# Kenpo Contact Manipulation



## Doc

Recently in another thread, "Kenpo Dark Lord" raised a point regarding "Contact Manipulation." In attempting to provoke some meaningful dialog and discussion, I asked the question, "Seeing how you brought it up, what is the definition of Contact Manipulation as you understand it?" To this point he has failed to reply but others expressed interest so rather than let it die, I further would like to know what the difference is between Contact and Control Manipulation? Although I'm aware that some of you know, I'd like to hear from others who have not had the oportunity to engage in this, (to some) Kenpo contridiction and mystery.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Doc said:
			
		

> Recently in another thread, "Kenpo Dark Lord" raised a point regarding "Contact Manipulation." In attempting to provoke some meaningful dialog and discussion, I asked the question, "Seeing how you brought it up, what is the definition of Contact Manipulation as you understand it?" To this point he has failed to reply but others expressed interest so rather than let it die, I further would like to know what the difference is between Contact and Control Manipulation? Although I'm aware that some of you know, I'd like to hear from others who have not had the oportunity to engage in this, (to some) Kenpo contridiction and mystery.


Well Doc, now that you bring it up, you suggested that dimensional stages of action were distance related but it is possible to be at one while your opponent is at another; so , distance is only a part of the concept. I can be at contact manipulation while keeping my opponent at out of contact range simply by controling position.
Sean


----------



## MisterMike

CONTACT MANIPULATION - The fouth stage of the FOUR STAGES OF RANGE. It entails the orchestration of control, once contact is made, to contour, leverage, takedown, restrain, twist, sprain, lock, dislocate, choke, etc. to increase the effectiveness of your action. These same techniques could be used to cause greater damage or injury to you as well, therefore, making every effort to be the victor.

CONTROL MANIPULATION - To sustain control of your opponent's actions while steering or maneuvering your opponent to more suitable and strategic positions. Setting up these positions not only helps to prevent further retaliation, but allows you clear access to your opponent's targets as well.

FOUR STAGES OF RANGE - Stages of range within the "Gap", that are crucial in combat. Listed in order of proximity they are (1) OUT OF CONTACT, (2) WITHIN CONTACT, (3) CONTACT PENETRATION, and (4) CONTACT MANIPULATION.

_Ed Parker's Encyclopedia of Kenpo, version 1.0_


----------



## jfarnsworth

I believe I'll come out of the shadows to participate and watch this thread. Thank you sir for bringing up a good topic of discussion. :asian: 

Control manipulation to me would be a more hands on with an attacker where I can control them. Say maybe crossing talon or grasp of death etc. a controlling technique like that. 

Contact manipulation (my opinion) is and in range type situation. Calming the strom comes to mind where after the first initial vert. punch to the face the right hand strikes the shoulder tie in joint to open him up for the left vert. punch to the sternum.

That's my opinion of the two types.  :asian:  Of course if I'm definately interested in learning what others think about this topic.


----------



## Doc

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> Well Doc, now that you bring it up, you suggested that dimensional stages of action were distance related


I don't believe I have suggested anything - yet.


> but it is possible to be at one while your opponent is at another; so , distance is only a part of the concept. I can be at contact manipulation while keeping my opponent at out of contact range simply by controling position.


Actually I disgree with that as well, but as MB would say, let's stay on topic and address the questions of the thread. We can return to other thoughts later.


----------



## Doc

MisterMike said:
			
		

> CONTACT MANIPULATION - The fouth stage of the FOUR STAGES OF RANGE. It entails the orchestration of control, once contact is made, to contour, leverage, takedown, restrain, twist, sprain, lock, dislocate, choke, etc. to increase the effectiveness of your action. These same techniques could be used to cause greater damage or injury to you as well, therefore, making every effort to be the victor.
> 
> CONTROL MANIPULATION - To sustain control of your opponent's actions while steering or maneuvering your opponent to more suitable and strategic positions. Setting up these positions not only helps to prevent further retaliation, but allows you clear access to your opponent's targets as well.
> 
> FOUR STAGES OF RANGE - Stages of range within the "Gap", that are crucial in combat. Listed in order of proximity they are (1) OUT OF CONTACT, (2) WITHIN CONTACT, (3) CONTACT PENETRATION, and (4) CONTACT MANIPULATION.
> 
> _Ed Parker's Encyclopedia of Kenpo, version 1.0_



Quoting is nice, but I already knew the book definitions and probably have a copy of the Encyclopedia somewhere. However you have yet to address the questions and answer as you understand them. But for the record, those definitions will become paramount in the discussion later, and I thank you for posting them.


----------



## MisterMike

Doc said:
			
		

> Quoting is nice, but I already knew the book definitions and probably have a copy of the Encyclopedia somewhere. However you have yet to address the questions and answer as you understand them. But for the record, those definitions will become paramount in the discussion later, and I thank you for posting them.



You're welcome. I posted them in case no-one else had access to them and to set some definitions before you guys have at it 

I unfortunately do not have much to offer on the subject. They do seem to have some overlap by definition.

Contact Manipulation seems to add effectiveness to your motion while Control Manipulation is a bit more positional, to make your opponent more vulnerable while you are kept safer?

Looking forward to see where this goes...


----------



## Touch Of Death

Doc said:
			
		

> I don't believe I have suggested anything - yet.
> 
> Actually I disgree with that as well, but as MB would say, let's stay on topic and address the questions of the thread. We can return to other thoughts later.


Be that as it were. I reject the range/distance defenition, and will here by put fourth that these are stages of action. By that I mean your style of fighting changes to different types of combat. Range is a limiting term.
Sean


----------



## pete

control manipulation is adhering, while contact manipulation is chin na.


----------



## sumdumguy

Doc said:
			
		

> Although I'm aware that some of you know, I'd like to hear from others who have not had the oportunity to engage in this, (to some) Kenpo contridiction and mystery.


You talk'n to Me Doc? Ok, I'll just watch this one and cheer you on....  :uhyeah: 

 :asian:


----------



## Doc

sumdumguy said:
			
		

> You talk'n to Me Doc? Ok, I'll just watch this one and cheer you on....  :uhyeah:
> 
> :asian:


Yeah Todd. You and I can go on this one all day.


----------



## Doc

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> Be that as it were. I reject the range/distance defenition, and will here by put fourth that these are stages of action. By that I mean your style of fighting changes to different types of combat. Range is a limiting term.
> Sean


For the purposes of the discussion, we are adhering to what Ed Parker defined as "ranges" of combat. You may choose to reject that in favor of your own hypothesis, however I respectfully suggest that if you change Ed Parker's fundamental combat ranges, than the subject and this discussion becomes moot. Oh, and for the record whenever we get back to it, I disagree with that as well.


----------



## Doc

pete said:
			
		

> control manipulation is adhering, while contact manipulation is chin na.


Interesting perspective. I'm curious as to how you draw these conclusions based on Ed Parker's definitions. Could you please elaborate within American Kenpo guidelines?

When I read them, they appear to be essentially one and the same with one glaring distinction.


----------



## sumdumguy

C'mon you guys, Let's get this train roll'n..... artyon: 
I know that more of you have opinions and Ideas about "contact manipulation" and "control manipulation". If you truly want to gain a greater understanding of it all, see the Doc..... 
Something about ?????????
 :asian:


----------



## jfarnsworth

sumdumguy said:
			
		

> C'mon you guys, Let's get this train roll'n..... artyon:
> I know that more of you have opinions and Ideas about "contact manipulation" and "control manipulation". If you truly want to gain a greater understanding of it all, see the Doc.....
> Something about ?????????



What about my post above? Am I on track, a little off track, or completely off track  ? Maybe I'll just put my white belt back on and start all over again. :uhyeah:  :asian:


----------



## Doc

sumdumguy said:
			
		

> C'mon you guys, Let's get this train roll'n..... artyon:
> I know that more of you have opinions and Ideas about "contact manipulation" and "control manipulation". If you truly want to gain a greater understanding of it all, see the Doc.....
> Something about ?????????
> :asian:


So Todd, how's the weather where you are?


