# The Commercial System



## MJS (Jan 13, 2008)

It seems whenever there is talk about the commercial system, it seems as if there are things that are missing, compared to the original version.  Now, in another thread here about the neutral bow, Doc said:

"Actually sir, that's true only on a limited basis. One of the things promoted in the commercial system is the concept of tailoring to allow flexibility for short term results. This is a major departure from "Old World Concepts" that taught for the long haul, over quick skills that diminish quickly as well. The business requires this perspective as customers are looking for immediate results, sometimes to their own physical detriment. Back, hip, shoulder, rotator cuff, elbow, and knee problems abound."

Now, why, if someone is looking for effective self defense, would someone want to 'water down' so to speak, the material?  Did the Tracys do this?  Do the Kajukenbo schools do this?  Do any of the other Kenpo instructors out there such as Larry Tatum do this?  IMHO, it seems to me that there are a handful, if that, of people that do not water anything down.  Doc, it seems that you are in that handful. 

So..at this time, I'd like to open this up for discussion.  I'd like to hear from all of the Kenpo arts, ie: Parker, Tracy, Kaju, so don't be shy...please post your comments. 

Mike


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 13, 2008)

having only studied the Tracy system, and never studied under any other lineage of kenpo, I really don't have much to say.  I cannot point out any comparisons because I simply havent experienced anything else to compare with.  Not sure where this will go...


----------



## pete (Jan 13, 2008)

one man's water is another man's wine.  drink up drink up, let me fill your cup...


----------



## Monadnock (Jan 13, 2008)

Here's a thought: they are ALL commercial systems.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 13, 2008)

MJS said:


> It seems whenever there is talk about the commercial system, it seems as if there are things that are missing, compared to the original version. Now, in another thread here about the neutral bow, Doc said:
> 
> "Actually sir, that's true only on a limited basis. One of the things promoted in the commercial system is the concept of tailoring to allow flexibility for short term results. This is a major departure from "Old World Concepts" that taught for the long haul, over quick skills that diminish quickly as well. The business requires this perspective as customers are looking for immediate results, sometimes to their own physical detriment. Back, hip, shoulder, rotator cuff, elbow, and knee problems abound."
> 
> ...


 
Well, Kajukenbo isn't the same art as EPAK (commercial or otherwise) so it's not a matter of it being watered down or not. Sijo Emperado was Prof. Chow's first black belt and broke off to group with four others to form the original nucleus of Kajukenbo in 1950 before Ed Parker even got to the mainland in 1953. Ed Parker's personal Kenpo isn't the original Kenpo Karate that he first taught either if I remember Doc's earlier posts correctly, but rather his development of Kenpo resulting from many influences and his own personal innovations over the years. It just wasn't readily packaged and sold.


----------



## Hand Sword (Jan 13, 2008)

Generally speaking, I don't feel that "Tailoring" is a weakness. Are there physical corrections that can and should be made at times---ABSOLUTELY! But, here, I refer to the term generally. I feel that it's something that is unavoidable. As the art becomes more and more one's own, through practice and experiences, certain tailorings are made intentionally, or unintentionally. We all have certain preferences, likes, dislikes, ertc.... I would also say, that tailoring has gone on since the very first practitoner, and will always continue to do so. Even Mr. Parker, Emperado. etc.. tailored what they were taught to fit them more. I would rather call it "shortcuts", instead of tailoring.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 13, 2008)

Monadnock said:


> Here's a thought: they are ALL commercial systems.



And some use "we are not commercial" as a marketing gimic


----------



## Doc (Jan 14, 2008)

MJS said:


> It seems whenever there is talk about the commercial system, it seems as if there are things that are missing, compared to the original version.  Now, in another thread here about the neutral bow, Doc said:
> 
> "Actually sir, that's true only on a limited basis. One of the things promoted in the commercial system is the concept of tailoring to allow flexibility for short term results. This is a major departure from "Old World Concepts" that taught for the long haul, over quick skills that diminish quickly as well. The business requires this perspective as customers are looking for immediate results, sometimes to their own physical detriment. Back, hip, shoulder, rotator cuff, elbow, and knee problems abound."
> 
> ...



Well the idea that some "do original, nothing left out kenpo," is incorrect as well. There isn't anything left out of Parker's commercial art that you'll find in Tracy's or other Parker Lineage's. kenpo wasn't developed to that extent that some think. Parker chose to allow students and teachers alike to express the material more conceptually though re-arrangement concepts and personal tailoring. Others chose to count every variation as a different entity or technique. Same thing. All martial arts engage in tailoring at some point. What made the commercial system unique is it put tailoring in the hands of students. Traditional arts mandate a strict study of basics and develops specific skills and knowledge, allowing the student to reach a significant level of competence, (usually well beyond black belt) before beginning a personal tailoring process based on a now substantial knowledge base. Therefore a student knows what is reasonable tailoring, and what tailoring is not acceptable. Tailoring for unsupported knowledge personal preferences alone just dilutes the process of the unskilled, but it allows for quick promotions and satisfies students desires and therefore student retention. In the business students are empowered to create a feeling of satisfaction with the product, through a measure of participation in their personal development.

Parker was developing different versions of Kenpo until he passed. One of those versions was motion based, and it was the chosen commercial product because it didn't require him to be in a school teaching strict basics or concepts. He also worked concurrently on other versions as well, including versions that had some cross-pollination through the evolutionary process.

What Parker did do is remove the "Control Manipulations" from the strict structure of the motion based structure, because it was not user friendly. It required a measure of pain, learning to fall, and it required a knowledgeable hands on teacher for every aspect. Something the business couldn't support, as the bulk of mature students didn't want to "wrestle." There is a reason most manipulation schools are in clubs and gyms and are only semi-commercial. The numbers are low. He also, after making reference to "nerve strikes" in his first book, removed all references in subsequent writings, as being too dangerous for commercial applications in schools full of, and dominated by teenage adolescents and children.

But Parker was very clever. Although he removed these things, he always hinted at their existence through the material. In fact 75% of the named techniques in his commercial system require significant manipulations, even though most teach them without that consideration. "Twisted Twig" is an attack of a wrist-flex and throw. "Entangled wing" is another variation as well on the theme. All of these things can be taught at the knowledge level of the teacher. Of course that means some variations are better than others that address the material realistically over a "move first" mentality found in defending against punches. It also means on one level, you have to spend as much time learning the attacks as the defenses. You have to learn a wrist-flex throw attack, to learn how to defend against it with a training partner.

