# Dr. Chapel - Technical Kicking Question



## IWishToLearn (Oct 6, 2005)

In regards to the discussion on the other forum, I thought in here might be efficient to ask. Are there any resources I can look into for ensuring correct principles of movement for my kicks prior to heading down to pick your brain in LA? I've a sneaking suspicion my TKD training had/has something to do with the length of time it's taking to recover from this injury (April 05); I still have yet to regain even half mobility on the left side and it's almost humorous to lament the lack of flexibility after the injury.


----------



## Doc (Oct 9, 2005)

IWishToLearn said:
			
		

> In regards to the discussion on the other forum, I thought in here might be efficient to ask. Are there any resources I can look into for ensuring correct principles of movement for my kicks prior to heading down to pick your brain in LA? I've a sneaking suspicion my TKD training had/has something to do with the length of time it's taking to recover from this injury (April 05); I still have yet to regain even half mobility on the left side and it's almost humorous to lament the lack of flexibility after the injury.


I will teach you to INDEX your kicks. That will take the strain off your body.


----------



## IWishToLearn (Oct 11, 2005)

I'd hope (edit: - hope...which is like "hoped") to hear that, but I was also hoping to find some direction until I can make it down there again .


----------



## Doc (Oct 11, 2005)

IWishToLearn said:
			
		

> I'd hope (edit: - hope...which is like "hoped") to hear that, but I was also hoping to find some direction until I can make it down there again .


Unfortunately there is no written material that I know of. Some people go out and buy Grey's Anatomy and other books they think will help them. The truth is the specific application of the information you seek is not written anywhere. Kinda like buying a book on acupuncture and then thinking it will help them do "nerve strikes" in a technique. Not going to happen.


----------



## IWishToLearn (Oct 11, 2005)

Dam. Somehow I knew you'd say that.

 *starts counting pennies for another trip south*


----------



## IWishToLearn (Nov 15, 2005)

Going to start working on the leg indexes...I spent Sunday doing that and the hip flexors are slightly peeved at me since I apparently haven't used them correctly before hehe.


----------



## Doc (Nov 16, 2005)

IWishToLearn said:
			
		

> Going to start working on the leg indexes...I spent Sunday doing that and the hip flexors are slightly peeved at me since I apparently haven't used them correctly before hehe.


Yeah its funny how when I start a person, no matter how much they trained before, they find muscles they didn't know they had. The indexes will put you in touch with most everything necessary to make those kicks anatomically correct. That's why you're feeling it from just a few minutes work. Sorry you couldn't have come in sooner, or went to dinner with myself and Dr. Crouch. Hope your buddy recovered from the "knockout." Any comments later from him?


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Nov 16, 2005)

Doc said:
			
		

> Yeah its funny how when I start a person, no matter how much they trained before, they find muscles they didn't know they had. The indexes will put you in touch with most everything necessary to make those kicks anatomically correct. That's why you're feeling it from just a few minutes work. Sorry you couldn't have come in sooner, or went to dinner with myself and Dr. Crouch. Hope your buddy recovered from the "knockout." Any comments later from him?


 
Your post reads "3:49 AM". You have got to get some sleep, my friend.

Monique dug dinner -- food and company -- and as I posted on another site, also enjoyed the kenpo. She's been hammerfisting me from a braced index since Saturday, and badgering me about pelvic alignment in gait.

Sleeeep...

D.


----------



## Doc (Nov 16, 2005)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Your post reads "3:49 AM". You have got to get some sleep, my friend.
> 
> Monique dug dinner -- food and company -- and as I posted on another site, also enjoyed the kenpo. She's been hammerfisting me from a braced index since Saturday, and badgering me about pelvic alignment in gait.
> 
> ...


She's a nautural and fun. Definitely a keeper my friend. (wear a cup)


----------



## IWishToLearn (Nov 17, 2005)

BTW just since I felt like posting in semi-privacy for once. Matt wanted me to reiterate he "LOVED-with 3 !!!'s" what you showed him and will be coming down with me again as soon as we both can afford to do so. Also - next time we'll frikking be there on time.


----------



## Doc (Nov 17, 2005)

IWishToLearn said:
			
		

> BTW just since I felt like posting in semi-privacy for once. Matt wanted me to reiterate he "LOVED-with 3 !!!'s" what you showed him and will be coming down with me again as soon as we both can afford to do so. Also - next time we'll frikking be there on time.


Check!!


----------



## IWishToLearn (Nov 17, 2005)

Knight to King's Bishop 3?


----------



## kenposikh (Nov 17, 2005)

IWishToLearn said:
			
		

> BTW just since I felt like posting in semi-privacy for once. Matt wanted me to reiterate he "LOVED-with 3 !!!'s" what you showed him and will be coming down with me again as soon as we both can afford to do so. Also - next time we'll frikking be there on time.


 
Hey Steve,

you're so lucky to be in the same country as Doc, make the most of your visits and enjoy.

Doc training is going well and Mr Mills is certainly enjoying teaching us.

Hope to see you soon, hey maybe when Steve pops over I could arrange a trip too. 

:asian:


----------



## IWishToLearn (Nov 17, 2005)

Is the name Amrik that is popping into my head correct?


----------



## kenposikh (Nov 20, 2005)

IWishToLearn said:
			
		

> Is the name Amrik that is popping into my head correct?


 
Certainly is Steve.

http://[URL="http://www.bkku.com"]www.bkku.com[/URL]


----------



## Danjo (Sep 16, 2006)

Roughly, what is "Indexing"? Is it targeting your kicks?


----------



## Doc (Sep 16, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Roughly, what is "Indexing"? Is it targeting your kicks?



*INDEX*  Specific points and methodologies the human body must utilize and move through in order to obtain maximum anatomical congruency, for any specific physical activity. 

Indexes are divided into two categories, Basic, and Advanced. *Index body parts* would be the Head, Arms, Hands, fingers, Pelvic, Legs and Feet. With a significant understanding of this aspect of human movement associated with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, (PNF) one begins to understand from the lost old Chinese perspective, why posture was and is so important to proper execution. Thus this is one of the reasons forms were created. They are Indexes of information, (not strict application as some believe), as well as the methodology for teaching proper body mechanics once properly decoded.

The sustained execution of proper Indexes invariably leads to what some call, Internal Energy or Qi or Ki. Those who obtain it move with an explosively articulate and powerful action *consistently*, cultivated from sustained correct anatomical movement. 

A good example would be a jump shooter in basketball. All great jump shooters all shoot the exact same anatomical way, having learned the proper *Indexing/basics* and *not allowed to alter, change, or tailor* by knowledgeable coaches. Ultimately the action becomes intuitive, smoothed and compressed in action and appears effortless in its effectiveness.

Put simply: Whatever it is you are going to do may require you to move from point A to point E. In that process anatomically you must move THROUGH B, C, and D to get there correctly. In this example, B, C, and D would be the Index Points, if one is to move properly utilizing all of the bodys architectural support properly to achieve the goal upon arrival at E.

In the beginning, these Index Points may look to some as exaggerated, excessive, or even slow. They are neither. The Chinese were criticized by other less knowledgeable art practitioners for some of their long, looping and exaggerated postures and methods. But the end result is anything but.

In Ed Parkers teaching to me, he referred to these Index Basics, as *Phonetic Movement.* (There are some that will remember him speaking of this) This analogy of learning of the ABCs, (Indexes) is transferred to writing in large blocks of PRINT, which gives way over time to smaller blocks of print, to large than small SCRIPT, and ultimately, SHORTHAND. The problem is; everyone wants to begin with shorthand when they havent learned the ABCs. But the really sad thing is, almost no one knows the ABCs (basics) to begin with. Everyone talks about them and their importance, but I can assure you they don't know them and it is demonstrable.