----------



## Doc

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> I believe I'll come out of the shadows to participate and watch this thread. Thank you sir for bringing up a good topic of discussion. :asian:
> 
> Control manipulation to me would be a more hands on with an attacker where I can control them. Say maybe crossing talon or grasp of death etc. a controlling technique like that.
> 
> Contact manipulation (my opinion) is and in range type situation. Calming the strom comes to mind where after the first initial vert. punch to the face the right hand strikes the shoulder tie in joint to open him up for the left vert. punch to the sternum.
> 
> That's my opinion of the two types.  :asian:  Of course if I'm definately interested in learning what others think about this topic.



Well Jason, not only have you stayed on point, but your understanding is pretty good. Admittedly, I might have used different examples, but you're pretty right on. But, what you say also contridicts all of the Parker definitions. Both "contact" and "control" say they control and to the same degree. Further, "control" is not even listed in the Four Ranges defined by Ed Parker. So why does it exist, and if it does in fact exist, why isn't it listed, and where does it belong? People should be careful of throwing out terminology they themselves don't understand. You're not in the shadows Jason. Too many pretend they know a lot and when they don't they change the subject. Thanks for participating. Anybody seen the "Dark Lord." Hey is he a black guy?

Haven't forgot you Sean. We'll get back to your position.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord

Doc said:
			
		

> But, what you say also contridicts all of the Parker definitions. Both "contact" and "control" say they control and to the same degree. Further, "control" is not even listed in the Four Ranges defined by Ed Parker.
> 
> Anybody seen the "Dark Lord."
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> Hiding in plain sight as usual.    You took the words right out of my mouth with that statement, I need not say more.
> 
> Dark Lord


----------



## Doc

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> Doc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But, what you say also contridicts all of the Parker definitions. Both "contact" and "control" say they control and to the same degree. Further, "control" is not even listed in the Four Ranges defined by Ed Parker. Anybody seen the "Dark Lord."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hiding in plain sight as usual. You took the words right out of my mouth with that statement, ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That statement is far from conclusive on any level.
> 
> 
> 
> I need not say more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh please do. There were several questions that followed the statement you can elaborate on while you're "hiding in plain sight." Todd's been waiting on you to get into the discussion, and frankly so have I. Comon' show us what you got. Answer the questions, or at least give us your interpretations and what you think it means. No fair quoting the teacher without a follow-up explanation. I do teach college you know and recognize a good stall when I see one.
Click to expand...


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord

Doc said:
			
		

> That statement is far from conclusive on any level.
> 
> Oh please do. There were several questions that followed the statement you can elaborate on while you're "hiding in plain sight." Todd's been waiting on you to get into the discussion, and frankly so have I. Comon' show us what you got. Answer the questions, or at least give us your interpretations and what you think it means. No fair quoting the teacher without a follow-up explanation. I do teach college you know and recognize a good stall when I see one.


 
 CONTACT MANIPULATION - The fouth stage of the FOUR STAGES OF RANGE. It entails the orchestration of control, once contact is made, to contour, leverage, takedown, restrain, twist, sprain, lock, dislocate, choke, etc. to increase the effectiveness of your action. These same techniques could be used to cause greater damage or injury to you as well, therefore, making every effort to be the victor.


What stall?  What discussion? What answers?   The definition given in II's is exactly that, it needs no further discussion to differentiate it.    Frankly, I can't see why you're going on about something that's pretty cut and dry. 


 A Rose By Any Other Name Is Still A Rose

Dark Lord


----------



## Doc

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> CONTACT MANIPULATION - The fouth stage of the FOUR STAGES OF RANGE. It entails the orchestration of control, once contact is made, to contour, leverage, takedown, restrain, twist, sprain, lock, dislocate, choke, etc. to increase the effectiveness of your action. These same techniques could be used to cause greater damage or injury to you as well, therefore, making every effort to be the victor.
> 
> 
> What stall?  What discussion? What answers?   The definition given in II's is exactly that, it needs no further discussion to differentiate it.    Frankly, I can't see why you're going on about something that's pretty cut and dry.
> 
> 
> A Rose By Any Other Name Is Still A Rose
> 
> Dark Lord



Well I guess that means the extent of your ability to discuss this topic is emcompassed in quoting the definitions. Now you leave me with the impression that all you know is to cut and paste on a topic you introduced.



> What discussion? What answers?


"Both "contact" and "control" say they control and to the same degree. Further, "control" is not even listed in the Four Ranges defined by Ed Parker. 



> So why does it (control manipulation] exist, and if it does in fact exist, why isn't it listed, and where does it belong?"



I guess you missed these 3 questions somehow. If you were in my class you'd rate an "F." But you're not so be it. Perhaps some other articulate persons will answer so Todd, Jason, and the others can have an actual discussion, although I feel certain you will benefit by "hiding in plain sight." An "F   " by any other name is still an "F   ."


----------



## Doc

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> CONTACT MANIPULATION - The fouth stage of the FOUR STAGES OF RANGE. It entails the orchestration of control, once contact is made, to contour, leverage, takedown, restrain, twist, sprain, lock, dislocate, choke, etc. to increase the effectiveness of your action. These same techniques could be used to cause greater damage or injury to you as well, therefore, making every effort to be the victor.
> 
> 
> What stall?  What discussion? What answers?   The definition given in II's is exactly that, it needs no further discussion to differentiate it.    Frankly, I can't see why you're going on about something that's pretty cut and dry.
> 
> 
> A Rose By Any Other Name Is Still A Rose
> 
> Dark Lord



Well I guess that means the extent of your ability to discuss this topic is emcompassed in quoting the definitions. Now you leave me with the impression that all you know is to cut and paste on a topic you introduced.



> What discussion? What answers?


"Both "contact" and "control" say they control and to the same degree. Further, "control" is not even listed in the Four Ranges defined by Ed Parker. 



> So why does it (control manipulation] exist, and if it does in fact exist, why isn't it listed, and where does it belong?"



I guess you missed these 3 questions somehow. If you were in my class you'd rate an "F." But you're not so be it. Perhaps some other articulate persons will answer so Todd, Jason, and the others can have an actual discussion, although I feel certain you will benefit by "hiding in plain sight." An "F    " by any other name is still an "F    " Dark Lord.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo

I tend to view manipulation as its own specific category with each of the various tools divided into further subcategories.  More specifically, manipulation through striking and manipulation caused by direct and sustained contact.  Now whether you consider the first category contact penetration or contact manipulation, I guess is solely up to you.  However, I do not consider all strikes to fall into the category of contact manipulation.  Only when the strikes are executed with the specific intent of manipulating your opponents posture and/or location in order to set up further strikes or to facilitate the use of control manipulation would I consider them to be members of the Contact manipulation subset.  

Control manipulation, as I view it, implies a moment of sustained contact and direct pressure to one or several targets in order to establish and/or maintain physical and mental control over an opponent, to strain or destroy specific limbs, each of which will either incapacitate, maim, or kill your opponent.  

As I said these are just my views.  This may not necessarily be what you were looking for, but it's what I got.....


----------



## Touch Of Death

I would venture to say that the difference is your dropping back from targets to position on the cycle of consideratons. By the way I loved your last post Doc, so good ya said it twice.
Sean


----------



## pete

Doc, thanks for starting this thread and making me "work" to qualify my last response.  You have initiated a wealth of information sharing and individual thought.

well, here is the result of my work/thought process...

Contact Manipulation is Chin Na.  It is techniques used in close range by applying lock joints, take downs, cavity press, and/or nerve target strikes. These techniques are used to restrain, cause pain, and injure an attacker in increasing order based on the level of the attack, so the response.  Contact Manipulation is apparent in many Kenpo techniques, yet is found in ALL Kenpo techniques in several places. Mace of Aggression, Desperate Falcons, Glancing Spear, and the extension to Circling Wing come to mind... off the cuff, so to say.

Control Manipulation is Adhering.  This was a short answer, and probably in retrospect incomplete on my part, since Adhering cannot be seperated from Listening, Neutralizing, Yielding, and Expanding.  Regardless, my point was that Control Manipulation is the method by which one would respond to an attack resulting in the attacker being lead into a position of disadvantage, while obtaining the position of advantage for yourself.  This is done by using Borrowed Force and recognizing Angles of Incidence to dodge the attack, yet remain "attached" to the attacker in order to respond.  This places offense within the defense, and defense within the offense. Ed Parker is quoted as saying "Freeing yourself from an opponent allows him freedom to hit."  The response of Control Manipulation would typically by Contact Manipulation Techniques or Chin Na from a superior position.