The notion that all the material is commercial is not true. The Kenpo material based on "motion" was specifically designed, created, and built from the ground up to be a commercial business model based on a dance studio concept. There are those however who do not teach it "commercially and choose to teach for the sheer enjoyment for little reward. However, the material is still commercially based in the Ed parker business of self defense studio proliferation, and therefore is a commercial system.

There are some that suggest that the declaration of being "non-commercial" is itself a business ploy and sales technique. The test for this is when someone says they are non-commercial, check to see if they advertise their school locations, and whether or not the school is open to the public and invites and accepts everyone who may stumble upon it. Of course they could still be teaching commercial material. However if the material is not based on the commercial version of Kenpo, and is not open to the public, and is unconcerned about numbers and only the quality of the product, it's a good bet they are indeed non-commercial. It isn't hard to tell when someone is in the "business" and when they're not. Call them up and ask their hours and how much it costs. If you can't find them or get them on the phone, they probably aren't fishing for business.


----------



## Jdokan (Jan 14, 2008)

Now, why, if someone is looking for effective self defense, would someone want to 'water down' so to speak, the material? 

So..at this time, I'd like to open this up for discussion. I'd like to hear from all of the Kenpo arts, ie: Parker, Tracy, Kaju, so don't be shy...please post your comments. 

Mike[/quote
To comment on why water down...I think first we have to ask is this done for a specific reason. 1) Is this a self-defense course? If so what is the objective? A 6-8 week program that is geared at giving the customer an understanding of basic self-defense...is a watered down program by design and as such is fine...From what I've heard reported from most of the Ken/mpo systems is each founder tends to increase the the requirements....
From my own experience I seen more material added... but I've also seen things watered down from a blood and guts respect...
We're not really teaching for the same reasons that the early Instructors did...survival techniques....Today's client is looking for the "health club" something that most can discuss over martini's...I think if you told them that broken bones are inevitable most would never sign up....So is watering down something done...I guess it must be....
How many instructors today put their students through the same physical requirements that they went through themselves??? I'm sure there are still the Blood, Sweat & Tears classes out there but by the large part...most are doing what they have to remain profitable....
IMO...


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

Doc said:


> The test for this is when someone says they are non-commercial, check to see if they advertise their school locations, and whether or not the school is open to the public and invites and accepts everyone who may stumble upon it.



Again, I've seen schools that do all of that as their sales gimic.  They won't call it that, but that's what it is.  A way to attract students based on getting them to believe they are joining something "special."  We'll call it the "Secret clubhouse" marketing method. Working off the belief that people want to join the "secret club" and instilling a sense of superiority to all the non-members.

In many cases this is almost a dangerous, cult like form of recruitment.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> Again, I've seen schools that do all of that as their sales gimic. They won't call it that, but that's what it is. A way to attract students based on getting them to believe they are joining something "special." We'll call it the "Secret clubhouse" marketing method. Working off the belief that people want to join the "secret club" and instilling a sense of superiority to all the non-members.
> 
> In many cases this is almost a dangerous, cult like form of recruitment.


 
Um, I think that's very rare. Usually you can tell by a couple of things the main one being if the instructor is making a living teaching the martial arts. If they are, there's a good chance that they are watering down the material or the requirements or both. If they are charging a fee, but clearly not enough to live on, then they are probably delivering good instruction. I don't think it's a marketing ploy ala a TKD "Black Belt Club" that you get to join for 50 bucks a month more and you get to feel like you're part of the "inner sanctum". 

Most of us know who the serious practitioners are out there in the Kenpo and Kajukenbo world and who the McDojos are.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

Both bood instructors and bad instructors can run either big schools or small schools. Size is not a determing factor.

I believe very strongly in a open school, one that allows anyone to come in and work out.  Closed door schools are in my mind a very strong sign of poor instruction.  There are two basically two types, or extremes in this category.  One is a competitive team, here it is understandable.  The other is more of a ego driven issue, where the instructor has some big but questionable claims, or someone above him does.  They claim to have inherited something secret, that everyone else doesn't know about.  These guys are using martial arts as a source for a cult leader like ego boast.  Not a healthy training environment.

Financial success does not equal poor instruction.  Nor does a instructor putting up his own cash to keep the doors open equal good instruction.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> Both bood instructors and bad instructors can run either big schools or small schools. Size is not a determing factor.
> 
> I believe very strongly in a open school, one that allows anyone to come in and work out. Closed door schools are in my mind a very strong sign of poor instruction. There are two basically two types, or extremes in this category. One is a competitive team, here it is understandable. The other is more of a ego driven issue, where the instructor has some big but questionable claims, or someone above him does. They claim to have inherited something secret, that everyone else doesn't know about. These guys are using martial arts as a source for a cult leader like ego boast. Not a healthy training environment.
> 
> Financial success does not equal poor instruction. Nor does a instructor putting up his own cash to keep the doors open equal good instruction.


 
It goes to the motives of the closed door policy. If it's to ensure serious students because the instructor is only interested in teaching those that are serious, then I don't see anything sinister about that.

In most cases, the quality of instruction is in direct proportion to how much they need that money to support themselves. If you have an example of someone making a lot of money teaching that still delivers quality instruction and doesn't water down the requirements, I'd be interested in hearing who they are.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> It goes to the motives of the closed door policy. If it's to ensure serious students because the instructor is only interested in teaching those that are serious, then I don't see anything sinister about that.
> 
> In most cases, the quality of instruction is in direct proportion to how much they need that money to support themselves. If you have an example of someone making a lot of money teaching that still delivers quality instruction and doesn't water down the requirements, I'd be interested in hearing who they are.



Most gyms that have big name pro's attached to them are going to have high fees, and full time coaches that make their living training people.  If you want to train at Team Quest, or the Gracie academy, it's gonna cost a little.

Even if you don't like full contact styles, there are guys like Ernie Reyes.  You might not agree what he does, but he is damn good at it, and I'm sure he charges for it.

Or for a more self-defence orientated school I would imagine folks like Dan Inostanto and Tony Blauer aren't cheap.

Hell Bruce Lee was a expensive guy to get training from, and he was pretty good at what he did.  Didn't Ed Parker make a living teaching as well?

I really don't get this assumption that so many people have that people want poor training and flock to the gyms that provide it.  There are a lot of people that want good training, and are willing to pay for it.  There are also a lot of people that want after school programs and are willing to pay for those.

But you can run a commercially successful school AND teach good quality martial arts.


----------



## LawDog (Jan 14, 2008)

You will pay for what you purchase,
*Purchase a membership into a quality school,
You could become what you wanted to be,
*Purchase membership into a romper room type of school,
You could become what they are.
:supcool:


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2008)

Monadnock said:


> Here's a thought: they are ALL commercial systems.


