# Training differences: EPAK & Tracy Schools



## jstronghawk (Mar 7, 2011)

I am new to the Kenpo world and this forum, but not Martial Arts. I trained in a Southern Chinese system for about 4 years before my instructor moved to Arizona. So, I went searching for a new art and found my way to Kenpo. 

I enrolled at a Tracy school and achieved an orange belt.

I am now trying an EPAK school and, I must say, the teaching between the two systems is vastly different.

I have done a lot of research and everyone posts about just how similar the systems are. While I understand the techniques are the same/similar, how it is taught is different enough for me to post an inquiry here. 

At the Tracy school, my private class consisted of learning the techniques (40 for orange belt), and then boxing drills. The group classes are kickboxing/conditioning classes, no review of techniques, no timing/sensitivity drills, etc. I really felt something was missing, which is why I have enrolled into an EPAK school.

At the EPAK School, they focus a lot on the techniques and have different drills which re-enforce techniques, etc. I am absolutely enjoying the technical aspects and feel at home.

Are these training differences normal between Tracy and EPAK? 

Thank you for reading! 

Jerry


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 7, 2011)

Hi Jerry,

As a former Tracy guy myself, I'll give you my observations.  First, I do not believe there is such a thing as EPAK.  When Mr. Parker passed away, all unity in kenpo fell apart and there is no centralized leadership, nor standardization in how the curriculum is practiced.  Instead, there are many people who trained with Mr. Parker and who now head their own lineage of kenpo, based on what they learned from him and how they practice.  Ultimately, all branches of kenpo that came from Mr. Parker, are probably more realistically described by their lineage.  Tracy kenpo would fall into this as well.  It is simply kenpo as learned from Mr. Parker by the Tracys, and that is what they teach.  They simply split from Mr. Parker earlier than most of the rest, so later lineages may have greater similarity in their curriculum, but ultimately there is separation between them.  If you peruse the Kenpo discussions, you will see many people representing many lineages of Parker-derived kenpo, attempting to discuss ideas and techniques and whatnot, and those coming from different lineages seem to disagree more than they agree on a lot of things.  

Lots of people still call it "EPAK" and differentiate Tracys as separate from "EPAK", but I simply do not see that as an accurate reflection of reality.  We have lineages such as Tracy, Frank Trejo, Larry Tatum, Ron Chapel (he posts here under the moniker "DOC"), Bob White, Chuck Sullivan, Huk Planas, etc.  These are all people who studied under Mr. Parker directly, and who now head up their own lineages.

I've never studied any lineage other than Tracys, so I cannot speak for any of them as to how they train.  Likewise, in Tracys, I believe there can be a lot of variation between teachers as to how they structure their class sessions.  Some people have other outside influences that may color their sessions as well.  Really, it depends greatly on the specific school and instructor.


----------



## jstronghawk (Mar 7, 2011)

Ok, that makes sense form everything I have been reading.

The "EPAK" lineage I am referring to comes from Mr. Willy Steele here in San Diego.  The instructor is Mr. Gary Wilson and he explained to me the school curreculium as being the 24 tech system and they are keeping it true to the way Mr. Parker was teaching it at the time of his passing.  

The Tracy School was opened by Richard "Dick" Willett in 1968. 

It is my understanding that both schools offer great instruction.

Thank you for clarifying, I appreciate your post!

Jerry


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 7, 2011)

Flying Crane said:


> Hi Jerry,
> 
> As a former Tracy guy myself, I'll give you my observations.  First, I do not believe there is such a thing as EPAK.  When Mr. Parker passed away, all unity in kenpo fell apart and there is no centralized leadership, nor standardization in how the curriculum is practiced.  Instead, there are many people who trained with Mr. Parker and who now head their own lineage of kenpo, based on what they learned from him and how they practice.  Ultimately, all branches of kenpo that came from Mr. Parker, are probably more realistically described by their lineage.  Tracy kenpo would fall into this as well.  It is simply kenpo as learned from Mr. Parker by the Tracys, and that is what they teach.  They simply split from Mr. Parker earlier than most of the rest, so later lineages may have greater similarity in their curriculum, but ultimately there is separation between them.  If you peruse the Kenpo discussions, you will see many people representing many lineages of Parker-derived kenpo, attempting to discuss ideas and techniques and whatnot, and those coming from different lineages seem to disagree more than they agree on a lot of things.
> 
> ...