Now I'll wait for my grade...

pete.


----------



## Doc

Touch'O'Death said:
			
		

> I would venture to say that the difference is your dropping back from targets to position on the cycle of consideratons. By the way I loved your last post Doc, so good ya said it twice.
> Sean


Yeah that was weird Sean. I wonder how that happened. Anyway, could you elaborate on that please? It sounds very interesting but I'm not quite sure of your intent and meaning.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Doc said:
			
		

> Yeah that was weird Sean. I wonder how that happened. Anyway, could you elaborate on that please? It sounds very interesting but I'm not quite sure of your intent and meaning.


well this goes back to master key stuff, but the "eight" or "nine" considerations (depending on who you talk to) trump eachother as you go up the list. That is position remains more important that targets until you have overcome your problems with position, or rather gain a positional advantage. And neither one of these matter until you have closed the "distance", ect. I see contact manipulation still at target phase and control as operating with positional considerations. As I have said before a target trained fighter will have trouble winning if his opponent maintains a positional advantage.
Sean( www.iemat.com )


----------



## jfarnsworth

Doc said:
			
		

> Well Jason, not only have you stayed on point, but your understanding is pretty good.



At least I'm on the right track :uhyeah: 



> Admittedly, I might have used different examples, but you're pretty right on.



Those were the first two techniques that came to mind. I believe that contact means to touch. If I want an attacker to move into the position that I need them to move then I MUST manipulate them to get into that position. This is my idea of contact manipulation. Maybe thundering hammers would be a better choice for contact manipulation.

The arm bars, locks, chokes would be a control manipulation technique. The idea behind "IF" my lock is on properly the attacker isn't getting out of it. That's why it's called a lock; right  ?



> But, what you say also contridicts all of the Parker definitions. Both "contact" and "control" say they control and to the same degree. Further, "control" is not even listed in the Four Ranges defined by Ed Parker. So why does it exist, and if it does in fact exist, why isn't it listed, and where does it belong?



Well,  :idunno:  personally speaking I would keep them seperate as two seperate entities. Sure, one can turn into the other but I can't answer why he didn't include them. As far as I'm concerned the control issue definately exists. My JJ friend says there are 6 stages of combat. Maybe I should ask him about his defintion behind his madness. 



> People should be careful of throwing out terminology they themselves don't understand.



I agree. This is why we are on different pages of the book. I still haven't quite agreed with the counter torque thing in the other thread but I've been in kenpo for almost 10yrs. and have just begun to start learning things. I have a life time of learning to go and even then it won't be enough to understand all of kenpo.



> You're not in the shadows Jason. Too many pretend they know a lot and when they don't they change the subject. Thanks for participating.



This is a good discussion to be apart of. I've gotten tired of the constant whining and fueding so I have not posted hardly any in the last few months. However this topic I would like to be apart of. Thanks for starting it. :asian:


----------



## sumdumguy

With out dribbling on, 
Control Manipulation and contact manipulation differ on several levels but the most obvious is when reading the definitions (if that's what you adhere to) you will notice that the def. for control manipulation really doesn't mention anything about contact. This is important so that we may understand that there are varying degrees of control. As well as different zones that we can control from. The four stages of range all have there place in this concept or whatever you want to call it. Control Manipulation is not confined to being within any particular of the four stages of range and can in fact be used in the first three but (and this is where interpretations vary) the fourth is "contact manipulation" a sub-cat of "control manipulation" as are the previous three. Ultimately, it's all control manipulation and further divided or sub-categorized from there.
Contact Manipulation, does in fact (in the definition) talk about contact or more importantly, "when contact is made". This is a catch 22 in my opinion because contact includes a variety of weapons and executions of such weapons. The definition goes on to mention leverage, takedown, restrain bla bla bla etc... This etc.. may include the kitchen sink or the 44 Magnum I might carry in my back pocket. In my opinion no definition should ever end or contain the (etc...) clause for lack of better terms.
The reality of it is that as Doc has said before these defs contridict and are not complete by any means. It has been in the most recent years that people have adopted this term "contact manipulation" for the purpose of trying to stay within the confines of Mr. Parkers great works and not adding a bunch of crap where it's not needed. The problem again is as I stated above, Not finite definitions. Boy, you would think I was writing a book on this stuff..... I am sure that Doc has some agreements and some dis-agreements, and I welcome them both......  :asian:


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord

Doc said:
			
		

> Well I guess that means the extent of your ability to discuss this topic is emcompassed in quoting the definitions. Now you leave me with the impression that all you know is to cut and paste on a topic you introduced.
> 
> 
> "Both "contact" and "control" say they control and to the same degree. Further, "control" is not even listed in the Four Ranges defined by Ed Parker.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you missed these 3 questions somehow. If you were in my class you'd rate an "F." But you're not so be it. Perhaps some other articulate persons will answer so Todd, Jason, and the others can have an actual discussion, although I feel certain you will benefit by "hiding in plain sight." An "F " by any other name is still an "F " Dark Lord.


 

No, I didn't miss the three questions, I just thought they were stupid.   Thank God I failed your class, one I'd NEVER join either!!!!!! Praise be the F from the F Man. I'n not as uneducated, illiterate, or inarticulate as you'd like to think either, I just know what I'm talking about.


Dark Lord


----------



## Doc

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> No, I didn't miss the three questions, I just thought they were stupid.   Thank God I failed your class, one I'd NEVER join either!!!!!! Praise be the F from the F Man. I'n not as uneducated, illiterate, or inarticulate as you'd like to think either, I just know what I'm talking about.
> 
> 
> Dark Lord



I find it interesting that the questions were prompted by you bringing up the topic. So you bring it up, someone asks, and because you think the questions are "stupid," you decline to answer. And for the record I never said you were, "uneducated, illiterate, or inarticulate ..." Further you don't know what I think, except what I will share with you. I don't think you know what you're talking about because you haven't given me any reason to think you do. To each his own, and although this may seem a bit self serving, I think it is your loss. You would have been better served by asking questions rather than pretending you know all the answers. That being said I wish you well in your kenpo, dark as it may be. Now I get it.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord

Doc said:
			
		

> I find it interesting that the questions were prompted by you bringing up the topic. So you bring it up, someone asks, and because you think the questions are "stupid," you decline to answer. And for the record I never said you were, "uneducated, illiterate, or inarticulate ..." Further you don't know what I think, except what I will share with you. I don't think you know what you're talking about because you haven't given me any reason to think you do. To each his own, and although this may seem a bit self serving, I think it is your loss. You would have been better served by asking questions rather than pretending you know all the answers. That being said I wish you well in your kenpo, dark as it may be. Now I get it.


For the record, I merely brought it up in the conversation regarding Short Form 1 in Reverse, I never asked a question! I don't pretend to know all the answers, I ask when appropriate, just not you.

Dark Lord


----------



## Doc

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> For the record, I merely brought it up in the conversation regarding Short Form 1 in Reverse, I never asked a question! I don't pretend to know all the answers, I ask when appropriate, just not you.
> 
> Dark Lord



Something is really wrong here in the communications department. Never said you asked. In fact I asked you a question, and you declined to answer. No problem, and I don't know what problem you have with me, but like you said, you won't ask me. Now I'll lose sleep wondering what it is you won't ask me. Oh well.


----------



## Doc

sumdumguy said:
			
		

> Control Manipulation and contact manipulation differ on several levels but the most obvious is when reading the definitions (if that's what you adhere to) you will notice that the def. for control manipulation really doesn't mention anything about contact. This is important so that we may understand that there are varying degrees of control.



Well said sir.



> As well as different zones that we can control from. The four stages of range all have there place in this concept or whatever you want to call it.



Once again, well said sir.



> Control Manipulation is not confined to being within any particular of the four stages of range and can in fact be used in the first three



Well here we tend to part company but only due to semantically different interpretations of the meaning of control within the American kenpo context. Most have been given incomplete information in the commercial kenpo arena.



> but (and this is where interpretations vary) the fourth is "contact manipulation" a sub-cat of "control manipulation" as are the previous three.



