# Flores Bros Illustrated Journals



## cdhall (Jan 17, 2003)

What madness is this?

Manuals, with photographs?

You mean you could actually SEE the attack for Locking Horns for example? 

http://www.kenpo.com/fbkk/attackingmace.cfm

This looks like a great idea.  Does anyone have these or have you seen these manuals in person?

I'm going to start a separate thread under the Kenpo General to ask about the Flores Brothers.

These manuals look very cool.


----------



## tarabos (Jan 17, 2003)

looks like a nice touch. seems like common sense though to me. i guess us kenpo people aren't used manuals with photos...


----------



## jfarnsworth (Jan 17, 2003)

I think they may be onto something big there. If that catches on with more and more instructors. Well it may never happen. A good idea though.


----------



## cdhall (Jan 17, 2003)

Of course I was joking. It is an excellent idea.

However I think it may be completely eclipsed by DVDs.

But a picture book would be a lot handier and more accessible than a DVD.  I mean, you could Easily flip through the book on the mat wherever you were and not have to worry about a remote, or if everyone can see the TV... 

Excellent idea.

Who has one of these and can comment on it?

Mr. C?

I may be interested in getting one to look at.
:idea:


----------



## ikenpo (Jan 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cdhall _
> *Of course I was joking. It is an excellent idea.
> 
> However I think it may be completely eclipsed by DVDs.
> ...



Not eclipsed by DVD, how many have DVD's on the mat? But VHS may be eclipsed by DVD for sure...can't wait to be able to afford a burner..

I think the Tracy's have converted all of their manuals to picture/text format....

Also Skip Hancock's new Yellow Belt manual 2.0 has photos.."Now the Yellow Belt Manual comes complete with step by step photos of Self-Defense Techniques, Block Set #1, Short Form #1 and the Freestyle Techniques." with more to come I'm sure. 

He also has the most reasonable Kenpo videos out at about $22.50 a piece. He has technique, weapons, historical and freestyle videos for all of you who don't do them in your curriculum, but want to learn them. www.kenpo2000.com


----------



## cdhall (Jan 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jbkenpo _
> *Also Skip Hancock's new Yellow Belt manual 2.0 has photos...www.kenpo2000.com *



Thanks.  That is good to hear!  I'll check.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Jan 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jbkenpo _
> * www.kenpo2000.com *



Is that link correct? I keep coming up with a page can't be displayed. Maybe it's a .net or something?


----------



## Brother John (Jan 17, 2003)

Might be that $$$ holds most back from this fine move as it would really up the cost of production.
just a thought...
Your Brother (who has little to no $$$)
John


----------



## Blindside (Jan 17, 2003)

I don't think the cost would be that high.

About 5 years ago I bought the Submission Fighter's Handbook which is a three inch thick binder with 600 pages of info in it.  All of the techniques; punching; kicking; and lots and lots of grappling are taken as video capture.  The pictures are clear, informative, and go along with a written description.  

The whole shebang cost $70.

If a kenpo instructor charged only $15 for each manual it should outpace the cost of production, especially since they have the written half of the curriculum essentially done.

There is absolutely no reason why someone couldn't go out and do this, except that it would take time.  And I expect that many instructors are set in their ways.

I applaud those instructors out there who are making the available training material better.  (So whoever is going to do the multiple angle DVD instructional series, get going!!!)  I saw a DVD player over the holidays for 50 bucks, I think I could afford to put that in my studio (if I owned one).

Lamont


----------



## ikenpo (Jan 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jfarnsworth _
> *Is that link correct? I keep coming up with a page can't be displayed. Maybe it's a .net or something? *



No,

www.kenpo2000.com is correct. I just attached it to the original message incorrectly...

jb:asian:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jan 17, 2003)

is the different references that many have out there, if you are with Steve LaBounty, Tom Kelly, Paul Mills, Ron Chape'l, Huk Planas or anyone else ..... these books may not help you all that much due to the specific material that each one does.  Groups have different interpretations and drills on many aspects of the art from basics, to techniques, to forms to etc., etc..

Without a standard base, these materials are only the authors point of view, and valuable to those who follow that particular curriculum.  Other than that just a "Kenpo Collectible" for anyone else for curiosity.  

I have seen many different sources and have my own personal training aids for the IKKO as well.  Each to his own.

:asian:


----------



## Doc (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> *is the different references that many have out there, if you are with Steve LaBounty, Tom Kelly, Paul Mills, Ron Chape'l, Huk Planas or anyone else ..... these books may not help you all that much due to the specific material that each one does.  Groups have different interpretations and drills on many aspects of the art from basics, to techniques, to forms to etc., etc..
> 
> Without a standard base, these materials are only the authors point of view, and valuable to those who follow that particular curriculum.  Other than that just a "Kenpo Collectible" for anyone else for curiosity.
> ...