Sir, While EPAK may have a different flavor and direction everywhere you look, it still exists. LOL


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 7, 2011)

Touch Of Death said:


> Sir, While EPAK may have a different flavor and direction everywhere you look, it still exists. LOL


 
that would be a difference of opinion  ;-P


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 7, 2011)

Flying Crane said:


> that would be a difference of opinion  ;-P


Is not an opinion that numerous schools claim to be Ed Parkers, nor is it and opinion that they share Parker terminology; however, if you, or people you respect want to play a game of semantics, then by all means; go for it. But you will find more EPAK schools claiming to be EPAK than not.
Sean


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 7, 2011)

jstronghawk said:


> Ok, that makes sense form everything I have been reading.
> 
> The "EPAK" lineage I am referring to comes from Mr. Willy Steele here in San Diego. The instructor is Mr. Gary Wilson and he explained to me the school curreculium as being the 24 tech system and they are keeping it true to the way Mr. Parker was teaching it at the time of his passing.
> 
> ...


 
I am not familiar with the name of Willy Steele, did he study directly with Mr. Parker?  Perhaps others here might have insights on his lineage.

I know the name of Dick Willet, but I don't know anything about him specifically.  In my own Tracy training, we never specifically worked boxing or kick-boxing techniques or drills.  We spent a lot of time working on basics and drills to develop usefulness of SD techs and kata and stuff like that.  Again, that's how my instructor ran classes, but I can't speak for what others may be doing.

Ultimately you need to find what approach works best for you and what your goals and desires in training are, and find the school and teacher who can work effectively with you.  Not all schools will fit the bill, and one school may not work for you while another school in the same lineage may work well for you.  Find your fit and go with it.


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 7, 2011)

Touch Of Death said:


> Is not an opinion that numerous schools claim to be Ed Parkers, nor is it and opinion that they share Parker terminology; however, if you, or people you respect want to play a game of semantics, then by all means; go for it. But you will find more EPAK schools claiming to be EPAK than not.
> Sean


 

Oh I do not deny that at all.  I simply do not believe it is an accurate portrayal of reality.  Ain't nuthin personal against anyone.


----------



## Blindside (Mar 7, 2011)

jstronghawk said:


> Ok, that makes sense form everything I have been reading.
> 
> The "EPAK" lineage I am referring to comes from Mr. Willy Steele here in San Diego. The instructor is Mr. Gary Wilson and he explained to me the school curreculium as being the 24 tech system and they are keeping it true to the way Mr. Parker was teaching it at the time of his passing.
> 
> ...


 
Teachers make the art, in both arts the techniques, sets, and forms are the framework around which the art is built, the skeleton.  The teaching methodologies that ingrain those aspects into the student, that form the associations between the different techniques, and that allow expansion from the basic curriculum make the rest of the animal.  

I have trained with both Tracy and AK instructors and found a wide range of methodologies, some good, others not so good.  As Flying Crane said, it is usually about the teacher.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Mar 8, 2011)

Agree with Blind and Crane. The differences between EPAK and Tracy methodologies are much less than the differences between individual teachers within EPAK or Tracy.


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 8, 2011)

Agreed, you can find a Tracy school that trains exactly as you are looking for and you can find an EPAK school that trains exactly as you are looking for.  Then, you could also find schools in both that train in a way that you don't like.

Same goes with any styles.  I have known TKD schools that were hardcore and the training focused on realism and self-defense and didn't teach any kicks above the waist, and have known others that only focused on Olympic style sparring and didn't teach much self-defense.  Again, neither approach is better than the other, just that the particular school in question either meets or doesn't meet what I want in training.  If I am looking for S-D skills, I might not want to pick a sport oriented school that only trains that aspect.  If my goal is to be a competitor, I probably wouldn't want to pick the school that doesn't focus on tournaments at all.

The same could be said of some BJJ schools.  There are some that still focus on using it to protect themselves in the street and train accordingly.  Then there are some that only focus on the sport's side of it (some even will only practice from their knees since learning takedowns and falls is too time consuming and dangerous). Then there are alot that combine the two approaches in their training. The best school is going to be the one that focuses and trains based on what you want and expect.  Doesn't mean the other approaches are "bad" or "better" than the others.

I have known many people that like the art, but didn't like a particular school and switch schools until they find a school/instructor that they do like.  Sometimes, even two people switching from the same schools with each other and then bad mouthing the other one on what they didn't like.

When you find an art/school that YOU enjoy and develop as a person and it meets your training needs, stick with it and have fun!  Just don't get up in the politics of styles of who is better than who.  Not that your post sounded that way, just that many times Parker vs. Tracy things get very heated on the benefits of either approach.


----------



## jstronghawk (Mar 8, 2011)

Yes, I believe Mr. Steele did study under Mr. Parker and Jeff English. He then opened a school with Dan Laxson (I wanted to make sure I could trace the lineage).

Thanks to everyone for your feedback!

I do understand how everything can depend upon the instructor. I have experienced that myself in Kung Fu. 

I feel confident that Mr. Steele's school is teaching what fits me best at this time. My brother is currently at the Tracy school I tried and he is staying there since he is at green belt and enjoys the kickboxing and sparring emphasis. This is going to work great since I can learn book set from him 

Jerry


----------

