# Parker/Tracy 32/24/16 Technique curriculum history



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Jul 31, 2003)

Most of us are familiar with the basic history of the American Kenpo techniques curiculum:  it "started" with a curriculum of 32 techniques per belt (5 Kyus, Orange through Brown), Mr. Parker introduced the 24 Technique curriculum (8 Kyus Yellow through 1st Brown), and Mr. Duffy created the 16 Technique curriculum shortly before Mr. Parker's passing.

Can someone tell me when the 24 Technique system was officially rolled out?

Also, I understand that the Tracy's had a 40-technique per belt curriculum in the mid-60's before introducing the yellow belt and  developing their current 600 technique curriculum.  

Can someone tell me when the 40-technique system was first rolled out?  Can someone tell me when the current system was first rolled out?

Also, were there any other curriculums in Parker/Tracy systems in the interim?

I am curious because my Kenpo branch is based on the 40 technique system.


----------



## Michael Billings (Jul 31, 2003)

I believe did the 24 technique manual, if I am not mistaken ... and I may be?  I am curious about the chronology and editor also.:asian:


----------



## kenpoevolution (Jul 31, 2003)

Apparently the 40-technique system was introduced in 1962 by the Tracy Brothers.

A 30 technqiue system was introduced in 1966 when the yellow belt rank was added. 

( visit http://www.georgiakenpo.net/belt_history/orange_history.htm for more information)


----------



## True2Kenpo (Jul 31, 2003)

Fellow Kenpoists,

I am curious as well to the origins of some of the curriculums...

I also wanted to add that there is also a 15 technique per level curriculum that I believe most W.K.K.A. schools teach.

What other variations exist?

My thought is as long as everything is there, the setup does not matter.  I have heard many times from other Kenpoists that if you are not teaching a certain way that it is not right...  the point is that what is right for one person, may not be right for another.

I think the 16 tech. levels and the 15 tech. levels work really well for schools, especially for teaching kids.  It helps spread the material out alittle better for students to have more time to focus on lesser techniques, but in the end still recieve all of the information.

In anycase, wish everyone the best.  Good journey!

Respectfully,
Joshua Ryer


----------



## tarabos (Jul 31, 2003)

the wkka does follow a modified technique cirriculum (poorly modified if you ask me), but it does not follow a 15 technique cirriculum.


----------



## dcence (Jul 31, 2003)

Currently, in the AKKI, the official curriculum uses a tiered approach recognize the more advanced you are the more you should be able to learn and retain.  For example, there are 10 in Yellow, 16 in Orange and Purple, 20 in Blue and Green, 30 in Brown (altogether including all three levels, or 10 per level), etc.

I know some instructors choose to just do 16 per level after yellow, which is no problem in the AKKI.

Just another spin on things.


----------



## Doc (Jul 31, 2003)

> Mr. Duffy created the 16 Technique curriculum shortly before Mr. Parker's passing.



Correction please: 

Brian Duffy created *"A"* 16 technique curriculum, not *'THE'* 16 technique curriculum.

There were several versions, and I myself was using a 16 technique curriculum in the seventies. In fact, in my study with Parker I NEVER used a 32 curriculum because I was not teaching commercially. 

Additionally, to my knowledge Parker himself created and introduced the 24. In my conversations with him, his ultimate intent was to cut the 32 in half, but settled on the 24 as an intermediate "stop gap" for "5 years" to avoid the triggering of premature promotions in the commercial schools. 

Remember all of this was a "business" model first and the martial art curriculum was actually secondary. "Elongation" of the process was important. Most in the 50's got their blacks in months rather than years.


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Jul 31, 2003)

Kenpo evolution, Doc:  Thanks!


----------



## True2Kenpo (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by tarabos _
> *the wkka does follow a modified technique cirriculum (poorly modified if you ask me), but it does not follow a 15 technique cirriculum. *



Tarabos,

Good afternoon sir.  You mentioned the W.K.K.A. does not follow a 15 technique curriculum.  I just wanted to ask what curriculum they do follow?

Thanks in advance.

Respectfully,
Joshua Ryer


----------



## Doc (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka _
> *Kenpo evolution, Doc:  Thanks! *


You know, I am one of the guys who keeps insisting we stop speaking of "Kenpo" as if it has all undergone the same evolution and essentially is the same for everyone with only "variations" in techniques. Nothing could be further from the truth. What is absolute for some is not for others based on many factors.