Those born of and reared in the commercial context began their study sans basics or Indexes at shorthand, thus lacking the proper foundation upon which to build and grow. Therefore, whatever level of skill acquired in general will level out, with no opportunity to reach higher. It is a functional ceiling built into the methodology.

The proper method requires a measure of patience and personal discipline, but oddly does not take any longer to learn than the commercial method. The difference is the latter requires the oversight of a supremely knowledgeable teacher of proper anatomical movement within the context of the learned activity. In sports, they call them coaches.

Hope I didnt bore you sir.


----------



## Carol (Sep 16, 2006)

Doc said:


> Put simply: Whatever it is you are going to do may require you to move from point A to point E. In that process anatomically you must move THROUGH B, C, and D to get there correctly. In this example, B, C, and D would be the Index Points, if one is to move properly utilizing all of the bodys architectural support properly to achieve the goal upon arrival at E.


 
Ohhh...so it's like charting a course!  Only the vessel is...one's body.  And the index points are used to not only avoid leaving the navigation to chance, they are also used to show how to get the maximum benefit out of the reason for the voyage.  

I'm really looking forward to heading west.


----------



## Danjo (Sep 16, 2006)

Doc said:


> *INDEX*  Specific points and methodologies the human body must utilize and move through in order to obtain maximum anatomical congruency, for any specific physical activity.
> 
> Indexes are divided into two categories, Basic, and Advanced. *Index body parts* would be the Head, Arms, Hands, fingers, Pelvic, Legs and Feet. With a significant understanding of this aspect of human movement associated with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, (PNF) one begins to understand from the lost old Chinese perspective, why posture was and is so important to proper execution. Thus this is one of the reasons forms were created. They are Indexes of information, (not strict application as some believe), as well as the methodology for teaching proper body mechanics once properly decoded.
> 
> ...


 
On the contrary, that was more than I hoped for by way of an explaination. As always Doc, you deliver the goods big time. I should have known better than to ask for a "Rough" answer to my question 

Thanks again.


----------



## Doc (Sep 17, 2006)

Danjo said:


> On the contrary, that was more than I hoped for by way of an explaination. As always Doc, you deliver the goods big time. I should have known better than to ask for a "Rough" answer to my question
> 
> Thanks again.



Only for the 'good guys' (and Carol).   Really time consuming and difficult conveying information to those that either wouldn't understand, or just want to find something they can diasgree with.


----------



## Carol (Sep 17, 2006)

Doc said:


> The proper method requires a measure of patience and personal discipline, but oddly does not take any longer to learn than the commercial method. The difference is the latter requires the oversight of a supremely knowledgeable teacher of proper anatomical movement within the context of the learned activity. In sports, they call them coaches.


 
You mean...it doesn't dismiss Kenpo to the Socratic Method, and actually requires an accomplished instructor that precisely instructs and fine-tunes every move of their students?    

I so want some of this blashemous instruction.


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

Carol Kaur said:


> You mean...it doesn't dismiss Kenpo to the Socratic Method, and actually requires an accomplished instructor that precisely instructs and fine-tunes every move of their students?
> 
> I so want some of this blashemous instruction.


 


Yes me too, only i live too fart away.  Doc can you name a chinese or okinawan form that particularly stands out to you as teaching indexing through posture as you mentioned?

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

Doc said:


> *INDEX*  Specific points and methodologies the human body must utilize and move through in order to obtain maximum anatomical congruency, for any specific physical activity.
> 
> Indexes are divided into two categories, Basic, and Advanced. *Index body parts* would be the Head, Arms, Hands, fingers, Pelvic, Legs and Feet. With a significant understanding of this aspect of human movement associated with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, (PNF) one begins to understand from the lost old Chinese perspective, why posture was and is so important to proper execution. Thus this is one of the reasons forms were created. They are Indexes of information, (not strict application as some believe), as well as the methodology for teaching proper body mechanics once properly decoded.
> 
> ...


 

Bore us!!! this answer helps a great deal.  Thank you again Sir

Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## Carol (Sep 17, 2006)

marlon said:


> Bore us!!! this answer helps a great deal. Thank you again Sir
> 
> Respectfully,
> marlon


 
Yes!  Bore us!   




			
				Marlon said:
			
		

> Yes me too, only i live too fart away. Doc can you name a chinese or okinawan form that particularly stands out to you as teaching indexing through posture as you mentioned?
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
I'd also be interested in knowing the answer...if there is any style that is taught through such indexing.   

Marlon - as a TOTAL noob that doesn't really know what I am doing yet  I'm finding that my FMA instructors are a bit more precise in their instsruction of the different body movements.  Not as precise as Doc but more precise than what I've seen in my admittedly limited exposure to Kenpo.  

I don't know if that is a result of teaching style or the style of the art.  It may be the way my instructor teaches.  The Filipino arts tend to divert from Kung Fu and Karate styles by makingn classifications on the grounds of different types of energy.  One of my instructors in particular is very picky focuses fine tuning each motion that we make because "the energy is different."  

Then again, there is also something about those sticks and knives that we hurl at each other that demands accuracy and precision.


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

Carol, i find also that many kempo instrructors are not precise and picky about body movements ertc...myself included.  I have been working for quiter some time to correct this and have gone to outside sources to learn...mostly chinese internal arts.  But i believe that one does not need throw out the system but re-introduce these concepts b/c in the end i find that it is already there in the forms and techniques.  Only too much practicing in the air and working with overly compliant uke's created false ideas and false 'corrections'.  I am teaching pickier and practicing with more intent to precision and having the moves match the basics and posture and stances are high on the prioirity list of basics...ther is posture and stance considerations in every block, hand strike and every kick and more so when these are liked into a technique.  Every time i see someone execute well i look for these things.  of course the limitation of this is that i can only look for what i already know but often questions like What the --- was that!? gets answered and i grow.  And there are many who share knowledge openly and willingly and i grow some more.  I believe this is a benefit to kempo and martial arts in general ..so than kyou to all of you who know and who share.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

i realize i left out someone important.  My current instructor, who spends a tremndous amount of time on his own training and self imporovement .  Who takes the time, money and enrgy to seek out instructors in different areas and goes to them to learn and then brings this back to us.  He encourages us to always learn and get knowledge where ever we can.  He does not enslave us to his organization or his way of doing things.  He is a great inspiration to me and has improved my kempo and my teaching abilities beyond measure.  He is definitely one who knows and who shares.  i am humbled by his skill and genrousity and love of kempo.  I say this because in my zeal to know i may to others sound unappreciative of my own instructor...this is definitely not the case.  He does not engage in thses forums so understand i am not sucking up.  Just telling it like it is.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## IWishToLearn (Sep 18, 2006)

Once again Dr. Chapel - thanks for showing me kicking indexes. Even though the herniation sends spikes down my leg, when I need to, at least the pressure isn't on my back any more.


----------



## Doc (Sep 18, 2006)

Doc said:


> *INDEX*  Specific points and methodologies the human body must utilize and move through in order to obtain maximum anatomical congruency, for any specific physical activity.
> 
> Indexes are divided into two categories, Basic, and Advanced. *Index body parts* would be the Head, Arms, Hands, fingers, Pelvic, Legs and Feet. With a significant understanding of this aspect of human movement associated with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, (PNF) one begins to understand from the lost old Chinese perspective, why posture was and is so important to proper execution. Thus this is one of the reasons forms were created. They are Indexes of information, (not strict application as some believe), as well as the methodology for teaching proper body mechanics once properly decoded.
> 
> ...