Well I agree with you here, but most would suggest it is the other way around. I knew that you would know different because I heard the correct answer from one of your students.



> Ultimately, it's all control manipulation and further divided or sub-categorized from there.



Yes and the secret is sub-categories. Something Ive explored extensively.



> Contact Manipulation, does in fact (in the definition) talk about contact or more importantly, "when contact is made". This is a catch 22 in my opinion because contact includes a variety of weapons and executions of such weapons.



Yes I agree with that as well.



> The definition goes on to mention leverage, takedown, restrain bla bla bla etc... This etc.. may include the kitchen sink or the 44 Magnum I might carry in my back pocket. In my opinion no definition should ever end or contain the (etc...) clause for lack of better terms.



Exactly.



> The reality of it is that as Doc has said before these defs contridict and are not complete by any means. It has been in the most recent years that people have adopted this term "contact manipulation" for the purpose of trying to stay within the confines of Mr. Parkers great works and not adding a bunch of crap where it's not needed. The problem again is as I stated above, Not finite definitions. Boy, you would think I was writing a book on this stuff..... I am sure that Doc has some agreements and some dis-agreements, and I welcome them both......



No, actually Todd we have very little to disagree on. The primary difference is I was lucky enough to get a more comprehensive understanding of the four ranges and their many sub-categories from Ed Parker, and as to how he fit them into his personal interpretation of Kenpo.


----------



## Doc

Kenpo Yahoo said:
			
		

> I tend to view manipulation as its own specific category with each of the various tools divided into further subcategories.



You guys are really good. The keys are the subcategories.



> More specifically, manipulation through striking and manipulation caused by direct and sustained contact. Now whether you consider the first category contact penetration or contact manipulation, I guess is solely up to you. However, I do not consider all strikes to fall into the category of contact manipulation.



Yes I agree here.



> Only when the strikes are executed with the specific intent of manipulating your opponents posture and/or location in order to set up further strikes or to facilitate the use of control manipulation would I consider them to be members of the Contact manipulation subset.



Wow! you guys didnt need me to discuss this one. Very cogent.



> Control manipulation, as I view it, implies a moment of sustained contact and direct pressure to one or several targets in order to establish and/or maintain physical and mental control over an opponent, to strain or destroy specific limbs, each of which will either incapacitate, maim, or kill your opponent.



well said.



> As I said these are just my views. This may not necessarily be what you were looking for, but it's what I got.....



Very good views sir and a good understanding of what they really are. Good discussion in my opinion.


----------



## Doc

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> What about my post above? Am I on track, a little off track, or completely off track  ? Maybe I'll just put my white belt back on and start all over again. :uhyeah:  :asian:


We're all white belts Jason. Some just think they aren't. Oddly enough they are the ones who won't answer questions.


----------



## Doc

pete said:
			
		

> Doc, thanks for starting this thread and making me "work" to qualify my last response. You have initiated a wealth of information sharing and individual thought.



Well thank you sir. Its all about sharing and learning.



> Contact Manipulation is Chin Na.



Well although I partially agree with you, chin-na as I was taught actually encompasses both contact and control.



> It is techniques used in close range by applying lock joints, take downs, cavity press, and/or nerve target strikes.



Yes partially.



> These techniques are used to restrain, cause pain, and injure an attacker in increasing order based on the level of the attack, so the response.



I agree with the exception of pain and the omission of other considerations. I understand you are using parameters outside of kenpo, but Ed Parker dictated American Kenpo Control Manipulations not be pain reliant, nor are they used to induce pain for the purposes of control.



> Contact Manipulation is apparent in many Kenpo techniques, yet is found in ALL Kenpo techniques in several places.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. Always present in every technique all the time. Its only a matter of degrees from Contact to Control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Control Manipulation is Adhering. This was a short answer, and probably in retrospect incomplete on my part, since Adhering cannot be separated from Listening, Neutralizing, Yielding, and Expanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Taiji is showing, but that is not a bad thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless, my point was that Control Manipulation is the method by which one would respond to an attack resulting in the attacker being lead into a position of disadvantage, while obtaining the position of advantage for yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes that is true, but think of it as part of a whole instead of an entity to itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is done by using Borrowed Force and recognizing Angles of Incidence to dodge the attack, yet remain "attached" to the attacker in order to respond. This places offense within the defense, and defense within the offense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Its showing again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ed Parker is quoted as saying "Freeing yourself from an opponent allows him freedom to hit." The response of Control Manipulation would typically by Contact Manipulation Techniques or Chin Na from a superior position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well in purely American kenpo terms it would be expressed differently but have the same results.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I'll wait for my grade...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Come on Pete. If you need a grade Ill accommodate. Looks like an A to me, but dont tell Dark Lord, hes confused enough already.
> 
> But lets talk about the four distances and how they relate to each other and exactly where Control Manipulation resides. I was taught there are subcategories to all four of the ranges, with each range as you progressively get closer to you attacker, encompassing additional concepts and principles, and including the previous ones. Thus the fourth range encompasses all of the others ranges principles of combat, as well as those exclusive to the fourth range itself.
> 
> This somewhat counters the different stages of action perspective. Although range can dictate the availability of various fighting tools, they do not dictate or restrict beyond simple physical range limitations normally associated with human physical interaction.
> 
> One of those exclusive concepts is Control Manipulation that is, from a commercial kenpo perspective, a subcategory of Contact Manipulation. Because most of this information is not included in commercial kenpo, the subcategories become significantly important to the higher levels of the science of execution. When the higher-level curriculum is studied however, the subcategories actually exchange places with the more superficial simplistic range explanations.
> 
> As an example, the first range is simply called out of reach. The subcategory is Psychology of Confrontation Theory. As you can see, the subcategory is where the real knowledge and comprehensive understanding lies. Therefore if you study one level, out of reach is how its defined. On higher levels, Psychology of Confrontation Theory must be learned. This holds true for every range. The simplistic versus the in-depth. Ed Parker Sr. only published the simplistic versions of his range theory because his popular interpretation of kenpo did not contain significant depth to warrant additional information he was not generally teaching or supporting in commercial schools.
> 
> Take Control Manipulation as another subcategory example on the other extreme at distance four, which, simplistically is defined as Contact Manipulation. This is a category of grappling yet popular kenpo does not address grappling or control manipulation in its codified curriculum in any form. In reality, the only concept it addresses in any range is contact manipulation and it only hints at Control Manipulation through techniques where victims are seized, grabbed, hugged, choked, and tackled with no clear instruction as to how to deal physically with these type attacks.
> 
> Because of the lack of information, most teachers of that information have addressed these attacks as attempts rather than actual completed assaults as they should be. Lacking the knowledge to address extrication from a significant lock means you must move before you are seized. They have no choice absent additional information.
> 
> Thus you see the origin of the term I coined, SubLevel Four Kenpo. A level of Kenpo that embraces all the concepts of all the sub-level ranges but draws its name from the fourth range because it is conceptually all inclusive.
> 
> Thus you also see why Control Manipulation although defined by Ed Parker Sr., is not included in the simplistic version of his range theory. But by defining it he hinted at its existence, while not including the how of any of its execution in the curriculum most learned. Nowhere is a wrist-lock, throw, pin, offensively or defensively or any control concept addressed in any of his writing.
> 
> In the Infinite Insight series physical categorical breakdown, all of the tenants of Sub-Level Four are addressed in the category simplistically labeled, Other.
> 
> Great discussion guys, and although I hope it isnt over, I thank everyone (well almost everyone) for such intelligent and well thought out exchanges. I hope everyone came away with information they may not have had before. I know I always learn something. Isnt this what these forums are supposed to be about? So lets keep going, because I know there are some not posting (hiding in plain sight:supcool: ) but soaking up every word we say for "playback" at another time.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord

Doc said:
			
		

> Great discussion guys, and although I hope it isnt over, I thank everyone (well almost everyone) for such intelligent and well thought out exchanges. I hope everyone came away with information they may not have had before. I know I always learn something. Isnt this what these forums are supposed to be about? So lets keep going, because I know there are some not posting (hiding in plain sight:supcool: ) but soaking up every word we say for "playback" at another time.