Ed Parker himself when asked about a technique by a student would always respond by asking, "Show me how YOU do it." Even back in the day when techniques didn't have names. It was always about making it work. An attitude he brought with him from Chow.

When a teaching methodology began to form and long term goals began to be more solidified as his personal art evolved, more of a "system" began to be the core, but the length, depth, and breath of that system varies from individual to individual taught by Parker. It depended on what you learned before you met him, what you wanted to do with it, were you in business with him, did you work for him, your own personal capabilities physically and intellectually, was there a financial consideration (paying for instruction), what, when, and how long someone actually studied, etc. And one other thing that was really mportant; did he like you, but don't think business considerations didn't play a major role.

Many people all going in different directions at different points in time and location dominated by the most recent commercial group of teachers and students by design. 

Very few people were actually taught by Parker from beginner to black because he recognized he could never spread his art that way. Most of those on the tree came to Parker from other arts and/or instructors and the majority were already black belts because that fit his business model.


----------



## meni (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by True2Kenpo _
> *Tarabos,
> 
> Good afternoon sir.  You mentioned the W.K.K.A. does not follow a 15 technique curriculum.  I just wanted to ask what curriculum they do follow?
> ...


with all the respect 

Im currently a student of Mr. Joe Palanzo Head of the W.K.K.A and as a member of his school and a student of his 
 I would like to inform you that we do follow the 15 technique curriculum and it pretty good thank you very much 

M


----------



## meni (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by tarabos _
> *the wkka does follow a modified technique cirriculum (poorly modified if you ask me), but it does not follow a 15 technique cirriculum. *



tarabos :
Please view the above answer!


----------



## tarabos (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by meni _
> *tarabos :
> Please view the above answer! *



if you have a listing of this cirriculum then i'd like to see how it is set up. i am a student of Mark Lawler and we do not use a 15 tech cirriculum...

seems we follow different cirriculums which strikes me as odd since we technically are a wkka school, though not many of us are members of the org.

if the cirriculum has changed i'd like to know and then ask Mr. Lawler why we have not adopted it.


----------



## Daishi (Jul 31, 2003)

I'll put money down that the 15 technique set that the WKKA is now using is the same list that Tarabos is refering to, but bumped alot of the required techniques down to optionals.  That seems to be the WKKA way of changing the lists, just move stuff around as optionals.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka _*
> Can someone tell me when the 24 Technique system was officially rolled out?
> *




1979

artyon:


----------



## meni (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by tarabos _
> *if you have a listing of this cirriculum then i'd like to see how it is set up. i am a student of Mark Lawler and we do not use a 15 tech cirriculum...
> 
> seems we follow different cirriculums which strikes me as odd since we technically are a wkka school, though not many of us are members of the org.
> ...


 you can view the list at 
http://www.pcwood.com/kenpo/fulllist_tech.html

 i hope this is helpfull 

let me know if there are any major changes!

m


----------



## meni (Jul 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Daishi _
> *I'll put money down that the 15 technique set that the WKKA is now using is the same list that Tarabos is refering to, but bumped alot of the required techniques down to optionals.  That seems to be the WKKA way of changing the lists, just move stuff around as optionals. *



i dont have any idea what change when and to where but for last to years i can tell that technique change it place and at list in Mr.Palanzo place we still do the same!

m


----------



## tarabos (Aug 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by meni _
> *i dont have any idea what change when and to where but for last to years i can tell that technique change it place and at list in Mr.Palanzo place we still do the same!
> 
> m *



ok...here's the deal. you have the wkka list, and in it are the "required" techs and the "optional" techs. we are aware of the fact that there are "optionals," but we teach them all...they are all required. hence the techs are still present and there are more than 15 techs per list.

however, this also results in a sporatic number of techniques per list, so you cannnot classify the  list we teach as either 15, 24 or 32. 

now if you DO NOT teach the "optionals," for whatever reason, then voila, you have a 15 technique cirriculum.

maybe there are a lot of people here wondering why some techs are optional. i wouldn't have an answer for them. this has always been one of my problems in my 11 years of working with the list. if you want some specifics of why i do not prefer the wkka cirriculum i will list a few, but not all. 

for one, the "optional" thing. many of the techniques that were made "optional" are techniques that i feel are very valuable teaching tools and just plain great techniques. not to mention there are techniques that have been made "optional" that are included in the forms. why would you not try and concentrate on those techniques a little more to learn the actual application of them and improve on that technique as well as the form it is in.

another problem i have is that the original yellow belt list and all of its techniques have been totally eliminated in most wkka schools, mine included. there are some valuable techniques in that list that are much better for introducing a new student to kenpo. look at some of the techniques on the yellow belt list for the wkka. there are some fairly complex techniques on it. why would you introduce a new student to kenpo with these? i had to take it upon myself to learn the original yellow techniques.

these are some of my opinions. you may enjoy the cirriculum and that's great, i'm glad you do, but i've never been a fan of it.


