# Technique Extensions



## headkick (Aug 12, 2002)

Yes, No?
Why, Why Not?


Just stirring... 

Headkick


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 12, 2002)




----------



## Wertle (Aug 12, 2002)

I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean by technique extensions, explain?

(if it's anything like hair extensions, i'd say avoid it)


----------



## jeffkyle (Aug 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> 
> * *



Are you stirring too....?


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 12, 2002)




----------



## eternalwhitebelt (Aug 12, 2002)

I like and teach the extensions but I sometimes think it would be bettter for the blackbelt to work more on the what if and the formulation phase of the base techs. and spend more time on that. I think students get too caught up in wanting to learn the next move.  Having said that there is a lot of redundency in some of the extensions, bu it can only make you better right?


----------



## ProfessorKenpo (Aug 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by eternalwhitebelt _
> 
> *I like and teach the extensions but I sometimes think it would be bettter for the blackbelt to work more on the what if and the formulation phase of the base techs. and spend more time on that. I think students get too caught up in wanting to learn the next move.  Having said that there is a lot of redundency in some of the extensions, bu it can only make you better right? *




I admit, some of the extensions look redundant, but they aren't, if you really know what they're for (trust me, it's like deciphering forms without knowledge of the techs without proper instruction).    Our Wed. nite class is a constant reminder of the rearrangement concept, formulation, and let's see which limb we can twist the furthest before it breaks class.  We love it, and the extensions.   They give us even more of a base to play with in the other phases




Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde


----------



## jfarnsworth (Aug 12, 2002)

Keep 'em. 
I'd like to learn more of them!
There are a lot of good ideas within them.
Jason Farnsworth


----------



## Kirk (Aug 12, 2002)

I was going to create a new thread for this, but I think this one
is appropriate.  I hear things like "Mr So-and-So teaches the
32 extension, and Mr So-and-So teaches 24" ... and I also hear
that there are 154 or 155 (depending on who ya talk to) base
techniques.  I realized that i have NO idea what extensions are.

I'd always thought that it was something like doing a lower belt
tech, for example's sake, 5 swords (my fave).  It ends with a
handsword to the back of the neck .. so you'd maybe do a knee
to the head, knife edge to the knee, foot stomp or something
to that effect, and that this tech with the "extension" had a new
name.  I think I'm wrong on this now, so can someone explain
this to me?


----------



## Klondike93 (Aug 12, 2002)

Starting at either 2nd brown or black, depending on whether your doing 32 or 24 or 16, there are Extensions for all the techniques starting with the Orange belt ones.  You would have the base move, Clutching Feathers, then you would have the extension for it, which I think is like 3 or 4 more strikes (I don't realy know it, but my instructor did it on me once).


:asian:


----------



## Kirk (Aug 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Klondike93 _
> 
> *Starting at either 2nd brown or black, depending on whether your doing 32 or 24 or 16, there are Extensions for all the techniques starting with the Orange belt ones.  You would have the base move, Clutching Feathers, then you would have the extension for it, which I think is like 3 or 4 more strikes (I don't realy know it, but my instructor did it on me once).
> 
> ...



Is it still called Clutching Feathers?


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 12, 2002)

One basic extension for Clutching Feathers resembles something I was taught, early on, about Shielding Hammer: after the right raking middle knuckle, let that strike carry you through into a left reverse bow accompanied by a right hammer/right heel-kick to the groin...then run away, 'cause if that don't work...

I don't find the extensions redundant at all: to begin with, they pushed me toward moving my feet. Among other things, they're an exploration of footwork and changing rhythms in kenpo. Certainly, the way I move has changed radically since I started really getting some of the extensions at around 1st brown.

Hope this helps.


----------



## eternalwhitebelt (Aug 12, 2002)

Clyde and Mr Robertson,

I think I understand where you are coming from.   I tend to think differently  about Kenpo when compared to others.  As far as understanding of the extensions, I think Huk, Mr Sepulveda, Mr. Speakman and your instructor Mr. Tatum, did a good job of teaching and explaing them to me.  I have been both unfortunate and lucky to have to learn from various seniors during my journey.  All of them have different views on there purpose and there usefulness.  Yes I do agree with you on some things as far as new motions and so on. However Mr. Robertson it has been my experience that students get caught up in learning the new dance steps.  My opinion is that after learning the 154 base techs. and the empty handed forms the student would be better suited to go over the material they know and simply refine it without spending that time on learning new material.  Having said that I still teach the extensions with some what of a reservation.  I try not to put my bias on the student so I do teach them the material as it was taught to me and let them then make the descision of what they want to work on.