 
You know, I've already seen who is who in the zoo over these many years, and in MY Kenpo world, there's nothing you have  I need or want so don't flatter yourself.

Dark Lord


----------



## sumdumguy

Doc said:
			
		

> Well here we tend to part company but only due to semantically different interpretations of the meaning of control within the American kenpo context. Most have been given incomplete information in the commercial kenpo arena.



Doc, first off thanks! I was not looking to pass out "correct" answers just dribbling out my view as you know. 
The control thing I think is mis-understood though because typically people believe that their has to be contact to have control. There are instances where by we can control an opponents actions through prepatory positions, baiting, feinting, and so forth. This is what I was talking about. Control is not always about contact, is it? Control begins before contact is made, or should begin before contact is made. Manipulation, can be obtained through phsycological and physical as well, however when calling it "contact manipulation it is blaitently(sp?) obvious that we have "contact".
Great Post and good reads.... Thanks.

incidently, Rainman has his own views and opinions, and is by no means as you know a puppet. Some things we agree on and some we don't. That's why we (I think I speak for both of us?) get along so well, because we both enjoy a good debate on occassion. The journey is long, no need to make it harder then it already is. :asian:


----------



## Kenpomachine

Thanks for the informative posts, everybody :asian:

The light for me came when Todd said that the control is not restricted to the fourth range. I don't know if I'm missing the point, but the haka dance (sp?) came to dance as an example of an out of reach control manipulation.

If not for that, I would have gone by the first thought than control is only physical (a woman forgetting about psicological control!) and can only be exerted at close range. 

So even if I'm still misunderstanding the terms, it has been enlightening 

Thanks again,
Lucía


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord

sumdumguy said:
			
		

> Doc, first off thanks! I was not looking to pass out "correct" answers just dribbling out my view as you know.
> The control thing I think is mis-understood though because typically people believe that their has to be contact to have control. There are instances where by we can control an opponents actions through prepatory positions, baiting, feinting, and so forth. This is what I was talking about. Control is not always about contact, is it? Control begins before contact is made, or should begin before contact is made. Manipulation, can be obtained through phsycological and physical as well, however when calling it "contact manipulation it is blaitently(sp?) obvious that we have "contact".
> Great Post and good reads.... Thanks.
> 
> :asian:


I've been teaching the control aspect of the four ranges for many years.   A simple stance change to lead them in the right direction for your attack is the standard analogy I use to illustrate this concept.   I think you're correct that most people think you need contact to have control, which definitely is not the case.   BTW, it's blatently

Dark Lord


----------



## Rainman

Depends on the context control manipulation is used.  Sub cat under contact manipulation it is control and containment with your locking, holding and everyones favorite ETC!

Control manipulation as a catch all by itself does have multiple meanings by definition in websters.  It just depends where and how it is placed.  No categories are ever complete because of overlap, placement and understanding.   All change, expand and contract over time.


----------



## Doc

sumdumguy said:
			
		

> Doc, first off thanks! I was not looking to pass out "correct" answers just dribbling out my view as you know.
> The control thing I think is mis-understood though because typically people believe that their has to be contact to have control. There are instances where by we can control an opponents actions through prepatory positions, baiting, feinting, and so forth. This is what I was talking about. Control is not always about contact, is it? Control begins before contact is made, or should begin before contact is made. Manipulation, can be obtained through phsycological and physical as well, however when calling it "contact manipulation it is blaitently(sp?) obvious that we have "contact".
> Great Post and good reads.... Thanks.
> 
> incidently, Rainman has his own views and opinions, and is by no means as you know a puppet. Some things we agree on and some we don't. That's why we (I think I speak for both of us?) get along so well, because we both enjoy a good debate on occassion. The journey is long, no need to make it harder then it already is. :asian:


Well actually Todd you are correct, but like I said, I teach from a strict "Kenpo Curriculum" so we differ on the expression but not the intent. The "out of contact but still in control" aspect is addressed in one of the subcategories of distance 2. It is called "Spatial Distortion," and actually can physically misalign an attacker with no contact, thus controling as you stated. Subtle but effective and proven over and over again. Nice to hang out with "thinkers." Reminds me of the "old Man." He loved thinkers but they were rare.


----------



## Doc

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> I've been teaching the control aspect of the four ranges for many years.   A simple stance change to lead them in the right direction for your attack is the standard analogy I use to illustrate this concept.   I think you're correct that most people think you need contact to have control, which definitely is not the case.   BTW, it's blatently
> 
> Dark Lord



:idunno:


----------



## sumdumguy

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> I've been teaching the control aspect of the four ranges for many years.   A simple stance change to lead them in the right direction for your attack is the standard analogy I use to illustrate this concept.   I think you're correct that most people think you need contact to have control, which definitely is not the case.   BTW, it's blatently
> Dark Lord



Hey Clyde, you don't know me and I remember you, don't think your fooling anybody here! Good for you, this was posted to enlighten other less knowledgable people not "Masters" such as yourself who know it all and have done it all..... I am not going to play the personal attack game here this forum is set up for EVERYBODY to discuss ideas concepts and theories. I choose to play nice (here). Happy Kenpoing.... 

Doc, Sir
Spatial Distortion is a topic all by itself. I think for now left off this forum until such time as people are ready and willing to accept the mere Idea of the concept. I try to steer clear of the really really good stuff for obvious reasons. Great Point though. Thank You. :asian: 

KenpoMachine, 
I am glad to have helped even if only in a small way. Every new room we walk into is dark until someone turns on the light.... Something like that.
 :asian:


----------



## Kenpomachine

Doc said:
			
		

> It is called "Spatial Distortion," and actually can physically misalign an attacker with no contact, thus controling as you stated



Spatial distortion as in the relativity theory? You've arisen my curiosity. Can you expend on this?



			
				sumdumguy said:
			
		

> KenpoMachine,
> I am glad to have helped even if only in a small way. Every new room we walk into is dark until someone turns on the light.... Something like that.
> :asian:



I agree with that


----------



## Doc

Kenpomachine said:
			
		

> Spatial distortion as in the relativity theory? You've arisen my curiosity. Can you expend on this?



*SPATIAL DISTORTION* - A concept that utilizes a fluctuation of anticipated time and space intersection in conjunction with the Line of Sight fluctuation on the visual cortex to disorientate and momentarily weaken and misalign your attacker. Although prevalent in all assaults, it is most obviously evident in torso-to-torso type assaults where the opponent attempts to use his body weight as the initial assault vehicle. When used in initiated striking assaults structural integrity is significantly impacted creating subtle and defensively effective Negative Body Posture. 

:supcool: (I see the thief lurking)


----------



## ob2c

Doc said:
			
		

> ...I know there are some not posting (hiding in plain sight:supcool: ) but soaking up every word we say for "playback" at another time.




Right again. :ultracool 
And enjoying it, especially the concept of catagorizing concepts as subsets of other concepts. Every once in a while the mud clears for me- good discussion.


----------



## Kenpomachine

Doc said:
			
		

> *SPATIAL DISTORTION* - A concept that utilizes a fluctuation of anticipated time and space intersection in conjunction with the Line of Sight fluctuation on the visual cortex to disorientate and momentarily weaken and misalign your attacker. Although prevalent in all assaults, it is most obviously evident in torso-to-torso type assaults where the opponent attempts to use his body weight as the initial assault vehicle. When used in initiated striking assaults structural integrity is significantly impacted creating subtle and defensively effective Negative Body Posture.
> 
> :supcool: (I see the thief lurking)


 Thanks for the information. I'm gonna go back and think over it, and try to digest it. Now they call it food for thought for something :lol:


----------



## psi_radar

Forgive me Doc, I've got a college education but for the life of me I couldn't visualize this, it's pretty codified. 



> SPATIAL DISTORTION - A concept that utilizes a fluctuation of anticipated time and space intersection in conjunction with the Line of Sight fluctuation on the visual cortex to disorientate and momentarily weaken and misalign your attacker. Although prevalent in all assaults, it is most obviously evident in torso-to-torso type assaults where the opponent attempts to use his body weight as the initial assault vehicle. When used in initiated striking assaults structural integrity is significantly impacted creating subtle and defensively effective Negative Body Posture.