IWishToLearn said:


> Once again Dr. Chapel - thanks for showing me kicking indexes. Even though the herniation sends spikes down my leg, when I need to, at least the pressure isn't on my back any more.



Been there. Nasty!


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 19, 2006)

Hi Doc, hope all is well.  



Doc said:


> A good example would be a jump shooter in basketball. All great jump shooters all shoot the exact same anatomical way, having learned the proper *Indexing/basics* and *not allowed to alter, change, or tailor* by knowledgeable coaches. Ultimately the action becomes intuitive, smoothed and compressed in action and appears effortless in its effectiveness.


 
One of the best 3 point shooters that played in the NBA, Michael Adams, was only 5'6",  He learned to shoot from the side, as opposed to in front/overhead, so that his shots could not be blocked.    There are a few correct ways to skin a cat, just have the goods to back it.  

By the way, I totally agree that to properly learn a kick one needs to know all the proper movments of the body and the results of not doing things properly.  But assuming all commercial practioners learned to wrong way may be an overstatement. They may have learned a modified method to account for knee injuries or other deficiencies in their training.  Or they just found something that worked better for them.  Just like Michael Adams did.  

As always, thanks for taking the time to post the information.


----------



## Doc (Sep 19, 2006)

HKphooey said:


> Hi Doc, hope all is well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Whenever I mention something like this, someone will always come up with an anomoly. There are people with anatomical deficiencies that force them to compensate to perform a particular activity. Usually it is a single activity. However that does not translate to what we're talking about. The example you gave was about compensating for what otherwise was a normal physical person, who desired to play basketball and thus adapted over many years of training a singular thing. Martial artist must train thousands of movements not one jump shot. And your example, with the exception of that one shot, had to play the game dribbling, moving, and passing just like everyone else.

In limited physical activities there can always be anomolies, but not often even there. Coaches know the optimal way to execute gleened from years of previous coaches experiences. Keith Wilks started playing when he was small and learned to 'swing' the ball around his head to help him get the ball up and never lost that trait, and became very succesful with it. But the rest of his game was by the coaches book.

The misunderstnding of tailoring in the arts is a modern one. You may 'tailor' for a given set of circumstances that present themselves, but you to not 'alter' the methodology, choosing instead to just use a different correct methodology. The exeption is if you're only doing one or two things, you could spend years concentrating on that one thing, and ultimately make it work for you. Martial artist have no such luxury of working on one thing for years, however in sports it possible. But even there its rare. That's another story.

You may hav to spel a word inkorectly bekaws u never lurned write or contex an stil be undastood. But all the letters you used were correct to do it. Had you made up your own letters, you would be incapable of communicating in writing.

"Tailoring and altering are not the same thing. You may tailor to the circumstances, but you do not alter the physical methodology." - Ron Chapél


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 19, 2006)

Doc said:


> Whenever I mention something like this, someone will always come up with an anomoly. There are people with anatomical deficiencies that force them to compensate to perform a particular activity. Usually it is a single activity. However that does not translate to what we're talking about. The example you gave was about compensating for what otherwise was a normal physical person, who desired to play basketball and thus adapted over many years of training a singular thing. Martial artist must train thousands of movements not one jump shot. And your example, with the exception of that one shot, had to play the game dribbling, moving, and passing just like everyone else.
> 
> In limited physical activities there can always be anomolies, but not often even there. Coaches know the optimal way to execute gleened from years of previous coaches experiences. Keith Wilks started playing when he was small and learned to 'swing' the ball around his head to help him get the ball up and never lost that trait, and became very succesful with it. But the rest of his game was by the coaches book.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for your opinion.  :asian:


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 19, 2006)

marlon said:


> Yes me too, only i live too fart away. Doc can you name a chinese or okinawan form that particularly stands out to you as teaching indexing through posture as you mentioned?
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 

My suspicion is that this lies in most, if not all of the traditional systems, and is not exclusive to SL4 kenpo.  It is just a matter of how well it is understood and taught.  

If an instructor has a less than perfect grasp of body mechanics and proper movement, he can only teach to that level (and just how do you measure "perfect", anyway?)  But I believe that the traditional arts that place a heavy focus on basics all contain this notion.  It is just that finding teachers of that caliber, to successfully teach these ideas, is becoming more and more difficult.


----------



## Doc (Sep 19, 2006)

Flying Crane said:


> My suspicion is that this lies in most, if not all of the traditional systems, and is not exclusive to SL4 kenpo.  It is just a matter of how well it is understood and taught.
> 
> If an instructor has a less than perfect grasp of body mechanics and proper movement, he can only teach to that level (and just how do you measure "perfect", anyway?)  But I believe that the traditional arts that place a heavy focus on basics all contain this notion.  It is just that finding teachers of that caliber, to successfully teach these ideas, is becoming more and more difficult.



As usual sir, on the money. The things in SubLevel Four Kenpo are not new, or even some kind of innovation. Call it old school Chinese if you will, but the trick is finding someone who knows and understands, and willing to teach.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 19, 2006)

Doc said:


> The things in SubLevel Four Kenpo are not new, or even some kind of innovation. Call it old school Chinese if you will, but the trick is finding someone who knows and understands, and willing to teach.


 
Now this raises another interesting issue: differences from system to system.  

For example, Tibetan White Crane and Wing Chun are two systems that I have some experience with.  They are polar opposites in how they approach fighting, both in philosophy and in technique.

White Crane is as long-armed as they get.  It uses high stances and relies on mobility to charge and overwhelm, and hit-and-run.  Large, circular, even "exagerated" strikes are thrown using a full-body pivot and torque, while keeping the shoulder and arm relaxed.  Tremendous power can be generated this way.

Wing Chun is about as short-range as you can get, without becoming an actual grappling and wrestling style.  Techniques are tight to the body and rely heavily on dominance of the centerline.  The training stance is a strange, knock-kneed stance that burns your legs.  Movement is decisive, but short and minimal, compared to White Crane.

So the question arises: is one of these arts "correct", while the other is "incorrect"?  and how would one make that judgement? 

My own suggestion is that they are both "correct" in their own way.  They simply approach the problem differently, but with their own set of principles.  As long as the principles are adhered to, it is "correct" in the context of the system.

But another point can be raised.  For example, the knock-kneed stance of Wing Chun can lead to knee problems for some people, or at least exacerbate existing problems.  One might argue that this stance is "incorrect", regardless of the fact that the system relies on it as a training stance.  If it can lead to injury, or magnify existing injury, then perhaps there is something inherently wrong with it, despite any positive development that its use can lead to.

Anybody wanna comment on this?  thx.


----------



## Doc (Sep 19, 2006)

Flying Crane said:


> Now this raises another interesting issue: differences from system to system.
> 
> For example, Tibetan White Crane and Wing Chun are two systems that I have some experience with.  They are polar opposites in how they approach fighting, both in philosophy and in technique.
> 
> ...


I agree. Most of the differences between the traditional Chinese Arts are philosophical based on a variety of factors. One of them for example, is environmental, and explains the differences in philosophy between Northern and Southern Traditional styles. 

But the more you examine the core, the more you see they are alike arriving at similar goals. Think of them as different kinds of trains running on different tracks, but all running properly principled with the same destination. 