----------



## Klondike93 (Aug 13, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> 
> *
> 
> Is it still called Clutching Feathers? *




Yes, as far as I know it's still the same name.

I had been told that the extensions are there because when doing the 32 technique system they ran out of material at 2nd brown, so they just went back and added extensions to the others starting at orange belt. They being Mr. Parker and some of his black belts. Any truth to this GD?


:asian:


----------



## Michael Billings (Aug 13, 2002)

... I teach them and practice them.  Things are found in them which allowed me to become much more comfortable with variable expansion and filling the "dead space."  No new principles, concepts, or theories which cannot be found in the basic techniques, but rather they added yet another layer of sophistication to my Kenpo.

-Michael
UKS-Texas


----------



## fanged_seamus (Aug 13, 2002)

So why are they called "extensions" and not "suffixes?"  It seems to me that if you aren't learning any new principles of motion, the extensions would go with the idea of "sentences of motion," and thus should be considered a suffix to the technique.

My other thought is that if they aren't giving you new principles of motion, why learn fixed extensions?  Why not just improvise suffixes?

Nowhere near this stuff on the learning curve, but curious nonetheless....

Tad Finnegan


----------



## headkick (Aug 13, 2002)

We don't do the extensions.  The thought here is that at that level you should be able to add or improvise your own extensions, not someone elses.   Learning more fixed motions isn't going to help too much.  Other than it looks cool.


R


----------



## Robbo (Aug 13, 2002)

> So why are they called "extensions" and not "suffixes?"



I beleive a suffix is an additional movement (1) added after the base and a extension is a series (more than 1) of movements added after the base.

Rob


----------



## satans.barber (Aug 13, 2002)

If you ask me, most of the techniques are too long anyway, I like the really short ones. Very few of the longer ones would ever be done to completion.

If you extend them, it makes the problem even worse....!

Ian.


----------



## jeffkyle (Aug 13, 2002)

> _Originally posted by satans.barber _
> 
> *If you ask me, most of the techniques are too long anyway, I like the really short ones. Very few of the longer ones would ever be done to completion.
> 
> ...




Most of the people that i know, non kenpo or MA at all for that matter, that have seen different techniques worked on people say the same thing.  "Man....that seems like a bit of overkill don't you think."  
I just laugh and tell them that we always want to make sure it will be safe so that we can run away.


----------



## Michael Billings (Aug 13, 2002)

"There is no such thing as overkill, it is overskill."  

I mis-spoke myself in saying they taught no new principles, concepts, or theories.  They introduce "en masse" things like angles of deviation, a lot more opportunities for quarter beat or broken rhythm timing, some interesting buckles, sweeps, lifting kicks, sweeping buckles or take downs, additional targets, simultaineous sweeps with stikes, more vertical knee strikes than you can shake a stick at, and lots of other "stuff", depending on the interest of the practitioner.  

You find pieces of these elsewhere, but the extesions just give you more ideas when you come to the Formulation Phase.  More grist for the mill as it were.  If you don't want to do them, no problem.  But there are some fun, creative, variations that I did not get taught with just the base techniques.  It just would not have occurred to me had I not learned the extensions.  If you want something short and effective go to Krav Maga, JKD, Shotokan, or any of the cross-training arts.  If you want it effective with limitless possibilities, try some of the extensions.  I did not really have lots of fun learning them ....  but I did have fun teaching them, as it was a very different perspective than having to memorize yet another 128 technique extensions.

Challenge yourself, try them before you discard them - judge for yourself before you take someone else's word for it and discard them.  

Just my 10 cents worth (inflation you know?)

-Michael
UKS-Texas


----------



## rmcrobertson (Aug 13, 2002)

What we're missing here is a real sense of what teaching, and learning, the martial arts depends upon. That's why we see Bruce Lee's comments about doing away with system endlessly repeated: he didn't know how to teach, and when folks argue for throwing out big chunks of the Amercian kenpo system, they're arguing for throwing out big chunks of what makes learning possible. 