Vely inelestink.
Sean


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> Most gyms that have big name pro's attached to them are going to have high fees, and full time coaches that make their living training people. If you want to train at Team Quest, or the Gracie academy, it's gonna cost a little.
> 
> Even if you don't like full contact styles, there are guys like Ernie Reyes. You might not agree what he does, but he is damn good at it, and I'm sure he charges for it.
> 
> ...


 
Well, if you're a world famous martial artist and live in a large city, you can probably make a living at it and still keep up your quality. Ed Parker created the commercial Kenpo Doc speaks of because he wasn't making any money doing the other stuff mentioned. Bruce Lee taught movie stars and was teaching in a culture 40 years ago when there weren't as many McDojos for folks to choose from. Now movie stars like Christian Slater train at the USSD in Brentwood and think they are learning something of value.

The reason people flock to the McDojos is because they want to learn something about self defense, but really don't want to put in the time and effort it takes to master something real. People will pay good money to feel good about themselves and the McDojos are like the Martial Art equivelant of Pectoral Implants for men who don't want to do push-ups or bench-presses., i.e., and expensive short cut that looks good on the surface.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Well, if you're a world famous martial artist and live in a large city, you can probably make a living at it and still keep up your quality. Ed Parker created the commercial Kenpo Doc speaks of because he wasn't making any money doing the other stuff mentioned. Bruce Lee taught movie stars and was teaching in a culture 40 years ago when there weren't as many McDojos for folks to choose from. Now movie stars like Christian Slater train at the USSD in Brentwood and think they are learning something of value.
> 
> The reason people flock to the McDojos is because they want to learn something about self defense, but really don't want to put in the time and effort it takes to master something real. People will pay good money to feel good about themselves and the McDojos are like the Martial Art equivelant of Pectoral Implants for men who don't want to do push-ups or bench-presses., i.e., and expensive short cut that looks good on the surface.


Another reason may be that that school was closest... Just as with most of your students.
Sean


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

So are closed door systems, in fact I'd say they are better at making people feel they are learning something super. 

As for the schools, you asked for examples, would you prefer I list schools that you've not heard of?  Don't see what good that would do to be honest.  Point is the same, a good instructor can teach good material and  make a living doing so.  Takes a combination of not just teaching, but also business skills.

This commercial vs "secret" is a faulty split, but if that's what you are after check out the back of a martial arts magazine.  "Secret style only I know because I awas the only one worthy and learnt it in a secret room with no witnesses" is a fairly widely used marketing scheme, usually associated with frauds.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Touch Of Death said:


> Another reason may be that that school was closest... Just as with most of your students.
> Sean


 
Not even close. There are a half dozen TKD schools within a 1/2 mile radius of our school. there's a karate class that uses the same facility on different days of the week. There's a Red Dragon School across the street. etc. etc. all of whom have larger enrollments and charge more money.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> So are closed door systems, in fact I'd say they are better at making people feel they are learning something super.
> 
> As for the schools, you asked for examples, would you prefer I list schools that you've not heard of? Don't see what good that would do to be honest. Point is the same, a good instructor can teach good material and make a living doing so. Takes a combination of not just teaching, but also business skills.
> 
> This commercial vs "secret" is a faulty split, but if that's what you are after check out the back of a martial arts magazine. "Secret style only I know because I awas the only one worthy and learnt it in a secret room with no witnesses" is a fairly widely used marketing scheme, usually associated with frauds.


Secretive and fraudulent do not need to go together.
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Not even close. There are a half dozen TKD schools within a 1/2 mile radius of our school. there's a karate class that uses the same facility on different days of the week. There's a Red Dragon School across the street. etc. etc. all of whom have larger enrollments and charge more money.


Sorry; close and affordable.
sean


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> So are closed door systems, in fact I'd say they are better at making people feel they are learning something super.
> 
> As for the schools, you asked for examples, would you prefer I list schools that you've not heard of? Don't see what good that would do to be honest. Point is the same, a good instructor can teach good material and make a living doing so. Takes a combination of not just teaching, but also business skills.
> 
> This commercial vs "secret" is a faulty split, but if that's what you are after check out the back of a martial arts magazine. "Secret style only I know because I awas the only one worthy and learnt it in a secret room with no witnesses" is a fairly widely used marketing scheme, usually associated with frauds.


 
If they're advertising in Black Belt, I doubt they're really that exclusive.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Touch Of Death said:


> Sorry; close and affordable.
> sean


 
Well, most of those that enroll(85-95%) drop out after watching their first sparring session or Kiai drill. They see that we do our techniques with contact and that the instructor or his assistants actually correct form and technique instead of allowing it to be sloppy and they simply leave and join something else. They don't even wait for the end of the six week session, they see the things I mentioned etc. and just never come back. Tough to make a living that way.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> If they're advertising in Black Belt, I doubt they're really that exclusive.




Nope, it's a matter of marketing language.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Well, most of those that enroll(85-95%) drop out after watching their first sparring session or Kiai drill. They see that we do our techniques with contact and that the instructor or his assistants actually correct form and technique instead of allowing it to be sloppy and they simply leave and join something else. They don't even wait for the end of the six week session, they see the things I mentioned etc. and just never come back. Tough to make a living that way.



Are you sure it's because you make contact?  Pretty much everyone that walks into my class comes in fully expecting contact, and would probably walk out if we started doing no contact stuff.

Although a kiai drill, depending on what that means, would likely get me to leave a school.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Well, most of those that enroll(85-95%) drop out after watching their first sparring session or Kiai drill. They see that we do our techniques with contact and that the instructor or his assistants actually correct form and technique instead of allowing it to be sloppy and they simply leave and join something else. They don't even wait for the end of the six week session, they see the things I mentioned etc. and just never come back. Tough to make a living that way.


"Kimo" has similar stories of Soldiers quiting after the first lesson in Hawaii.
Sean


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> Are you sure it's because you make contact? Pretty much everyone that walks into my class comes in fully expecting contact, and would probably walk out if we started doing no contact stuff.
> 
> Although a kiai drill, depending on what that means, would likely get me to leave a school.


 
It's where you stand in a horse stance while the entire class takes turns punching you in the stomach.

So now we're talking about your school? Ok, what do you teach and are you able to support yourself at it?


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Jan 14, 2008)

what is the main question whether tailoring the system is good or bad? or if tailoring the system is considered watering it down?

