "co-promotion" status.


----------



## Flying Crane

Doc said:
			
		

> I was there when the tree was created, and in some cases I actually edited and removed some people and added others. If you notice J.T. Will is listed in more than one place. Mr. Parker always co-promoted black belts with their instructor. This is why everyone claims to be a "Parker Black Belt." In a sense they are but most are actually second generation and beyond. On many occasions they "dropped" their instructor and "claimed" only Parker as their teacher without truly studying with him. As an example, Larry Tatum promoted a large number of well known black belts before he quit the IKKA, however almost universally they all claim to be Ed Parker students. Look at the tree and all of the first generation students and in most cases they are listed only under Ed Parker in the middle of the chart. But even that is not a 100 percent tell. Some actually did switch to first generation so are listed alone, others did the same but because of the prominance of their actual teacher, had to be listed in both places. I myself started outside of the Kenpo Lineage under Ark Wong where Parker also studied and then switched, so even I switched Chinese generations so it can get pretty convoluted. Dennis Conatser did the same but is also only listed under Parker as an example.
> 
> Another way to check is to look at the diplomas. If someone claims to be a Parker student look at their diploma. If Ed Parker's signature is on the right, he claimed them as students. If's its only on the left, he quietly did not and their instructor signed on the right. J.T. Will was actually a Tracy student and as such is listed on the tree twice. Once under the Tracy's and once under Parker indicating the previous mentioned "co-promotion" status.


 
Gotcha.  I did notice his name in both places, along with footnotes explaining that he switched from second to first generation, and also from first to second generation.  From that, I assumed he had actually studied with both, but in what order I couldn't tell.

Given that Tracy's website listed him as 8th degree with them, that is an indicator of a long-term relation and commitment so I sort of inferred that he was at least primarily Tracy's student.  

Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Doc

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Gotcha.  I did notice his name in both places, along with footnotes explaining that he switched from second to first generation, and also from first to second generation.  From that, I assumed he had actually studied with both, but in what order I couldn't tell.
> 
> Given that Tracy's website listed him as 8th degree with them, that is an indicator of a long-term relation and commitment so I sort of inferred that he was at least primarily Tracy's student.


Correct sir.


----------



## celtic_crippler

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> No one is or have been attacking you or your training. I have no beef with you nor do I care to get into any keyboard wars. I don't think that anyone here wants to play any political games either.
> 
> The only question I have is about Mr. Berry in general. There was a lengthy thread about him on here somewhere and he actually even registered but never commented or posted once. It appears as he has been with many many organizations over the years. My main question is the man claims an 8th degree and he is only a few years older than me. Who promotes him? How does he put in enough seasoning in his rank to advance to another rank? Be weary under your lineage and ask questions.
> :asian:


 
First off let me state this: I'm here to learn. I live in the South Eastern U.S. and there ain't a lot of Kenpo in this neck of the woods. I'm not arrogant enough to think that I know it all. Far from it. That's why I came to this forum as it was a reccomended resource. 

I've trained with Mr. Berry three times in the 7 years I've studied Kenpo (this time anyway, I started studying initially back in 90 when in the US Air Force but could not find a school when I was discharged and came back home.) As far as I know he's been studying since he could walk. Literally. 

So that would explain his experience (over 30+ years). He has never stopped training since he started. He lives it. The EKKS now has approximately 20+ affiliated schools and all the senior black belts voted to promote him to 8th (I was around for that) unknown to Mr. Berry at the time. He didn't know until the board told him of the promotion. I know he's done a lot for the art of Kenpo in spreading it where ever he goes. I know he developed the Hostile Combat Course for the Army while serving as an officer. I know he loves the art. But that's about all I know. I know the man knows his stuff from what I've experienced. My immediate instructor is a man named Wade Wilbourn who is also talented. 

I know Mr. Berry has had issues with others in the Kenpo community before, but I don't know the details. I really don't care either. I just want to learn as much about the system and the art as possible before my time on this planet is over. I will listen to anyone with anything productive to say. I'm not here to wave a banner for any organization and get involved with "who is better because..." blah, blah, blah. There is way too much knowlege out there for me to get bogged down in politics. That was my point. No feelings were hurt, I just felt I should make my position clear. 

I'm not here for flame wars. My motto is: No Politics-Know Kenpo.


----------



## jfarnsworth

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> I'm not here for flame wars..


Me either. I'm going to go back in the TKD section for a while. Again.