The concept sounds like a methodology for performing a feint of some variety, but the definition alludes to a level of complexity I'm just missing.  You say it's been proven time and again on a physical level--I'm intrigued and would like to hear an example in layman's terms.

thanks


----------



## sumdumguy

psi_radar said:
			
		

> Forgive me Doc, I've got a college education but for the life of me I couldn't visualize this, it's pretty codified.
> 
> 
> 
> The concept sounds like a methodology for performing a feint of some variety, but the definition alludes to a level of complexity I'm just missing.  You say it's been proven time and again on a physical level--I'm intrigued and would like to hear an example in layman's terms.
> 
> thanks



This really goes hand in hand with Isolation. The ability to move a limb or body part forward or toward an opponent with out telegraph. I.E. trunk rotation or motion. This relates to a smaller mass gaining distance on the target without perception of the opponent until it is too late. Our depth perception is the slowest of the three to compute. The brain can be trained but will always be harder to perceive actions of depth then hieght or width. You can do a simple experiment with a class mate with this. Face off with your opponent and test the theory. 
 :asian:


----------



## kenpo2dabone

In the UKF we use 8 stages of engagement not just 4. It is my understanding that Mr. Pick felt that the orginal four needed to be broken down further to be properly understood. In my opinion it is kind of like saying that all techniques have only one step. However we teach then in steps i.e Step 1- step back inward block step 2- right snap kicj to groin step 3- chop to the neck. Sometimes it is required of an instructor to break down those steps into smaller steps and so on. Here are the 8 stages of engagement that we use in the UKF. I will be happy to answer any questions regarding them, should anybody have some on monday when I et back from my trip. Anyway her they are.  

   1. Out of Your Personal Range of Controlled Engagement and In the Tactical Area of Response

Visual clarification of the stimuli is the process of the beginning of the conditioned response. Clarity of the opposing action and the recognition of danger begins this process. The assembly of resources, internal, external and universal activation, and the conscious commitment to unify energy. Natural response to the unfolding reality brings progress. Progress supports enlightenment. The embodiment of a natural way is reflective on one's ability to lose control, and the loss of that control reflects the lack of continuity with the laws of the universe. Co-joined energy manifests in the dynamic nature of peace and collection personifies the projection of this energy. Refusal of a negative human to enter your peaceful state is unyielding victory. Victory is multi-faceted.




2. In Your Personal Range of Controlled Contact
Up to and including your Four Rings. Physical observation is digested of the enemy. The nature of the attack is cataloged, and action unfolds. Decision is forthright on the course of action. If an attack is imminent, the detachment process is complete. Action to action; attack the attack. Commitment to the depth of attack, and life and death is platformed. Critical mass. In an atom, critical mass is achieved when several heavy particles are occupying the same space, therefore creating extraordinary chains of catastrophic events. Harmony permeates your vision, and penetrates your enemies dwelling.




3. Controlled Impact Penetration and Target Creation
Penetrating the dimension in which you are attacking. Dimensional steps in maneuvering to penetrate the center of the opponents mass is referred to as penetrating the spinal ring. When the spinal ring is penetrated, and the action completes its cycle, the understanding is that you have gone through your target, not to your target. Penetration of a human's spirit disables the will to resolve. Relentless pursuit and constant invasion in an expanding domination of the enemy's physical dimensions. Connected sequential attack. Synergistic engagement. Total and complete unification of the laws of the universe, unfolding and blooming. The sequence is natural and real. The mighty redwood begins as a seed from a single point, and the sequence and impulse to manifest destiny is underway.




4. Target Impact Manipulation
The resultant of impact penetration. Simply understood as if you hit someone, this is where they will be after you hit them. This continuous process maintains the attack in an unfolding sequential state of physical domination. Assessing the depth of a continuing attack. Impact penetration and impact manipulation are exchanged and connected. The physical destruction of your opponents will to continue. Breath and stamina are destroyed. Spirit wanes and fades, expanding and acting on one's energy.




5. Physical Body Control Manipulation
The contoured physical state of controlling your opponents actions by canceling all his dimensions. Common terms of wrestling and grappling are applicable. Locks and hugs. A constant physical attachment with your opponent, maneuvering to tactical advantage and to physically dominate. Energies are united and harmony with the universe has been established. Spirit domination is conjoined to one's control. The wind pushes the sail on course, charts are plotted and manifest. All control of your opponent has been dominated. And as the wind passes, the aftermath and the void of wind has energy as the sail bellows in anticipation.




6. Control Manipulation Maintenance
Physically controlled state of opponent domination as survey is made of the environment. The process of attachment and tactical arrangement of your four ring domination. Assessment of the conscious level of your enemy. Decision to inaugurate a new attack is determined. From survey of the physical plane, and survey of the enemy's state of life and the ability to retaliate an offensive attack. The course is set, the sail full and in control.




7. Control Manipulation Release
The physical release of your opponent in a tactical advantage for you, and canceling his ability to gain advantage on you. Capture your energy for complete control. Disengaging harmony from your opponent, remove the wind. Mission complete. Resolved. If no contact made, victory. If death is created, molecular change begins. Fill your sail and inhale as you exhale the bad wind, life.



8. Extraction
The physical maneuvers that places you in an expanded tactical area of response, and the maximum distance from danger without compromise, gaining physical visual control of your environment. Personal search of your body for injury. Attachment with your way, gathering back the loose lines, focus in on the journey as seen and lived. Expanding back in, conjoining destiny and circumstance, nothing personal is lost, acceptance of unfolding events and digestion of the resultant.

And just to throw something else out there, Think about how each of your weapons in there ranges passes throught these stages at different intervals in the techniques in relation to your attackers weapons\targets.

Enjoy and Salute,

Mike Miller UKF


----------



## psi_radar

Gentlemen,

First of all, thanks for the dialogue, it's been interesting and informative. However, I'm still feeling a bit lost.

"This really goes hand in hand with Isolation. The ability to move a limb or body part forward or toward an opponent with out telegraph. I.E. trunk rotation or motion. This relates to a smaller mass gaining distance on the target without perception of the opponent until it is too late. Our depth perception is the slowest of the three to compute. The brain can be trained but will always be harder to perceive actions of depth then hieght or width. You can do a simple experiment with a class mate with this. Face off with your opponent and test the theory. "

Can't this statement be simplified to:

If you throw a limb out in front of your opponent's face, the shock of the closeness of that object will make him/her believe that your core and centerline is within range of any arm or leg strike. 

I'm sure it could be said more concisely but I had had some bad news today and I'm not much for copy editing.

 In the process of trying to define what we DO in Kenpo, there's a tendency to overcomplicate the definitions of our actions. I think this is a subject for another thread which I will post shortly. 

Kenpo2dabone, I'll speak to your response there as well.

thanks guys.
 :asian:


----------



## Rainman

psi_radar said:
			
		

> Gentlemen,
> 
> First of all, thanks for the dialogue, it's been interesting and informative. However, I'm still feeling a bit lost.
> 
> "This really goes hand in hand with Isolation. The ability to move a limb or body part forward or toward an opponent with out telegraph. I.E. trunk rotation or motion. This relates to a smaller mass gaining distance on the target without perception of the opponent until it is too late. Our depth perception is the slowest of the three to compute. The brain can be trained but will always be harder to perceive actions of depth then hieght or width. You can do a simple experiment with a class mate with this. Face off with your opponent and test the theory. "
> 
> Can't this statement be simplified to:
> 
> If you throw a limb out in front of your opponent's face, the shock of the closeness of that object will make him/her believe that your core and centerline is within range of any arm or leg strike.
> 
> :asian:



No.  The hand is quicker than the eye.  This is the point of isolation.  It looks like you may be out of range but with the rotation of the trunk, which comes after the launch, you are indeed in contact penetration range thus moving you into contact manipulation.  Isolation is the hand moving first with nothing else until the time is right to pivot and rotate close the percieved gap and hit the target.  The point being it is easier to see and react to body movements then hand movements when they are isolated.   You can relate this to a boxer who has an excellent jab such as Roy Jones Jr.