B


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

Nope, but my business skills suck.  Tried it, did so for about 4-years, made some big mistakes business wise and decided I was better off not being self-employed.  Holidays where non-existant and never having a free evening where not fun.

So unless there is a sudden demand for martial arts durring regular working hours, I don't think I'd want too ever go back to that.

And your drill would definately loose me as a student, not because its hard, but because I don't think that sort of training has any benefit, nor is it any fun.  If you want to hit me, then glove up and spar.


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Well, Kajukenbo isn't the same art as EPAK (commercial or otherwise) so it's not a matter of it being watered down or not. Sijo Emperado was Prof. Chow's first black belt and broke off to group with four others to form the original nucleus of Kajukenbo in 1950 before Ed Parker even got to the mainland in 1953. Ed Parker's personal Kenpo isn't the original Kenpo Karate that he first taught either if I remember Doc's earlier posts correctly, but rather his development of Kenpo resulting from many influences and his own personal innovations over the years. It just wasn't readily packaged and sold.


 
Hey Dan!  Thanks for the reply.  Yes, I see what you're saying.  I was just using Kaju as an example, along with the other two.  If you notice, there always seems to be this 'difference' between EPAK and say the SL4 that Doc teaches.  I was just curious to see if there was that 'difference' amongst the various Kaju schools.  In other words, GM Harper and Prof. Bishop both teach the original method correct?  If thats the case, are they both teaching the same or would one fall into the 'commercial or motion' description that we often see with Parker material?


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Hand Sword said:


> Generally speaking, I don't feel that "Tailoring" is a weakness. Are there physical corrections that can and should be made at times---ABSOLUTELY! But, here, I refer to the term generally. I feel that it's something that is unavoidable. As the art becomes more and more one's own, through practice and experiences, certain tailorings are made intentionally, or unintentionally. We all have certain preferences, likes, dislikes, ertc.... I would also say, that tailoring has gone on since the very first practitoner, and will always continue to do so. Even Mr. Parker, Emperado. etc.. tailored what they were taught to fit them more. I would rather call it "shortcuts", instead of tailoring.


 
Well, this is the same line of thinking that I was using.   Teach everyone the same techniques, the same way, however, allow for 'tailoring', 'shortcuts' or whatever other words we want to use, so we can adapt the moves for the various height, reach advantages/disadvantages, etc that everyone has.  I mean, can it be expected that a 5'7, 110lb female and a 6'5, 220lb male are going to move the same, have the same reach, etc.?  I'd think that some changes would have to be made.


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Doc said:


> Well the idea that some "do original, nothing left out kenpo," is incorrect as well. There isn't anything left out of Parker's commercial art that you'll find in Tracy's or other Parker Lineage's. kenpo wasn't developed to that extent that some think. Parker chose to allow students and teachers alike to express the material more conceptually though re-arrangement concepts and personal tailoring. Others chose to count every variation as a different entity or technique. Same thing. All martial arts engage in tailoring at some point. What made the commercial system unique is it put tailoring in the hands of students. Traditional arts mandate a strict study of basics and develops specific skills and knowledge, allowing the student to reach a significant level of competence, (usually well beyond black belt) before beginning a personal tailoring process based on a now substantial knowledge base. Therefore a student knows what is reasonable tailoring, and what tailoring is not acceptable. Tailoring for unsupported knowledge personal preferences alone just dilutes the process of the unskilled, but it allows for quick promotions and satisfies students desires and therefore student retention. In the business students are empowered to create a feeling of satisfaction with the product, through a measure of participation in their personal development.


 
Thanks Doc, for another wel-thought out reply.   Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but as I safe to interpret the above as, tailoring is ok, but it would be better if the students were not the sole ones responsible for it, but instead the instructors?  

Out of curiosity, how do you address the 'tailoring' idea at your school?  Do you adjust the tech. for the person or are all of the students, regardless of physical differences, applying the moves in the same way?




> What Parker did do is remove the "Control Manipulations" from the strict structure of the motion based structure, because it was not user friendly. It required a measure of pain, learning to fall, and it required a knowledgeable hands on teacher for every aspect. Something the business couldn't support, as the bulk of mature students didn't want to "wrestle." There is a reason most manipulation schools are in clubs and gyms and are only semi-commercial. The numbers are low. He also, after making reference to "nerve strikes" in his first book, removed all references in subsequent writings, as being too dangerous for commercial applications in schools full of, and dominated by teenage adolescents and children.


 
I'm going to assume that SL4 still contains the control manipulations?  I'm wondering if they still could have been kept and required of every teacher, however, the teacher would only teach them to adults, rather than kids.  Its a shame that it was removed, as it seems to me that it is a very important aspect of the arts.  Did the Tracys have this and do they carry this concept on?




> But Parker was very clever. Although he removed these things, he always hinted at their existence through the material. In fact 75% of the named techniques in his commercial system require significant manipulations, even though most teach them without that consideration. "Twisted Twig" is an attack of a wrist-flex and throw. "Entangled wing" is another variation as well on the theme. All of these things can be taught at the knowledge level of the teacher. Of course that means some variations are better than others that address the material realistically over a "move first" mentality found in defending against punches. It also means on one level, you have to spend as much time learning the attacks as the defenses. You have to learn a wrist-flex throw attack, to learn how to defend against it with a training partner.


 
Agreed.  Kind of hard to defend against something if someone doesnt even know how to apply the initial attack. 





> The notion that all the material is commercial is not true. The Kenpo material based on "motion" was specifically designed, created, and built from the ground up to be a commercial business model based on a dance studio concept. There are those however who do not teach it "commercially and choose to teach for the sheer enjoyment for little reward. However, the material is still commercially based in the Ed parker business of self defense studio proliferation, and therefore is a commercial system.
> 
> There are some that suggest that the declaration of being "non-commercial" is itself a business ploy and sales technique. The test for this is when someone says they are non-commercial, check to see if they advertise their school locations, and whether or not the school is open to the public and invites and accepts everyone who may stumble upon it. Of course they could still be teaching commercial material. However if the material is not based on the commercial version of Kenpo, and is not open to the public, and is unconcerned about numbers and only the quality of the product, it's a good bet they are indeed non-commercial. It isn't hard to tell when someone is in the "business" and when they're not. Call them up and ask their hours and how much it costs. If you can't find them or get them on the phone, they probably aren't fishing for business.


 
Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> And your drill would definately loose me as a student, not because its hard, but because I don't think that sort of training has any benefit, nor is it any fun. If you want to hit me, then glove up and spar.


 
Oke Doke.