----------



## Sapper6

Doc said:
			
		

> I'm sorry sir but I must take issue with your assertion. While it is true there were questions about the gentleman's lineage, I believe they were generated by previous threads and discussions on the topic, as well as the posters own interpretations of what he studies which appears to be limited in his own understanding.
> 
> Then to cast such a broad brush and suggest that all EPAk people are some how "political" because of a disagreement about techniques and lineage questions is, to say the least, inappropriate.
> 
> Personally I am in the Ed Parker Sr. lineage and have his son in mine, however I could care less what anyone's lineage is when it comes to discussing the arts. I know many with "legitimate" lineage who are as ill-informed and incompetent as they come. At least as far as most of us here are concerned, the poster will have to live and die at his own keyboard defending his own position without his instructor or the lack thereof, being a factor one way or another.
> 
> Politics? Yes, and what art doesn't, but please direct your inquiries, suggestions, and concerns toward individuals and not an entire board in a more courtious and productive manner. It is illconceived to come to an Ed Parker kenpo forum and disparage all of its members and expect to remain cordial and polite in continued postings.
> 
> Thanks a lot sir.


 
take issue with it, that's your right.  should i have narrowed down my statement...?  maybe, but the majority of the EPAK people i have come into contact with, both on forums and in person share this attitude.  albeit, an interesting observation on my part is that this type of egotistical mindset isn't coming from the EPAK seniors, but rather, their students.  i just would have figured the seniors would have instilled a little more humility into their students.

very true, that i've never heard anything derogatory coming from yourself, Mr. Kelly, LaBounty, Mills, Tatum or any of the other more knowledgable people in the AK community.  again, i hear it from the students, black belt students.  i just wonder why.



> It is illconceived to come to an Ed Parker kenpo forum and disparage all of its members and expect to remain cordial and polite in continued postings.


 
i'm sorry, but i've seen more egotistical boastful conversation on this board than anywhere else.  i don't expect cordialness or polite continued postings.  i would have expected that a long time ago, but not toward myself, but amongst yourselves as American Kenpo students.

i will try not to make such a "blanket statement" in the future.

my apologies for taking this thread even more off topic.


----------



## jfarnsworth

The reason why you probably see these problems as you put it is because there are many Kenpoists here under various different organizations, lineages, groups, indepedents, affiliations, etc. I haven't seen any other board that has more kenpoists in it. To each his own with ideas and whatnot. As for agendas :idunno: there are a few bad apples in any style.


----------



## Sapper6

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> The reason why you probably see these problems as you put it is because there are many Kenpoists here under various different organizations, lineages, groups, indepedents, affiliations, etc. I haven't seen any other board that has more kenpoists in it. To each his own with ideas and whatnot. As for agendas :idunno: there are a few bad apples in any style.


 
my apologies if i've offended you.


----------



## jfarnsworth

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> my apologies if i've offended you.


I'm not offended in any way.


----------



## Doc

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> take issue with it, that's your right.  should i have narrowed down my statement...?  maybe, but the majority of the EPAK people i have come into contact with, both on forums and in person share this attitude.


I agree with you sir, and I myself have been the subject of many attacks because of my non mainstream view of the art. Althought, that is also the reason I make my home on MartialTalk. Disagreements are acceptable, but disrespectful behavior is not tolerated.


> albeit, an interesting observation on my part is that this type of egotistical mindset isn't coming from the EPAK seniors, but rather, their students.  i just would have figured the seniors would have instilled a little more humility into their students.


Although I cannot speak for others students, I can guarantee you my students will not be among the offenders. The bulk of my own students don't participate for the very same reasons you observed, so you would be preaching to the chior with them. But that is no excuse for how we choose to conduct ourselves. I personally choose to ignor persons who have a negative confrontational reputation and simply don't answer their questions or particpate with them. My students that do participate are advised to do the same, or walk away. Dropping to their level serves no useful purpose.


> very true, that i've never heard anything derogatory coming from yourself, Mr. Kelly, LaBounty, Mills, Tatum or any of the other more knowledgable people in the AK community.  again, i hear it from the students, black belt students.  i just wonder why.


So do I.


> i'm sorry, but i've seen more egotistical boastful conversation on this board than anywhere else.


Clearly you have never been to Kenponet.  AKA "Bash of-the-month club." I think I personally hold the record for negative subject matter there.


> i don't expect cordialness or polite continued postings.  i would have expected that a long time ago, but not toward myself, but amongst yourselves as American Kenpo students.


But that's the point. You have a right to not only expect it, but demand it. But, your actions have to speak to it as well.


> i will try not to make such a "blanket statement" in the future.


Myself and others would surely appreciate that. I have no problem whatsoever with you speaking your mind or defending your position against those who choose to be less than polite. In fact, I'll come to your defense and join you should that occur.


> my apologies for taking this thread even more off topic.


No apologies are necessary sir. I think we needed to clear the air, and I find that very much on topic. I very much look forward to our continued discussions.

Respectfully,

Ron Chapél


----------



## bushidomartialarts

you can find most of these techniques in the tracy system, but why?

by the time you're learning 4,5,6, you're quite capable of figuring out your own applications.  you'll remember them better and enjoy them more, too.

kenpo is not about rote memorization of endless lists.  it's about the intelligent application of certain principals of movement.  the lists are just a delivery vehicle for those principals.


----------