----------



## meni (Aug 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by tarabos _
> *ok...here's the deal. you have the wkka list, and in it are the "required" techs and the "optional" techs. we are aware of the fact that there are "optionals," but we teach them all...they are all required. hence the techs are still present and there are more than 15 techs per list.
> 
> however, this also results in a sporatic number of techniques per list, so you cannnot classify the  list we teach as either 15, 24 or 32.
> ...



Hi again
1. As far as I know 15 technique curriculums mean only 15 techniques are required to advance for next level between your white until you reach 5 degree bb which completes the system so 
I believe that if one is going to see all the techniques, one for sure is going to have some time to see the optional technique however as most of as know there are so many techniques that it hard enough to keep track as it is, I'm sure the more time that I will spend on doing learning and practicing I will remember techniques better 

2. About better les complex or not in my opinion the collection of ten techniques for the first level is well rounded 
You have kick. Choke, grab, push, stepping of line, regrabing, 
And with all the respect some of the original technique (which is now in optional section) are not simple at all ,like intellectual departure 
For example,
There for I'm quit happy with the way things are. 
M


----------



## tarabos (Aug 1, 2003)

we could debate this all day and not make any progress. i am happy to call it a difference of opinion...


----------



## Kenpodoc (Aug 1, 2003)

We follow Mr. Wedlakes curriculum.  It is my understanding that he got it from Mr. Parker in the late 1980's.  (I don't know the details of this interchange.)  We have the following number of techniques per belt.
yellow        10
orange       12
purple        12
blue           16
green         20
Brown III   20
Brown II    20
Brown I     20
Black         20

This system allows quicker initial progression and more material after the student is hooked.  

It is my impression that Mr. Parker had not settled on any one curriculum when he tragically died.  The problem is balancing  motivation with adequate learning.  

Respectfully,

Jeff


----------



## cdhall (Aug 1, 2003)

FYI.
I've posted this before but I guess it fits in here rather well.
Some info on Mr. Duffy's 16 technique curriculum is here
http://www.akfkenpo.com/curriculum/index.html

I just got some more info on this myself recently I was not clear on some of its development, but this overview is pretty thorough I think.
:asian:


----------



## meni (Aug 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by tarabos _
> *we could debate this all day and not make any progress. i am happy to call it a difference of opinion... *


yep i agree

by the way  since your doing this for a long time can you  please help my find the rest of the curriculum ?
i.e after 1bb?

thank you
m


----------



## Jagdish (Aug 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *Correction please:
> 
> Most in the 50's got their blacks in months rather than years.
> ...


----------



## Old Fat Kenpoka (Aug 1, 2003)

OK, here is the curriculum from my school

No Yellow Belt.
Orange:  25 Techniques + 17 variations = 42 total.  Short 1, Stance set
Purple:  28 Techniques + 13 variations = 41 total.  Long 1, Short 2
Blue:  30 Techniques + 8 variations = 38 total.  Long 2, Short 3
Green:  30 Techniques + 11 variations = 41 total.  Long 3, Staff Set.
3rd Brown:  10 Techniques.  Book Set, Mass Attack Kata
2nd Brown:  6 Techniques.  Long 4, Finger Set
1st Brown:  6 Techniques.  Long 5, Sticks Set
184 techniques and variations total.  

1st Black: no new techniques.  Tiger & Crane, 2-Man Set, personal/thesis kata & written thesis.
2nd Black:  Spear Set
3rd Black:  Long 6
18 forms and sets total (plus your thesis kata).


----------



## Doc (Aug 1, 2003)

*



Originally posted by Doc 
Most in the 50's got their blacks in months rather than years. 

Sir: When you explain that some people got their B.B. in some months, were they really black belst from a combative point of view?
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely. In those days many of the guys (yes guys) who came to such a rigorous physically demanding combat activity, were athletes, police, ex-military, etc. Discipline was a given and you subjected yourself to the regimine.