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Jdokan said:


> Now, why, if someone is looking for effective self defense, would someone want to 'water down' so to speak, the material?
> 
> So..at this time, I'd like to open this up for discussion. I'd like to hear from all of the Kenpo arts, ie: Parker, Tracy, Kaju, so don't be shy...please post your comments.
> 
> ...


 
And that, IMHO, is sad.  If someone wants the health club feel, let them join a gym.  I have other methods of getting in shape, so while the arts to provide a good cardio workout and the chance to make friends, that is not my sole purpose for training.  My goals are SD.  In essence the serious minded SD student suffers in the long run, because the demand for 'tea time' is greater.  

Sure, if the classes resulted in bruises and extreme contact every time, chances are you may face a lawsuit and enrollment would drop.  But, while a change in the contact from the old days to current is necessary, people should still get what they pay for.  If you're advertising effective SD, then part of that package is contact.  IMO, better to prep the SD minded person in the dojo, where mistakes can be made and corrected, rather than if they need to call upon their material, they are in for a surprise.


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> Again, I've seen schools that do all of that as their sales gimic. They won't call it that, but that's what it is. A way to attract students based on getting them to believe they are joining something "special." We'll call it the "Secret clubhouse" marketing method. Working off the belief that people want to join the "secret club" and instilling a sense of superiority to all the non-members.
> 
> In many cases this is almost a dangerous, cult like form of recruitment.


 
Its interesting because I've had some of my very best sessions in a garage or backyard, conducted by people who have knowledge and skill, that I've met thru the martial art circles, yet they don't advertise, but you're walking out of there knowing that what you're learning works.   No gimmicks, no BS, just so good old fashion kick *** training.


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Well, most of those that enroll(85-95%) drop out after watching their first sparring session or Kiai drill. They see that we do our techniques with contact and that the instructor or his assistants actually correct form and technique instead of allowing it to be sloppy and they simply leave and join something else. They don't even wait for the end of the six week session, they see the things I mentioned etc. and just never come back. Tough to make a living that way.


 
And that is the way it should be IMO.  I just don't understand why people would want to join a school and expect no contact.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 14, 2008)

MJS said:


> Its interesting because I've had some of my very best sessions in a garage or backyard, conducted by people who have knowledge and skill, that I've met thru the martial art circles, yet they don't advertise, but you're walking out of there knowing that what you're learning works.   No gimmicks, no BS, just so good old fashion kick *** training.



Me too 

Of course it's never claimed as non-commercial or special in any way, just training.  What makes those sessions great is the friendly / laid back atmosphere and the openness.


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> Are you sure it's because you make contact? Pretty much everyone that walks into my class comes in fully expecting contact, and would probably walk out if we started doing no contact stuff.


 
They walk in because they already know and accept the fact that what you're teaching, ie BJJ, sub grappling, involves contact.  A good portion of people that I have seen are timid flowers, grossed out at the thought of anything violent.  I've gone over some grappling in classes that I used to teach.  Amazing at the number of uncomfortable people.  I guess those types assume that they will never have to get in close contact and touch anyone and will be capable of throwing someone across the room with their mind. 



> Although a kiai drill, depending on what that means, would likely get me to leave a school.


 
Don't worry Andrew, I don't think you'll see any LARPing at a Kajukenbo school.


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> And your drill would definately loose me as a student, not because its hard, but because I don't think that sort of training has any benefit, nor is it any fun. If you want to hit me, then glove up and spar.


 
I'd say its more conditioning than anything else.  This is done without any protective gear.  Interestingly enough, I watched in full today, the Fight Quest Kyokushin Karate episode.  I saw that same type of drill/conditioning and those guys are certainly no stranger to contact.  I also found it interesting to hear two MMA guys repeatedly comment that the training was tough and kicking their ***.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 14, 2008)

MJS said:


> Hey Dan! Thanks for the reply. Yes, I see what you're saying. I was just using Kaju as an example, along with the other two. If you notice, there always seems to be this 'difference' between EPAK and say the SL4 that Doc teaches. I was just curious to see if there was that 'difference' amongst the various Kaju schools. In other words, GM Harper and Prof. Bishop both teach the original method correct? If thats the case, are they both teaching the same or would one fall into the 'commercial or motion' description that we often see with Parker material?


 
there might be slight differences/ppreferences between teachers etc., but no, there's no commercial Kajukenbo.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 14, 2008)

MJS said:


> Don't worry Andrew, I don't think you'll see any LARPing at a Kajukenbo school.


 
No I do not think we need to worry about that do we MJS!


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 14, 2008)

MJS said:


> I'd say its more conditioning than anything else. This is done without any protective gear. Interestingly enough, I watched in full today, the Fight Quest Kyokushin Karate episode. I saw that same type of drill/conditioning and those guys are certainly no stranger to contact. I also found it interesting to hear two MMA guys repeatedly comment that the training was tough and kicking their ***.


 
It was a good episode and you are right that they were working hard and that the Kyokushinkai training was pretty darn tough.


----------



## MJS (Jan 15, 2008)

Folks,

You will notice some posts missing from this thread.  They have been split and moved here.  The original purpose of this thread was to talk about the 'commercial' Kenpo system and whether or not anything was removed, why it was removed, etc.

The side discussion that was taking place was going good, so I wanted to give it its own thread, so that discussion can continue to grow.

Thanks,

Mike


----------



## kaizasosei (Jan 15, 2008)

i'm not sure about kempo exactly, but i heard that mr.parker took some things out because many students of his were youngsters that could have gotten themselves into trouble.  same as they say about karate of okinawa.
things like chops to the back of the neck, throat, dangerous pressurepoint attacks, and brutal bone breaks i can see might get rounded off a bit.


----------



## MJS (Jan 15, 2008)

kaizasosei said:


> i'm not sure about kempo exactly, but i heard that mr.parker took some things out because many students of his were youngsters that could have gotten themselves into trouble. same as they say about karate of okinawa.
> things like chops to the back of the neck, throat, dangerous pressurepoint attacks, and brutal bone breaks i can see might get rounded off a bit.


 
Thats fine to do for a child, holding off until they're mature enough for that.  However, what about the adults?


----------



## kaizasosei (Jan 15, 2008)

well, if they're adults, i guess you can hit 'em.   :wink2:

?? i don't know that much more than i stated.


----------



## Blindside (Jan 15, 2008)

kaizasosei said:


> i'm not sure about kempo exactly, but i heard that mr.parker took some things out because many students of his were youngsters that could have gotten themselves into trouble. same as they say about karate of okinawa.
> things like chops to the back of the neck, throat, dangerous pressurepoint attacks, and brutal bone breaks i can see might get rounded off a bit.