Keep in mind, 

*"Styles do not have principles. Styles have philosophical concepts or methodologies of training. But all styles (although many don't), should comply with the physical laws associated with most efficient human movement. They should not be subject to 'artistic' change for personal preferences or philosophy for the sake of a style." - Ron Chapél*


> But another point can be raised.  For example, the knock-kneed stance of Wing Chun can lead to knee problems for some people, or at least exacerbate existing problems.  One might argue that this stance is "incorrect", regardless of the fact that the system relies on it as a training stance. If it can lead to injury, or magnify existing injury, then perhaps there is something inherently wrong with it, despite any positive development that its use can lead to.
> 
> Anybody wanna comment on this?  thx.


Well sir, you have found a pefectly good example. Wing Chun is based on female anatomy, and the female knee inherently is turned inward from the wide pelvic bone, and is anatomically misaligned. This position is perfectly natural for a woman but not for most men.

Consider the inception of most 'styles' was based on a smaller window of viability as well. Many styles philosophically promote hyperextension and flexibility, for a 'style' of movement and execution that gave specific skills for a short period of time, in warriors who were not expected to live long, in a population that lived only slightly longer. The knee, hip, shoulder, etc joint problems created were not important. Most would die before they became major issues in ones quality of life. The conditioning of body parts by continued striking that ultimately created debilitating arthritic conditions are similar 'style mandates' that have no place or relevance today.

Ed Parker created a modern art if you will, sans the cultural accoutrements with a focus on self-defense. This had never been done before. Many of the cutural aspects of the arts have nothing to do with defending yourself, but rather promoting a cutural artisitic philosophy. Parker was in the process of distilling the physical aspects of the art from the artistic cultural mndates, to a practical application process that focused on self-defense from an American perspective. Many still hang onto cultural aspects while promoting  strict self-defense. in many cases, these are incompatible. Thus many modern day martial artist are having significant joint problems, and hip replacement has now become commonplace. We as modern practitioners must learn to know the difference between 'art and style' mandates, over practicality.

Really good obs sir.


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 19, 2006)

Flying Crane said:


> Now this raises another interesting issue: differences from system to system.
> 
> For example, Tibetan White Crane and Wing Chun are two systems that I have some experience with. They are polar opposites in how they approach fighting, both in philosophy and in technique.
> 
> ...


 

Great stuff Crane!


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 19, 2006)

Doc said:


> Consider the inception of most 'styles' was based on a smaller window of viability as well. Many styles philosophically promote hyperextension and flexibility, for a 'style' of movement and execution that gave specific skills for a short period of time, in warriors who were not expected to live long, in a population that lived only slightly longer. The knee, hip, shoulder, etc joint problems created were not important. Most would die before they became major issues in ones quality of life. The conditioning of body parts by continued striking that ultimately created debilitating arthritic conditions are similar 'style mandates' that have no place or relevance today.


 
Thank you for the dialog, and this part especially makes a lot of sense to me.


----------



## Carol (Sep 19, 2006)

Wayne, Michael, Doc, Marlon... :asian:


----------



## Sigung86 (Sep 20, 2006)

Carol Kaur said:


> Wayne, Michael, Doc, Marlon... :asian:



I had absolutely nothing significant to add.  However, thanks for thought material guys.  This discussion all occurred while I was teaching and then spending extended hours on attempting to get my budding "eBay Career" off the ground, and so, I had to wait until this morning.

However, it was an interesting conversation we had last night after class.  Some students do get it.  Last night I ran a 2 hour class of just basics, and working on getting the appropriate limbs in the appropriate places, correctly.

After class we normally go to a local Denny's for "dessert" and such.  One of my newer students, a thinking man's thinking man, came in and began to assail virtually everything I know, or think I know about physical attributes of the techniques we use versus simply learning and applying excellent  basics.  I showed him that four fundamental techniques, inward block, outward block, a correct punch, a ball kick and the addition of the neutral bow to the square horse stance repertoire, could easily expand to 64 or so seperate techniques.  After 2 1/2 hours of this type of discussion, he decided that he had made a good choice in getting into Kenpo.

That led to a whole different thought for me.  I posited this position before here and got no, or very little original thought or input.  It is that the original material taught by SGM Parker on the 8 mm tapes and the knowledge of the forms short 1, short 2, and short 3, when worked with the application of correct physiology, such as that done by Doc, would make one Hell of a great self defense system. And, without the need to make the extra 150 something and 400 something techniques that make up, what I consider to be the two "main" branches of Kenpo.  Um... That would be EPAK and Tracy's.

Just a quick question, if I may... Of those who might take the time to read this post of mine... Have you done any experimentation with the material that Doc and some of his folk have put out here, or something that you may have glommed onto during these types of discussions?  And (sorry this makes the second part) have you modified anything that you currently do in your technique, or style, based on that experimentation?

Just curious.


thanks,

Dan


----------



## DavidCC (Sep 20, 2006)

I can't stop slapping myself!  (that sounds a lot worse than it is LOL)

And, since I strated practicing a littel SL-4 my wife says that now she cant' study while I'm practicing because the "Chapel stuff is too noisy" haha  boom-slap-pop-slap-BOOM! LOL

I've spent a little time playing with our base SK techniques to incorporate proper indexing and the "management" of alignment (positive and negative)  the timing of our techniques, for monitoring (threat level and body reaction), for posture control (PAM and BAM) etc. 

Working with SL-4 material has refreshed my motivation to make sure the basics are as solid as they can be.  1/4 inches, 10 degrees... everything matters.

Also, we are looking at the beginnings of our techniques : recovering from (or taking advantage of) your natural instinctive reaction to an attack.  Especially for attacks that feature grabs, pushes, etc.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Sep 20, 2006)

Doc said:


> I agree. Most of the differences between the traditional Chinese Arts are philosophical based on a variety of factors. One of them for example, is environmental, and explains the differences in philosophy between Northern and Southern Traditional styles.
> 
> But the more you examine the core, the more you see they are alike arriving at similar goals. Think of them as different kinds of trains running on different tracks, but all running properly principled with the same destination.
> 
> ...


Wow "Verrrrdy Intelestinque!" is that true? I guess it makes sense that this type of stuff would go on.
Sean


----------



## JamesB (Sep 20, 2006)

Sigung86 said:


> Just a quick question, if I may... Of those who might take the time to read this post of mine... Have you done any experimentation with the material that Doc and some of his folk have put out here, or something that you may have glommed onto during these types of discussions? And (sorry this makes the second part) have you modified anything that you currently do in your technique, or style, based on that experimentation?


 
Absolutely, although in my case I rely on my instructor (who's a student of Doc's) to help me understand how to do this stuff.

We slap-check in our techniques, and PAM and BAM - it's great! Our basics, stances etc have all developed a great deal. Short#1 would be a great example of something that has changed somewhat - adding transitions through forward-bows for example (we do this unilaterally as it happens). And we don't kick high, don't do spinning/twirling kicks in techs either.


----------



## JamesB (Sep 20, 2006)

Doc said:


> Well sir, you have found a pefectly good example. Wing Chun is based on female anatomy, and the female knee inherently is turned inward from the wide pelvic bone, and is anatomically misaligned. This position is perfectly natural for a woman but not for most men.


 
very interesting. Doc, do you tailor the basic SL4 stances for female students (i.e. neutral-bow etc) or is it not necessary?


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 20, 2006)

I've been thinking about this a lot since yesterday, and really this is something that I have been thinking about a lot over the years.  In my opinion, many practices that have crept into the martial arts today are harmful to the body.  Some of this may be inherent in the style itself, while others may be due to current trends.  I think that some of the experiences that I have had with specific systems have made this very clear to me.