Sorry, but I simply don't find the extensions repetitive. Sure, you have to bring a lot to understanding them--they won't magically bring knowledge all on their lonesome. But if you do bring something of your own to the party, they teach movement, and rhythym, that simply aren't available elsewhere in the system. They amplify, and extend, your understanding of previous techniques--they are an extension of vocabulary. 

That's what's wrong with arguing that "I prefer short techniques." I prefer avoiding trouble in the first place--how's that for short technique? maybe the extensions teach something besides technique.

Sure, there'll be folks who can figure all this stuff out on their own.I'm not one of them; for me, the extensions made grafting and some of the other, "pick and choose," material in kenpo (including monitoring, a big piece of what extensions teach) available to us mortals. I am extremely reluctant to jack around with a system that I don't altogether understand--and here, the primary reason I'm reluctant is because I do not want students shortchanged. 

My experience has been that those who know the extensions are less impoverished in movement. I have again and again seen the extensions radically alter thier ways of movement. I know for myself that the extensions had direct effects on, say, sparring. 

Thanks; interesting discussion.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 13, 2002)

> _Originally posted by satans.barber _*
> If you ask me, most of the techniques are too long anyway,
> Ian. *



The Length of the EPAK techniques are the way they are for a reason.  They teach continuity and combination motion.  The Techniques are constantly misunderstood as a "must use" on the street in their entirety.  They are there to instruct you as to "possibilities" not musts.  Most advanced Black Belts understand this concept.  

The material is there to teach us, yet we USE what we need in time of attack.  



> _Originally posted by satans.barber _*
> I like the really short ones.
> Ian. *



What each of us likes is not important.  If you like short techniques then revert to shotokan or other systems that have a "one punch one kill" attitude.  Kenpo was designed the way it is to combat this, so that if a strike or movement didn't hit its target or was blocked (by chance - I know we are always on but......) we would be skilled or trained to put together further actions to become victorious.



> _Originally posted by satans.barber _*
> Very few of the longer ones would ever be done to completion.
> Ian. *



Maybe none of them would be................ so what..... they are just training drills.......... on the street you use what you need/want ... you do not have to perform a complete training drill on someone to subdue them.  It is sure nice to have the skills rather than not.

I do agree with you as far a making the effort as short as possible yet still be effective, as one of my favorite moves is a single punch that drops the.... guy and it's over!   But reality has shown that is not always what happens, but it can be a goal, in the meantime better to .........

"Be prepared to do actions and not have to use them, than to need actions to use and not be prepared."



> _Originally posted by satans.barber _*
> If you extend them, it makes the problem even worse....!
> Ian. *



Now, what problem was that?.............

:asian:

SUB NOTE:  Many of these techniques were much longer or actually taught in their entirety at one time.  i.e., (I learned Dance of Death completely at orange belt) but as the reorganization of the curriculum came in.......  many of the techniques were cut in half (thus creating extensions) for those techniques, so they would not be so long to teach to the lower students and later on re unite the complete technique...... with it's extension.

:asian:


----------



## Kirk (Aug 13, 2002)

Even if they just ONLY reiterated concepts that were already
taught, I'm all for "beating a dead horse" in this sense.  Just
in case I missed something previously.


----------



## Seig (Aug 14, 2002)

My students probably think I am warped and twisted...I have tried to explain Black Belt Dementia.....When they ask me about overkill, I try not to always fall back on the overskill line.  I sometimes come up with something like "Kill him again, he's not dead enough!"  The reason I do this, I feel there needs to be an element of humor to our training.  I have several reasons for this.  Such as, I don't want my students intimidated by the material and above all, as their skills grow, so too should their humanity.  I too, like techniques that are short and to the point, but I also like the unending flow of motion of the longer techniques.  To clarify this, when I am sparring, some of my more talented students are too fast for me to be certain of stoppping them with one shot.  When I am working with them in a sparring session, I simply overwhelm them with anywhere from 3 to 8 different attacks in the different ranges and at different targets.  I learned to do that by practicing the longer techniques.


----------



## kenpo3631 (Aug 14, 2002)

It is my understanding that during the "Original" structure of the system...32 Technique charts, the only extensions taught were the "extensions" for Orange Belt. This is better explained at these links:

32 Technique Explanation 

Original Technique Charts 

When you got to the extensions you had the "complete" system of "Motion Kenpo" (threw MK in there to clarify). Not until after the system was divided into the 24 Technique charts did Purple and Blue Belt get extension techniques.