 
The yellow belt curricullum originally started off as being a "kids belt," the adult curricullum started at orange.  The first technique has a kick to the groin and the chop to the neck, as does the third, so I'm going to go ahead and say that this particular claim is a little odd.


----------



## Doc (Jan 16, 2008)

Blindside said:


> The yellow belt curricullum originally started off as being a "kids belt," the adult curricullum started at orange.  The first technique has a kick to the groin and the chop to the neck, as does the third, so I'm going to go ahead and say that this particular claim is a little odd.



Yeah, you're correct. This perspective suggests Parker took out "chops to the back of the neck," but left in fingers to the eyes, and hand-swords to the throat. 

For the record, Parker didn't "take anything out," as much as he adjusted the material based on its method of teaching, and business plan. His mandate was quick self defense skills for the masses. The business plan was from a dance studio. The methodology utilized would be an expanded version of most women's self defense courses. 

Take the quick skills in a short course that utilizes soft tissue assaults, stomping people when they are down, etc and expand it into a "style" of kenpo. Remember it is  *A "style"*of kenpo, it is not representative of * ALL* of Parker's Kenpo, or the totality of his knowledge. 

Anyone who knew him closely will tell you that Parker's skill and knowledge are not completely represented in the commercial system. How could it be? If you were to create a style of your art, that had to be open and marketable to everyone of all ages, and not so physically demanding that it turned people away (like some jiujitsu/grappling), and would produce reasonable skills quickly, what would it look like? 

Now add that you are the *only* expert, but needed "students" and their students, removed from you geographically, and spread literally everywhere, to function without standing in front of you in a class learning specific basics and applications everyday. Remember the bulk of your students when you began the commercial system were already students from other styles. Few began as white belts with you, so they already had "skills and basics" they were doing and teaching. Even those that did begin with you as white belt beginners, either left when you made the commercial push, or embraced it for the money and or the prestige of "business promotions." (Of course many left to form their own "business" once they learned enough of the kenpo business to do so.)

You "allow" flexibility to lure these students to you, introduce concepts to support that flexibility, and promote it as a sales tool. "Unlike the traditional school down the street, the style promotes and teaches, "You don't have to do it that way, you can do it this way if you like." This was so radical a concept it revolutionized, and literally created the business of self-defense from scratch.

While many criticized Parker for creating this "sloppy slap art," these same people attempted to do the same when they observed how financially successful Parker became rather quickly. This spawned a plethora of "kenpo business styles" attempting to capitalize on that success. That was followed by obscure non-kenpo styles that did the same thing in an attempt to rise to prominence. Seriously, it's all driven by financial concerns.

Although the limitations are obvious, they are a result of the marketing demographic mandate more than anything else. But even so, Parker managed to hint at much of the material that is "left out," by including grappling and manipulations options and scenarios, and even some "nerve" material hidden among some scenarios. 

But, he had to create a system to satisfy the many levels of skill, desire, and capabilities, of its many participants. The quality and  flavor of what you do will always be the responsibility of those that teach it. It has always been the teachers job to decipher some material and raise their own personal level of understanding to their highest capability. But teachers, are just students. Whatever their level, that is the level of their students. Most would not put in the work, travel, etc necessary to do that. For most it just wasn't possible, but the business forced their promotions anyway. "Just because the red show...." remember that was Parker's own saying, created at a time when only his kenpo people had red stripes on their belts. So who was he speaking to?

Over and above the inherent limitations of the commercial system, it is still a viable and effective methodology, but it will never be any better than the teacher that teaches it. If there are any problems with a persons "commercial" kenpo, don't blame the vehicle, blame the guy with all the "business stripes" taking your bucks.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 16, 2008)

One of the things that I remember Ralph Gracie saying back when I was at his school was that Helio was pretty upset by much of what was being taught as BJJ because it focused so much on the sportive aspects of the art and left out the self defense pre-arranged techniques that were part of the curriculum he designed and taught. In his book, The Master Text, Helio spends the bulk of the book showing those pre-set techniques against various self defense scenarios. I know that this tends to fly in the face of what most people think of when they think of BJJ,. THey think of Kenpo and say, "Doing a pre-set technique against a compliant uke is worthless", but that's what the founder and still head of Gracie JJ believes is the most important part of the art. He feels that most of what is being taught as BJJ is watered down and too sportive. Also, most of the pre-set Gracie JJ scenarios are stand-up, not ground, techniques. Go figure.


----------



## Doc (Jan 16, 2008)

Danjo said:


> One of the things that I remember Ralph Gracie saying back when I was at his school was that Helio was pretty upset by much of what was being taught as BJJ because it focused so much on the sportive aspects of the art and left out the self defense pre-arranged techniques that were part of the curriculum he designed and taught. In his book, The Master Text, Helio spends the bulk of the book showing those pre-set techniques against various self defense scenarios. I know that this tends to fly in the face of what most people think of when they think of BJJ,. THey think of Kenpo and say, "Doing a pre-set technique against a compliant uke is worthless", but that's what the founder and still head of Gracie JJ believes is the most important part of the art. He feels that most of what is being taught as BJJ is watered down and too sportive. Also, most of the pre-set Gracie JJ scenarios are stand-up, not ground, techniques. Go figure.


Of course you know this is a scenario that has been playing itself out all over the world for the last century. Old school "real art," versus newbies wanting to compete to demonstrate their superior martial prowess and stroke their own egos to go with their belts. Every art in general, from every country has gone through this. The only difference is, America started with "new school" and can't back to old school, because of the culture. I wrote an article for the magazine about it awhile back. It's posted on Danny Inosanto's site. http://paintball.iisports.com/page.asp?content_id=8032


----------



## Danjo (Jan 16, 2008)

Doc said:


> Of course you know this is a scenario that has been playing itself out all over the world for the last century. Old school "real art," versus newbies wanting to compete to demonstrate their superior martial prowess and stroke their own egos to go with their belts. Every art in general, from every country has gone through this. The only difference is, America started with "new school" and can't back to old school, because of the culture. I wrote an article for the magazine about it awhile back. It's posted on Danny Inosanto's site. http://paintball.iisports.com/page.asp?content_id=8032


 
Thanks for the article. It clears up some things I had wondered about before about the need for a direct one-to-one transfer of knowledge given the huge amount of integrated information contained.