Smartass.


----------



## cdhall (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> *...Without a standard base, these materials are only the authors point of view, and valuable to those who follow that particular curriculum.  Other than that just a "Kenpo Collectible" for anyone else for curiosity...*



Sir,

Does it then follow therefore that with a standard base these can be a useful reference guide?

I mean if someone is in the intermediate/brown belt level then someone else's illustrated manual should serve as a handy reference, no?

Also, if we all had an illlustrated manual to refer to, then the Kenpo Technical discussion thread might not turn into a dozen posts on how to do the Headlock for Locking Horns properly.  

I still don't know how Doc says that should be done.

It is too bad that there is not a good set of reference materials that we can all use, particularly when trying to discuss Kenpo on the internet.

I am hopeful that Mr. Speakman's DVD's will contain lots of useful information.  I mean, we deviate from The Manual slightly in about 5 instances but I know what those instances are.  I am thinking from what he said in his seminar and what he has seen that his demonstrations will be 90%+ accurate for each technique and that I can simply make a note of where we deviate.

Maybe not.  I guess "Ed Parker's American Kenpo" which was theoretically once standardized everywhere has now become "Your Teachers American Kenpo" and no two school are alike?

I missed my chance to "get the goods" from Mr. Parker and it looks like from what you are saying, that "the goods" ain't there anymore. 

Does that mean that if you and I worked through the entire system as Mr. Parker taught it to you, that it would be different from how Mr. Parker would have taken me through it or even that it would also be different from how Mr. Parker took you through it?

I think this question is at the root of my Journey. If I can quit trying to learn what Mr. Parker "might" have taught me, I might "loosen up" and progress faster.  

And then once I get all this Motion Kenpo stuff down I can go to Doc perhaps and start over doing it completely differently.  

It's like The Neverending Story (I need to rent that, I know my son watched at least one of them about 8 years ago).

As you can see, I'm confused on this "standardization" topic/issue.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cdhall _
> *As you can see, I'm confused on this "standardization" topic/issue.*



You are not alone. I think there are quite a few of us out here like that. I'm not speaking for everyone just myself.


----------



## SingingTiger (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cdhall _
> *As you can see, I'm confused on this "standardization" topic/issue.*



Nope, you're definitely not alone.

I'm studying at a "kenpo karate" school.  It wasn't until I started reading this board that I found out that I'm not studying what is now called "Ed Parker's American Kenpo."  I talked with the owner quite a bit, and he told me that what he teaches is a combination of what Ed Parker was teaching back in the 60's, with some older Tracy material thrown in (since he came from a Tracy school).  Many of our self-defense techniques are similar or identical to the descriptions I've seen here and on Michael Billings' website; for example, I just learned that we have "Lone Kimono," it's just got a different name (thanks for posting that, Jason!).

On the one hand, it _is_ confusing having different curriculums, and having techniques (and probably basics, too) taught differently.  But on the other hand, I think that's somewhat inevitable, even between organizations that purport to teach the same curriculum.  You can't really insert too much interpretation when you're teaching "2+2=4," but when you get into something three-dimensional and have to teach something like, "first you move like this, and then you move like that," well, I think that minor variations are bound to crop up.

I'm still considering looking into an EPAK school that's somewhat local (I think it's about twice as far from my home as my current school is, but that's not prohibitively far).  But I've decided not to get too worked up over the differences in the meantime, I just read how people do things differently and see if I can learn from them.  From what I've seen so far, the owner of my school knows plenty about body mechanics and how to move, and that's really what I got into it for.

I also have no desire to go through a five-hour test, or get kicked in the stomach.  

Rich


----------



## Doc (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cdhall _
> *Sir,
> 
> Does it then follow therefore that with a standard base these can be a useful reference guide?
> ...



Remember I said the curriculum in the commercial system is interpreted by the head instructor of a school or group. But unfortunatelly because of the nature of the way most of them teach, "what ifs" have taken on a life of their own and even then there is no set curriculum. It is a fact we spend our time   discussion here asking the question, "How do you do it?" This points out something else I've stated. The conceptual interpretive nature of the material was designed to be the most benefit to the individual giving him the flexibility to make it work for him.  Therefore it has no real "set" curriculum and never has. It does have "set concepts" but concepts  too are flexibly intereprete as well. Even reading about the "Five Element Theory" on another string, I saw someone had created there own that couldn't be farther from what it really is in TCM. But it apparently works and that is all Ed Parker intended to create. So when someone says something "won't work" it doesn't matter as long as the person who uses thinks it will. Anything else is  being "silly."