Did Ed Parker develop these or did his students? Also if for years the "complete" system ended with the Orange Belt extensions, do the seniors that learned the "complete" system prior to the 24 technique division not know the complete system anymore? Afterall there were additions, did they have learn something that they didn't have already?

Just curious:asian:


----------



## kenpo3631 (Aug 14, 2002)

> Not until after the system was divided into the 24 Technique charts did Purple and Blue Belt get extension techniques



Captured Leaves 
Evading The Storm 
Twirling Wings 
Snapping Twig 
Leaping Crane 
Crushing Hammer 
Circling Wing 
Calming The Storm 

Were originally part of the "Green-Orange" Extensions prior to the 24 technique chart Purple Belt extensions.:asian:


----------



## fanged_seamus (Aug 14, 2002)

Okay, so as best as I can understand it, here's the deal:

1) In the distant past, the early belt techniques had more moves
2) They were reduced in length and became the "BASE" technique
3) The remainder of the technique (the "EXTENSION") was taught at a higher belt level
4) An extension differs from suffixing because the extension is part of the ORIGINAL technique, not some random add-on

So now the question is: why weren't the reduced techniques called "abbreviations?" :shrug: 

Thanks for helping me to understand this better.  Good thread!

Tad Finnegan


----------



## Blindside (Aug 14, 2002)

> Originally posted by Headkick:  We don't do the extensions. The thought here is that at that level you should be able to add or improvise your own extensions, not someone elses. Learning more fixed motions isn't going to help too much. Other than it looks cool.



So does "Dance of Death" seem really silly to you, since there isn't a dance in the base technique? 

Lamont


----------



## RCastillo (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by jeffkyle _
> 
> *
> 
> Are you stirring too....? *



About time the Goldendragon came out of hibernation!


----------



## RCastillo (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Seig _
> 
> *My students probably think I am warped and twisted...I have tried to explain Black Belt Dementia.....When they ask me about overkill, I try not to always fall back on the overskill line.  I sometimes come up with something like "Kill him again, he's not dead enough!"  The reason I do this, I feel there needs to be an element of humor to our training.  I have several reasons for this.  Such as, I don't want my students intimidated by the material and above all, as their skills grow, so too should their humanity.  I too, like techniques that are short and to the point, but I also like the unending flow of motion of the longer techniques.  To clarify this, when I am sparring, some of my more talented students are too fast for me to be certain of stoppping them with one shot.  When I am working with them in a sparring session, I simply overwhelm them with anywhere from 3 to 8 different attacks in the different ranges and at different targets.  I learned to do that by practicing the longer techniques. *



Yes, I like what you have to say, but...........I concurr..........you are warped/ twisted!


----------



## RCastillo (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> 
> *
> 
> ...



Dang, Mr. Conatser, we both speak the same! How about that!


----------



## RCastillo (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> 
> *Even if they just ONLY reiterated concepts that were already
> taught, I'm all for "beating a dead horse" in this sense.  Just
> in case I missed something previously. *



Kirk, you're not a "Hells Angel", so you really don't have to beat any more than necessary! Dead is Dead!:rofl:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Blindside _*
> So does "Dance of Death" seem really silly to you, since there isn't a dance in the base technique? Lamont
> *



LOL Well, I don't think the technique is silly but at the lower level of teaching the technique the name sure doesn't match the technique......... lol  but you know what is really funny...... nobody ever asks about how the technique got it's name until much later.

So when you teach the complete technique they all say..... Ohhhhhhhhhhh so that's where the name came from...... Haaaaaa  I always wondered about that!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: 

:asian:


----------



## satans.barber (Aug 14, 2002)

> I like the really short ones.
> Ian.
> 
> What each of us likes is not important. If you like short techniques then revert to shotokan or other systems that have a "one punch one kill" attitude. Kenpo was designed the way it is to combat this, so that if a strike or movement didn't hit its target or was blocked (by chance - I know we are always on but......) we would be skilled or trained to put together further actions to become victorious



All I meant was, that if most of the lengthy techniques are too long to be used in full, but we can use little flurries and combinations out of them, then the three of four move techniques are analagous to these; but can still be used in their entirity, that's why I like them.

That certainly doesn't mean I want to run off and join a one punch Shotokan club TYVM, and I don't think I really implied that either!