I think that many styles incorporate practices that are harmful.  Often, these practices give tremendous benefits in the short term, but over a long period of time they can be detrimental to one's health.  My earlier example of Wing Chun's stance is one.  Another would be the long, extended, swinging punches in Tibetan White Crane.  They can be tremendously powerful, but if you get careless and screw them up, you can tear up your shoulders.  Maybe this example falls more into the category of making sure you do it right.  If you do, you are fine; but if you don't you are screwed.

I have spent many years practicing and playing capoeira.  The movement in capoeira is unlike any other art I have every seen.  It includes a lot of ground work, but not grappling like a ju-jitsu system.  The groundwork is very mobile and quick, and is used to get in and out, and reposition and attack with a wide variety of kicks.  But I see a lot of long-time capoeiristas with knee, shoulder, and back injuries.  I believe that a lot of what is being done with this groundwork can lead to these injuries.  When you develop these skill you can learn to do some amazing things.  The art is beautiful like no other.  But over a long period of time, I believe it has potential to break your body down.  Again, I believe that a lot of it has to do with correct positioning in your movements, and a bit of luck along the way.

Hung Gar uses a lot of dynamic tension type exercises, along with controlled breathing to develop power.  The Sanchin Kata found in many Okinawan systems does this as well.  These exercises can build tremendous power and make your practice very strong.  But I have also heard that over a long period of time it places unusual stress on the heart, and can lead to heart trouble.  It is said that people who practice these arts often die at a young age.

These are some examples of practices in the arts themselves that can be harmful.  But some issues have more to do with modern trends in the martial arts.

Example:  capoeira again.  The acrobatics are becoming more and more extreme.  I believe this is contributing to injuries among capoeiristas.  Many of these movements were not found in the art several generations ago.

Another example: Modern Wushu.  It is a performance art based on Traditional Kung Fu.  But it has been modified to be a crowd-pleaser.  This means techniques have been changed for aesthetic reasons.  More and more extreme acrobatics are also being added to the art.  I believe these all are contributing to injuries.  My sifu is also a coach for Modern Wushu.  He trained with the Beijing team in the 1980s.  He has collapsed arches in his feet, due to the hard landings that they would do out of aerial techniques.  These hard landings had nothing to do with traditional kung fu.  They are done for performance effect.

I believe that traditional arts, when done correctly, should not lead to injuries and should be something that can be done for one's whole life.  But the key is in moderation as well as good habits.  Training hard is ok, but some extreme things should not be done, or should only be done a little bit.  Doc's example of pounding the body to toughen it up is a good one.  It makes you tough, you can hit hard with highly conditioned hands, but you are on the road to debilitating arthritis in middle and old age.  These kinds of practices should be approached with moderation and a lot of caution.  We no longer live in a world where that kind of extreme training is necessary for most people.  And we tend to live longer, and have a greater chance of experienceing the long-term effects of poor training habits.

Any art that is focused on performance or competition is likely to have a greater injury potential.  Techniques are more extreme to please the audience and judges, and basics are improperly modified for aesthetic reasons.  These can lead to injury.

I can't talk about this stuff on the micro level like Doc and the SL4 people can and I am sure my own basics are in need of improvement, but I can certainly recognize poor training habits and dangerous practices when I see them.

Anyway, sorry for the rant.  Like I said, this has been on my mind for quite a while.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Sep 20, 2006)

You really need to condition your body to move with fluidity speed and power. Cultural traditions train our bodies to move un-naturaly and the martial arts take us to what ever extreem based on drilled methods of execution.
Sean


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 20, 2006)

Sigung86 said:


> That led to a whole different thought for me. I posited this position before here and got no, or very little original thought or input. It is that the original material taught by SGM Parker on the 8 mm tapes and the knowledge of the forms short 1, short 2, and short 3, when worked with the application of correct physiology, such as that done by Doc, would make one Hell of a great self defense system. And, without the need to make the extra 150 something and 400 something techniques that make up, what I consider to be the two "main" branches of Kenpo. Um... That would be EPAK and Tracy's.
> 
> Just a quick question, if I may... Of those who might take the time to read this post of mine... Have you done any experimentation with the material that Doc and some of his folk have put out here, or something that you may have glommed onto during these types of discussions? And (sorry this makes the second part) have you modified anything that you currently do in your technique, or style, based on that experimentation?
> 
> ...


 
Hi Dan,

I certainly like the idea.  It seems to me that solid basics, well understood and able to be used creatively would make for a very effective yet streamlined system.  The more extras that can be removed, so long as they don't really add anything of value, the better so far as I am concerned.

I've played with some of the things that Doc has described.  I've never worked with him so I am much more limited in this scenario.  Working off a written description isn't the same as getting it face-to-face, of course.


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 20, 2006)

In doing some research on baseball pitching mechanics the other night I came across this article.  Seems the article could easily be about the martal arts.  IMO, there are many aspects of the article that are very similar to some aspects of SL4 (but I have yet to meet Doc, so I may be way off).  Without the proper motor skills and basics one cannot adequately progess.  I guess my only disagreement is only one way to properly kick or that if you are doing "commercial" kenpo you are doing it wrong.  I wish I had someone like Doc, early in my learning, pushing me to execute perfect basics before progressing.  The school I am at now pushes the solid basics first and saves the complex/extensions for higher levels of black belt.  I had to go back and figure things out on my own or do the research.  

Here is the article:
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/chapters/cap-ch17.shtml

And for any of you who do not play golf, try it, and you will see how basics make all the difference in the world.

Sorry for all the sports anologies.


----------



## Doc (Sep 20, 2006)

Flying Crane said:


> I've been thinking about this a lot since yesterday, and really this is something that I have been thinking about a lot over the years.  In my opinion, many practices that have crept into the martial arts today are harmful to the body.  Some of this may be inherent in the style itself, while others may be due to current trends.  I think that some of the experiences that I have had with specific systems have made this very clear to me.
> 
> I think that many styles incorporate practices that are harmful.  Often, these practices give tremendous benefits in the short term, but over a long period of time they can be detrimental to one's health.  My earlier example of Wing Chun's stance is one.  Another would be the long, extended, swinging punches in Tibetan White Crane.  They can be tremendously powerful, but if you get careless and screw them up, you can tear up your shoulders.  Maybe this example falls more into the category of making sure you do it right.  If you do, you are fine; but if you don't you are screwed.
> 
> ...


What's a rant or two among friends. You put up with mine. Keep it up.


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 20, 2006)

HKphooey said:


> In doing some research on baseball pitching mechanics the other night I came across this article. Seems the article could easily be about the martal arts. IMO, there are many aspects of the article that are very similar to some aspects of SL4 (but I have yet to meet Doc, so I may be way off). Without the proper motor skills and basics one cannot adequately progess. I guess my only disagreement is only one way to properly kick or that if you are doing "commercial" kenpo you are doing it wrong. I wish I had someone like Doc, early in my learning, pushing me to execute perfect basics before progressing. The school I am at now pushes the solid basics first and saves the complex/extensions for higher levels of black belt. I had to go back and figure things out on my own or do the research.
> 
> Here is the article:
> http://www.baseball-almanac.com/chapters/cap-ch17.shtml
> ...


 

*Pitching coaches tell pitchers, 'just throw naturally.' If pitchers threw naturally, then why do they injure pitching arms? Newton's three motion laws and pitching arm anatomy determine proper pitching motions. With practice, all pitching motions feel natural*


This quote was taken from the article, and may perhaps illustrate one point, at least.