If something is a science, then it can be taught with precision. Not that there aren't scientific break-throughs from time to time, but it's far more precise a discipline than art is where only the basics can be taught then the student is on his own and everything depends on their vision and aptitude. But since that tends to fly in the face of the idea that everything of value has to be taught in strictly "alive" conditions, it's bound to be dismissed by most people these days, hence the need for a more commercial vehicle.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 16, 2008)

Danjo said:


> One of the things that I remember Ralph Gracie saying back when I was at his school was that Helio was pretty upset by much of what was being taught as BJJ because it focused so much on the sportive aspects of the art and left out the self defense pre-arranged techniques that were part of the curriculum he designed and taught. In his book, The Master Text, Helio spends the bulk of the book showing those pre-set techniques against various self defense scenarios. I know that this tends to fly in the face of what most people think of when they think of BJJ,. THey think of Kenpo and say, "Doing a pre-set technique against a compliant uke is worthless", but that's what the founder and still head of Gracie JJ believes is the most important part of the art. He feels that most of what is being taught as BJJ is watered down and too sportive. Also, most of the pre-set Gracie JJ scenarios are stand-up, not ground, techniques. Go figure.


There's more to this sort of training than working with a compliant partner.  That's only the beginning... Once you have the basic motions, your partner should become increasingly less compliant, instead of continuing to let you get the hold or work the sequence.  The attack should stop being the basic, easy feed, and become more erratic, at different angles, and so on.  

I can't address whether BJJ has become too sport oriented -- or if kenpo is to business/sales oriented.  That's something each practitioner has to judge for themselves.


----------



## Jdokan (Jan 16, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Oke Doke.


Well said!! 
  I think the best way to train the body to accept contact is in controlled sessions that get increasingly harder....I you can't hit the wakiwara board extremely hard then how could you expect the hands to be conditioned to be a weapon...by the same token if when you get hit HARD how are you going to know that you can take it??? ( without turtling) Unless you undergo proper training drills....In my session I expect to get hit as I expect to hit....goes with the territory...better to cry in the dojo than bleed in the streets...(old polish proverb)


----------



## Jdokan (Jan 16, 2008)

Jdokan said:


> Well said!!
> I think the best way to train the body to accept contact is in controlled sessions that get increasingly harder....If you can't hit the wakiwara board extremely hard then how could you expect the hands to be conditioned to be a weapon...by the same token if when you get hit HARD how are you going to know that you can take it??? ( without turtling) Unless you undergo proper training drills....In my session I expect to get hit as I expect to hit....goes with the territory...better to cry in the dojo than bleed in the streets...(old polish proverb)


_gotta start using word to spell check ....._


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2008)

Jdokan said:


> Well said!!
> I think the best way to train the body to accept contact is in controlled sessions that get increasingly harder....I you can't hit the wakiwara board extremely hard then how could you expect the hands to be conditioned to be a weapon...by the same token if when you get hit HARD how are you going to know that you can take it??? ( without turtling) Unless you undergo proper training drills....In my session I expect to get hit as I expect to hit....goes with the territory...better to cry in the dojo than bleed in the streets...(old polish proverb)



We call it "training camp."


----------



## diamondbar1971 (Jan 17, 2008)

Doc, you always hit the nail on the head and then drive it into the ground..i really enjoy your explanations when you reply to everyone's postings


----------



## diamondbar1971 (Jan 17, 2008)

I don't think changes within any of the arts makes it watered down. I always had a hard time with, what you do with the right, you do with the left. I kick a football with my right leg but when I broad (now comes the term politically correct) Long jumped I used my left. I had a horse roll down an embankment years ago and really tore up my left shoulder, and I had to make some adjustments in certain moves and I don't feel as if I have watered down anything, as a matter of fact it works out even better as I am only
5' 6" and its easier to come around to my right bringing my left arm along with it.


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2008)

diamondbar1971 said:


> I don't think changes within any of the arts makes it watered down. I always had a hard time with, what you do with the right, you do with the left. I kick a football with my right leg but when I broad (now comes the term politically correct) Long jumped I used my left. I had a horse roll down an embankment years ago and really tore up my left shoulder, and I had to make some adjustments in certain moves and I don't feel as if I have watered down anything, as a matter of fact it works out even better as I am only
> 5' 6" and its easier to come around to my right bringing my left arm along with it.



"You can't, by definition, call something "watered down" that has everything in it that its supposed to have when it was created." - Dr. Ron Chapél

You may however compare it to another entity and say that, "In comparison, it appears to be watered down.


----------



## diamondbar1971 (Jan 17, 2008)

Thanks, i guess i just wanted someone else to agree or at least see another side of it, as i only added and didn't take away


----------



## Doc (Jan 27, 2008)

MJS said:


> Thanks Doc, for another wel-thought out reply.   Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but as I safe to interpret the above as, tailoring is ok, but it would be better if the students were not the sole ones responsible for it, but instead the instructors?


Of course you're correct sir. How would a low level student know what is an acceptable tailor, or not? That is a teachers job as he works with various students in the classroom.


> Out of curiosity, how do you address the 'tailoring' idea at your school?  Do you adjust the tech. for the person or are all of the students, regardless of physical differences, applying the moves in the same way?


Students are required to learn the techniques correctly. There is only one correct way when material is presented in a well designed progressive curriculum. The curriculum is supposed to teach specific physical principles of effectiveness first. This information must be inculcated properly before anything else can be addressed. As an example, just because a person is short in a class of giants doesn't mean all of their techniques should be done high or low. When a short person does a form, do they reach high with all of their strikes because they know they're short? We are training their body as much as intellectually imparting information. Once that is done, only an instructor may offer minor tailoring for "gender", "height," and "girth/mass" discrepancies. 

Gender tailoring simply means, there are some techniques that are most likely to occur male-to-female, female-to-female, and almost never "female to male." A good example is a rear bear hug under the above guidelines. When you add the other examples of height and girth, than the problem becomes exacerbated. Therefore a small stature female student would not waste her time trying to apply bear hugs to a tall large girth male. The male would get no benefit, and neither would the female.

Height tailoring is most apparent. It allows that a technique may be adjusted  to fit the stature of the student, when it calls for a strike to the head area, and it is out-of-reach. However the adjustment will be given specifically to the student by a teacher, and will expressly define the alternate target, and scientifically why. Not just a lower strike, but a strike that will present the same desired effect and sequential action, so that it does not materially alter the science of the technique, nor impair its effectiveness.

Girth/mass tailoring is only an issue for those that might attack a large individual. Rarely will it be the other way around, therefore it is the least of the tailoring possibilities from an execution perspective. Large people don't really have a problem attacking, the problem lies with those that would attack them, when the assault calls for an encircling grab, or a substantial movement of their mass as a part of the assault vehicle.