----------



## Dark Kenpo Lord

kenpo2dabone said:
			
		

> In the UKF we use 8 stages of engagement not just 4. It is my understanding that Mr. Pick felt that the orginal four needed to be broken down further to be properly understood. In my opinion it is kind of like saying that all techniques have only one step. However we teach then in steps i.e Step 1- step back inward block step 2- right snap kicj to groin step 3- chop to the neck. Sometimes it is required of an instructor to break down those steps into smaller steps and so on. Here are the 8 stages of engagement that we use in the UKF. I will be happy to answer any questions regarding them, should anybody have some on monday when I et back from my trip. Anyway her they are.
> 
> 1. Out of Your Personal Range of Controlled Engagement and In the Tactical Area of Response
> 
> Visual clarification of the stimuli is the process of the beginning of the conditioned response. Clarity of the opposing action and the recognition of danger begins this process. The assembly of resources, internal, external and universal activation, and the conscious commitment to unify energy. Natural response to the unfolding reality brings progress. Progress supports enlightenment. The embodiment of a natural way is reflective on one's ability to lose control, and the loss of that control reflects the lack of continuity with the laws of the universe. Co-joined energy manifests in the dynamic nature of peace and collection personifies the projection of this energy. Refusal of a negative human to enter your peaceful state is unyielding victory. Victory is multi-faceted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. In Your Personal Range of Controlled Contact
> Up to and including your Four Rings. Physical observation is digested of the enemy. The nature of the attack is cataloged, and action unfolds. Decision is forthright on the course of action. If an attack is imminent, the detachment process is complete. Action to action; attack the attack. Commitment to the depth of attack, and life and death is platformed. Critical mass. In an atom, critical mass is achieved when several heavy particles are occupying the same space, therefore creating extraordinary chains of catastrophic events. Harmony permeates your vision, and penetrates your enemies dwelling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Controlled Impact Penetration and Target Creation
> Penetrating the dimension in which you are attacking. Dimensional steps in maneuvering to penetrate the center of the opponents mass is referred to as penetrating the spinal ring. When the spinal ring is penetrated, and the action completes its cycle, the understanding is that you have gone through your target, not to your target. Penetration of a human's spirit disables the will to resolve. Relentless pursuit and constant invasion in an expanding domination of the enemy's physical dimensions. Connected sequential attack. Synergistic engagement. Total and complete unification of the laws of the universe, unfolding and blooming. The sequence is natural and real. The mighty redwood begins as a seed from a single point, and the sequence and impulse to manifest destiny is underway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Target Impact Manipulation
> The resultant of impact penetration. Simply understood as if you hit someone, this is where they will be after you hit them. This continuous process maintains the attack in an unfolding sequential state of physical domination. Assessing the depth of a continuing attack. Impact penetration and impact manipulation are exchanged and connected. The physical destruction of your opponents will to continue. Breath and stamina are destroyed. Spirit wanes and fades, expanding and acting on one's energy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. Physical Body Control Manipulation
> The contoured physical state of controlling your opponents actions by canceling all his dimensions. Common terms of wrestling and grappling are applicable. Locks and hugs. A constant physical attachment with your opponent, maneuvering to tactical advantage and to physically dominate. Energies are united and harmony with the universe has been established. Spirit domination is conjoined to one's control. The wind pushes the sail on course, charts are plotted and manifest. All control of your opponent has been dominated. And as the wind passes, the aftermath and the void of wind has energy as the sail bellows in anticipation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. Control Manipulation Maintenance
> Physically controlled state of opponent domination as survey is made of the environment. The process of attachment and tactical arrangement of your four ring domination. Assessment of the conscious level of your enemy. Decision to inaugurate a new attack is determined. From survey of the physical plane, and survey of the enemy's state of life and the ability to retaliate an offensive attack. The course is set, the sail full and in control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Control Manipulation Release
> The physical release of your opponent in a tactical advantage for you, and canceling his ability to gain advantage on you. Capture your energy for complete control. Disengaging harmony from your opponent, remove the wind. Mission complete. Resolved. If no contact made, victory. If death is created, molecular change begins. Fill your sail and inhale as you exhale the bad wind, life.
> 
> 
> 
> 8. Extraction
> The physical maneuvers that places you in an expanded tactical area of response, and the maximum distance from danger without compromise, gaining physical visual control of your environment. Personal search of your body for injury. Attachment with your way, gathering back the loose lines, focus in on the journey as seen and lived. Expanding back in, conjoining destiny and circumstance, nothing personal is lost, acceptance of unfolding events and digestion of the resultant.
> 
> And just to throw something else out there, Think about how each of your weapons in there ranges passes throught these stages at different intervals in the techniques in relation to your attackers weapons\targets.
> 
> Enjoy and Salute,
> 
> Mike Miller UKF


Seems you guys are overcomplicating something that doesn't need to be.   All other stages are going to be sub-categories of the four, and they are clearly defined.     I can't seem to get past all the mystical unfolding the universal secrets and sailing analogies without a bit of a chuckle either.

Dark Lord


----------



## Kenpomachine

Now, many thanks to all of you. Rainman, your example shed a bit more light to my understanding of spatial distorsion


----------



## Doc

psi_radar said:
			
		

> Forgive me Doc, I've got a college education but for the life of me I couldn't visualize this, it's pretty codified.



Yes I understand. The knowledge is so specific and drawn from such a wide variety of human body, and non-human body related sciences, it can be a bit disconcerting until someone actually physically teaches you its application.

Even then rather than trying to "understand" it, it's best to know when and how to use it, and understand it much later. Ed Parker always said, "learn how first, understand later." Unfortunately many want to understand everything now, and speak of concepts and principles they can't put into practical application. Ed Parker called that "Hypothetical Kenpo." "If you do this then I'll do this." they say. Except one thing, "They can't do this." because they spend all their time talking about it instead of doing it. 

I have several M.D.'s as students. I also have a couple of Dr's of Chiopractic Medicine, a Dr. of Physical Therapy and Sports Medicine, and a licensed Acupuncturist in our main location. None of them understand what I do, they only know it works and subscribe to the methodology, so no big deal.

Youre kind of on the right track in one of its applications. Its complexity or simplicity is predicated on the knowledge of the individual. Unfortunately, some me toos (not you obviously) sit back, offer nothing, and chime in after others have had real dialog in an effort to increase their understanding. These "know-it-alls" would reduce everything they dont understand to a level of simplicity commensurate with their own meager knowledge level, rather than accept there may be really significant information they dont have a grasp of. 

I believe Ed Parker Sr. called it Full Cup Syndrome. Some of these people have been discrediting information I've been desseminating for years only to resurface later to embrace the same information, with the qualifier, Ive been doing that for a long time.  They should go back to beating the Neanderthal bag and let adults have their discussions.

At any rate, one use of Spatial Distortion examines how the human body determines its relationship with other objects in space through its senses and focuses primarily on the Visual Cortex Line of Sight, and its affect on base Startle Reflex Mechanisms. Its very nature precludes an individual from being capable of compensating, even with advance notice, and it does break down structural integrity creating momentary weakness and a lack of coordination. 

A very simplistic example that is not combat related to help you understand:

Have you ever been focused on an object while moving, and been distracted enough to lose your place in space in anticipation of some physical action that requires a significant shift in weight, balance, and muscle use?

Like looking at a well-endowed woman while walking and anticipating stepping off of a curb only to prematurely miss. Now the ground didnt move, but you expected your foot to drop in height, so your body anticipated the change in height, adjusted your weight distribution in anticipation of the extra weight on one side of your body, and your arm swing moved to counter-balance the action. 

When the drop off didnt occur, for a second you felt like an idiot. You were momentarily weak, uncoordinated, startled and confused. And although you recovered quickly, for that moment you were extremely vulnerable. A good understanding of how these mechanisms work will allow you to induce the same effect, subconsciously and totally destroy a persons structural integrity without their knowledge as they initiate an assault.

Thats the Spatial Distortion I was speaking of as I understand, use, and teach it to my students. Hope that helps a bit, and please excuse the insert rants not directed at you. Idiots get old, but continue to be idiots nevertheless.