There may well be many ways to do something, with tremendous effect.  And with practice, any of these ways feels natural.  But perhaps some of these ways subject you to unnatural stresses that can lead to injury, more so than others.  This may not become apparent until much later, even after the damage is irreparably done.  

I've never been a big sports fan, but as a kid I played some baseball.  I always heard that if you pitch sidearmed, you can injure your arm (If this isn't true, those who know more about baseball can feel free to correct me).  But you might be able to pitch sidearmed, very effectively, for a long time.  However, at some point this practice bites you in the butt and you find yourself with an injured arm.

Keyboarding is the same thing.  Those of us who hold an office job do it every day, often for hours at a time.  We become very skilled at it, and it becomes "natural".  But all the information that we have about carpal tunnel syndrome and other repetitive stress injuries tell us that this activity is unnatural, is not good for us, and can injure us if we do it long enough.

In martial arts, we see many methods to do something.  And in their own way, they all must be effective, or else they wouldn't survive within an art today.  But maybe they are not all equal, with regard to long-term viability.  And even this is something that is very difficult to determine, as everyone will be affected differently.  One person may do something his whole life and have no trouble with it, while another person may do the same thing, identically, and develop severe problems because of it.  So it can be difficult to make sweeping statements that "this" or "that" is just plain wrong, because there will always be at least some anecdotal evidence that suggests otherwise.

maybe this is one goal of SL4: to find the most effective way of doing something, that research indicates also causes the least negative wear and tear on the body while doing it.  It doesn't mean it is the ONLY effective way to do something.  It also doesn't necessarily mean that those who do it differently are GUARANTEED to be injured because of it.  But with extra attention paid to the avoidance of wear and tear, along side maximizing effect, maybe that gives it something more.

Just trying to put it all together.


----------



## Doc (Sep 20, 2006)

HKphooey said:


> I guess my only disagreement is only one way to properly kick or that if you are doing "commercial" kenpo you are doing it wrong.  Sorry for all the sports anologies.


There is only ONE correct way to do ONE particular kick. Now if we examine the act of walking, we have variables but they all still consistently fall with within the anatomically correct definition. We can take small steps, or medium or long steps. We can change the speed of all of the above and move from walking to jogging to running. All different but all can and should be done anatomically correct. I suspect the variables you see as a 'different' way to do something are really a varied application on a correct anatomical theme. 

Sir, you can't ever find anywhere where I said 'commercial makes it wrong.' What I have always said is, "no mater what you do, the teacher, their knowledge, and their ability to teach will always be the deciding factor, commerical or not."

There are people teaching non-commercial traditional arts wrong, as well as commercial arts. Obviously the commercial arts have proliferated because of business and money making opportunities, so you will find more incompetence there. But in the end, whether it's commercial or not a unknowledgeable teacher has the same impact.

Sports analogies are actually one of the best ways to make comparisons. 

God article sir. If baseball pitchers would learn to BAM, they would extend their effective pitching life.


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 20, 2006)

Doc, I just wish the Red Sox pitchers would learn that!  

_"Those born of and reared in the commercial context began their study sans basics or Indexes at shorthand, thus lacking the proper foundation upon which to build and grow. Therefore, whatever level of skill acquired in general will level out, with no opportunity to reach higher. It is a functional ceiling built into the methodology."_

Sorry if i took you words out of context. :asian:  My bad!


----------



## Doc (Sep 20, 2006)

HKphooey said:


> Doc, I just wish the Red Sox pitchers would learn that!
> 
> _"Those born of and reared in the commercial context began their study sans basics or Indexes at shorthand, thus lacking the proper foundation upon which to build and grow. Therefore, whatever level of skill acquired in general will level out, with no opportunity to reach higher. It is a functional ceiling built into the methodology."_
> 
> Sorry if i took you words out of context. :asian:  My bad!



Actually, your point is well taken sir, but it was a generality. Unfortunately most do actually fall into this category, and most of the original 'Ancients and Seniors' agree on this point. Keep me on my toes sir, and give me no slack.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Sep 20, 2006)

I just finished reviewing an old biomechanics text on complex kinematic chains, and their specifics (right/wrong, good form that aids/bad form that injures or depletes efficiency) in sports applications (minute dissection of tennis serves, pitching throws, golf swings, and the specific muscular firing sequences optimal for each, as well as the analysis of dyskenisias in these chains...how to spot them when the correct sequence is deviated from, and how to fix it).

I am reminded throughout this text of SL4 concepts, and brought back to an appreciation of the subtleties in SL4 that make a difference.

*For an experiment in optimal kinematic chain recruitment and indexing...(this might be fodder for a different thread, but it kinda fits here...)*

In lotsa kenpo, a lead hand back-knuckle is thrown point-of origin to point of contact. In SL4, we usually do something else on the way to the back-knuckle to recruit some buncha muscles and improve joint and structural stability as we go. Some of what we do is considered "bad form" in many kenpo circles. Example: In a technique with a glancing inward elbow to the ribs, followed immediately by an outward elbow to the other side of the ribs, I reach with my hand really far after the inward elbow, to c o c k for the outward elbow. I get told (at non-SL4 schools) not to do that; it violates economy of motion. Nevermind that the actual blow lands like a ton of bricks; gotta keep it short and snappy.

But back to the backfist, and a motion/force experiment that involves complex kinematic chains. Take a right neutral bow facing a heavy bad, or whatever your target of choice is (friend holding focus pad, etc.). Throw your best, fastest, hardest backfist to your 12:00 target. Pay attention to how hard it hits, and what your shoulder feels like near or at the time of contact. Throw a few in a row, warming up to doing it harder each time.

Next, with your right lead hand, before you throw the backfist, throw a vertical thrust punch type of motion to 9:00 on the ground clock. (or, if you're using a compass, your bad guy is at North, and you extend a punch or simply straighten your arm out towards West).  You're going to combine 2 moves. Imagine drawing a bowstring back towards you, from that 9:00 position. Elbow high. When your hand is about 4 to 6 inches from your shoulder, switch directions to throw the backfist to 12:00. Do it a couple times so that your hand is sling-shotting around the hitch in the shoulder, instead of stopping at the 90-ish degree angle that it clears while changing directions. In other words, round the corner from the bowstring pull, to the backfist. Warm into it with a few slow-mo practice runs, then pick up the pace to full speed & full power. Add a slap check: About a 16th of a second before the backfist hits the target, use your left hand to slap yourself on the anterior deltiod/biceps/pectoralis tie-in on the front of your right shoulder.

Do it on your heavy bag/target a couple of times, and notice the stability in your shoulder. Also notice the improved power in the strike. It may SEEM to move more slowly because of the extra distance you're travelling (from the extended punch starting point, back towards your body, then out to the backfist). HOWEVER!!!! now go back and throw your original lead hand backfist to the target again. You should notice a couple of things:

1. The standard method is weaker, slower, and had some odd "hitches" in the shoulder joint as it elevates and extends.

2. Despite the extra distance to cover en route, the "indexed" version is faster. Meaning, from the time the starters pistol goes off and it leaves the starting blocks at the vertical punch to 9:00 position, to the time it lands actually takes less time than when you throw it from a lead-hand fighting position.