Anyway as far as the "pictured manual" I experimented with this about 7 years ago and  found for our curriculum it was useless. It also creates some intresting problems in a  "system" that allows interpretations and we don't. So if it won't work for a standardized curriculum, an interpretive one spells failure in my opinion.

Remember these  "manuals" were orginally designed for instructors not students. There was only supposed to be enough information in them to keep the teacher in the "general area" of the attack and defense to keep the assaults broad. I remember looking at a "manual" created by a "kenpo" school I visited. Apparantly they had never heard of the "Web of Knowledge" and their manuals were about 80% right punches, 15% left puches, and about 5% grabs.

I have some bad news for  everyone. If you check your history, the word "ken/mpo" is and always has been "generic" as the word "karate." Only Ed Parker began working on something specific and he didn't finish. He only established one aspect through some of his concepts. I know , I know,

Silly rabbitt, what's up Doc?

Hey Doug, a visit will enlighten you but you won't be any less confused,  but what do I know!

ThththththThat's all folks!

I'm sorry I just feel soooo  "silly."


----------



## Sigung86 (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *Silly rabbitt, what's up Doc?
> 
> Hey Doug, a visit will enlighten you but you won't be any less confused,  but what do I know!
> ...



Silly Doc!  Tricks are for kids!  :lol:

Standardization?  The wave of the past! :soapbox: 


As he did not mention it, I feel compelled to tell you that the good Doc was already ahead of the game.  He has/had a cdrom out somewhere in the vicinity of "a little over a year ago".

The Tracy manuals with photos have been available for a little over a year...   Unfortunately, even with manuals with pictures, there are many Tracy schools that are just as "different" in their interpretations as there are EPAK schools.  And that is pretty interesting in that Tracy's, "by definition", isn't really an interpretive system.  It just comes off that way in the hands of some of the instructors!  :lol: :lol: :lol:

Saintly Uncle Dan :asian: :rofl: :asian:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> Sir, Does it then follow therefore that with a standard base these can be a useful reference guide?
> *



Even with a standard "base" any specific techniques shown in pictures only depicts the exact ideas that the author starts with, unless it has several additional pics that explain options.   

Besides, some "bases" (basics - technique - forms) I have seen have quite a bit of difference between them!  So any such manuals are best used with the system that they were made for.



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> I mean if someone is in the intermediate/brown belt level then someone else's illustrated manual should serve as a handy reference, no?
> *



All ranks are not created equal.....  this includes... (Colored - Brown & Black Belts), just because you wear that color doesn't mean that you are at any level of competence or understanding, it depends on the individual.



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> Also, if we all had an illustrated manual to refer to, then the Kenpo Technical discussion thread might not turn into a dozen posts on how to do the Headlock for Locking Horns properly.
> *



I doubt it..... there is always another's opinion on how to do something, so as to differences.... that is the spice of life my friend.



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> It is too bad that there is not a good set of reference materials that we can all use, particularly when trying to discuss Kenpo on the internet.
> *



Yes, I agree........ if we all worked from a central point of reference it would be most helpful not to waste time talking about useless topics that are never-ending and get down to actually training the material vs. talking about all the options.



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> I guess "Ed Parker's American Kenpo" which was theoretically once standardized everywhere has now become "Your Teachers American Kenpo" and no two school are alike?
> *



Correct-a-mundo  He was, imho, in fact theoretically standardized and still is!   It is the Teachers that utilize different points of reference that are different..... many, many share the same basics and principles..... but use different "examples" to teach the system.  It has been and still is ....... Ed Parkers American Kenpo.  



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> I missed my chance to "get the goods" from Mr. Parker and it looks like from what you are saying, that "the goods" isn't there anymore.
> *



Of course the goods are still there......don't be silly.  If you would have studied directly with Ed Parker.... you'd be in the mix today discussing your perceptions and interpretations along with everyone else.   All you missed  was having your own personal stories.



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> Does that mean that if you and I worked through the entire system as Mr. Parker taught it to you, that it would be different from how Mr. Parker would have taken me through it or even that it would also be different from how Mr. Parker took you through it?
> *



Yes, due to the "methodology of teaching the Art" that Mr. Parker prescribed to.  He would teach a person or group based upon his "feelings and experiences" from that specific group.  He would analyze and decide the best way to clearly illustrate or depict the ideas he was trying to teach who he was in front of.  This unique (and admirable, I might add) method of transmitting information is why he utilized so many different examples to get the same effect or point across.   He wanted to share his art with whom he was teaching in a language filled with examples, that he felt they would understand the best.