As I have often said before, most were already "tough guys" who could fight when they came in the door. They came to become better fighters. 

It was a different time where bleeding and brusing was normal in a class session. I didn't wear a cup until the eighties, (presumably I got smarter), and I had many friends from Oshima's school (Shotokan) who were missing their front teeth from "vigorous" sparring sessions. A schoolmate of mine at UCLA named George Byrd comes to mind, along with Ralph Castellanos from Kenpo. Make no mistake these guys could "knuckle" as we used to say, and suggest the ones that are still around still can. They're just "old school" tough guys.

Many got their belts while overseas in the military. Joe Lewis got his black in 6 months, Chuck Norris around the same length of time. Ed Parker made black while on active duty in the Coast Guard stationed in Hawaii. The amount of knowledge was nothing compared to today.

True, much less was taught in those days but what guys knew they knew well and could use without a doubt. The schools were not commercial and they were no place for the weak, faint of heart, women, or children. Everyone was a "warrior," or you wouldn't be there. It was a "war" mentality. No cups, no pads, no gloves, and you got talked about bad if you wore shin guards for being "soft." Man were we dumb.

It was a time when the information from China like Pressure points were not even heard of let alone available to actually learn, with rare exceptions. But make no mistake when you walked into the school everybody was a fighter, now a few are.



			And , which will be the difference if we compare them to present B.B. not taught commecially?
		
Click to expand...

I don't think there is a comparison in many respects. It is always difficult to compare physical attributes over decades of separation. What we call a linebacker today was a huge offensive lineman then. Can you believe Fred Dryer was a fearsome defensive end? To day he would have to play on offense as a big wideout or small tight end. Are there guys as tough as some of those from another time and place? Absolutely, but there are not as many. After all most schools now are commercial and full of women, kids and wannabe's. Don't get me wrong, there are some tough guys around, but they are harder to find now. Some rare schools like Bob White in Costa Mea sdemand that you are physical or you're in the wrong place. Others don't even allow contact. Go figure.*


----------



## Michael Billings (Aug 1, 2003)

I forgot the "No shinguards" back then ... I still have knots on my tibia, 30+ years later, from forearm "bone" blocks in Shotokan in the 60's.  

Thanks for sharing & the memories.  You might also mention that early on, guys who did Karate were not exactly considered the intellectual cream of the crop by the general public.  This does not mean they were not smart ... obviously, rather the way they were perceived early on were as "fighters."  

Think of a bunch of guys who like, and want, to fight better - pretty much most of the time.  Lots had other jobs, law enforcement, ex-military (lots), current military, etc., as Dr. Chapél said, but the perception of the public was slowly changed by the younger generation of the 60's as they grew up on Green Hornet, I Spy, Wild Wild West (later) and comic books with super hero's doing "Karate".  

The movies made it to America and the changes in perception began.  Billy Jack was the 1st I remember, Enter the Dragon, Kung Fu (the movie), etc.  

I remember my mom being ok with my taking Judo at the Y circa 1963-1964, but then in the late 60's she was agast and/or apalled that I wanted to do "Karate".  Judo was a sport, Jui-Jitsu was a "wrestling" type of self defense from Japan.  The rest were unknown for the most part, by her generation.

My hat is off to the "Pioneers", or Seniors, who paved the way for students of today.  It is hard to imagine what it used to be like.  Boxing was the manly art of self defense, for the most part.  Karate was fighting dirty, Judo a sport, etc.  

Thanks for the memories

Oss


----------



## Doc (Aug 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Michael Billings _
> *I forgot the "No shinguards" back then ... I still have knots on my tibia, 30+ years later, from forearm "bone" blocks in Shotokan in the 60's.
> *


*
Man that was dumb wasn't it? My mother convinced me to wear a cup when she overheard that I didn't. "What if there is just an unlucky accident?" She said. But then I remembered Bobby Burbridge having his testicles trapped when a kick flexxed and cracked his cup in a tournament and then it closed shut on his body.



			Thanks for sharing & the memories.  You might also mention that early on, guys who did Karate were not exactly considered the intellectual cream of the crop by the general public.  This does not mean they were not smart ... obviously, rather the way they were perceived early on were as "fighters."
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, "Karate" guys had this public conception of the big knuckles and punching boards and bricks. Not the smartest of activities. Whereas judo was touted as gentleman wrestling.