3. Going back to the standard way leaves you feeling like you're straining or hurting your joints. Because you are.

Have fun,

Dave


----------



## Sigung86 (Sep 20, 2006)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:


> I just finished reviewing an old biomechanics text on complex kinematic chains, and their specifics (right/wrong, good form that aids/bad form that injures or depletes efficiency) in sports applications (minute dissection of tennis serves, pitching throws, golf swings, and the specific muscular firing sequences optimal for each, as well as the analysis of dyskenisias in these chains...how to spot them when the correct sequence is deviated from, and how to fix it).
> 
> I am reminded throughout this text of SL4 concepts, and brought back to an appreciation of the subtleties in SL4 that make a difference.
> 
> ...



That, sir... Was well written.  I didn't realize until I read your description that I have been "roughly" doing that for a good many years. Then with the advent of my introduction to Doc those years ago, I began slap checking with it. Didn't know I was doing it "right"!  It just felt good that way.

Now ... Talk to me about the whys and wherefores of PAMs on my thighs.

Reason I ask is that again, for years, before I throw a kick, I have been slapping on the distal anterior outer portion of first, the kicking leg thigh, followed immeidately by the slap on the anterior distal outer portion of the supporting leg thigh.  I've been told I shouldn't do that, because it is a "tell".  On the other hand, it does seem to lend an aura of stability to my kicks.  I wish I could remember where I picked it up.   Is it good?  Bad?  No matter?  Simply a warning that I am about to kick?

Thanks,

Dan


----------



## Danjo (Sep 20, 2006)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:


> I just finished reviewing an old biomechanics text on complex kinematic chains, and their specifics (right/wrong, good form that aids/bad form that injures or depletes efficiency) in sports applications (minute dissection of tennis serves, pitching throws, golf swings, and the specific muscular firing sequences optimal for each, as well as the analysis of dyskenisias in these chains...how to spot them when the correct sequence is deviated from, and how to fix it).
> 
> I am reminded throughout this text of SL4 concepts, and brought back to an appreciation of the subtleties in SL4 that make a difference.
> 
> ...


 
Damn, that works!


----------



## Doc (Sep 21, 2006)

Sigung86 said:


> That, sir... Was well written.  I didn't realize until I read your description that I have been "roughly" doing that for a good many years. Then with the advent of my introduction to Doc those years ago, I began slap checking with it. Didn't know I was doing it "right"!  It just felt good that way.
> 
> Now ... Talk to me about the whys and wherefores of PAMs on my thighs.
> 
> ...


PAM's omly refer to the lower platform and feet.

The reason your BAM's on your legs feel good is because your hips are out of line to begin with, and the BAM helps to re-align them. Kicking requires multiple mechanisms including but not limited to; foot indexes, leg indexes, hand and arm indexes, and BAM's.


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 21, 2006)

This link was just sent to me from my sister who runs a PT center.

There is a flash animation of the skeletal/muscel structure in a kick/running.

http://science.education.nih.gov/supplements/nih6/Bone/activities/activities_toc.htm


----------



## marlon (Sep 21, 2006)

Doc said:


> I agree. Most of the differences between the traditional Chinese Arts are philosophical based on a variety of factors. One of them for example, is environmental, and explains the differences in philosophy between Northern and Southern Traditional styles.
> 
> But the more you examine the core, the more you see they are alike arriving at similar goals. Think of them as different kinds of trains running on different tracks, but all running properly principled with the same destination.
> 
> ...


 

Doc What do you think of san chin kata in relation to alignment and mechanics?

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon (Sep 21, 2006)

This discussion is wonderful nad practrical.  Thanks for the info an dhelp all of you

Marlon


----------



## marlon (Sep 21, 2006)

Sigung86 said:


> I had absolutely nothing significant to add. However, thanks for thought material guys. This discussion all occurred while I was teaching and then spending extended hours on attempting to get my budding "eBay Career" off the ground, and so, I had to wait until this morning.
> 
> However, it was an interesting conversation we had last night after class. Some students do get it. Last night I ran a 2 hour class of just basics, and working on getting the appropriate limbs in the appropriate places, correctly.
> 
> ...


 

I think Doc has given me about as much info as i can learn without actually training with him.  the experimentation i have done has been fantastic.  i have used mainly his pam and bam concepts to revisit my basics of stance and alignment and apply this strictly to techniques and combo's and the differences have been powerful and exceptional.  my kempo skill has increased exponenttionally and of course now i emphasize these things more and with better understanding when i teach.  When i take apart my forms i keep these things in mind and things become more claer and effective...better breathing and movement actually give me more time to pull off techniques.  This stuff is great...of course should i ever meet Doc he will probably take everything i do apart and put it back together as something i recognmize ...sort of  but different...but this is what i have to work with.  Basic are basics and bassics are powerful

Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## marlon (Sep 21, 2006)

marlon said:


> Yes me too, only i live too fart away. Doc can you name a chinese or okinawan form that particularly stands out to you as teaching indexing through posture as you mentioned?
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
sorry i should really proff read these things.....i live too far away...not the other word

marlon


----------



## Danjo (Sep 21, 2006)

marlon said:


> sorry i should really proff read these things.....i live too far away...not the other word
> 
> marlon


 
Not to mention you "Nad practice" from the earlier post


----------



## Flying Crane (Sep 21, 2006)

marlon said:


> Doc What do you think of san chin kata in relation to alignment and mechanics?
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 

I can't comment on the body mechanics, and I don't know the kata but I have seen it performed.  As I suggested in my earlier post, I have heard that its tension exercises place dangerous stress on the heart, and can lead to heart disease.  It is sometimes said that Goju people who do San Chin, as well as Hung Gar people, die young if they train a lot.


----------



## marlon (Sep 21, 2006)

Flying Crane said:


> I can't comment on the body mechanics, and I don't know the kata but I have seen it performed. As I suggested in my earlier post, I have heard that its tension exercises place dangerous stress on the heart, and can lead to heart disease. It is sometimes said that Goju people who do San Chin, as well as Hung Gar people, die young if they train a lot.


 

San chin is not always done with hard tension.  some Chinese versions and then Uechi ryu version are not hard.

Marlon


----------



## marlon (Sep 21, 2006)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:


> I just finished reviewing an old biomechanics text on complex kinematic chains, and their specifics (right/wrong, good form that aids/bad form that injures or depletes efficiency) in sports applications (minute dissection of tennis serves, pitching throws, golf swings, and the specific muscular firing sequences optimal for each, as well as the analysis of dyskenisias in these chains...how to spot them when the correct sequence is deviated from, and how to fix it).
> 
> I am reminded throughout this text of SL4 concepts, and brought back to an appreciation of the subtleties in SL4 that make a difference.
> 
> ...


 

This is good stuff.  It brings up a point that has come up in class with the students .  i emphasize body mechanics that the students find slow things down  such  as a  proper crane to the front before pivoting into the side kick...not dropping the knee ...etc  my explaination so far has been the this is the optimal form for maximal effect and that in a crisis situation you will loose some of the form of your practice.  Therefore if you already start your practice with suboptimal basics then when you need them you are really below the mark.  however, i like the way sl4 just says it is the correct way period.
again i have never trained with Doc so the body mechanics may not match what he teaches but the idae is the same

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Doc (Sep 21, 2006)

.