----------



## sumdumguy

Great example Doc! I don't think I would have related "spatial distortion" quite that way?
Riddle me this, When in combat and using this practice, doesn't the line of sight of the opponent vs our movement, i.e. isolation effect an opponent somewhat similarly? Or, are you saying that this is an effect of an anticipated (mental) motion or movement of the body? 
Maybe I am just really confused? Yep I think so......... :asian:


----------



## rmcrobertson

Since some--not all, but some--of the stuff written here is either pseudo-science (three bops with a copy of, "The Dancing Wu Li Masters," for the guilty parties) or poetry, I'd suggest that useful lines of discussion would include: a) the fake science of kenpo; b) the intellectualism of kenpo; c) the personal use of pseudo-science and poetry in kenpo; d) the aesthetic quality of poetic expressions in kenpo.


----------



## Dominic Jones

Hi

Dr Chapel talked about each Stage of Contact/Range having increasing numbers of sub-category(s) as the range decreases.  That is, Stage 1 has 1 sub-category; Stage 2 has 2 or more sub-categories; Stage 3 has 3 or more sub-categories Stage 4 has 4 or more categories.

Does each individual Stage have 1 new category thus ending with 4 categories at Stage 4 or does each individual Stage have more than 1 new category thus ending with more than 4 categories at Stage 4.

Can each sub- category be further divided into new sub-sub-categories?

If possible Dr Chapel could you elaborate on the sub-category(s) of the Contact Penetration Stage.


On a final thought, are the sub-categories related to the 8 Considerations of Combat (Environment, Range, Positions, Maneuvers, Targets, Natural Weapons, Blocks, Cover) as Touch of Death hinted at.
Stage 1 (Out of Reach) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers
Stage 2 (Within Contact) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers, Positions, Targets
Stage 3 (Contact Penetration) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers, Positions, Targets, Natural Weapons, Blocks
Stage 4 (Contact Manipulation) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers, Positions, Targets, Natural Weapons, Blocks, Cover

Cheers Dom :asian:


----------



## Doc

Dominic Jones said:
			
		

> Hi
> 
> Dr Chapel talked about each Stage of Contact/Range having increasing numbers of sub-category(s) as the range decreases.
> 
> That is, Stage 1 has 1 sub-category; Stage 2 has 2 or more sub-categories; Stage 3 has 3 or more sub-categories Stage 4 has 4 or more categories.



I do not believe I alluded to any relationship between the numerical range and the number of subcategories.



> Does each individual Stage have 1 new category thus ending with 4 categories at Stage 4 or does each individual Stage have more than 1 new category thus ending with more than 4 categories at Stage 4.



No. The numerical designation of the four ranges is an arbitrary designation by Ed Parker Sr. That is he simply determined the ranges or stages he wanted to address at one level and the numerical number ended at four when he was satisfied. He began with the closest range outward and when he finished, he designated them outside in. Then he removed or failed to address information he had no intention of including in his commercial interpretation of American Kenpo.

As I have stated previously, a good example of that is Control Manipulation. Not included in the ranges at all, but existing outside of the simple 4 range definitions. To my knowledge it is the only subcategory he published (other than the one purposeful word *Other* in Infinite Insights), although others were definitely there. I think the reason for that is because many of the self-defense technique general scenarios hinted at a Control Manipulation component offensively and defensively.



> Can each sub- category be further divided into new sub-sub-categories?



In science and almost any other categorized activity, I believe you can subcategorize and sub-reference eternally. At some point it can become meaningless or at the very least repetitive. 



> If possible Dr Chapel could you elaborate on the sub-category(s) of the Contact Penetration Stage.



The subcategories I am willing to publish in what is considered the Contact Penetration stage are;

III. Distance Three: 
		Contact Penetration (Peripheral Contact)

			Sub-Level Three:

				A. Contact Manipulation
		  B. Visual Cortex Disruption
		  C. Nerve Cavity Activation
				D. Startle Reflex Access



> On a final thought, are the sub-categories related to the 8 Considerations of Combat (Environment, Range, Positions, Maneuvers, Targets, Natural Weapons, Blocks, Cover) as Touch of Death hinted at.
> Stage 1 (Out of Reach) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers
> Stage 2 (Within Contact) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers, Positions, Targets
> Stage 3 (Contact Penetration) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers, Positions, Targets, Natural Weapons, Blocks
> Stage 4 (Contact Manipulation) relates to Environment, Range, Maneuvers, Positions, Targets, Natural Weapons, Blocks, Cover
> 
> Cheers Dom :asian:



No. The Eight considerations are general guidelines that can be applied to almost any competitive physical activity, sport, or interaction. The sub-categories were developed in part prior to, and without any consideration to the eight and have, at best only a peripheral relationship to concepts of motion based kenpo. As Ed Parker told me, You need to ".. draw a line in your mind between the two.

Those who have come to me to make the transition, the first thing I tell them is, forget what you thought you knew. All of the many components are interactively supportive. You may not take one and "graft" it to someting else. You cannot learn just "nerves" and add it to what you do. It simply won't work. Different philosophies, different methodologies, different result. All three components must change, not just one.


----------



## kenpo2dabone

Dark Kenpo Lord said:
			
		

> Seems you guys are overcomplicating something that doesn't need to be.   All other stages are going to be sub-categories of the four, and they are clearly defined.     I can't seem to get past all the mystical unfolding the universal secrets and sailing analogies without a bit of a chuckle either.
> 
> Dark Lord



I can understand that you may have had a chuckle at some of Mr. Picks' terminology. I have to be honest and tell you that after my first seminar with Mr. Pick I was lost as a result of the terminology until I applied what he was teaching ona body. The actions deffinatelty spoke louder than the words. After working with Marcus Buonfiglio, my instructor, and MR. Pick the terminology is not a problem. We lovingly call it Pickenese and it does take some getting use to. I new that some people would feel the same as you which is why I welcomed questions ragrding my post. 

I do not think that further breaking down something makes it more complicating. In fact I feel that it creates more clarity. Like I mentioned in my original post most people, from what I have seen, teach DS as a three step technique. Step back block, snapkick to groin, chop to neck. To take someone and teach them this with no prior Martial arts experience could be a night mare. You must first teach them how to block properly this could be a three step process in itself. Then to teach the timing of stepping back to block is another process. Then you have to break down the process of a snap kick, another three step or so process and finally a chop or hammer fist as we do it. You have to teach the proper way to do the hand formation and the correct timing with the plant of the foot. Clarity is in the details. Breaking the stages of engagement into eight catagories makes complete sense to me. It becomes very clear as to what is going on as you pass through each stage. Like everything else it is much easier to demonstrate than it is to comprehend through mere words. 

Food for thought. Just something to think about whether you use four or eight stages of engagement. As you go through a technique think about how each of your weapons passes through each stage with relation to your attackers weapons. I will use DS again. (we do it for a right punch) The attacker throws a right pnch. We step back and block. My right hand (third ring) has gone through the first four stages. Out of range but in the tacticle area of response ( you are aware that action is going to unfold),in range contact (The point that the block makes contact with the arm), Contact penetration (the block went through the intended target not just to the intended target), impact manipulation (Is what happenned to the punch as a result of the block). Now our hand can only make contact to the neck but not penetrate the neck which would result in another impact manipulation. However, our foot (fourth ring) is in range for contact penetration to the groin. Resulting in the attacker height zone being affected as well as bringing the head closer (this is impact manipultion). Now that the head is closer it is in range for cantact penetration with our hand (third ring) so we hammerfist the mastoid. When the head came forward it brought the attacker punching arm into range for the fifth and sixth stages. After the kick and hammer fist I could choose break the arm with an outside to inside break (control manipulation the fifth stage) This would result in having all three zones checked and be in complete controle of my attcker which is the sixth stage (Control Maintanence). Now I can check my surroundings for additional attackers without worring about the original attacker although always keeping him in mind. I can now choose to release him which the seventh stage however he is still in range so I must extract and return to the tactical area of response or stage one (out of range).

I hope this clarifies some of why Mr. Pick broke the stages of engagement down into eight steps as appose to the original four. Understanding them gives you more options in a technique because you will understand which weapon is in which zone in relation to a particular body part of you would be attacker.

Salute,
Mike Miller UKF


----------



## sumdumguy

Kenpo2dabone,
    I would have to agree with you on the finite, leading to a better understanding of application. Skimming seams to be a popular thing now a days and leads to partial or lack of effectiveness of the physical applications of the Kenpo tools and concepts. Well said
 :asian:


----------