			Think of a bunch of guys who like, and want, to fight better - pretty much most of the time.  Lots had other jobs, law enforcement, ex-military (lots), current military, etc., as Dr. Chapél said, but the perception of the public was slowly changed by the younger generation of the 60's as they grew up on Green Hornet, I Spy, Wild Wild West (later) and comic books with super hero's doing "Karate".
		
Click to expand...

Don't forget, "The case Of The Dangerous Robbin," "Honey West," "The Detectives," and of course "I Spy," with Ed Parker.



			The movies made it to America and the changes in perception began.  Billy Jack was the 1st I remember, Enter the Dragon, Kung Fu (the movie), etc.
		
Click to expand...

That's true. I was lucky because I could go down the street from my first school to the "Sing Lee Theater" in LA Chinatown and see the movies with English subtitles in the sixties. Over on LaBrea was the "Toho LaBrea Theater" that showed all the samurai movies. On crenshaw was the "Kabuki Theater." Great times, all gone now.



			I remember my mom being ok with my taking Judo at the Y circa 1963-1964, but then in the late 60's she was agast and/or apalled that I wanted to do "Karate".  Judo was a sport, Jui-Jitsu was a "wrestling" type of self defense from Japan.  The rest were unknown for the most part, by her generation.



			Funny I remember my Grandmother asking me, "Are you going to go play karate today?" like it was basketball or something.



			My hat is off to the "Pioneers", or Seniors, who paved the way for students of today.
		
Click to expand...

Hey I got some bad news for you. Sounds like that includes you as well so keep your hat on.



			It is hard to imagine what it used to be like.  Boxing was the manly art of self defense, for the most part.  Karate was fighting dirty, Judo a sport, etc.  
Thanks for the memories.
Oss
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...



Click to expand...

*


> > Yeah if you threw a kick it meant you wanted to fight "dirty."
> >
> > Thank YOU for the memories as well.


----------



## Jagdish (Aug 2, 2003)

Sir:

From your point of view, when some practicioner is a B.B? Does he has to have some physical assets like a number of push ups or does he msut have some fighting skill solely, like to k.o. any opponent, surviving an attack only or to defend fairly good from a fighter?



If we must take into account  the different materials, then which equivalent DAN will be it , when the practicioner can drop an opponent with one shot in closer distance?

Thanking you in advance,

Jagdish


----------



## tarabos (Aug 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by meni _
> *yep i agree
> 
> by the way  since your doing this for a long time can you  please help my find the rest of the curriculum ?
> ...



i haven't seen any net resources for that, but i haven't really looked all that hard for it. you could always ask mr. joe or one of his instructors for it....

i won't be back in the studio until tuesday, if i remember i'll type them up. i don't remember all the requirements off the top of my head verbatim...


----------



## Jagdish (Aug 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Jagdish _
> 
> DEAR DOC:  SIR: ANY OPINION?
> 
> ...


----------



## Doc (Aug 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Jagdish _


I believe I answered as well as possible.


----------



## Jagdish (Aug 4, 2003)

[

SIR: THIS IS THE RIGHT MESSAGE & NOT THE PREVIOUS ONE YOUR GOODSELF ANSWERED. SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE.JAGDISH

QUOTE]_Originally posted by Jagdish _
*Sir:

From your point of view, when some practicioner is a B.B? Does he has to have some physical assets like a number of push ups or does he must have some fighting skill solely, like to k.o. any opponent, surviving an attack only or to defend himself fairly good from a fighter?



If we must take into account  the different materials, then which equivalent DAN will be it , when the practicioner can drop an opponent with one shot in closer distance?

Thanking you in advance,

Jagdish

 *


----------



## CoolKempoDude (Aug 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *
> 
> Some rare schools like Bob White in Costa Mea sdemand that you are physical or you're in the wrong place.  *


* 

Bob White, how can i forget about this individual? I heard a lot of things about him. I'll share one of them here with everybody here.

one of his students told my friend that his wife kicks him in the parking lot in front of his studio. 

i'm not sure if this is true. Perhaps, any of his *former* students or WITNESS can clarify this.His wife or his neighbor KNOW about this.???

i thought it is funny. Have a good laugh.  *


----------



## Doc (Aug 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CoolKempoDude _
> *Bob White, how can i forget about this individual? I heard a lot of things about him. I'll share one of them here with everybody here.
> 
> one of his students told my friend that his wife kicks him in the parking lot in front of his studio.
> ...