----------



## Doc (Sep 21, 2006)

marlon said:


> This is good stuff.  It brings up a point that has come up in class with the students .  i emphasize body mechanics that the students find slow things down  such  as a  proper crane to the front before pivoting into the side kick...not dropping the knee ...etc  my explaination so far has been the this is the optimal form for maximal effect and that in a crisis situation you will loose some of the form of your practice.  Therefore if you already start your practice with suboptimal basics then when you need them you are really below the mark.  however, i like the way sl4 just says it is the correct way period.
> again i have never trained with Doc so the body mechanics may not match what he teaches but the idae is the same
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


Consider my comments about kicking and the multiple mechanisms and postures necessary to perform them correctly without injury. I too like you sir, demand everything is performed correctly. Once a student asked me if I was too demanding. I told him that if a technique requires 10 things to be most efficient, but in the process of applying them in stressful reality you screw up 5, you can still survive and be effective. However if in training I only demanded 5, and you easily screwed up 3 or 4, than you got nothing.

As an example, when all of the mechanisms are in play, if you were to charge to grapple with one of my students in the midst of performing a roundhouse kick, you would not knock him off his feet or balance. He would either complete the kick, or bounce back into a strong stance.

There is an obssesion with speed in most people. Wanting to be fast is normal, expecially in the arts. Somehow Kenpo has acquired more than its share of 'need for speed' over and above basics. This is mostly because 'basics' after the early sixties were never consistently taught by Mr. Parker, instead switching to a conceptual model to allow him freedom of movement between his many schools and students. 

Basics require a knowledgeable teacher, pounding and making constant, and sometime small corrections consistently every class. This was physically impossible, so 'basics' died in favor of 'concepts.' Therefore, in general, no one actually knows them at a finite level. Instead the business of kenpo switched to teaching 'self-defense techniques, forms and sets' conceptually over the finite basics needed to support the physical actions.

Students always want to be fast, inspite of the fact in no physical activity do you began learning this way. Every physical activity starts with learning the basic movements slowly and correctly, with speed building a little at a time until the movement is inculcated and 'natural' in execution - except kenpo.  

I pick my students carefully, and anyone who does not have the commitment to learn correctly is rejected.

As far as sanchin, there are various versions and rather than step on someone feelings, I'll just generally say the 'knee in' position in male practitioners is acceptable on a limited basis, but requires a compensating drop in height. It is also NOT designed for mobility as some have used it. Dynamic tension of this type can exacerbate other subtle problems with larynx, blood pressure, heart disease, and stroke potential over time.

Marlon, keep doing what you're doing sir. As your knowledge improves pass it on to your students. Do the best you can do, and when you can, do better. The 'idea' is important. Too bad more don't have it.


----------



## Danjo (Sep 21, 2006)

Doc said:


> Consider my comments about kicking and the multiple mechanisms and postures necessary to perform them correctly without injury. I too like you sir, demand everything is performed correctly. Once a student asked me if I was too demanding. I told him that if a technique requires 10 things to be most efficient, but in the process of applying them in stressful reality you screw up 5, you can still survive and be effective. However if in training I only demanded 5, and you easily screwed up 3 or 4, than you got nothing.
> 
> As an example, when all of the mechanisms are in play, if you were to charge to grapple with one of my students in the midst of performing a roundhouse kick, you would not knock him off his feet or balance. He would either complete the kick, or bounce back into a strong stance.
> 
> ...


 
Doc, 

how many "Naturals" do you come across when it comes to picking up techniques quickly? The reason I ask is that in an article by Ed Parker he once talked about working out with Bruce Lee. He said that Lee could watch you do a technique once and do it as well as you did it the first time and the second time he would do it better. Was this exaggeration on Mr. Parker's part? If not, how many other naturals like that have you come across?


----------



## Doc (Sep 21, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Doc,
> 
> how many "Naturals" do you come across when it comes to picking up techniques quickly? The reason I ask is that in an article by Ed Parker he once talked about working out with Bruce Lee. He said that Lee could watch you do a technique once and do it as well as you did it the first time and the second time he would do it better. Was this exaggeration on Mr. Parker's part? If not, how many other naturals like that have you come across?



Certainly some have more physical gifts than others, but as far as 'naturals' go, some may be gifted in one aspect but lousy in others. This is more likely the case with all humans. If you are talking about a singular, or a few particular movements, there are lots of 'naturals.' But overall this trait would be beyond rare.

Some may have a 'gift' of hand and eye coordination to swing a bat making contact with the ball, but end up playing first base because they're lousy fielders. Or, how about the 'pure shooter' in basketball who can't go to the hole, or play defense, or the opposite player who only can play defense and can't shoot at all.

With regard to Bruce Lee, he was indeed very gifted. However, having seen him train and workout, I don't consider him having been anymore 'natural' than a Frank Trejo, Lenny Ferguson, or Frank Wilson. Frank Trejo was a 'natural' who could 'fight' in any venue you might choose and win. Frank Wilson was the fastest person I have ever seen in my life hands and feet with untold natural ability. (yes, faster than Bruce Lee) I recruited Lenny Ferguson out of my old "Wah Que" studio and he too had natural 'gifts.' 

What did make Bruce unique was his intelligence, and willingness to set everything else aside and train like a mad man with a maniacal focus and ignore other facets of his life. Anyone with physical gifts who does the same will probably achieve similar results.

My point is a simple one; The personal drive to train coupled with some physical gifts it what set Bruce apart. Not some 'natural' talent that tranlated to all aspects of the many facets of the arts in my opinion.


----------



## Danjo (Sep 22, 2006)

Doc said:


> Certainly some have more physical gifts than others, but as far as 'naturals' go, some may be gifted in one aspect but lousy in others. This is more likely the case with all humans. If you are talking about a singular, or a few particular movements, there are lots of 'naturals.' But overall this trait would be beyond rare.
> 
> Some may have a 'gift' of hand and eye coordination to swing a bat making contact with the ball, but end up playing first base because they're lousy fielders. Or, how about the 'pure shooter' in basketball who can't go to the hole, or play defense, or the opposite player who only can play defense and can't shoot at all.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks Doc. That was a very good answer. It fits with my experience also. There seem to be people that pick things up very quickly and then do them very well, but it still took them time to develop into what they became later on. Bo Jackson was very versatile and very talented but he wasn't the best at either sport he played. Michael Jordan was, IMO, the greatest basketball player that ever stepped on the court (appologies to Dr. J), but it still took him a while to get there. And he never could play baseball very well.


----------



## marlon (Sep 22, 2006)

Doc said:


> Consider my comments about kicking and the multiple mechanisms and postures necessary to perform them correctly without injury. I too like you sir, demand everything is performed correctly. Once a student asked me if I was too demanding. I told him that if a technique requires 10 things to be most efficient, but in the process of applying them in stressful reality you screw up 5, you can still survive and be effective. However if in training I only demanded 5, and you easily screwed up 3 or 4, than you got nothing.
> 
> As an example, when all of the mechanisms are in play, if you were to charge to grapple with one of my students in the midst of performing a roundhouse kick, you would not knock him off his feet or balance. He would either complete the kick, or bounce back into a strong stance.
> 
> ...


 
thank you Sir for the advice and all the help you have given and i am sure will continue to give

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon (Sep 22, 2006)

I almost quit when my first teacher closed her school, because where she used to constantly correct everything ( the angle of my wrist the position of my elbow , my chin, my feet, my wieght distribution...everything during the drill even!!), my second teacher would wait months before correcting things and then tear into you so you felt like you knew nothing!  I felt like i was not being taught at the second school, but i adapted and learned that my training was primarily my responsiblility and looked forward to those times when she would lay all my effort to waste and then put it back together again.  Many did not like it and hated those times of focused attention...they were for me the next best thing to being tested...and you never knew when it was coming.  I still miss my first teacher with the constant corrections and teach more that way myself but i did learn to take responsibility for my own growth.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------