The shorter things are,  the more easily remembered they are and the more digestible they are, which is why we write in paragraphs, have versus in songs etc.. I just think that when some of the techs are fully extended, it stops being as useful and turns into a performace, but that might just be a reflection on the way I learn as an individual.

...mumble mumble Shotokan my **** mumble mumble</jim royal>...

Ian.


----------



## Blindside (Aug 14, 2002)

> LOL Well, I don't think the technique is silly but at the lower level of teaching the technique the name sure doesn't match the technique......... lol but you know what is really funny...... nobody ever asks about how the technique got it's name until much later.



I'm a Tracy guy, so I got to learn the whole tech as a purple belt, I think it qualifies as the longest tech in the system.  Where does the base tech end in AK, after the handsword to the groin?

Lamont


----------



## Kirk (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by RCastillo _
> 
> *
> 
> Kirk, you're not a "Hells Angel", so you really don't have to beat any more than necessary! Dead is Dead!:rofl: *



How do you know?  Why, I was a bouncer at the Rolling Stones'
first farewell concert!  Errr ... well I coulda been .. if I wasn't 6 at 
the time


----------



## ProfessorKenpo (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Blindside _
> 
> *
> 
> ...



The longest techniques, including extension,  are Destructive Twins and Obscure Sword.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Blindside _*
> Where does the base tech end in AK, after the handsword to the groin?Lamont
> *



Yes

:asian:


----------



## Blindside (Aug 14, 2002)

> The longest techniques, including extension, are Destructive Twins and Obscure Sword.



Hi Clyde,

Hmm, I should have indicated Tracy, not EPAK.  Though my knowledge of the Tracy system is somewhat truncated compared to someone taught from the "official" (whatever that means in the Tracy world) curriculum.  

Salute,

Lamont


----------



## Kirk (Aug 14, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> 
> *
> 
> ...



Weird .. in my school, we're taught that after the handsword,
you do a takedown by grabbing the achile's pulling back, and
pushing with the shoulder. After the attacker is down, you back
knuckle the "Jimmie" (thanks Clyde) and backfist his thigh .. hold
the knee and ankle, through it to the right as you cross out.
(was told to "dance on  his groin")

I saw Inosanto do Dance Of Death where he stomped all over
the dude's head a couple times ... just my own personal 
assumption at the time was that the head stomping was the 
extension.


----------



## headkick (Aug 15, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Blindside _
> 
> *
> 
> ...



Yes it does.  Has far as I know, that's the only one named for the full technique, with extension.  That being said, I can make the short version of DoD work pretty well, thank you.  I'm a horrible dancer


----------



## headkick (Aug 15, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Blindside _
> 
> *
> 
> ...



One story to relate about that.   A few years back at the John Sepulveda Spirit Camp held in Cascade, Idaho, the BB's were doing a technique line.  When DoD came up, Mr. Steve Moore from Boise did the full technique wonderfully to great applause.  Then Mr. Larry Beltramo got up there and the when the punch started he threw a front thrust kick to the sternum.  The crowd went nuts.  That was his Dance of Death for that day.

R


----------



## Roland (Aug 15, 2002)

There are two handswords to the groin, first one, while he is still standing, is also known as a Ridgehand, the other is your Knife or Sword hand after the take down & back knuckle!


----------



## Michael Billings (Aug 15, 2002)

... I count 2 handswords and one reverse handsword.  Don't forget the last handsword to the cervicle vertibrae (back of the neck)after the left back stomp to the right kidney, before you "dance" back across him shovel kicking and stomping as you go.

Also, Circling Windmills seems to be a lengthy sorta technique.  Used to hate it, now I love it.  Bits and pieces can be utilized in a confined space or where people are the environmental considerations ... i.e. the local pub being sorta crowded tonight.

-Michael
UKS-Texas


----------



## kenpo3631 (Aug 21, 2002)

A prime example



> Circling Windmills seems to be a lengthy sorta technique





> Bits and pieces can be utilized in a confined space or where people are the environmental considerations



That's the key to any of these techniques..at least I think so. The "motion kenpo" techniques are nothing more than basics backed by principles. We can stop the flow or change flow any time. We can alter it, abbreviate it, prefix, suffix, add, rearrange and delete as we see fit. So all this stuff about  "wow that technique is lengthy" could stand to be looked at more closely. *MAYBE* it's teaching us more than how do just shred our attacker 

I think if the "lengthy" techniques are examined in that light, we all might appreciate them more.:asian:


----------