And how does that apply to this string? If you must, take it to the locker room. But if I were you, I would not discuss Mr. White's interaction with his wife anywhere.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CoolKempoDude _*
> One of Bob White's students told my friend which in turn told me.....  that his wife kicks him in the parking lot in front of his studio.
> 
> I thought it is funny. Have a good laugh.
> *



Hmmmmmmm ......... Well, I don't find the post funny in fact .... it sounds a LOT like hearsay to me.... but even if it were true...... what is your point?   If  in fact it was true...  I can assure you it was because he allowed it and NOT because he HAD to take it.  LOL

but rumors like this have no place on the net....... this is way off topic anyways.  Take Doc's advice... and leave this kind of rubbish off line, no one wants to hear this stuff.


----------



## cdhall (Aug 18, 2003)

Sirs:

CoolKempoDude is an "anonymous" member of MartialTalk if you didn't notice.

I agree with you both on all counts. 

Is is just me or do these anonymous members all tend to post stuff like this.  

Irritating.  This type of behaviour has kept me away recently.  I think I'd prefer it if we all had to populate our profiles.  But that is also off topic.  I'll go post this idea somewhere else.

On the subject of Mr. White, I'll say that I consider him an excellent role-model.  I enjoyed his contribution to Mr. Bleeker's "The Journey" very much and I greatly appreciated having him participate in my last belt test.
:asian:


----------



## CoolKempoDude (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> * If  in fact it was true...  I can assure you it was because he allowed it and NOT because he HAD to take it.  LOL
> 
> *



it is so true


----------



## CoolKempoDude (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cdhall _
> *
> 
> Is is just me or do these anonymous members all tend to post stuff like this.
> ...



gee. I did use my REAL name to register but it doesn't show up in my profile for some reasons. Whatever it is, it's surely a good decision.

I like privacy. keep it that way 

i didn't try to diminish or demean anybody. I told you what his student told my friend.

If it is true, what is wrong with me telling the truth ?

:soapbox:


----------



## CoolKempoDude (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *And how does that apply to this string? If you must, take it to the locker room. But if I were you, I would not discuss Mr. White's interaction with his wife anywhere. *



by saying this, i didn't try to diminish or demean anybody.I just told you what HIS student told my friend. if it is true, what is wrong with me telling the truth ?

"you shall tell the truth and the truth shall make you mad"


----------



## Kirk (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cdhall _
> *Sirs:
> 
> CoolKempoDude is an "anonymous" member of MartialTalk if you didn't notice.
> ...



If ya ask me, to find the identity of CoolKempoDude, from 
Broadford take the B8083 heading for Elgol. This is indeed a "long 
and winding road" - take it slow, take it easy - enjoy the scenery. 
When you reach Kilmarie take a left off the main road, signed to 
Kilmarie Old Burial Ground. Park just around the corner by the 
graveyard. Just back around the corner is a bridge over the 
stream. Cross this and then head out along the coast. You'll need 
to follow the coast path for about a mile and there he is.


----------



## CoolKempoDude (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> *
> 
> but rumors like this have no place on the net....... this is way off topic anyways.  Take Doc's advice... and leave this kind of rubbish off line, no one wants to hear this stuff.
> ...



somebody here mentioned Bob White and HIS FORMER student told my friend what he saw in the parking lot at night.

I didn't realize that people here ONLY hear what they LIKE to hear. If that is the case, i will not post any more.


----------



## cdhall (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CoolKempoDude _
> *If it is true, what is wrong with me telling the truth ?
> *



Dude:

I personally don't think there is anything wrong with telling the truth.  However, even telling the truth will have a consequence and that consequence should be considered before telling such a truth.  For example.  your anecdote offered at least 3 distinct outcomes and probably more, but these should have occurred to you before you posted:

1. People would jump in and say "Amen, brother!  I was there.  I see it every night.  Amazing isn't it?  Who'd have thought."  

2.Or "Ha, ha.  Very funny Thank you."

3. "What are you talking about.  I have known Mr. White for years and I have never heard anything like this.  You are trying to start trouble.  Someone should put you in your place."

And it appears that several of us opted for 3.

However, there is another underlying issue here that even the New York Times seems to disregard and that is the nature of "Truth."

Once upon a time, a journalist would not consider "reporting" something they could not verify.  I think this basic principle used to be at least part of something called "journalistic integrity."  I also thinkg that it was common not to intentionally represent fiction as fact.  

