# Web of Knowledge interpretation



## Handsword (Feb 27, 2003)

For those of you familiar with the different ground-fighting positions such as the guard and mount (top and bottom), where would these be classified in the web of knowledge?  

WEB OF KNOWLEDGE:
1. Grabs and Tackles 
2. Pushes 
3. Punches 
4. Kicks 
5. Holds and Hugs 
6. Locks and Chokes 
7. Weapons 
8. Multiple Attacks

Would each position come under one of the above or would they use multiple classifications (I'm thinking 'Holds & Hugs' and/or 'Locks')?

Altertatively, would anyone ignore the position, and instead classify the attack that comes with it (eg. 'punch' or 'lock and choke')?

Or would anyone suggest a separate classification for ground positions?


----------



## Michael Billings (Feb 27, 2003)

It seems to me, at first glance, that a number of techniques across most of the catagories in the Web, can be applied in more than one (the vertical) dimension.  You can pick and choose and experiment to see if you can find the techniques that have logical, practical, applicaiton in the mount, in the guard, or if it is more like a street fight an the guy is sitting on your chest trying to rip your face off.

-Michael
Kenpo-Texas.com


----------



## Doc (Feb 28, 2003)

Although it is possible to be on the ground when the attack begins, from the perspective that Ed Parker worked from, such assaults would be considered secondary. 

The WOK would address the action that put you in that position first.


----------



## Michael Billings (Feb 28, 2003)

But hey, it is dark, I am taking out the trash (alley) and I trip as I am assaulted ... I could happen ... it could, well maybe it could happen.  And at my level, looking at this what if is a better alternative than attempting to borrow solutions (BJJ) from another system.  

I do play with the BJJ guys because I need the familiarity with what is out there now days, and what possible attacks we may face (outside of the ideal.)  However, I do not cross train generally.  I find the answers by application of the logical, non-complex, Principles and Concepts inherent in Kenpo.  Sometimes I formulate my own Theories within this framework, then I have to test them or the Postulates that make up the Theory. 

:asian:
Oss, 
-Michael
Kenpo-Texas.com


----------



## jfarnsworth (Feb 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *Although it is possible to be on the ground when the attack begins, from the perspective that Ed Parker worked from, such assaults would be considered secondary.
> 
> The WOK would address the action that put you in that position first. *



If I may ask a question or two. If there weren't any "specific" techniques based as actual ground fighting techniques in our system, did Mr. Parker set up the curriculum to deal with us being on the ground then getting up off of the ground? Also did Mr. Parker set the curriculum as we take the person to the ground as we stand and finish out the techniques? The techniques such as Encounter with Danger, Prance of the Tiger, and Bowing to Buddha for the first question. For the 2nd question techniques such as Leap of Death, Dance of Death, Squatting Sacrifice, Twirling Sacrifice, etc.? I believe the material is there if we're going into the grappling thing but then again who wants to fight the "shark" in his own waters. :asian: 

Looking at Leap of Death vs. Destructive Kneel obviously there's a connection between the two tech. One we work the guy totally on the floor working the technique from behind on the horizontal plane. The other we leave him on the knees and work him from behind in the vertical position.


----------



## Kirk (Feb 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jfarnsworth _
> * I believe the material is there if were going into the grappling thing but then again who wants to fight the "shark" in his own waters. *



Great Analogy!


----------



## jfarnsworth (Feb 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Great Analogy! *



That comes from Dr. Chapel's posts in the Grasp & Grip of Death threads. Yes I do like it as well.:asian:


----------



## Michael Billings (Feb 28, 2003)

In my old Chinese Kenpo system (NCKKA), Destructive Kneel was called "Missing the Leap".  What-If's built in.

Oss,
-Michael
Kenpo-Texas.com


----------



## Handsword (Mar 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jfarnsworth _
> *If I may ask a question or two. If there weren't any "specific" techniques based as actual ground fighting techniques in our system, did Mr. Parker set up the curriculum to deal with us being on the ground then getting up off of the ground? Also did Mr. Parker set the curriculum as we take the person to the ground as we stand and finish out the techniques? The techniques such as Encounter with Danger, Prance of the Tiger, and Bowing to Buddha for the first question. For the 2nd question techniques such as Leap of Death, Dance of Death, Squatting Sacrifice, Twirling Sacrifice, etc.? I believe the material is there if we're going into the grappling thing but then again who wants to fight the "shark" in his own waters. :asian:
> 
> *



Here's my 2 cents in Q&A format:

Did Mr Parker set up the curriculum to deal with us being on the ground then getting up off the ground?

Yes, he touched on this topic in some specific instances, and getting back to your feet was definately a common theme.

Have times since changed with an increase in martial arts training/knowledge of the general population?

Yes, and ground fighting (with competent takedowns) is becoming a signifcant skill of many people.

Does Kenpo (not "did Mr Parker"*) allow for adaption to face this arising potential challenge to our 'stand-up orientated' skills?

Of course, but it would be infinitely easier to apply Kenpo concepts to ground based scenarios if these positions are addressed with some common ideal attacks of such a nature.  Even practicing these one week a year would be so much better than not at all.  