Throughout the lessons, it is constantly stressed that particular sequences are in fact, not a requirement on the street "beyond ones own capabilities." The goal is to inculcate and regurgitate the principles, including their sequences, but immediate results and survival skills take precedent.

A Parker Technique like, "Sword of Destruction" calls for a finishing hand-sword to the side of the neck. We execute in a particular way that creates a finishing result that knocks the attacker out quite effectively. However it is a 101 (Yellow Belt) technique, and a student may choose to use a hammer-fist in a confrontation because they are more comfortable with that weapon, but in doing so they would alter the target to suit the weapon. Here they would adjust to the base of the ear or TW-17 for maximum effect not achievable with the hand-sword.

So in conclusion, there is nothing wrong with tailoring when it is put in context based on the science of execution, and when "approved" or "suggested" by the teacher. Students should not be allowed to tailor until they have achieved a significant level of skill and the knowledge that accompanies that level. I've seen students taught a simple technique and shown multiple ways to execute it. All most students want is one way that works. When you inundate a beginner with infinite possibilities, they learn none of them, and develop poor skills at best. I've seen it all over the world. The problem is because "everyone is doing it," everyone looks universally "good" (bad), and no one can tell because they lack perspective of how it should actually be done. Students mimic their teachers, so you know where the blame is.

My students of skill don't "consciously" tailor, and they are fine with it because what they've been taught works well, and they are fascinated with the mechanisms they're learning and how effective they are. However, because they have been taught well, when they tailor on the street, it is more "instinctive" and simply falls within the boundaries of other lessons. This is what my law enforcement people tell me, and so tailoring is not an issue for them. they simply do what they've been taught, and it comes out one way or another. Isn't that supposed to be the way it is? Reacting instinctively to what is effective is not tailoring. It simply means you learned your lessons. Tailoring is a conscious effort to "change something." 

From the beginning, minor alternate possibilities are built into the default technique sequence. if you do the technique correctly, it doesn't matter that the attack is not perfect, or altered slightly. Any major difference in the assault is covered by another technique sequence. So in that regard, there are no "what-ifs. "What-ifs" are the responsibility of teachers who would design basic techniques to be taught. Students do what they are taught, the technique takes care of the "what-if" and simply work "as is."


> I'm going to assume that SL4 still contains the control manipulations?


Oh yeah. When I first went public, that's what many thought SubLevel Four Kenpo was. Simply adding a manipulation onto a technique, and therefore some claimed to know SL-4. They were as wrong as you can be. Than they saw me knock guys down and out with literally "taps," and then they decided SL-4 was "nerve strikes." Wrong again. SL-4 kenpo is all inclusive of all the four combat ranges AND their sub-categories. Physical Manipulations, subtle and not-so-subtle, may be executed at all ranges, and sometimes without contact.

We spend as much time on all attacks as we do the counter techniques themselves. In "Twisted Twig," students are capable of attacking with a "wrist-flex throw takedown," which means they can use it offensively themselves independently of the technique scenario. this insures those training the self-defense technique are learning to counter it properly without having to "move first" before grabbed to be effective. I also have a couple of simple control manipulation counters to weapons I'm waiting to put up on UTube as soon as they're titled, as well as when punching moves from horizontal to vertical. I also have more of my AOD Drills coming.


> I'm wondering if they still could have been kept and required of every teacher, however, the teacher would only teach them to adults, rather than kids.


The problem is the teacher would have to learn them first. Not only does this take effort but who was going to teach them? Parker was only one man, and as anyone who does manipulations will tell you, it is the hardest part of the martial arts to execute effectively against an unwilling subject. It is strictly tactile hands-on, and is painful in the learning process. Not to many people line up in commercial schools to have their wrist twisted and be thrown down until it hurts every night, and that includes the teachers.


> Its a shame that it was removed, as it seems to me that it is a very important aspect of the arts.


No matter what anyone says, it is not a commercially viable part of training. How many of those schools do you see around compared to everything else? Parker took simple self defense concepts that have always been around, and worked them into a commercially viable self defense art that satisfies what most people want. But as I previously stated, he told you there was more, if you listened. When you have a technique like "Twisted Twig," you would think that a Kenpo Teacher would get someone to show him how to do the attack, even if he had to go down to a Aikido or Traditional Jiujitsu guy in the area. But of course, if he learned the proper attack mechanism, then his counter technique wouldn't be any good. Dam, there goes the whole system. 


> Did the Tracys have this and do they carry this concept on?


I haven't talked to Al Tracy since he called me up to invite me to the first "Gathering." I don't know what they do anymore, but I can guarantee you this. If Al wants it in there, he isn't shy about hiring somebody to teach how to do it right. Come to think of it, how the hell did AL get my home phone number? I guess I better double check my security again. 


> Agreed.  Kind of hard to defend against something if someone doesnt even know how to apply the initial attack. Thanks for the clarification.


Ain't that the truth Brudda. Having a guy "hand you his hand," and you standing there so he can do a technique is a recipe for disaster.  But then again, what the hell do I know? Most teach this way and are successful. as Dennis Miller would say, "I could be wrong." and I'm sure they're many who think so. Oh well, back to work.


----------



## Danjo (Jan 27, 2008)

Wow. Once again, someone asks you for a bite of your hamburger and you give them a four course meal. Thanks for all of the information.



Doc said:


> as anyone who does manipulations will tell you, it is the hardest part of the martial arts to execute effectively against an unwilling subject. It is strictly tactile hands-on, and is painful in the learning process. Not to many people line up in commercial schools to have their wrist twisted and be thrown down until it hurts every night, and that includes the teachers....No matter what anyone says, it is not a commercially viable part of training. How many of those schools do you see around compared to everything else?


 
Well, in Kajukenbo we do a great deal of manipulations as a built-in part of the system. They do indeed hurt like hell. And you're right: We're not a commercially viable system. Not many keep lining up for it after a short stay with us. Oh well.


----------



## TaiChiTJ (Jan 27, 2008)

Doc said:


> Traditional arts mandate a strict study of basics and develops specific skills and knowledge, allowing the student to reach a significant level of competence, (usually well beyond black belt) before beginning a personal tailoring process based on a now substantial knowledge base. Therefore a student knows what is reasonable tailoring, and what tailoring is not acceptable. .


 
Here, I think, is how Tony Annesi says the same thing: 

There are two ideographs for kata. One implies a rigid mold, the other suggests a general shape  "the mold filled with gelatin." As a beginner you were instructed to follow the rigid mold, but did you learn how that rigidity becomes softened by interpretation and personal sensibilities in more senior practice?


----------