I mention this only to illustrate that professional reporters used to consider what you were doing as wrong because not only are you not identified to us yourself, but your source is un-verifiable as well.  So some of the things that could have irritated people like me on this website are:

1. You are gossiping for the sake of gossiping
2. You are smearing the reputation of a someone who at the very least is considered by many to be among "24 of the Most Prominent American Kenpoists of Today As told to Joe Hyams."  As I believe it says on the cover of The Journey.

So what is wrong with your Truth is that by your own admission it may only be a rumor and no one here can check this out directly by verifying either the person who posted it or the person who originated the story.

We could of course call Mr. White and ask him about it, but the story does not merit being treated with that much credibility.

So those are my concerns with the potential outcomes of you telling the truth.  You are gossiping and there are a few good examples in history as well as several admonishments in famous books that many of us have read that discourage gossip in general.  

Now had you been gossiping about Punxsutawney Phil
http://www.punxsutawneyphil.com/
then maybe no one would have taken much notice.  But you did not, you told an unflattering anecdote about a well-regarded Kenpoist and you did so from the shadows of anonymity.  I hope this will help you understand why I for one took some exception to this post of yours.

:soapbox: 

Now that I'm off my soapbox, let me say that I am not passing judgement on you personally but I hope you can see how you don't come off here in a very good light and I am offering you and others this feedback in the hopes that it will do some good to help avoid misunderstandings in the future.  

Now I'll have to go back and look at the topic of this thread again. I'm pretty sure that somewhere Mr. Conatser has posted the approximate dates of the inception/use of the 32, 24 and 16 technique curriculums, but if he would post it here again I would be greatful myself.  As well as what preceeded the 32 technique curriculum.  As I understand it, it goes like this:

32 technique system, forms up to Short 3 until 196x
32 techniques per belt began 196x
24 techniques per belt introduced in 198x
16 techniques per belt introduced posthumously, never published by Mr. Parker but several seniors were working on them with Mr. Parker who intended to publishing it in the early 1990s, around 1991 or 1992 is my guess.

Wow.  I only need about 4 more posts to make it to MartialTalk 3rd Black.  I should have broken this up.


----------



## Michael Billings (Aug 18, 2003)

KoolKenpoDude don't you see the potential harm you can cause by passing on a slanderous rumor?  Your post about Mr. White is out of context and makes him appear like he is abusing his wife.  This could be construed as an attempt to slam one of the true gentleman and Seniors in Kenpo today.  Not to mention one of the best fighters in any tournament, or other setting ... bar none.

It is also hearsay, in fact in my profession it is triple hearsay with no indicia of reliability due to how far removed from the source it is.  Basically just gossip!  

This is so far off the topic as to be just plain silly.  Get it back on course and you won't receive the responses you did from others.  

In any event, it does not belong on this thread.  And is much more like the type of speculation or rumors found on other Boards.  You may not have posted or read MartialTalk enough to know that, but if so, you know it is Locker Room Talk, and even then, I personally would not say this about somebody without more proof.  

Just my thoughts, not a Mod warning or anything, about being off topic ... YET!


----------



## Seig (Aug 18, 2003)

=============
Mod. Note. 
Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Seig
-MT Moderator-



====================
Mod. Note. 
Please, keep the conversation on topic..

-Seig
-MT Moderator-
====================


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 18, 2003)

Just piping in with a short note on 'profiles'

New members are required to fill out a name and location section that is only viewable by admins.  The rest of the registration is optional.


That said, any questions on that policy please address in the support forum so we can return this thread to its original intent.

Thank you.
:asian:


----------



## Nightingale (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CoolKempoDude _
> *gee. I did use my REAL name to register but it doesn't show up in my profile for some reasons. Whatever it is, it's surely a good decision.
> 
> I like privacy. keep it that way
> ...



There are two "name" and "Location" fields.  One is public so everyone can see.  Filling in that one is optional.  One is private, and accessible only to forum administrators.  Filling in that one is NOT optional.


----------



## Nightingale (Aug 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CoolKempoDude _
> *somebody here mentioned Bob White and HIS FORMER student told my friend what he saw in the parking lot at night.
> 
> I didn't realize that people here ONLY hear what they LIKE to hear. If that is the case, i will not post any more. *




If you want to talk about Mr. White, that's fine, but talk about his Kenpo, not his personal life.  We care about Mr. White's martial arts, not what takes place between himself and his wife.


----------