I'm not saying that we should all become ground fighters, but we should be aware of the common elements of such emerging arts and "change with the times".  It will be extremely difficult to apply an effective defence while in a completely unfamiliar position.

The way I had previously heard the shark analogy - 

Which is the better fighter, the stand-up guy or the ground fighter?  
This was answered with another question:
Which is the toughest animal - the shark or the tiger?  The shark if you are in the water, the tiger if you are on the land.

We are part of an evolving art and you cannot grow gills if you do not jump in the water.

To quote Charles Darwin -

"It is not the strongest of the species that survives.  Not the most intelligent.  Rather, it is that which is most adaptive to change."


----------



## jfarnsworth (Mar 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Handsword _
> *Here's my 2 cents in Q&A format:*



Handsword I seen that you have BJJ listed in your bio. Do you find it hard when fighting off of your back with someone in the mount position while your punching or striking upward? Here's my thing. A good friend of mine owns a JJ school. He let's me work out with him from time to time. While your striking upward from the ground do you get armlocked, bicep locked, choked in various fashions, or do you find this works well for you? I'm just curious what you have found in your travels of martial arts training.


----------



## Handsword (Mar 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jfarnsworth _
> *Handsword I seen that you have BJJ listed in your bio. Do you find it hard when fighting off of your back with someone in the mount position while your punching or striking upward? Here's my thing. A good friend of mine owns a JJ school. He let's me work out with him from time to time. While your striking upward from the ground do you get armlocked, bicep locked, choked in various fashions, or do you find this works well for you? I'm just curious what you have found in your travels of martial arts training. *



If I am on the bottom with an opponent in the mount position (by the away, I train to avoid such a situation), then my immediate priority is to change position.  

This can be related to one of the first rules of Kenpo - establish your base.  Although, I won't be able to lower my centre of gravity any further, gravity is now on my opponent's side and he has control of my hips.  Therefore, to establish my base I must escape the mount position.

A common opinion from a 3rd party (usually sitting in a safe arm chair ) is that strikes such as eye gouges could be used to escape.  This is true, although my opponent is in a much better position to deliver them, has more manoeuvrability to avoid them, and can also take and break my arm if I reach up for such an attack.  Even if I could somehow knockout my opponent from the bottom, I would still have the obstacle of his body on top of mine before I could return to my feet.

There are a number of options in escaping the mount (these are best 'borrowed' from the grappling arts).  Because Kenpo is a predominately striking based art, there is no reason that these escapes must remain so confined by the rules of grappling.  Instead, they can be adapted to become a more offensive defence.

Striking upward from the bottom position does place yourself at an even greater risk (as you've pointed out).  However, there are options striking along a horizontal plane.  One of these strikes (if you have the space for it) is an downward (anchoring) elbow to the groin.


----------



## WilliamTLear (Mar 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *Although it is possible to be on the ground when the attack begins, from the perspective that Ed Parker worked from, such assaults would be considered secondary.
> 
> The WOK would address the action that put you in that position first. *



You're right. It is possible to be on the ground when an assault begins... or should I say... on your back. The majority of the bugars out there wait until their victim is the most vulnerable before attacking them. I guess that's one of the reasons Mr. Parker made environmental awareness a priority.

I can think of a couple other situations that may occour:

1. Trip and fall scenario (as in Mr. Billings post above).
2. Attacked while in bed.
3. Attacked while laying on a park bench while reading a book.
4. Attacked while getting a sun-tan at the beach.
etc...

Just some thoughts,
Billy

P.S. I also think Mr. Parker worked from the perspective that such assaults would be considered secondary (i.e. having to defend yourself from the ground after the initial assault put you there).


----------



## Doc (Mar 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by WilliamTLear _
> *You're right. It is possible to be on the ground when an assault begins... or should I say... on your back. The majority of the bugars out there wait until their victim is the most vulnerable before attacking them. I guess that's one of the reasons Mr. Parker made environmental awareness a priority.
> 
> I can think of a couple other situations that may occour:
> ...



I agree with everything, except that "sun tan" thing.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Mar 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Handsword _
> *A common opinion from a 3rd party (usually sitting in a safe arm chair ) is that strikes such as eye gouges could be used to escape. *



I'm not taking this as a shot at me however I'm not an armchair quarterback person. I don't own a recliner and I'm not sure I will for a long time. But I do powerlift 5 days a week, kenpo 7 days a week, and with occassional invitation from my friend I do roll with his students on the mats. He does take me to the side and help me along with grappling positions, hand positions and such. :asian:


----------



## Handsword (Mar 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jfarnsworth _
> *I'm not taking this as a shot at me however I'm not an armchair quarterback person. I don't own a recliner and I'm not sure I will for a long time. But I do powerlift 5 days a week, kenpo 7 days a week, and with occassional invitation from my friend I do roll with his students on the mats. He does take me to the side and help me along with grappling positions, hand positions and such. :asian: *



That definately wasn't a shot at yourself, rather, a bit a mild sarcasm directed towards those people who say they'll never find themselves on the ground.

Putting theory to the test (which you seem to be doing on the mat)  is the best way to see what translates from stand-up to the floor.

Good to see that you also live a lifestyle that doen't allow much couch time.

There's training to be done ...


----------