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> I think this question is at the root of my Journey. If I can quit trying to learn what Mr. Parker "might" have taught me, I might "loosen up" and progress faster.
> *



You gain wisdom child!



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> And then once I get all this Kenpo stuff down I can go to Doc perhaps and start over doing it completely differently.
> 
> It's like The Never-ending Story (I need to rent that, I know my son watched at least one of them about 8 years ago).
> *



Yes, isn't that wonderful ....(Re-read your green belt pledge!)



> _Originally posted by cdhall _*
> As you can see, I'm confused on this "standardization" topic/issue.
> *



Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I have a firm foundation of basics and have had for over 25 years!  The IKKO develops the 3 - Divisions of the Art in a methodical and standardized way to insure a minimal amount of confusion about anything.... rather the difficult measure is the standard of skill that needs to be obtained from the vast knowledge and skilled base.  

Once an adequate base is learned and ingrained, it is not and option but a "must" to investigate & explore other possibilities and concepts that others may share to compare and expand ones variables.  To gain vast knowledge you must seek and if you do..... you will find.
:asian:


----------



## Doc (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> *Even with a standard "base" any specific techniques shown in pictures only depicts the exact ideas that the author starts with, unless it has several additional pics that explain options.
> 
> Besides, some "bases" (basics - technique - forms) I have seen have quite a bit of difference between them!  So any such manuals are best used with the system that they were made for.
> ...



I apologize for not remembering your own manuals that were illustrated and had pictures almost 2 decades ago. I only though you got rid of them because of those ugly bell bottom gi bottoms you worn. You know the ones with the ruffles, feathers, embroidery, and "sweet" looking trim around the ankles. SWAK


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *I apologize for not remembering your own manuals that were illustrated and had pictures almost 2 decades ago. I only though you got rid of them because of those ugly bell bottom gi bottoms you worn. You know the ones with the ruffles, feathers, embroidery, and "sweet" looking trim around the ankles. SWAK *



Hey!!  Those are now collectors editions!!


----------



## Doc (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> *Hey!!  Those are now collectors editions!!
> 
> *



Collectors edition? Thats just another way to say ancient.

BREAK OUT YOUR SILVER BOW TIE AND YOUR BLACK TUX -

WE BE GOING TO THE PROM DOG!


RAIDERS!!!!!


----------



## Sigung86 (Jan 19, 2003)

It is my understanding that the Raiders would have won larger, had they not gotten so many penalties for kicking opponents in the pelvic arch!  :rofl: 

Dan


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _*
> Collectors edition? Thats just another way to say ancient.
> BREAK OUT YOUR SILVER BOW TIE AND YOUR BLACK TUX -
> WE BE GOING TO THE PROM DOG!
> ...




ARggggggggggg

Q.  Say matey......... How much do Pirates pay for earrings?

A.   About  A Buckanear!!  (Patch on 1 eye)  Arrrgggggggggggg

Tampa Bay ....... all the way.....


----------



## cdhall (Jan 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> *You gain wisdom child!
> *



Yes, thank you.
And once again, you were there!
:ultracool

Thank you, Mr. C this has been a considerably valuable discussion for me.
:asian:


----------



## ikenpo (Jan 20, 2003)

Well, 

After all that discussion, there is one piece of collectors' item reference material I didn't mention. J.T. Will's books on Kenpo. The Advanced Kenpo book is still the best pictured technique breakdowns I have ever seen. As a person with printing and desktop publishing & design experience I feel you'd be hard pressed to find a book that does it better. The techniques are Tracy based. 

jb


----------



## Doc (Jan 22, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jbkenpo _
> *Well,
> 
> After all that discussion, there is one piece of collectors' item reference material I didn't mention. J.T. Will's books on Kenpo. The Advanced Kenpo book is still the best pictured technique breakdowns I have ever seen. As a person with printing and desktop publishing & design experience I feel you'd be hard pressed to find a book that does it better. The techniques are Tracy based.
> ...



Yeah, I remember Ed Parker being pissed because JT used his terminology but incorrect examples. He picked the book clean. Even the basic punches were "off center' and not on the centerline.


----------



## ikenpo (Jan 22, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *Yeah, I remember Ed Parker being pissed because JT used his terminology but incorrect examples. He picked the book clean. Even the basic punches were "off center' and not on the centerline. *



Yeah, 

That was the first book. I remember mentioning on a board a long time ago that I though he had executed many of the basics wrong and got a nice little email from a Will's blackbelt thanking me for commenting on the good layout, but not being too happy with my comments on what I thought was not correct (misaligned outward block was the thing that comes to mind right now, but there was more). The Advanced Kenpo book is strictly technique based, while the first book did the breakdown of basics.

jb


----------

